A Once and Future of Mexico Ecosystem Restoration Recommendations of an Expert Working Group

Charles H. Peterson

Felicia C. Coleman, Jeremy B.C. Jackson, R. Eugene Turner, Gilbert T. Rowe

Richard T. Barber, Karen A. Bjorndal, Robert S. Carney, Robert K. Cowen, Jonathan M. Hoekstra, James T. Hollibaugh, Shirley B. Laska, Richard A. Luettich Jr., Craig W. Osenberg, Stephen E. Roady, Stanley Senner, John M. Teal and Ping Wang Acknowledgments

Pete Peterson wishes to thank his co-authors, in particular Gene Turner, Felicia Coleman, Gil Rowe and Jeremy Jackson, for their insights and assistance in producing this report. The authors thank the Pew Environment Group for financial support for this project and the three peer reviewers, whose comments helped to improve the manuscript. We appreciate the many helpful discussions that we each had with interested colleagues.

Suggested citation: Peterson, C. H. et al. 2011. A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem: Restoration Recommendations of an Expert Working Group. Pew Environment Group. Washington, DC. 112 pp.

The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Pew Environment Group, Campaign for Healthy Oceans or The Pew Charitable Trusts. A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Restoration Recommendations of an Expert Working Group

Contents

3 Abstract

5 Introduction

9 Precedents and Principles for Restoring the Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem

15 Acute and Chronic Stressors on the Gulf of Mexico Before and After the DWH Oil Spill

37 Recommendations for Resilient Restoration of the Gulf of Mexico

91 Conclusion

93 Appendices

100 Endnotes

101 References

The Pew Environment Group is the conservation arm of The Pew Charitable Trusts, a nongovernment organization that works globally to establish pragmatic, science-based policies that protect our oceans, preserve our wildlands and promote clean energy.

www.PewEnvironment.org Figure 1 The Gulf of Mexico Region Featured sites mentioned in the report

Mobile Pensacola Biloxi Mississippi Baton Rouge F I New Orleans H Houston E

B Houma D G Tampa Galveston Site of DWH spill Corpus Christi C Egmont Key National Miami A Wildlife Refuge

Padre K See map detail Page 28 See map detail Page 31 J GULF OF MEXICO

A Padre Island National Seashore, TX E Chandeleur , LA I Big Bend coastal region, FL, includes (Breton National Wildlife Refuge) Apalachicola , St. Joe Bay and the B Galveston, TX Fenholloway, Suwanee and Ochlockonee F Pascagoula River, LA C Flower Garden Banks Rivers National Marine Sanctuary G Green Canyon area J Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (near the DWH spill site) D Grand Isle, LA K Everglades National Park H De Soto Canyon

2 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Abstract

The Deepwater Horizon (DWH) well blow- argue that restoration of the Gulf must go out released more petroleum hydrocarbons beyond the traditional “in-place, in-kind” into the marine environment than any restoration approach that targets specific previous U.S. oil spill (4.9 million barrels), damaged habitats or species. A sustainable fouling , damaging deep sea and restoration of the Gulf of Mexico after shoreline habitats and causing closures of DWH must: economically valuable fisheries in the Gulf 1. Recognize that ecosystem resilience has of Mexico. A suite of pollutants — liquid been compromised by multiple human and gaseous petroleum compounds plus interventions predating the DWH spill; chemical dispersants — poured into eco- systems that had already been stressed by 2. Acknowledge that significant future overfishing, development and global climate environmental change is inevitable and change. Beyond the direct effects that were must be factored into restoration plans captured in dramatic photographs of oiled and actions for them to be durable; birds in the media, it is likely that there are 3. Treat the Gulf as a complex and inter- subtle, delayed, indirect and potentially syn- connected network of ecosystems from ergistic impacts of these widely dispersed, shoreline to deep sea; and highly bioavailable and toxic hydrocarbons and chemical dispersants on marine life 4. Recognize that human and ecosystem from pelicans to grasses and to in the Gulf are interdepen- deep-sea animals. dent, and that human needs from and effects on the Gulf must be integral to As tragic as the DWH blowout was, it has restoration planning. stimulated public interest in protecting this economically, socially and environmentally With these principles in mind, we provide critical region. The 2010 Mabus Report, the scientific basis for a sustainable restora- commissioned by President Barack Obama tion program along three themes: and written by the secretary of the Navy, provides a blueprint for restoring the Gulf 1. Assess and repair damage from DWH that is bold, visionary and strategic. It is and other stresses on the Gulf; clear that we need not only to repair the 2. Protect existing habitats and damage left behind by the oil but also to populations; and go well beyond that to restore the anthro- pogenically stressed and declining Gulf 3. Integrate sustainable human use ecosystems to prosperity-sustaining levels with ecological processes in the Gulf of historic productivity. For this report, we of Mexico. assembled a team of leading scientists with Under these themes, 15 historically expertise in coastal and marine ecosystems informed, adaptive, ecosystem-based and with experience in their restoration to restoration actions are presented to recover identify strategies and specific actions that Gulf resources and rebuild the resilience of will revitalize and sustain the Gulf coastal its ecosystem. The vision that guides our economy. recommendations fundamentally imbeds Because the DWH spill intervened in eco- the restoration actions within the context of systems that are intimately interconnected the changing environment so as to achieve and already under stress, and will remain resilience of resources, human communities stressed from global climate change, we and the economy into the indefinite future.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 3

Introduction

The blowout and spill On April 20, 2010, the eyes of the nation ecosystem include overfishing and overhar- released more oil into U.S. and the world focused on the northern Gulf vesting of marine life; pollution from agri- of Mexico and witnessed the beginning of a cultural runoff and industry; global climate waters than any other oil human and natural disaster. On that day, a change and rising sea level; and alterations spill incident in history. BP oil well blew out on the Macondo of terrain and rivers for oil exploration and This tragedy, however, is Prospect 1,500 m below the ocean’s surface real estate development. Coastal marsh but one of many historic, and began gushing crude oil into the acreage, riparian , and forests recent and ongoing sea. Eleven men died from the explosions in the drainage basins of the Mississippi accompanying the blowout and subsequent and smaller rivers have declined dramati- stresses degrading the fire on the drilling rig, Deepwater Horizon. cally, reducing and wildlife habitat and Gulf environment. The great depth of the well—almost a mile removing natural water-purifying func- beneath the ocean’s surface—complicated tions. These changes, in turn, have reduced efforts to stanch the torrential flow of oil the Gulf ecosystem’s ability to provide the and natural gas. During the next 85 days, services and resources on which coastal an estimated 4.9 million barrels of crude oil communities depend. flowed into the sea as BP and the U.S. gov- The success and durability of actions taken ernment tried chemicals, concrete, physical to restore damage caused by the oil release material and other desperate measures will depend upon the way Gulf restoration to plug the wellhead. The environmental addresses the impacts of historical ecosys- tragedy was dramatized in a continuous, tem degradation and anticipates future mesmerizing video stream of the turbulent changes by creating both social and natural flow of oil and gas at the seafloor wellhead resilience. Even narrowly focused restoration and in the satellite and television imagery actions are unlikely to be sustainable if they of oil covering the sea surface, and fail to consider the complex and intercon- shorelines. This blowout and spill released nected human and natural ecosystem of the more oil into U.S. waters than any other spill Gulf. Restoration plans must also compen- in history. In terms of human welfare, this sate for prior impacts to individual resources single event severely damaged the Gulf’s and to human economic enterprises and natural resources, harming the economy and must consider the full scope of relationships costing lives and jobs in a region dependent to historical baseline conditions. Finally, on fishing, tourism and oil-and-gas extraction. the ability of restoration plans to anticipate This tragedy, however, is but one of many future dynamic change will determine the environmental perturbations that have success of those plans over the long term. degraded or are still degrading the Gulf Some of these environmental changes, such environment. Over the previous five years as sea level rise and severe weather events, Oil burns during a controlled alone, for example, hurricanes Katrina, Rita are occurring faster and having larger fire after the Gulf oil spill. and Ike struck the Louisiana, Mississippi and consequences along the Gulf than Photo: Justin Stumberg/U.S. Texas , causing extensive loss of life anywhere else in the country. Therefore, the Navy/Marine Photobank and property. Chronic stressors on the Gulf Gulf ecosystem could be a model for how

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 5 to solve multiple social and natural chal- two positive contributions to the region. lenges to achieve sustainability in the face The publicity generated by the oil spill put a of dramatic environmental change. spotlight on the immense value of the natu- ral resources and communities of the Gulf To assess restoration opportunities in the Coast. It also drew attention to how little Gulf, we assembled a team of leading public or private investment has been made scientists with expertise and experience in in restoring the Gulf ecosystem after past coastal and marine ecosystems and their injuries or in creating the natural and social restoration. Together we identify strategies resiliency required for this unique region to and specific actions that will help revitalize sustain itself in the face of a dramatically the Gulf Coast ecosystem and economy. changing natural environment. Although Our scientific approach is based upon spa- government promises of funding for hur- tially explicit and ecosystem-based insights ricane rehabilitation and restoration have derived by inferring the baseline conditions proved overly optimistic, funds for Gulf res- and controlling functions of the Gulf coastal 1900 Overharvesting of oysters toration derived from environmental fines ecosystem as they were before major from the Chesapeake Bay and for ocean pollution and natural resource human modifications were made. Previous other contributed damage will be more substantial. Some of to dramatic changes in their use of this approach to guide ecological the funds are restricted to direct compensa- ecosystems. Above, the oyster restorations of estuarine (Lotze et al. 2006), tion for damage done by the DWH oil spill fleet in Baltimore Harbor, circa marine (Jackson et al. 2001) and freshwater to the Gulf ecosystem, its natural resources 1885. Photo: Collection of (Scheffer et al. 2001) aquatic ecosystems and the Gulf coastal economy; however, Marion Doss have revealed how human-induced modifi- the potential uses for the rest of the funds cations, such as overfishing apex predators range broadly. and historically dominant filter feeders, have led to the loss of ecosystem resilience The federal Oil Pollution Act of 1990 when subsequent perturbations occurred, (OPA) dictates criteria for compensatory such as nutrient overloading. Such interac- restoration projects that can be supported tions among multiple stressors can propel by monies given in settlement of natural the ecosystem across a threshold and into resource damage claims or awarded by the an alternative persistent state from which court system. OPA then has general jurisdic- recovery to baseline conditions is difficult. tion over Gulf restoration funds derived For example, the overharvest of suspension- from legal settlements with BP. Under the feeding oysters from Chesapeake Bay and provisions of OPA, compensatory restora- Pamlico estuaries in the decades tion projects must be explicitly tied to the around 1900 disabled the capacity of the natural resource injuries, either damage to ecosystem to exert top-down grazing specific resources, such as the loggerhead controls on blooms. When turtle, or damages to specific habitats, such nutrient overloading occurred decades later, as coastal marsh. Consequently, restora- the suspension-feeders were no longer tion that draws upon this source of funding functionally capable of grazing down must be justified by linkage to one or more the microalgae and helping to suppress injured resources or habitats, such as those bloom development (Jackson et al. 2001). listed in Table 1. Therefore, our restoration recommenda- The Gulf ecosystem has been buffeted and tions address a range of modifications The ability of restoration so deeply modified by such a wide variety to the Gulf ecosystem. Using historical plans to anticipate of anthropogenic and natural stressors that baselines to guide restoration does not merely following traditional government future dynamic change mean that we advocate the impossible, guidelines for “in-place, in-kind” com- will determine the such as rebuilding coastlines to match the pensatory restoration under OPA or other locations and elevations of previous times success of those plans statutes is unlikely to provide sustainable before substantial subsidence occurred. over the long term. benefits. For example, the combination of Instead, historical ecology guides us toward subsidence, global sea level rise, shoreline restoring previously critical processes that erosion by major hurricanes, and ero- serve to organize the ecosystem and trig- sion and flooding facilitated by numerous ger compensatory internal dynamics that navigation channels cut through the wet- strengthen resilience. lands could easily lead to submersion and The DWH well blowout is an obvious trag- drowning of Spartina marsh constructed edy, but it appears to have made at least at most or all sites where the DWH oil spill

6 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem destroyed previous marsh habitat. Conse- as the restoration process takes shape; quently, at a minimum, compensatory resto- these grantors may help to multiply the ration of injuries caused by DWH oil and synergistic benefits from related restoration collateral damage from emergency response projects. actions should contemplate expected Our restoration guidance is therefore dynamic change to ensure durability of intended to target administrators of several restoration projects. At best, the long-term funding sources. Funding institutions Gulf restoration plan would redress past will value aspects of the Gulf of Mexico insults and restore a resilient Gulf ecosystem variously; for this reason, we have not similar in functioning to its historic base- prioritized the restoration actions that we line condition, within which compensatory develop. Nor have we made detailed esti- restoration of habitat and natural resources mates of the costs of these 15 restoration injured by the DWH oil release could be actions. Costs of compensatory restoration self-sustaining. President Obama’s mandate 1970s Passage of the actions will vary with the scale of injuries to address historical and immediate ecologi- Clean Water Act provided from the oil spill that require compensa- cal damage in the Gulf provides an oppor- the framework for regulating tion. The multiple funding sources will have environmental stressors on tunity for this ideal restoration strategy; the different goals and constraints. Many of our the Gulf ecosystem. Above, Mabus Report, commissioned by President suggested actions address long-standing oil and natural gas spew Obama and written by Secretary of the modifications of the Gulf ecosystem that from a broken cap in Bayou Navy Ray Mabus, provides a broad and bold fit well into the strategies articulated in St. Denis in Louisiana. Photo: vision for how to proceed with important initial expert responses to the spill (e.g., the Carrie Vonderhaar/Ocean aspects of fulfilling this mandate. Futures Society/National Mabus Report). Others are directly related Geographic Stock Fortunately, the compensatory damages to oil spill damage and compensatory res- funds do not represent the only source of toration. We offer these recommendations support for DWH oil spill and broader Gulf to help guide allocation of resources while restoration, so the limiting criteria laid out plans are still being developed. Guidelines in OPA need not apply to all restoration for use of the funds provided by BP as an actions that are taken in the wake of the initial payment to jump-start restoration are Deepwater Horizon incident. For example, now vague and will be developed by the under the federal Clean Water Act of 1972 administrators. Details of how water pollu- (CWA), the uses of monies from water pol- tion fines will be allocated are likely to be lution penalties for illegal discharge of oil determined by Congress. Consequently, our into the ocean are not similarly constrained. strategy is to offer what we conclude are CWA penalties are based on volume the most influential and justifiable actions discharged with an additional multiplier to take, while emphasizing the principles of for negligence. Particularly if negligence restoration that must guide all expenditures is established as a significant factor to the so as to maximize likelihood of success, blowout, CWA penalties may represent the achieve synergies of integration based upon bulk of the DWH restoration funds. The ecosystem connections, re-create lost eco- $500 million transferred from BP to the system processes associated with historical Gulf Coast Alliance does not appear to be ecological baselines, and enhance resilience controlled by provisions tying the use of through knowledge of ongoing and inevi- those funds to injured resources. Finally, it is table environmental change. likely that other major grantors will emerge

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 7

Precedents and Principles for Restoring the Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem

Because so much was The interdisciplinary fields of restoration of Ocean Conservancy, wrote a letter in done under the banner ecology, conservation biology, and com- August 2010 to the government trustees of munity and ecosystem ecology all offer the DWH case, offering practical guidance of restoration after the scientific guidance for restoration projects. based upon experiences from the Exxon Exxon Valdez oil spill, Basic research in community and ecosystem Valdez restoration process. Addressed to learning from that history ecology sheds light on the mechanistic Deputy Secretary of the Interior David Hayes seems prudent before functions of habitats and the roles of direct and Under Secretary of Commerce Jane restoration decisions are and indirect interactions between species in Lubchenco, this letter drew upon a panel organizing communities. Conservation biol- of scientific experts that included two of made to compensate for ogy offers strategies for protecting habitats, us, Senner as panel lead and Peterson as DWH injuries to natural species and their interactions in ecosystems. participant, each with extensive experience resources of the Gulf Restoration ecology tends to move ahead in habitat and species restoration after the and to restore its ecosys- through practice, rather than via elabora- Alaskan oil spill. In this letter, Dr. Takahashi- tem services. tion and subsequent testing of theory (Allen Kelso quotes President Obama’s June 15, et al. 1997, Palmer et al. 1997, Peterson and 2010 charge to Navy Secretary Ray Mabus Lipcius 2003). These fields offer related and pledge to develop a long-term Gulf approaches to restoration, but no overarch- Coast restoration plan. Dr. Takahashi-Kelso ing theory of restoration has emerged. The offered support for a plan that acknowl- absence of a compelling theory that could edges the importance of the National be applied to species or habitat restora- Resources Damage Assessment (NRDA) tion implies that empirical assessment of restoration process, which is the process successes and failures of previous restoration used for OPA’s “in-place, in-kind” approach. actions should guide new decision-making But he stressed that restoration must also and that small-scale tests of restoration go beyond those constraints. We agree concepts should be conducted before decid- that recognition of the dual mandate of ing on larger-scale projects (Bernhardt et al. the president’s wider plan and the narrower 2005). Because so much was done under compensatory restoration process driven the banner of restoration after the Exxon by OPA is critically important to achieving Valdez oil spill, learning from that history sustainable restoration. We build upon this seems prudent before restoration decisions overarching concept to design and advo- are made to compensate for DWH injuries to cate our specific restoration suggestions. natural resources of the Gulf and to restore Based in part on his own Exxon Valdez its ecosystem services (see box, Page 11). experiences and those of Senner, Peterson and others, Dr. Takahashi-Kelso makes several fundamental points about the Oyster reefs and Learning from the Exxon process of restoration after natural resource (shown on Sanibel Island, FL) Valdez restoration efforts serve important functions in damage that should be applied to the DWH the Gulf ecosystem. Photo: In response to the DWH oil spill, Dennis oil spill restoration process. We modify and Brian Kingzett Takahashi-Kelso, executive vice president expand upon these points to formulate our

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 9 suggested ecosystem-based restoration Restoration must also be based upon sci- guidance (Appendix I). A summary of the ence and developed using peer review by most relevant points from the Takahashi- independent scientists without conflicts of Kelso letter follows: interest. Some of the science needed to conduct successful restoration of important • The restoration process should be trans- natural resources in the Gulf ecosystem, parent to the public and should engage including the injuries caused by the Deep- the public in meaningful dialogue over water Horizon disaster, is not complete and potential actions from an early point. needs further development before restora- • Quick settlement of damage claims tion can be confidently achieved (Bjorndal without a legal mechanism to achieve et al. 2011). compensatory funding for restoration of unexpected, delayed injuries is not in The Mabus Report the public interest. The legal settlement 1989 A worker operates language is critical because it dictates In addition to the Takahashi-Kelso letter, respirator hoses during an oil the scope of restoration possibilities. we take guidance from the Mabus Report dispersant application test on (2010), which was prepared by the secre- Smith Island in Prince William • Restoration should be broad to allow tary of the Navy in response to the Presi- Sound after the Exxon Valdez enhancement of injured resources over dent’s charge. Fundamentally, we endorse oil spill. Photo: Alaska Resources and beyond their status and condition the recommendation of the Mabus Report Library and Information Service at the time of the oil spill so as to be that an informed and independent funding responsive to the need to account for structure is necessary “to lead to long-term past degradation and, in the process, ecosystem, economic, and health recovery create a self-sustaining system more in the Gulf” (Mabus, Page 5). similar to historic baselines. Specifically, the Mabus report recom- • The scope of possibilities to be consid- mended the establishment of a Gulf Coast ered for restoration should be clearly Recovery Council that “should work with defined and, for the compensatory existing federal and state advisory com- restoration fund, limited to resources, mittees, as appropriate, to ensure that habitats and systems that were injured relevant scientific and technical knowledge by the hydrocarbon releases. Otherwise, underpins recovery planning and decision public expectations can be misguided making, and that research, monitoring, and overly expansive, which unnecessar- and assessment efforts are organized. The ily causes disappointment and bitterness. Council should also provide oversight and • Care must be taken to avoid harming accountability into Gulf of Mexico recovery the ecosystem and its services by imple- efforts by developing quantifiable perfor- menting untested projects that could mance measures that can be used to track result in negative rather than positive progress towards recovery goals” (Mabus, net impacts on resources. Page 8). However, we recommend that the (perhaps inadvertently) restricted focus on • The restoration program or programs, state and federal agencies be broadened to separating the Gulf ecosystem restora- include academics and nongovernmental tion from compensatory restoration agencies. We enthusiastically concur with for spill injuries, should be ecosystem- the five guiding principles for restoration based, integrating component projects (see box, Page 12) presented in the Mabus into a comprehensive restoration plan report, though we offer several cautions. across the northern Gulf. We note that sediment management issues • Division of restoration funds into state are complex, and some suggested interven- “block grants” would not achieve the tions may be so narrowly focused as to be synergies possible, resiliency needed counterproductive. Additionally, monitoring and scope required to address the most conditions and processes is necessary, and critical challenges in sustaining Gulf the metrics of success must be identified ecosystems and their services, because and used to adapt the restoration actions as those bigger challenges tend to be needed to achieve their goals. regional in scope and require coordi- nated responses.

10 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Cormorants sit on stakes placed by researchers next to newly planted sea grass in the Florida Keys. The birds’ drop- pings serve as fertilizer for the plants. Photo: Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission

Ecosystem Services

Natural ecosystems and their constituent • high primary productivity of emer- organisms engage in a wide variety of gent vascular plants as well as single- processes. Some of these processes serve celled benthic microalgae and habitat needs of other organisms, communities provision supporting the food webs of organisms, and ecosystems; these clus- leading to fish and wildlife; ters of beneficial processes are known as • serving as a buffer against storm ecosystem services. Valuable ecosystem wave damage to the adjoining veg- services have historically been taken etation and human development on for granted and therefore not properly higher ground; considered in the process of permitting development projects. One example is • shoreline stabilization and erosion the pollination of crops by honeybees. protection; If farmers had to pay for the services of • flood water storage; pollination instead, the costs of produc- ing crops would be much higher. The • water quality maintenance, including recent decline of honeybee populations filtering out sediments, nutrients and highlights our need to protect valuable pathogens; ecosystem services as we modify natural • biodiversity preservation, especially systems. of a suite of endemic, often threat- Coastal wetlands have for decades ened or endangered vertebrates; been recognized for the high value of • carbon storage as peat is accumu- their many ecosystem services, and the lated, buried and stored, thus buffer- importance of this delivery of goods and ing greenhouse gas emissions; and services has been reflected in federal and state legislation for the protection of • socioeconomic benefits, such as sus- coastal wetlands. The mantra of “no net taining the aesthetics of coastlines, loss of wetlands” has guided approaches maintaining a heritage and historical to estuarine management for decades. culture, supporting ecotourism, serv- Tidal marshes are valued, protected and ing as a living laboratory for nature restored in recognition of their ecosystem education, and promoting psycho- services (MEA 2005), which include: logical health and supporting fishing and waterfowl hunting.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 11 A Foundation for 1. Recognize that ecosystem resilience has Durable Restoration been compromised by multiple human interventions predating the DWH spill; With guidance from Dr. Takahashi-Kelso’s letter to government leaders, from pub- 2. Acknowledge that significant future lished papers on ecosystem-based restora- environmental change is inevitable and tion, and from our own experience, we must be factored into restoration plans feel that restoration in the Gulf must rest and actions for them to be durable; on a solid foundation that acknowledges 3. Treat the Gulf as a complex and inter- the past, is realistic about the future, and connected network of ecosystems from recognizes the interdependence of habitat, shoreline to deep sea; and species, and human beings in the ecosys- tem. Therefore, durable and successful 4. Recognize that human and ecosystem restoration in the Gulf of Mexico must: productivity in the Gulf are co-depen- dent, and that human needs from and effects on the Gulf must be integral to restoration planning.

Mabus Principles (2010)

Our committee’s reactions are in italics; details appear later. The following serve as ideal and guiding principles to restoration toward states to which the Gulf can realistically aspire. The Mabus Report asserts that they “serve as the drivers for achieving the vision of resilient and healthy Gulf of Mexico ecosystems” (Mabus, Pages 38-39).

Principle 1: Coastal and Barrier Shoreline Habitats We concur with this guidance, are Healthy and Resilient. In order to sustain the many ecosystem although we express serious con- services upon which humans rely, coastal habitats must be healthy cern about whether the Mississippi and resilient. Reversing ongoing habitat degradation and preserving River, with all its channelization the remaining healthy habitats is a key principle. It must be recog- and engineering constraints such nized that even the healthiest ecosystems are dynamic, so a restora- as levees and dams, brings enough tion effort should not focus entirely on a fixed “footprint.” A key sediment to sustain wetland objective of this principle is to bring greater balance to managing elevations beyond the immedi- the Mississippi River and other rivers for flood control, navigation, ate footprint of the river-mouth and ecosystem restoration. Another objective is to retain sediments delta. We suggest that the organic in coastal wetlands, before they leave the river to the Gulf soils of the inter-levee area can be (Mabus, Page 38). harmed by the high concentration of nutrients in the river. We also suggest that filling dredged chan- nels and preventing new wetland losses will be much more effective and less expensive than alternative restoration approaches.

12 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Principle 2: Fisheries are Healthy, Diverse and Sustainable. We concur that conservation regu- The Gulf is home to the largest commercial fishery in the contigu- lation will be required to render ous United States. The total trip expenditures for recreational fishing fishing sustainable in the Gulf, in the Gulf states in 2008 were nearly $1.5 billion. Key objectives of but we also identify habitat protec- this principle may include incorporating testing and other mecha- tion as a major additional process nisms for seafood safety to ensure that fish and shellfish are safe for needed to develop the ecosystem human consumption, and working through regulatory and other support for resilient fish and shell- conservation mechanisms to restore populations of fish and shellfish fish populations. (Mabus, Page 38).

Principle 3: Coastal Communities are Adaptive and Resilient. We concur and go further to add The needs and interests of Gulf communities vary and the most that a long-term process of social effective solutions will be based on local conditions. Given that much engagement with local communi- of the land affected by the oil spill is privately held, full restoration ties to encourage understanding will rely on local citizen support. The impacts of climate change, of the scope of unavoidable including sea level rise and more frequent and intense storms, future change is required to sup- will likely alter the landscape significantly, forcing communities to port development of community reassess their priorities. Key objectives of this principle may include resilience. providing coastal managers with information and tools to make better land use and public health decisions, and increasing aware- ness of the connection between ecosystem and community resilience (Mabus, Page 38).

Principle 4: A More Sustainable Storm Buffer Exists. Persistent We concur while recognizing coastal , compounded by sea level rise, is deteriorating that hardened erosion protection natural lines of defense, leaving coastal communities vulnerable to structures and nourishment tropical storms. Natural and engineered systems are necessary to degrade ecosystem reduce exposure and ensure protection. Key objectives of this prin- services and require compensatory ciple may include maintaining and expanding natural storm buffers restoration of impacts to natural such as wetland and barrier islands and improving decision-making resources. with regard to structural protection and navigation interests so that these complement and enhance restoration of natural systems. Another objective is the reduction of risk posed to people and pri- vate property through effective planning, mitigation, and balancing of interests (Mabus, Pages 38-39).

Principle 5: Inland Habitats, Watersheds and Offshore Waters We concur with every point. are Healthy and Well Managed. Communities across the nation rely on our ability to maintain healthy, resilient, and sustainable ocean, coasts, and Great Lakes resources for the benefit of present and future generations. Additional stressors on the health of these systems and the resources they support include overfishing, pollu- tion, and coastal development. Further, ocean and coastal resources are directly and indirectly impacted by land management and use decisions in the watersheds that drain into the Gulf of Mexico. Key elements of this principle include improving management of agricul- tural and forest lands; restoring floodplains and wetlands to improve water quality by uptake of nutrients, reduce flood risks, and enhance wildlife habitat; reducing erosion and nutrient runoff from agricul- tural and developed land; and using state-of-the-art planning tools to deliver comprehensive, integrated ecosystem-based management of resources (Mabus, Page 39).

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 13

Acute and Chronic Stressors on the Gulf of Mexico Before and After the DWH Oil Spill

The DWH Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico

The state of the Gulf and The Deepwater Horizon well blowout June 3 in Alabama. Oil ultimately grounded its coastal zone imme- occurred April 20, 2010, resulting in explo- on hundreds of miles of , marshes, sions and fires on the drilling rig that killed sea grass beds, tidal flats and oyster reefs, diately before the DWH 11 men, injured many more and led two despite intensive response efforts to prevent incident was far from days later (ironically on Earth Day, April 22) and minimize this outcome. These efforts pristine, with countless to sinking of the rig to the seafloor about included massive applications of dispersants stressors having already 1,500 m below the surface. On April 22, both on the sea surface and injected into altered and degraded the substantial amounts of orange-brown crude the plume emerging from the seafloor, oil appeared at the surface, confirming skimming floating oil from the sea surface, ecosystem. that a well blowout had occurred at the burning it at sea, installing booms along drill site. As the oil continued to flow for marshes and other sensitive shorelines, 85 days, totaling an estimated 4.9 million diverting freshwater river discharges into barrels, the nonprofit organization SkyTruth marshes in an attempt to prevent intrusion assembled and posted satellite images from of oil slicks, and dredging and filling to infrared and radar sources depicting the construct artificial berms on the coastline. location of the surface oil slick. By June 25 Although no damage assessment test data and 26, the slick had covered more than are available, field observations suggest that 24,000 square miles of the sea surface in these response actions caused some level the northern Gulf of Mexico (Norse and of collateral injuries to wildlife and habitats, Amos 2010). By July 16, the day after all oil which therefore represent indirect damage flow from the stricken well had ended, an attributable to the Deepwater Horizon area of about 68,000 square miles of the blowout (Table 1). Gulf surface had been covered by oil (Norse Despite the emergency response efforts, the and Amos 2010). oil fouled many acres of the most valuable In late April, winds in the Gulf typically marsh edge habitat, fouled ocean beaches, switch to the seasonally characteristic, forced closures of shellfisheries and fin- southwesterly onshore direction, which fisheries and decimated the economically would have brought the oil quickly and vital Gulf tourism industry, extending at heavily onto and into shoreline habi- least as far as southwest Florida (Table 1). tats. Fortuitously, the spring of 2010 was Many birds of several species were killed not typical and lacked the spring period of along shore, including brown pelicans and onshore winds. In addition, much of the other species that were nesting during that surface oil was caught up in an eddy that spring-summer season, and marsh residents The skyscrapers of New Orleans helped keep it at sea and prevent its trans- like rails. Lesser amounts of oil entered low- are visible behind houses port via the Loop southward to the energy muddy habitats of marshes and mud flooded by Hurricane Katrina. Florida Keys and then into the Gulf Stream flats, where it can persist without com- Photo: Tyrone Turner/National and Atlantic Ocean. As a consequence, oil plete weathering for years. Consequently, Geographic Stock was not detected reaching shore until the Deepwater Horizon oil release also

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 15 resembled earlier shallow-water oil spills invertebrate larvae and other - The DWH oil release by affecting shoreline habitats of value to consuming, mesopelagic zooplankters. differs so dramatically wildlife and to human enterprise. Subsequent agglomeration of oil particles, sediments and , possibly medi- from all previous, well- ated by release of muds from the well and studied crude oil spills Differences between DWH by sticky bacterial exudates (Hazen et al. that it requires develop- and other oil spills 2010), facilitated the transport of this oil to ment of a completely As anticipated, the Deepwater Horizon the seafloor, where observations of dead, new conceptual model. blowout led to the oiling of sea-surface soft corals and crinoids on hard bottom and shoreline habitats and to consequent and polychaetes and brittle stars on soft damage to natural resources. In contrast bottom were associated with dark deposits to previous spills, however, the majority of hydrocarbon-enriched sediments (Fisher of the oil and gas released at the well- 2010). Consequently, the process of dis- head remained far below the sea surface. persing the oil led to widespread exposures An estimated 500,000 tons of gaseous of particle-feeding organisms of the deep hydrocarbons — perhaps half of all hydro- pelagic and seafloor realms. This oil stimu- carbons released by the blowout (Joye et lated massive production of microbes, with al. 2011) — entered the ocean yet were unknown consequences to deep-ocean metabolized by heterotrophic bacteria in food webs, in part because of the likely the deep ocean, and only 0.01 percent was mortality and feeding incapacitation of the vented into the atmosphere (Kessler et al. particle feeders that might consume these 2011). A large fraction of the oil was also microbes (Table 1). retained beneath the sea surface because Clearly, the Deepwater Horizon oil release of the unique physical chemistry created by differs so dramatically from all previous, the deepwater blowout conditions. Under well-studied crude oil spills that it requires conditions of high-pressure deepwater dis- development of a completely new concep- charge of hot oil and gas, the entrainment tual model, applicable not only to this spill of cold seawater, caused by violent and but also to all future deepwater releases turbulent flows at the wellhead, created a (Peterson et al. in press). Elaboration of variety of dispersed phases, including fine- this emerging model for deepwater well scale oil droplets, gas bubbles, dissolved blowouts, including rigorous ecotoxicologi- gas, oil-water emulsions and gas hydrates. cal models, is urgently needed to document The collective buoyancy of this mixture of and understand the deep-ocean impacts of oil and gas created a rising plume, from this oil spill, and especially to allow for the which much of the oil and gas separated effective compensatory restoration of lost and was trapped by ocean stratification at ecosystem services. depths of 800 to 1,200 m and subsequently deflected and transported by ambient cur- rents (Joye et al. 2011). Massive production What DWH indicates about of methanotrophic bacteria was associated failures in the deep-sea oil with the oil and gas in this depth stratum, drilling program causing a detectable depression of oxygen levels, but it did not approach anoxia (Joye The National Commission on the BP Deep- et al. 2011). water Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling (Graham et al. 2011a) provides an insightful The natural dispersal of oil induced by pro- and comprehensive account of the many cesses at the wellhead may have rendered factors over multiple time scales that led to the application of 1.8 million gallons of the well blowout on the Macondo Prospect toxic Corexit dispersant unnecessary, but and the resulting loss of life, environmen- the net effect was the novel dispersal of the tal contamination, and impacts to human oil in very fine droplets and retention of a enterprise along the northern Gulf Coast. large percentage of the oil droplets in the The commission concluded that the spill mesopelagic and bathypelagic depths of was preventable. According to the commis- the deep sea. Such dispersal and reten- sion, the immediate causes of the calamity tion of oil in the as finely were failures in management by BP, dispersed droplets exposes organisms Halliburton, and Transocean on the Deep- living there or passing through to bioavail- water Horizon rig at the end of the drilling able, toxic oil, affecting copepods, salps, process. Communications failures among

16 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Table 1 Major Natural Resource Damage From DWH Well Blowout

Damage from surface oil at sea

Resource Damage Seabirds Tens to hundreds of northern gannets, brown pelicans, laughing gulls, terns, black skimmers and many others were killed and experienced fitness losses that reduced reproductive capacity.

Sea turtles Hundreds of loggerhead, Kemp’s ridley, green and leatherback turtles (all threatened or endangered spe- cies) experienced fitness loss or were killed.

Marine mammals Bottlenose dolphins were killed.

Sargassum community Plants were soaked with oil, hatchling sea turtles oiled, juvenile game fish exposed, forage fish and inverte- An oiled pelican stands on a brate prey exposed, resulting in community mortalities rock jetty at Grand Isle, LA, and fitness losses. after the Deepwater Horizon spill. Photo: Eileen Romero/ Fish and crabs Blue crab in early life stages took up oil and dispersant Marine Photobank with likely effects on fitness; fish in early life stages were similarly exposed.

Cannonball jellyfish Physical fouling likely resulting in loss of life and and smaller gelatinous fitness.

Damage from oiling of shoreline habitats

Resource Damage Coastal marsh habitat Loss of ecosystem services from hundreds of acres of heavily, moderately and lightly oiled marsh

Ocean beach habitat Some mortality from fouling of feeding apparatus of mole crabs, bean clams, amphipods and polychaetes (prey for surf fish and shorebirds, reducing their pro- ductivity)

Sea grass bed habitat Some mortality of sea grass with loss of its ecosystem services and mortality of sensitive species such as crus- taceans and echinoderms

Tidal flat habitat Many areas of partial loss of ecosystem services of Oil from the spill is visible on a producing fish, crabs and shrimp marsh. Photo: NOAA Oyster habitat Polycyclic aromatic hydocarbon contamination of oys- ters and likely slower growth and production; probable deaths of some resident crustaceans such as amphi- pods, shrimp and crabs.

Nearshore species More bird deaths, including rails, pelicans, terns, black skimmers, shorebirds, gulls, wading birds; reptile deaths including terrapins and alligators; deaths of marsh mammals such as river otters

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 17 Damage from subsurface dispersed oil and gas

Resource Damage Pelagic suspension feeders Ingestion of particulate oil and fouling of feeding apparatus caused widespread mortality of deep-sea, mesopelagic and benthopelagic guilds of particle feed- ers (e.g., salps, appendicularians, jellies, zooplankton), altering energy transfer through the

Benthic suspension feed- Ingestion of particulate oil and fouling of feeding ers on hard bottoms and apparatus caused widespread mortality of soft corals, suspension and deposit crinoids, bryozoans, brittle stars, polychaetes — the feeders on soft bottoms of both hard and soft bottoms

Heterotrophic microbial Massive organic carbon enrichment resulted in production throughout the localized oxygen reductions and disruptions in the Dying corals have been found water column, especially in food web. near the Deepwater Horizon 800–1,200m of water site. Photo: NOAA OER and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement Collateral damage caused by response actions Activity Damage Soot releases into Wildlife health effects of respiring soot and possible the atmosphere and benthic effects of its ocean deposition deposition on the seafloor from burning oil

Use of mechanical skim- Contact with skimmers resulted in wildlife injuries and mers to remove surface oil fatalities

Dredging and filling to Mortality of benthic invertebrates, which serve as key create berms offshore in prey for shrimp, crabs and , and mortality attempts to block oil from of and sea turtle eggs grounding on natural habitats Two fishing vessels drag an oil boom after trapped oil is set Intensive repeated beach Simultaneous mortality of benthic invertebrates such ablaze in the Gulf. Controlled excavations and raking to as mole crabs and bean clams—important prey for surf burns were conducted to remove tarballs fishers and shorebirds—plus removal of wrack, which prevent the spread of spilled serves as habitat for small crustaceans and insects oil. Photo: Jeffery Tilghman consumed by plovers and other shorebirds Williams, U.S. Navy/Marine Photobank Sea turtle nest relocations Risks of imprinting survivors to return to live along and from Gulf Coast to eastern nest on a different coast Florida beaches

Boom deployment off- Direct physical damage to marsh plants as booms shore of marsh shorelines break loose and are driven by waves into the marsh; occasional trapping of oil and waterbirds together, resulting in oiling and enhanced mortality of the birds

Use of 1.8 million gallons There is uncertainty about Corexit-generated chronic of Corexit exposures to pelagic organisms, and likely fitness losses and direct mortality of particle feeders.

18 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem separate specialists and failure to recognize well should have preceded the emergency the seriousness of inherent risks were part need for them. Application of dispersant of a complex sequence of multiple fail- at the wellhead should at least have been ures that facilitated an improbable event. tested in mesocosms under conditions Although the blowout may have been mimicking a deepwater blowout before the improbable, an underlying and long-stand- decision to use it for the DWH. Toxicity tests ing culture of indifference within both the using the unique deep-sea particle feeders petroleum industry and the federal regula- at risk to finely dispersed oil should have tory agency (the former Minerals Manage- been conducted in advance of the decision ment Service) set the stage for the blowout to use dispersants. In addition, scientific and made such an event inevitable (Graham advances needed to understand the biologi- et al. 2011a). cal communities of the deep pelagic and benthic oceans and the physical transport As the most accessible oil reservoirs are regime that carries oil after release into the Ships clean up oil in the Gulf of being depleted while the demand for environment in deep water had also stalled. Mexico using the same crude oil increases, the petroleum industry has As a consequence, assessment of oil spill tools that were used after the extended exploration and production into Exxon Valdez spill 21 years impacts from deepwater blowouts was seri- progressively deeper waters. This pro- earlier. Photo: James Davidson ously compromised. cess has required remarkable engineering innovation for successful drilling in ocean As tragic as the DWH blowout was, it offers waters over a mile deep and extraction of an opportunity. As with the 1969 blowout oil several miles deeper below the seafloor. in the Santa Barbara Channel,1 which led Oil at such depths exists under far greater to passage of the National Environmental pressures than oil extracted from shal- Policy Act (NEPA), and the moratorium on low depths, thereby increasing the need oil drilling off the California coast and other Despite remarkable to control pressure in the well. Despite states, the DWH blowout could stimulate advances in engineer- remarkable advances in engineering for oil interest in protecting the economically, exploration and production in deep water, socially and environmentally critical Gulf ing for oil exploration corresponding progress has not occurred in region of the United States. and production in deep blowout prevention, emergency response, water, corresponding clean-up and mitigation technologies. Some Ecosystem and natural progress has not occurred of the same crude tools used to respond to resource impacts of oil and in blowout prevention, the oil release at the surface of the ocean by the grounded Exxon Valdez tanker in gas release emergency response, 1989—skimming and surface booming— Before the Deepwater Horizon blowout, clean-up and mitigation were applied again 21 years later. Neither the prevailing paradigm of maritime oil the industry nor government regulators had technologies. behavior, biological exposure pathways developed effective new technology for fate, and consequent impacts to natural shutting down a deepwater, high-pressure resources was based upon syntheses of past blowout, as evidenced by the well-pub- shallow-water, largely nearshore oil spills licized and remarkably rapid conceptual (e.g., NRC 2003). In such spills, crude oil development, construction and testing of remains at the surface, unless mixed into tools and approaches by the industry in the the water column by strong surface waves. weeks after April 20, 2010. If discharged below the sea surface, the oil Industry complacency, failure to recognize rises rapidly to the surface because of its risk and the differences between deep and buoyancy. Gaseous hydrocarbons such as shallow oil releases, and the conflicted methane also rise to the sea surface, primar- mission of the federal regulatory agency ily as bubble plumes, and disperse rapidly charged with promoting development and into the atmosphere. The crude oil on the production of oil and gas while simulta- sea surface is viscous and sticky; it fouls neously acting as regulator meant that the feathers of seabirds and the coats of appropriate advances were not made in fur-bearing marine mammals, causing high environmental safeguards to match the rates of mortality by disrupting thermoregu- heightened risks and challenges of deepwa- lation and through ingestion of toxins as ter drilling. The development and testing of these birds and mammals preen feathers or effective and reliable technologies to cap a fur (Rice et al. 1996). Other organisms that runaway blowout of a deep or ultra-deep use the ocean surface, such as sea turtles,

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 19 are exposed to physical fouling, potentially that excavate those sediments to form bur- Oil that penetrates into resulting in death. Smooth-skinned marine rows (Culbertson et al. 2007) or to uncover the sediments sufficiently, mammals, such as killer whales and harbor infaunal prey. This exposure can cause seals, risk mortality and sublethal effects on sublethal losses of fitness that can have so that sunlight does growth, reproduction and behavior from population-level consequences for several not reach it and oxygen inhalation of oil globules while breathing years (Peterson et al. 2003b). cannot be readily resup- through their blowholes and from inhaling The DWH well blowout indeed led to plied from the atmo- the more volatile toxic hydrocarbons in the substantial coverage of the sea surface and sphere, can persist for atmosphere. The floating oil is transported consequent fouling and killing of seabirds, by winds and surface currents and can end many decades without sea turtles, bottlenose dolphins and perhaps up grounded on , where it exposes, degradation. other marine mammals, as expected from fouls and kills intertidal and shallow subtidal traditional shallow-water spills (Table 1). The organisms, including salt marsh plants, sea seabirds that experienced the most loss of grasses, macroalgae and oysters that pro- life include northern gannet, brown pelican, vide important biogenic habitat (Teal and gulls, terns and the black skimmer. Aborted Howarth 1984). Oil that penetrates into the bottlenose dolphin fetuses were observed. sediments sufficiently, so that sunlight does Surface oil also collected in the floating not reach it and oxygen cannot be readily Sargassum, a large brown alga that forms resupplied from the atmosphere, can persist a unique floating nursery habitat in the for many decades without degradation Gulf and other seas. Sargassum supports (Boufadel et al. 2010), exposing animals large numbers of small , including

The Menhaden Fishery in the Gulf of Mexico

The Gulf menhaden fishery dates to important fishery. Because menhaden is the late 1800s and remains economi- a forage fish for many predatory pelagic cally important today. With landings of fishes, seabirds and marine mammals, 468,736 tons in 2004, the Gulf men- reductions in stock levels by fishing haden landings comprise 11 percent may have consequences for the health of all U.S. fishery landings, and Gulf and viability of populations of higher menhaden support the second-largest trophic-level predators (Botsford et al. commercial fishery in the United States 1997). To the extent that these higher- (Pritchard 2005). The menhaden catch order predators are protected by law, records for years before World War II these indirect ecosystem-based issues are incomplete, but annual landings associated with menhaden harvest are A menhaden fishing boat in from 1918 to 1944 probably ranged likely to represent a critical manage- Empire, LA. Photo: Louisiana from 2,000 to 12,000 tons (Nicholson ment concern. The menhaden fishery’s Sea Grant College Program/ 1978). Landings appeared to increase history indicates limited consideration Louisiana State University from the late 1940s through 1970, with for ecosystem-based impacts, yet as a peak of 521,500 tons landed in 1969 the ocean environment continues to (Chapoton 1970, 1971). Landings con- change, management of this highly pro- tinued to increase through the 1970s ductive fish stock will need to take into and 1980s, exceeding 800,000 tons for account a broader range of factors that six consecutive years (1982 to 1987) drive menhaden dynamics, including and peaking at 982,800 tons in 1984 DWH oil spill impacts, and a wider range (Smith 1991). Since 1988, the land- of consequences of fishing, including ings have ranged from 421,400 tons in impacts on threatened and endangered 1992 to 761,600 tons in 1994, show- species and on species injured by the ing no apparent trend. Although the oil spill. Menhaden represent one of menhaden landings do not appear to be many fish stocks for which ecosystem declining further from the 1982–1987 consequences of fishing need to be levels, the potential for overfishing is considered in a context of the changing still a concern and must be consid- Gulf environment so that sustainability is ered in the future management of this incorporated into management.

20 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem juvenile bluefin tuna, cobia and wahoo, as other sea turtles from the time of leaving well as crustaceans and other invertebrates the nest until they return to coastal waters. that help feed juvenile predatory pelagic Large numbers of sea turtle hatchlings fishes. In addition, this is the critical habitat were recovered dead and dying from the for juvenile loggerhead, Kemp’s ridley and Sargassum.

Damage to the Gulf of Mexico Prior to the DWH Oil Spill

The state of the Gulf and its coastal zone increases in impermeable surface area, and immediately before the DWH incident was dredge-and-fill activities in wetlands; extrac- far from pristine, with countless anthropo- tions of subsurface fluids such as oil, gas genic stressors having already altered and and groundwater, which induce subsidence; degraded the ecosystem. In the Gulf and water quality degradation from agricultural, other ocean ecosystems, anthropogenic urban, and industrial runoff of nutrients; degradation is a historically cumulative and the burgeoning impacts of anthropo- process (Jackson 1997, 2010, Jackson et al. genically induced global climate change. 2001, 2011), and an understanding of that The Gulf has endured the consequences of degradation process is critical to success- uncontrolled nutrient runoff and eutro- ful restoration. Stressors can synergistically phication because of agriculture upstream intensify their impacts over time and across (Rabalais et al. 2002, 2007); overfishing and systems and species in ways that may result associated habitat destruction from trawl- 1890s Green turtles are pre- in alternative and less desirable ecosystem ing; and loss of habitat because of coastal pared for shipping to New York states (Scheffer et al. 2001). Thus, attempts development, land subsidence, channeliza- from Key West, FL, in 1898. to repair the consequences of more recent tion of wetlands, intensification of severe The Gulf sea turtle fishery disturbances in any ecosystem will neces- storms, and sea level rise. The historical peaked in the late 1800s and sarily fail unless restoration addresses all of context of each of these human modifica- then declined sharply because the drivers of degradation both present and tions of the ecosystem is presented below. of overexploitation. Photo: past. Consequently, the restoration should Florida Keys Public Libraries incorporate an understanding of the base- line natural processes of the ecosystem, the Centuries of fishing in the historical degradation of those processes, Gulf of Mexico and the way in which progressive environ- The first significant human impact on mental changes in the ecosystem might the Gulf ecosystem was probably caused affect restorative actions. The durability of by fishing in coastal estuaries by Native restoration depends upon consideration of Americans. Although no recorded evidence these factors. This section outlines some exists, Native American fishing may have of the major historical and anthropogenic particularly affected accessible species such stressors on the Gulf ecosystem. as oysters near shore (Jackson et al. 2001, Humans have been active in the Gulf Lotze et al. 2006). This effect may have ecosystem for thousands of years, ranging been minimal: From the time of Columbus’s from centuries of subsistence fishing and landing through the early 1600s, there were harvesting of nearshore resources by Native accounts of large abundances of fish, oys- Americans to oil and gas extraction in the ters, sea turtles and marine mammals found 20th and 21st centuries. The impacts of in the Gulf and the Caribbean. However, human activities include bottom habitat by the early 1800s, many of these organ- modification and population reductions isms were already being overfished (Jackson in targeted fish and shellfish stocks and in 1997, Jackson et al. 2001), and exploitation species killed as bycatch from large-scale increased through the 19th century. The sea commercial and recreational fishing; chan- turtle fishery peaked in 1890, when turtles nelization and damming of major rivers ranked 10th among fishery products from flowing into the Gulf; widespread and rap- Gulf states and fifth in Texas, and declined idly accelerating coastal development with sharply after 1892 due to overexploitation its attendant modification of hydrology, (Doughty 1984).

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 21 Advances in fishing technology affected disturbed by trawling, indicating shifts in the Gulf as vessels and catching devices community structure at multiple trophic improved the efficiency of fishing. The levels (Wells et al. 2008). Such bottom transitions from sailing vessels in the late disturbance resets the benthic invertebrate 1800s to steamers in the early 1900s and community to an early successional stage then to diesel-powered vessels in the 1930s of small, short-lived invertebrates. When each increased the impact that fishing had combined with the loss and degradation of on marine populations. The introduction of coastal habitats induced by other stressors, purse seines and longlines in the late 1800s, continued intense fishing pressure and otter trawls for groundfish and shrimp in the bottom disturbance associated with trawling early 1900s, and more recent advances such and dredging may cause even more habitat as durable nylon fibers for nets, Loran-C, modifications and reductions in fish stocks. and GPS navigation systems dramatically Fishing is a major pillar of the contemporary increased efficiency, the ability to target Gulf coastal economy. Achieving sustainable Late 1800s Sailing vessels specific sites, and the size of catches. Refrig- harvest levels at higher stock abundances were replaced by steam vessels. eration also helped increase demand by would result in millions of dollars’ worth of Credit: NOAA creating globalization of markets. enhancement to Gulf state economies. Our These technological advances in the com- Gulf restoration actions under Theme 3 (see mercial and recreational fishing industry Page 75) include suggestions for achieving have contributed to overfishing and the sustainable levels of extraction of fish and subsequent decline of major fisheries in the shellfish at high yields while also minimizing Gulf, including Spanish and king mackerel, impacts on wildlife. red snapper, several species of grouper, red drum and many pelagic shark species (UN FAO 2005, Coleman et al. 2004a, Baum Pollution in the Gulf and Myers 2004). The U.S. National Marine Trends in nutrient loading and pollution Fisheries Service reported that in 2002, the The concentration of Nutrient loading, sedimentation and dis- five Gulf Coast states landed a total of more nitrate and phosphorus charges of other pollutants into the Gulf than 1.7 billion pounds (771,800,000 kg) in river systems, such as has increased over the past 200 years as of fish, including Gulf menhaden (see box, a consequence of more intense human the Mississippi, that feed Page 20) and shellfish, worth more than occupation, development and use of land into the Gulf increased $705 million. These landings, however, do in the Mississippi River watershed and other not include the many pounds of bycatch three- to fivefold rivers entering the Gulf (Turner 2009). The (including juvenile commercial fishes, forage between the early concentration of nitrate and phosphorus in fishes, birds, sea turtles and marine mam- 1900s and the 1990s. river systems that feed into the Gulf, such as mals) that are associated with many fisheries the Mississippi, increased three- to fivefold (Moore et al. 2009), making the total between the early 1900s and the 1990s extraction of fish and wildlife from fisheries and may continue to rise with increas- much greater. ing demands for food and, more recently, Gulf landings of shrimps and oysters for corn and other crops used in ethanol account for about 68 and 70 percent, production in the Midwest (Figure 2; Turner respectively, of total U.S. landings. Although et al. 2007). The concentrations of pollut- impacts of fishing on populations of these ants such as heavy metals have increased animals are not well documented in the in the sediments, and these increases are Gulf, the indirect effects of their harvest probably associated with oil drilling activities on the benthic habitats and the commu- in the Gulf (Vazquez et al. 2002). Increased nities of invertebrates and fish that they levels of mercury and some other toxic con- support have been well studied in recent taminants in the Mississippi River and other decades. Trawling for shrimp and groundfish rivers leading into the Gulf can be linked disturbs bottom habitat and reduces the to settlement of the Midwest by European species diversity, abundance and immigrants in the mid-1800s. Contaminant of bottom-dwelling organisms that serve as concentrations of heavy metals peaked a food source for many demersal fish and in the 1960s and have since declined, crustaceans (Collie et al. 1997). Different primarily in response to environmental laws assemblages of fish and crustaceans can enacted in the 1970s such as the Clean also be associated with habitats frequently Water Act (Wiener and Sandheinrich 2010).

22 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Despite regulatory protections, mercury million hectares) of the Gulf; sea grass habi- and organic pollutants, such as DDT and tat losses over the past 50 years, however, PCBs, which were released into the Gulf have been estimated at 20 to 100 percent watersheds before effective regulation, have for most northern Gulf estuaries (Duke and gradually biomagnified to concentrations Kruczynski 1992). Similarly, losses of 50 adversely affecting apex predators (Wiener to 89 percent are estimated for oysters in and Sandheinrich 2010). the Gulf from baselines ranging from 20 to 130 years ago to the present (Beck et al. Impacts of nutrient loading 2011). Coral reefs in the Gulf have experi- and pollution enced and disease outbreaks Salt marshes, sea grass meadows and attributed to anthropogenic stressors in oyster reefs act as filters for nutrients the past few decades, resulting in losses in and other pollutants, but the process of total coral cover on some reefs (Knowlton trapping excess nutrients, heavy metals and Jackson 2008). Because of the known and toxic organic chemicals has ecological stress of excess nutrients on these organ- consequences (Dame et al. 1984). Although isms, we can attribute some aspect of these nutrient enrichment is not the primary losses to nutrient loading. Nutrient loading is cause of wetland loss in the Gulf, it appears likely to continue to increase in the coming to contribute to it. From 1998 to 2004, decades and could interfere with successful 370,760 of the 3,508,600 acres of saltwater restoration of coastal wetlands and subtidal wetlands along the Gulf Coast were lost, biogenic habitats of the Gulf if it continues more than along any other U.S. coastline unabated. (Stedman and Dahl 2008). Dead zones in the Gulf of Mexico: 1920s–present Widespread In general, nutrient enrichment of wetlands application of pesticides and The consequences of results in higher aboveground standing bio- fertilizers occurred on agricul- In large part because of nutrient loading, mass (Morris 1991). However, belowground -1 tural lands beginning in the hypoxia (dissolved oxygen < 2 mg l ) is a 1920s and continuing today. production is more critical than aboveg- growing problem worldwide in estuaries Photo: Willard Culver/National round production to sustaining marshes and coastal oceans (Rabalais 2002, Diaz and Geographic Stock as sea level rises. The production of roots Rosenberg 2008). The extent and persis- and rhizomes elevates the marsh surface at tence of hypoxia on the rates that can help compensate for rela- of the northern Gulf make the Gulf’s “dead tive sea level rise. Results from a 30-year zone” the second-largest manifestation of experiment in salt marshes in Massachusetts anthropogenic coastal in the show that eutrophication does not increase world (Figure 2). Systematic mapping and organic matter accumulation belowground monitoring of the area of hypoxia in bottom but instead weakens soil strength and may waters began in 1985 (Rabalais 2002). The cause a significant loss in marsh elevation size, as measured each year in equivalent to about half the average global July, has ranged between 40 to 22,000 km2 sea level rise rates (Turner et al. 2009). and averaged 16,700 km2 from 2000 to 2007 Therefore, sustaining and restoring coastal (excluding two years when strong storms emergent marshes is more likely if they occurred just before the hypoxia survey). receive fewer, not more, nutrients. An Action Plan for Reducing, Mitigating, Like wetlands, other biogenic shoreline and Controlling Hypoxia in the Northern habitats have suffered significant degrada- Gulf of Mexico (Mississippi River/Gulf of tion and loss from nutrient enrichment Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force in the decades before the DWH oil spill. 2001) endorsed by federal agencies, states Nutrient loading can cause massive blooms and tribal governments calls for a long-term of phytoplankton, microalgae and macroal- adaptive strategy coupling management gae, which can compete with benthic sea actions with enhanced monitoring, mod- grasses (Hughes et al. 2004, Burkholder et eling and research, and reassessment of al. 2007) and corals (Anthony et al. 2011) accomplishments and environmental indica- for light and oxygen and can interfere with tors at five-year intervals. Several models oyster spat settlement on reefs (Thomsen summarize the relationship between the and McGlathery 2006). Orth and van nutrient loading of nitrogen and phospho- Montfrans (1990) estimated that sea grass rus and the severity of the hypoxic zone covered 2.47 million acres (nearly one (Figure 2; Rabalais et al. 2007) and support

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 23 Figure 2 Mississippi River Basin Rivers, estuaries and tributaries from the 48 contiguous states run off into the Gulf via the Mississippi River basin. Source: USDOI and USGS 2008

Galveston Mississippi Bay River

Study area 200 km

Hypoxic “Dead” Zone States that run off into the Gulf When dissolved oxygen levels reach two milligrams per More than 75% of nitrogen and phosphorus runoff liter or less—a condition called hypoxia—most slow- comes from Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, Arkansas, moving or attached animals suffocate, creating areas Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio and Mississippi known as dead zones in the bottom waters. The dead zone in the northern Gulf of Mexico is nearly the largest Agricultural sources contribute more than 70% in the world, averaging 6,700 square miles (17,300 of the nitrogen and phosphorus delivered to the square kilometers) over the past five years; it is second Gulf, versus only 9 to 12% from urban sources. only to the hypoxic zone in the Baltic Sea.

The maximum area of this dead zone was Nitrogen measured at 8,481 square miles (22,000 66% comes from growing crops, espe- square kilometers) during the summer of cially corn and soy. Other sources include 2002; this is equivalent to the size of atmospheric deposition (16%), urban and Massachusetts. population sources (9%), pasture and range (5%), and natural land (4%).

Phosphorus Year-to-year area of Gulf of Mexico 43% comes from crops, especially corn hypoxia, shown in square miles and soy, and 37% comes from range and No data available for 1988 and 1989. pasture, particularly animal manure. Other Source: Rabalais et al. 2010 sources include urban and population sources (12%) and natural land (8%).

Source: Alexander et al. 2008 10,000

5,000 square miles square

0 1985 1990 2000 2010

years

24 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem

Year to year area of Gulf of Mexico hypoxia, shown in square miles. Source: NOAA http://www.gulfhypoxia.net/Research/Shelfwide%20Cruises/ 50000005 Coastal Development in South Florida 40000004 South Florida, consisting of seven coun- single-family residences surrounded by

30000003 ties, supported a population of only golf courses, pools and urban centers 5,000 people in 1900. By 1930, after (Walker et al. 1997). Today the popula- 20000002 Henry Flagler, a principal in Standard Oil, tion is over five million, representing one completed the Miami railway, the popu- of the highest growth rates in the United population (millions) 10000001 lation had grown to more than 230,000. States from 1900 to the present. With this population surge came large 0 0 increases in agriculture in the first half of Because of the high rate of develop- the 20th century, with more than 55,000 ment, many of the functions of the 1900 1950 2011 hectares of farmland by 1943, accom- ecosystems in South Florida are no panied by the destruction of coastal longer being performed. Erosion has forests and the Everglades become a major problem on the coast, Figure 3 wetlands, and then large increases in largely as a result of severed water and South Florida Population residential and urban development in the sediment transport pathways from Growth Since 1900 South latter half of the 20th century. Massive upstate down through the Everglades Florida’s population has grown flooding in the late 1940s with bur- and to Miami, loss of mangroves on from 5,000 in 1900 to a current geoning mosquito populations caused shore, consequences of channel dredg- population over five million. the federal government to build dikes ing, and impacts of subsidence caused Source: Walker et al. 1997 around Lake Okeechobee to provide by groundwater extraction. With sea flood protection for the growing urban level rise now threatening to flood all areas to the south and to build mosquito of South Florida (Figure 8), restoration abatement throughout the area. efforts in this region must address a suite By 1950, the South Florida population of ecological issues to restore long-term reached 720,000, primarily associated sustainability and resilience of ecosys- with migration of retirees into suburban tems and human communities.

the key component of the management increases (Crossett et al. 2004). Increases action, which is to reduce nutrient loading in residential, commercial, industrial and to the Gulf of Mexico so that the average agricultural development have accompa- hypoxic area in summer is 5,000 km2 or nied this population increase, resulting in less by 2015. Turner et al. (2008) suggested the loss of coastal forests and wetlands that there was an increase in the oxygen and increases in storm water runoff and demand of marine sediments arising from transport of nutrients and sediments into the accumulation of organic matter and the Gulf. that the accumulation in one year made the Channelization, levee construction and system more sensitive to nitrogen loading damming have limited floodwater flows the next year. Remedial actions meant to onto the flood plains, thereby suppressing reduce the size of the hypoxic zone must the transport, deposition and retention of address these future increases in nutrient sediments to enrich the soils and vegeta- loading and today’s legacy of eutrophication. 1980–2008 The population tion. Motivated by a desire to create more of the five Gulf Coast states waterfront real estate with riparian access increased by 45 percent. Above for large boats, aggressive construction of is Panama City, FL. Photo: Ray Land loss along the Gulf Coast “finger channels” (see photos, Page 26) Devlin Coastal development took place in the mid-1950s to late 1960s The population of the five Gulf Coast states along much of the coast of south Florida. increased by 45 percent between 1980 The dredge-and-fill operations were often and 2008. More than 20 million people are conducted directly over mangrove forests or now living on the Gulf Coast, with coastal oyster reefs, as illustrated in these photos. counties in Texas and Florida (see box In addition to destroying critical fish habi- above) experiencing the largest population tats, aggressive construction in the estuaries

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 25 1950s–1960s Finger channels were constructed over man- grove and oyster reef habitats in South Florida. The reduction in bay size from filling also had a substantial impact on the tidal and on sediment supply to adjacent beaches. Photos: Courtesy of Ping Wang

1951 2010 reduced the bay size and altered the sedi- of land loss where dredging is low is near The rise and fall in ment dynamics of the tidal inlets and the zero; and, 3) the land loss rates acceler- dredging is coincidental nearby ocean beaches (Wang et al. 2011). ated and slowed when dredging rose and slowed in the Barataria basin (Turner et al. with the rise and fall of Compounding the rapid residential develop- 2007b). wetland loss. ment, dredging for oil and gas extraction has been causally linked to coastal wetland The rise and fall in dredging is coinciden- loss in the Gulf. More than 90 percent of tal with the rise and fall of wetland loss U.S. offshore oil and gas reserves, past (Figure 4). Other plausible explanations production and present yields are in the for wetland loss are related to the loss of coastal waters of the Gulf of Mexico, but the accumulated organic matter and plant the inshore recovery peaked more than a stress accompanying an altered hydrology decade ago. Large-scale efforts to slow or (Swenson and Turner 1987, Turner 1997, reverse wetland losses along the Gulf began 2004). But the fact that sea level rise, soil in the early 1990s, focused on construction subsidence and the concentration of sus- of river diversions. Such projects make up pended sediment in the river have remained the largest and most expensive strategy for about the same from the 1960s to the addressing wetland loss in the Louisiana present (Turner 1997, Turner and Rabalais coastal area, with future costs possibly 2003) supports the conclusion that the cur- reaching several billion dollars. Dredging rent dominant cause of Gulf wetland loss is navigation routes through Gulf coastal wet- dredging. lands began at least 200 years ago (Davis 1973), but it was the canals dredged for oil Dredging is regulated and authorized and gas recovery efforts beginning in the through permits issued by state and federal 1930s and peaking in the 1960s (Figure 4) agencies, and the permitting process that had demonstrable and coastwide influ- does not appear to reflect the foreseeable ences on wetlands. The direct impact of consequences for wetland loss. Damage dredging on wetlands amounted to 1,017 that is now evident was largely completed km2 of canals in 1990 (Britsch and Dunbar before critical analyses of wetland impacts 1993), with an equal area of spoil banks of canal dredging were completed. But stacked on the adjacent wetlands (Bau- even today there is no coastwide restoration mann and Turner 1990). There is a much program that specifically targets compen- 1918 A canal is dredged in larger indirect impact from canals and the sating for the direct and indirect impacts New Orleans. Photo: Team dredged spoil deposits that is demonstrable of canals and spoil banks on wetland loss. New Orleans/U.S. Army Corps at several temporal and spatial scales. For Existing canals and any future dredging and of Engineers example, 1) land loss rates in the deltaic canal construction could compromise DWH plain, in similar geological substrates, are restoration efforts if they occur within areas directly related to dredging; 2) the amount targeted for restoration.

26 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Figure 4 120 12 Relationship between land loss and canal density in the Louisiana coastal zone The ) study measures land loss over 2 ) 80 8 five time periods between 1930 2 and 2000. Source: Adapted from Turner et al. 2007b

Land loss (km 40 4 Canal area added (km

0 0 1930 1950 1970 1990 2000 1930 1950 1970 1990 2000

years years

18 0 Figure 5 Land loss trends for Horn Island, a Mississippi-Alabama Relationship between land loss and canal density in the Louisiana coastal zone. barrier island (left), compared 2) What are the 6 intervals? with depths of shipping chan- 16 -5 nels dredged through the outer bars at the Horn Island Pass. Source: Adapted from Morton Land area (km 2008 14 -10 Outer bar dredging depth (m)

12 -15 1850 1900 1950 2000 1850 1900 1950 2000

years years

The sinking coastline: unsustainable oil, to compensate gas and groundwater extraction for land loss Land-loss trends for Horn Island (Mississippi-Alabama barrier island) (left) compared with depths of Althoughshipping natural channels subsidence dredged through processes, the outer bars at the HornAs sea Island level Pass. (Source:rises and Morton hurricanes 2008). and other such as sediment compaction and down- storms subject barrier beaches to high warping of underlying crust (e.g., in the wave run-up and beach erosion, the land Mississippi plain, Barataria Basin, forms can change dramatically. With rising and Atchafalaya Basin) are occurring along sea level, barrier islands commonly roll the coast, the withdrawals of subsurface oil over through the process of over-wash and and gas are also major contributors to Gulf become reestablished in a new location wetland loss in some places (Kennish 2002). displaced landward (Figures 9, 10). This For example, the rates of soil compaction process represents a natural dynamic of and eustatic sea level rise along the upper sandy shorelines, although the greenhouse Texas coast can exceed 13 millimeters per gas-driven high rates of present and future year (mm yr -1), while human-induced sub- sea level rise are abnormal. So long as bar- sidence rates can be as high as 120 mm yr-1 rier islands and coastal barrier beaches are (White and Tremblay 1995). In the Houston- not developed and residents do not attempt Galveston area, withdrawal of groundwa- to draw permanent property lines, the roll- ter has caused up to three meters of land over of coastal barriers does not represent surface subsidence, with the rate of subsid- a problem (Figures 9, 10). However, when ence ranging from 10 mm yr-1 to more than houses, roads and other infrastructure and 60 mm yr -1 (Gabrysch and Coplin 1990). businesses are constructed on these mobile

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 27 Figure 6 Detail of northern coast of Gulf of Mexico Alabama See Gulf overview map Page 2. River See Barrier Island detail maps Mississippi River on Pages 34–35 (Isles Dernieres and Chandeleur Islands). Pascagoula Escambia River Mobile River Pensacola Biloxi Baton Rouge Dauphin Atchafalaya Island River New Orleans Chandeleur Islands (see detail map on Page 35) Houma

Atchafalaya Bay Grand Isle De Soto Site of Canyon Mississippi DWH spill Isles Dernieres River Delta (see detail map on Page 34)

Flower Garden Banks National GULF OF MEXICO Marine Sanctuary

lands, then engineered hard structures such Alterations of river systems as seawalls and jetties or soft solutions such that lead into the Gulf of as beach nourishment are typically pursued Mexico to protect the investments. Stabilizing costal barriers under the emerging context The watersheds in the Gulf contain a range of accelerating rates of sea level rise and of habitats that support biologically diverse enhanced frequency of intense tropical and productive ecosystems with both storms will make occupation of coastal nursery and feeding grounds for ecologi- barriers along the Gulf Coast increasingly cally and economically important species expensive, environmentally damaging and (Livingston 1997, MCWMP 2007). Although potentially too costly to maintain, especially representative bays have a number of on the rapidly subsiding Mississippi Delta. morphologic and hydrologic similarities, they differ in the extent to which they have Beach excavations to locate and remove been affected by anthropogenic changes buried oil and tarballs also represent physi- and in their loss of ecological integrity over cal habitat disturbances that can bury and the past few decades (NOAA 2009). For kill the invertebrate prey for shorebirds and example, the Mississippi Sound, near metro- surf fish, but this is a brief pulse disturbance politan New Orleans, is heavily affected A sign warns of a pipeline cross- from which recovery should occur within a by sewage outflows, agricultural drain- ing in Louisiana. Because of year. Removal of plant wrack composed of age and intensive development, while the , many pipelines marsh macrophytic and sea grass materials Apalachicola Bay system is still relatively are closer to the surface and in takes away a resource that nurtures insects, pristine and is the last bay of that quality some cases are even in open amphipods, isopods and other invertebrates in the northern Gulf of Mexico. A tremen- water. Photo: Paul Goyette that serve as prey for shorebirds, especially dous advantage in the scientific study of plovers. Consequently, this intervention these systems is that each contains estab- into sandy beach habitats also represents lished National Estuarine Research Reserves degradation of ecosystem services. Potential (NERRs), thus providing investigators with impacts on the threatened piping plover are access to significant stores of existing especially critical to assess. data, new or recently developed numerical

28 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Environmental Concerns Related to Petroleum Storage in Salt Domes

The practice of storing oil in salt domes site for oil storage would involve inundat- throughout the Gulf of Mexico has gone ing the dome each day with millions on for more than 40 years, with active of gallons of freshwater drawn from storage sites in Louisiana and Texas (DOE the river to dissolve the salt and then 2011). Domes are considered ideal stor- pumping out the resulting hypersaline age receptacles because the salt forms (264 parts per thousand) solution into a seal around contained substances, a pipeline constructed over 1,500 acres creating a stable reservoir. But leakages of wetlands to transport it 80 miles to in similar domes off Weeks Island, LA., the Gulf of Mexico. The activity would The Pearl darter, a rare small have proven problematic, resulting in the take five to six years to complete, fish, is one of the threatened removal of petroleum stores and aban- severely reduce flow in the Pascagoula or endangered species in the donment of the site (Neal 1997, Neal et and discharge millions of gallons of Gulf region. Photo: Joel Sartore/ al. 1998, Kurlansky 2002). Undoubtedly, salt brine just south of Horn Island, a National Geographic Stock heterotrophic microbes exist in the conti- 2,763-acre barrier island that is part of nental shelf that can degrade petroleum a group of islands along the Mississippi hydrocarbons relatively rapidly, but if the coast that the federal government has oil leakage creates significant patches spent millions of dollars to protect. Other of floating oil or contaminates oysters anticipated damage includes saltwater or other shellfish, then leakage is clearly intrusion from the Mississippi Sound unacceptable. up the river, with potentially devastat- ing outcomes (if the damage caused by A proposal from the DOE to create a Hurricane Katrina is any indication) and petroleum reserve site in Mississippi salt development of a dead zone near the domes, which was recently withdrawn, outfall from the pipeline. Although the threatened the Pascagoula River basin. proposal was withdrawn in March 2011, The process for preparing the Mississippi it still looms over the river’s future.

models, and guidance of NERR managers the Mississippi-Alabama-Florida (MAFLA) with tremendous expertise in the needs of Shelf through barrier island passes involv- coastal and environmental decision-makers. ing seven primary islands, including Grand Research conducted in these reserves can Island, Cat Island, West Ship Island, East help to restore unimpeded water flows, Ship Island, Horn Island, Petit Bois Island and improve water quality and restore and Dauphin Island. The shelf-scale hydrography protect riparian in-stream habitats of high is dominated by seasonally shifting winds value. Below are short descriptions of that influence salinity patterns, creating several Gulf waterways and their known offshore-directed salinity gradients driven by historic stresses. river discharge. Seasonal differences result in westward-directed transport over the shelf The Mississippi Sound System during fall and winter, reducing the local The Mississippi Sound (drainage area, influence from the Mississippi River, while 69,700 km2) is a shallow estuarine system low-salinity water spreads over the shelf that extends from Lake Borgne, Louisiana, during the spring and summer, resulting in to Mobile Bay, Alabama. It receives freshwa- a strong halocline (Morey et al. 2003a, b). ter through marsh habitat runoff and seven watersheds (from west to east, the Pearl, The Pascagoula River (drainage area, Escatawpa, Pascagoula, Tchoutacabouffa, 23,310 km2), the second-largest basin in Biloxi, Wolf and Jourdan Rivers) and occa- Mississippi, is the last unimpeded river sionally receives large freshwater inputs system in the continental United States via Mississippi River flood control releases and the largest contributor of freshwater to that can cause low-salinity anomalies that Mississippi Sound. Unobstructed flow and last for months. It exchanges water with natural fire regimes are critically important

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 29 in maintaining the high productivity of Alabama (Livingston 2000, 2001, 2007). bottomland forests, marshes, savannas and The introduction of different nutrients at aquatic habitats that support an enor- various times of the year stimulates a series mously diverse biota, including 22 threat- of phytoplankton blooms, with diatoms pre- ened or endangered species. Among these dominating in the spring, raphidophytes in are species found only in Mississippi, includ- summer and dinoflagellates in winter. When ing the Pearl darter (Percina aurora), a rare these become coupled with high concentra- small fish found only in the Pascagoula and tions of orthophosphate and ammonia from Pearl River drainages, the Mississippi - the mill, the outcome is characterized by hill crane (Grus canadensis pulla), critically the loss of planktivorous infaunal inverte- endangered nonmigratory birds, the yellow- brates. Teasing apart these multiple effects blotched map turtle (Graptemys is quite difficult without intensive food web flavimaculata) and the Louisiana black modeling that takes into account benthic bear. The river basin also provides habitat conditions, planktonic responses to nutrient The Pascagoula River is the to other species endangered throughout loading, and climate change. Clearly, both largest contributor of freshwater their range, such as the red-cockaded top-down and bottom-up processes act on to Mississippi Sound. Photo: woodpecker, swallow-tailed kite (Elanoides this system (Livingston 2007). Jennifer Cowley/Plan for forficatus) and Gulf sturgeon (Acipenser Opportunity The pulp mill adopted some strategies to oxyrhynchus desotoi), among others. reduce nutrient input, and these resulted Stresses to the Pascagoula in some improvement in the complex of include invasive plant species; sedimenta- infaunal species. Although much remains tion from mining and other activities; water to be done, the only solution proffered withdrawal for use in agriculture, industry by the industry (and approved by Florida’s and domestic purposes; and direct dis- Department of Environmental Protection charge of pollutants, especially nutrients, [DEP]) was to build a pipeline that would from industrial or municipal wastewater move the effluent discharge site from the treatment facilities, mining and waste man- upper stretches of Eleven Mile Creek to the agement. Although these stresses take their mouth of creek. This would help clean up toll, another concern is a proposal from the Eleven Mile Creek, but it would do nothing U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) to create to stop the arrival of pollutants in Perdido a petroleum reserve site in Mississippi salt Bay. Within months of approving this plan, domes (see box, Page 29). DEP Director David Struhs retired to become The Perdido River (drainage area 2,937 km2) vice president for environmental affairs at provides the primary freshwater source for International Paper. This plan illustrates one Perdido Bay, a relatively small, shallow estu- of the many challenges of large-scale resto- ary at the Alabama-Florida border. The bay ration projects: the intertwining of industry is affected by two interwoven problems: and government interests in the use of artificial widening of its mouth in the 1970s natural resources. and nutrient loading that started as early as the 1940s. The widening of the bay mouth The Apalachicola System to help retain sediment led to the unantici- Apalachicola Bay (drainage area, 50,674 Apalachicola Bay is one pated consequence of saltwater intrusion km2) (Figure 7) consists of a large of the more productive into the bay. This contributed significantly with extensive wetlands that receive water estuaries in North Amer- to salinity stratification, the development of from the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee hypoxia and ultimately serious declines in and Flint Rivers (the ACF watershed). The ica, supplying approxi- benthic invertebrates and fish assemblages Apalachicola River, the largest river in mately 90% of the oyster in the deeper waters of the bay. The overall Florida and among the largest entering landings (Crassostrea effect was disruption of local food webs. the Gulf of Mexico, provides 35 percent virginica) in Florida and Nutrient loading created a different set of of the freshwater input to the northeast 10% nationally. trophic problems. The nutrients entered Gulf (Richter et al. 2003). Apalachicola the bay from multiple sources, including Bay, covering approximately 1,012 km2, effluents from a paper mill (operated by is one of the more productive estuaries in International Paper; effluent enters Eleven North America, supplying approximately 90 Mile Creek), urban storm water and sewage percent of the oyster landings (Crassostrea runoff (the area around the bay is highly virginica) in Florida and 10 percent nation- developed), and agricultural runoff from ally It also provides nursery habitat for

30 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Figure 7 Apalachicola Detail of northeast coast Pensacola Ochlockonee of Gulf of Mexico Fenholloway See Gulf overview map, Page 2 Escambia Big Bend The Big Bend coastal region in Region Florida includes Apalachicola St. George Sound St. Joe Bay Suwanee Bay, St. Joe Bay and the Apalachicola Bay Fenholloway, Suwanee and Ochlockonee Rivers.

Tampa

Egmont Key National Wildlife GULF OF MEXICO Refuge

Caloosahatchee

numerous economically important fish and also influenced secondarily by freshwater invertebrate species (Livingston et al. 1974, drainage from Tate’s Hell Swamp. Tides in Livingston et al. 1997). The adjacent west this multiple estuary form a compli- Florida shelf, extending along the length of cated pattern of mixed semi-diurnal/diurnal the Florida and the panhandle, tides and have small amplitudes (Huang makes up 75 percent of the total U.S. Gulf and Spaulding 2002). continental shelf and contains some of the Like the Pascagoula River, the Apalachicola most diverse and economically important River is one of the last free-flowing alluvial (e.g., salt marsh, sea grass rivers in the continental United States, but meadows, coral reefs) and fisheries (e.g., river channelization and damming of its snappers, groupers) in the nation (Coleman upstream distributaries affect its flow. The et al. 2000, Koenig et al. 2005). Despite its natural flow of the river provides a sea- great importance to Gulf state economies, sonally varying supply of nutrients (e.g., this system remains relatively unstudied in A blue crab prepares to fend nitrogen and phosphorus) that enhance terms of defining its influence on ecologi- off an intruder among the primary productivity from Apalachicola Bay rocks in the Florida Keys. Photo cally and economically important species in (Mortazavi et al. 2000a, 2000b, 2001). Courtesy of 1stPix inshore and nearshore environments. Sustained declines in river flow, the result The major water bodies of the estuary are of drought or upstream diversion, could East Bay, Apalachicola Bay and St. George lead to fundamental shifts in both trophic Sound. A series of inlets (one of which is structure and the capacity of the system man-made) allows sediment and seawater to support overall productivity (Livingston exchange with the Gulf. The Apalachicola 1997). Indeed, ocean color images from River is the principal source of sediment satellite radiometry show an extended for the development of the barrier islands, plume of river water emanating from the despite the presence of a dam approxi- watershed southward over the west Florida mately 115 km upstream from its mouth, shelf during periods of peak river discharge. with beach sand dispersion having a net This conspicuous biological event, known westward transport. Circulation in the bay as the Green River Phenomenon (Gilbes et is dominated by local winds and tides, al. 1996, 2002), occurs during late winter whereas hydrography and salinity are domi- and early spring and persists for weeks to nated by river flow on multiple time scales months, overlapping in time and space with (Conner et al. 1982), although salinity is the spawning season and locations of a

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 31 Figure 8 Lands vulnerable to sea level rise

This map displays land below an elevation of 1.5m. The IPCC estimates that sea level will rise 75 to 190 cm by 2100, resulting in tidal inundation in the areas pictured here. Source: Adapted from Titus and Richman 2001

Scale Land below 1.5 meters 100 miles elevation

number of important fish species (Koenig light of anticipated growth in coastal devel- et al. 2000). Its inter-annual variability is opment and the effects of climate change. in part explained by climatic variability over the ACF drainage basin that influ- ences freshwater flow (Morey et al. 2009). Effects of flood control efforts Although dedicated investigations are on the Gulf Coast lacking, we suspect that this plays a key The flooding regime, freshwater volume role in supplying nutrients and fixed organic and routes of the major U.S. rivers flow- carbon that influences the general structure ing into the Gulf have been significantly and function of estuarine and offshore altered through levee construction, dam- oceanic food webs in the northeast Gulf ming and channel rerouting to accom- (Mortazavi et al. 2000a, 2000b, 2001, modate increases in coastal populations, Putland and Iverson 2007a, b). agriculture, shipping and industry over the Recent national attention focused on the past century. The reduction in the sedi- management of the ACF drainage system ment supply to many Gulf barrier islands because of extended drought conditions has affected their morphology (Figure 5, over the southeastern United States and Morton 2008), and drainage of wetlands regional conflicts over water use. Georgia for urban development has led to increased and Alabama have drawn an increasingly soil subsidence (e.g., much of New Orleans larger volume of water for municipal and is now below sea level). Explosive breaks in agricultural needs over the years that in flood protection levees, called crevasses, are concert with regional drought has resulted recognized by geomorphologists as being in severe declines of floodplain forests vastly different from the overbank flood- (Darst and Light 2008) and possibly overall ing that occurred before levees were built. estuary health. The fact that this conflict Before the construction of levees, sediment remains unresolved despite years of debate overflowing river banks accumulated near highlights the need for effective science the river to form a levee parallel to the river that can inform policy decisions by address- channel not much wider than the river ing human needs while sustaining key eco- itself (Frazier 1967). The dramatic release system services. There is concern that the of floodwater through flood protection continued alteration of historical pathways levees sends sediments farther from the of energy flow will precipitate significant river levee and sometimes forms a mini- declines in fisheries production (currently delta or “splay.” Kesel (1988) estimated that valued at billions of dollars per year) and the amount of sediment flowing over-bank potentially undermine the entire food web in an unconfined river and through the in this portion of the Gulf of Mexico. Given flood protection levees was equal to 2.3 the enormous economic value of these fish- and 0.86 percent of the river’s sediments, eries, such a disruption would be devastat- respectively. This compares with 12 percent ing, and even more so when considered in returned from offshore from hurricane

32 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Barrier islands in the Gulf are threatened by increas- ing rates of sea level rise. Houses on Dauphin Island in Alabama are protected by sand berms. Photo: Joel Sartore/National Geographic Stock

deposition, primarily within a few kilome- amounts because the IPCC was unable to ters of the seashore. include estimates of increasing melt rates for the Greenland ice sheets and polar ice Hurricane protection levees, increasingly caps. Vermeer and Rahmstorf (2009) show needed to protect people settled in the that under the future global temperature Gulf, will both impound wetlands behind scenarios of the IPCC (2007) report, predic- them and restrict sediment deposition— tions of eustatic sea level rise from 1990 to each reducing the resiliency of the wetlands 2100 range from 75 to 190 cm. seaward that should function to reduce storm surge heights. These changes in how The most alarming expected consequences sediments, nutrients and water are redis- of climate change for the Gulf Coast are tributed must be quantified and considered the combined effects of relative sea level for each proposed wetland restoration rise at an already high and escalating rate project to ensure long-term sustainability of and more frequent severe hurricanes. Using restored areas. a projection that accounts only for flooding of low-lying land without including impacts Effects of global climate of storm erosion, large parts of Louisiana and southern Florida, as well as other change on Gulf ecosystems smaller sections of the Gulf Coast, will be Large parts of Global climate change, occurring as a direct submerged even under moderate estimates Louisiana and southern result of anthropogenic increases in levels of sea level rise (Figure 8). In addition to of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse the loss of human settlements, rising sea Florida, as well as other gases in the atmosphere, is predicted to levels are likely to result in the “drowning” smaller sections of continue to increase atmospheric and sea of wetlands, some barrier islands, sea grass the Gulf Coast, will be surface temperatures, acidification of the meadows, oyster reefs and coral reefs if submerged even under oceans, rate of sea level rise and frequency they are unable to achieve increases in their moderate estimates of intense storm events, in addition to vertical elevation equal to sea level rise. numerous other changes over the next Mangroves have greater ability to move of sea level rise. several decades (IPCC 2007). The long-term inland as seas rise, provided the uplands impacts of these changes on the ecosys- are undeveloped and not bulkheaded or tems will be wide-ranging and potentially armored in some other way, but the uneven irreversible (Scavia et al. 2002). Although ability of organisms to adapt to rising sea the rate of eustatic, or global, sea level rise levels will shift the balance of the ecosys- projected by IPCC (2007) is rapid, we now tem in unpredictable ways. It seems highly know that these projections actually under- unlikely that accretion rates in these critical estimated the rate of change by substantial coastal habitats will keep pace with sea

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 33 Caillou Bay East Island Whiskey Island Raccoon Island Trinity Island

GULF OF MEXICO

Scale Area of islands 2005 Map Scale 1:75,000 1887 0 5 miles 2.5 5 Area of islands 1887 Miles 2005 Kilometers 0 2.5 5

level rise if it increases by a factor of two developed by Anthony et al. (2011) based Figure 9 or more in the next 50 to 100 years, as on the IPCC A1F1 scenario (fossil-fuel Shoreline Changes of the expected (Vermeer and Rahmsdorf 2009). intensive) demonstrated that severe ocean Isles Dernieres Barrier Island Indeed, many Gulf wetlands are already acidification and sea surface warming could Arc, Louisiana, 1887–2005 being submerged and subsequently lost decrease resilience even under Source: Adapted from Lee (Day et al. 1995). otherwise favorable conditions of high et al. 2006 grazing intensity and low nutrients. These Increased water depth will result in results indicate that coral reefs already sub- decreased light availability to sea grasses jected to overfishing of herbivorous fishes and hermatypic corals and increased and to nutrient loading are likely to be turbidity for oysters, probably resulting in even more vulnerable to increasing carbon increased mortality and decreased growth dioxide Impacts on larval fishes could be rate. Loss of shoreline habitat destroys profound as they struggle to form internal its capacity to buffer the shoreline from skeletons that are needed for locomotory wave-driven erosion. Under higher ambi- ability when full grown. The thin larval ent sea level and more frequent intense shells of oysters and other bivalve mollusks storms, storm-surge flooding of the Gulf may be unable to form; several studies have Coast will be more extensive and damaging demonstrated increased mortality rates of to infrastructure, threatening massive loss juvenile clams and other bivalves during of property and life. Effects of hurricanes early development. Shell additions to estua- on shoreline erosion, damage to struc- rine environments, which would augment tures, and risk of loss of life interact with the ability of the mollusks to grow their rising sea level and human modifications shells, may be necessary as a management to hydrodynamic regimes. For example, the adaptation to acidification in estuaries to loss in area of Gulf coastal barriers from provide chemical buffers for growing acidity multiple states is clearly related to hurricane and to allow sensitive calcifying organisms activity and also to depth of shipping chan- to persist. nels excavated through the barriers (Figure 5). The effects of climate change on the Gulf Ocean acidification and increased sea sur- ecosystem extend beyond those discussed face temperature are stressors that interact here and it is impossible to outline every to affect calcification in marine organisms, possibility. However, restoration efforts such as corals, oysters and a host of other must address the inevitable environmental taxa with external or internal skeletons of changes to achieve restoration that calcium carbonate. For example, models is resilient.

34 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Figure 10 Hewes Point Shoreline Changes of the North Chandeleur Islands, Louisiana, 1855–2005

The area of the islands has decreased from 6,827.5 acres in 1855 to 913.9 acres in 2005. Source: Adapted from Lee et al. 2006

Scale

5 miles Schooner

Area of islands 2005 Area of islands 1855

North Islands

New Harbor Islands

Freemasons Islands Monkey Bayou

Chandeleur Sound

GULF OF MEXICO

Map Scale 1:100,000 1855 0 2.5 5 Miles Kilometers 0 2.5 5 2004

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 35

Recommendations for Resilient Restoration of the Gulf of Mexico

To treat an ecosystem In this chapter, we provide 15 recom- Understand the past. holistically—including mendations that can work together to We need to account for historical baselines, produce comprehensive and long-term expected future dynamics and ecosystem the lives and processes restoration of the Gulf. Our understanding interactions to develop a responsible and and futures of marine of historical and contemporary stresses on effective restoration program. We need to animals, vegetation, the ecosystem, as described in the previ- recognize the historically pristine condition microbes and humans ous chapter, informs these recommended and functions of Gulf ecosystems and the —is difficult but actions. Restoration of an anthropogeni- nature of their degradation as the basis cally damaged ecosystem such as the Gulf for defining realistic restoration goals. The essential for resilient must include not only an understanding of purpose is not to return the Gulf to some restoration. its basic history and natural processes but idealized pristine condition, but to recog- also a realistic and scientific assessment of nize that restoration will be unsustainable damage, well-defined goals and policies unless all of the necessary components and that accurately reflect these realities, and functions of the ecosystem are in place. open communication of all decisions to We also need to be realistic about the time educate the public and earn the trust of frames required to achieve goals in the light local communities. Our recommended of extreme variations in recruitment and actions, then, reflect this exigency for rigor- growth rates of different essential species, ous assessment, defined goals and coopera- the necessarily enormous spatial scale of tion with human communities. Taken alone, intervention and protection that may be each action may be no more effective than needed, as evidenced by the recent rezon- the traditional “in-place, in-kind” approach ing and protection of one-third of the entire to environmental restoration. However, we Great Barrier Reef (Pandolfi et al. 2005), have designed our recommended actions and the inevitable future consequences of to work in concert, treating the Gulf as a climate change, sea level rise and intensifi- holistic ecosystem that must accommodate cation of hurricanes (Rahmstorf et al. 2007, multivalent, intersecting and sometimes Vermeer and Rahmstorf 2009, Jackson 2010). competing uses by plants, wildlife, micro- scopic organisms and humans. To treat an Acknowledge the future and ecosystem holistically—including the lives, restore resilience. processes and futures of marine animals, Restoration will require a comprehensive vegetation, microbes and humans—is dif- and integrated plan focused on rebuild- ficult but essential for resilient restoration. ing the functional integrity and services of Our recommendations stress the need entire ecosystems that have been harmed for rigorous scientific research, goals that as a consequence of the DWH oil spill, in reflect that research, and open communica- addition to responding to the systematic Grass is planted on a newly created embankment on tion and involvement with human commu- degradation that has progressively compro- Dauphin Island, AL. Photo: nities in the Gulf. Below, we provide more mised Gulf ecosystems. To ensure sustain- Joel Sartore/National detail on these characteristics that we find ability, restoration should be defined to Geographic Stock so fundamental to restoration: include enhancement of natural resources

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 37 Recommendation Themes

THEME 1 THEME 2 THEME 3 Assess Protect Integrate and repair existing Gulf sustainable human damage from of Mexico habitats use with ecological DWH and other and populations. processes in the stresses on the Gulf of Mexico. Gulf of Mexico.

over and above pre-DWH levels and should because increasing sea levels and increased Each recommendation take explicit account of the highly dynamic frequencies of intense storms will ultimately stresses the need nature of the Gulf environment that will require retreat from the Mississippi River require adaptive management as conditions delta. Resilience of human communities for rigorous scientific change. The institutional mantra of and ecological resources are intimately research, goals that reflect “in-place, in-kind” restoration is inappropri- connected; therefore, the ecosystem must that research, and open ate without including analysis of sustainabil- be understood as a coupled human-nat- communication and ity and would probably lead to longer-term ural system. A robust model for restoring involvement with human failures without planning for future chang- ecosystem resiliency holistically combines ing conditions. Efforts to achieve durable environmental with human approaches— communities in the Gulf. restoration should not be diluted by calls for for instance, compensatory habitat restora- economic and community development. tion combined with a project that redresses historical anthropogenic injuries that now Recognize the interconnection jeopardize the sustainability of shoreline between human prosperity and habitats. ecosystem health. The experience of the Exxon Valdez spill Such a wide-ranging restoration program and some harmful consequences of so- calls for structuring the recommendations called restoration actions demand that around general goals. Therefore, we have the goals for restoration in the Gulf, plans organized our 15 recommendations along for their implementation and subsequent three themes: assessment of progress be fully transparent 1. Assess and repair damage from to the scientific community and public at DWH and other stresses; large. The public must be aware of the time frames and geographic scope of intended 2. Protect existing habitats and restoration actions as they compare to the populations; and pace of environmental change. It is critically 3. Integrate sustainable human use important to acknowledge, celebrate and with ecological processes in the foster meaningful and timely public partici- Gulf of Mexico. pation in the restoration process, especially

38 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Examples of Ecosystem-Based Approaches to Restoration

Example 1: Coastal Marsh the inlet. Inlet stabilization by groins Shoreline margins damaged by the inhibits over-wash, thereby allowing DWH spill should be replanted only if denser growth of vegetation, which sup- we can be reasonably confident that this presses nesting of some shorebirds such planting will be sustainable over time. as piping plovers and American oyster- Therefore, planting should be combined catchers. Beach nourishment, sometimes with filling of navigation channels in the justified by contentions that it enhances vicinity and possibly also construction of habitat for sea turtles and ground- a living oyster reef breakwater to reduce nesting birds, can actually have negative erosion rates and induce sediment impacts. Sediments that do not match Marshes are replanted near deposition, as predicted by application natural beach can be rejected Lake Pontchartrain near New of locally relevant hydrodynamic models. as unsuitable by female turtles seek- Orleans. Photo: Scott Eustis Additionally, restoring marsh habitat in ing to lay eggs. The filling that defines locations subject to high rates of relative beach nourishment covers and kills prey sea level rise should proceed only where invertebrates on the intertidal beach. public ownership or publicly owned Beach invertebrate populations recover development rights exist up-slope so that within about a year if sediments match transgression can occur and produce the grain sizes of natural beach sands resilience of the marsh habitat and its but may require years if coarse shelly or ecosystem services. rocky materials are included (Peterson et al. 2006). Beach nourishment lasts Example 2: Sea Turtle and Shorebird on average only about five years before Nesting Habitat requiring repetition (Leonard et al. 1990). Attempts to restore or protect nesting Costs of beach nourishment are likely to habitat for sea turtles and ground-nest- increase as sea level rises further because ing shorebirds and seabirds on coastal of the need to elevate the beach even barrier islands must rely on a broader sci- more to avoid flooding. Consequently, entific understanding of inexorable envi- the best way to sustain nesting habitat ronmental change to be resilient. Use for sea turtles and shorebirds is to leave of hardened structures such as seawalls, uninhabited barrier islands alone to roll jetties and groins that are designed over and migrate landward in their natu- to combat shoreline erosion can have ral response to sea level rise. Where sub- serious negative effects on barrier island aerial habitat has disappeared and the habitat. The intertidal sand beach is lost barrier sand mass has been lost in critical to erosion seaward of seawalls, which locations, then island reconstruction by removes invertebrate prey for shorebirds. dredging and filling (nourishment) may The seawall structure can prevent female be necessary to replace lost nesting and sea turtles from reaching the back foraging grounds for sea turtles and beach for egg laying, and thus reduce shorebirds, but this process should be reproductive success. If terminal groins done in collaboration with sedimentary serve their designed purpose near inlets, geologists, engineers and ecologists to they limit the movement and dynamic maximize sustainability of the project in changes of shoreline locations around light of sea level rise and storm risks.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 39 THEME 1 Assess and Repair Damage from DWH and Other Stresses on the Gulf

To respond to the damage that has resulted from the DWH oil spill as well as prior and compounding stressors, we must first know the ex- tent of the damage to the ecosystem. Monitoring damage from the oil spill is challenging because there is a paucity of ecological base- line data on the Gulf. This lack of information is due in some cases to inaccessibility, for example, the deep ocean. But in many other cases, we lack data because there has not been enough funding and sup- port to monitor and assess changes in the environment. The recom- mendations under this theme are directed toward the assessment and repair of damage related to the DWH oil spill, as well as other stressors in the Gulf. We address important shoreline, marine and deep-sea habitats and describe ways to improve water quality and habitat for critical ecosystem species. Our focus is not on quick fixes, but rather on innovative restoration actions that will be sustainable over the long term.

Recommendation 1 Restore shoreline habitats directly and indirectly damaged by the oil release.

»» Restore critical foundation habitats such fauna to an enormous extent at relatively as coastal marsh, sea grass and oyster low cost and with great capacity for the reef using proven methods and consid- system to sustain itself (Coats et al. 1995, eration of sustainability under climate Reed 2002, Teal and Weishar 2005). change. The coastal habitats in the Gulf are the »» Allow natural recovery to restore ocean most vulnerable and at the same time are beach and estuarine mud flats. extraordinarily important to the ecological and economic productivity of the region. Habitat restoration promises cost-effective The foundation species that provide the restoration of natural resources harmed by architectural structure—oysters, salt marsh the spill because a restoration of even a macrophytes, sea grasses, mangroves, single type of foundation (bioengineered) corals and sponge—also provide critical habitat can serve multiple injured species habitat for additional species, including simultaneously. Moreover, habitat is often many juvenile and forage fish that sup- Dead cypress trees resulting the limiting resource for many marine and port fishery production. Many of these from saltwater intrusion near Houma, LA. Photo: Paul estuarine species, and so an improvement habitats also play a vital biogeochemical Goyette or expansion of habitat can have a greater role as filters of pollutants (Grabowski and effect than other measures on population Peterson 2007). We recommend restora- health. Habitat restoration can allow natural tion projects targeting biodiverse, accessible reestablishment of appropriate flora and shoreline habitats such as coastal marsh,

40 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem The oil spill damaged important habitat, such as Louisiana’s Breton Island, which is home to as many as 2,000 brown pelican nests. Photo: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Southeast

Many restoration pro- sea grass meadows and oyster reefs. In this Habitat restoration projects must also grams presume that section, we first provide an introduction to include systematic monitoring and adaptive habitat restoration and then detail specific management, and be sufficient for as long human intervention can measures to restore these critical habitats in as is necessary to reach restoration goals. accelerate the process of the Gulf. Unfortunately, many restoration programs habitat recovery without presume that human intervention can further injury and there- Proper habitat restoration accelerate the process of habitat recovery fore undertake activities Proper habitat restoration, as described by without further injury and therefore under- Teal and Peterson (2009), takes into account take activities with insufficient planning, with insufficient plan- the life cycles of the animals in the habitat, inadequate baseline data, no monitoring ning, inadequate baseline potential shifts in the habitat resulting from and unrealistic expectations. This naivete data, no monitoring and environmental change, and human con- illustrates that we have not learned enough unrealistic expectations. cerns and management of the habitat (see from the history of problematic restoration box, Page 43). Although excellent examples approaches (Bernhardt et al. 2005). of restoration using these principles can be found in salt marsh projects (Broome et al. 1986, Teal and Weishar 2005) and oyster Marsh habitat restoration reefs (Schulte et al. 2009), the principles Restoration of marsh habitats damaged by cannot guarantee success in restoration the DWH oil spill and other prior stresses (NRC 2001a). Each habitat is unique and would involve replanting native marsh requires careful and specific scientific study vegetation. But any marsh restoration in the to achieve the best results. Gulf must also take into account the travel corridors for marsh organisms, prevail- Habitats cannot be considered in isolation: ing water currents, earlier stresses on the Restoration projects should account for the marsh, such as channel excavation, and pathways that organisms travel through future risk of marsh edge drowning from their life cycles and seasons. Corridors sea level rise. permit important movement of fish and mobile crustaceans among different types Early work in marsh restoration developed of habitat. Such connectivity enhances critical horticultural principles for success feeding opportunities, which vary with (e.g., Broome et al. 1986). Subsequent tidal stage, and survival rates, which may advances have further demonstrated the be improved by accessing rich but risky importance of allowing normal water flows habitats during protection of night while to develop with meandering channels moving to structured habitats for protection penetrating into the marsh or, if neces- in daylight. sary, to engineer inundation and water

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 41 delivery regimes that mimic naturally by meteorological tides instead of regular Proper habitat restora- productive marsh habitat. These channels astronomic tides. Spartina alterniflora is tion, as described by enhance connectivity between the marsh not well adapted to such conditions, and if and the estuary, allowing tidal transport of planted there, it would not have the intrin- Teal and Peterson 2009, sediments, plant propagules, larvae of fish sic resilience of a natural marsh. takes into account the and invertebrates, and nutrients into the lifecycles of the animals Second, the traditional guidelines for marsh. The channels also provide corridors compensatory restoration that promote in the habitat, potential for larger fish and mobile crustaceans to “in-place, in-kind” replacement would shifts in the habitat due access the marsh for feeding, spawning appear to be an ineffective action in much and escaping predation under protection to environmental change, of the marshland affected by the DWH oil, of plant cover (Able et al. 2002, Weishar et and human concerns especially in the Mississippi Delta region, al. 2005). Allowing distributaries, or parts and management of the where most coastal marsh injury occurred. of the river that flow away from the main Most of the loss of coastal marsh, whether habitat. channel, to penetrate into the marsh can from oiling or from unintended physical create substantially more ecologically valu- impacts by emergency response actions, able edge habitat for a variety of fish and occurred at the marsh edges. These are the wildlife (Peterson and Turner 1994, Minello locations at highest risk of ongoing marsh and Rozas 2002). drowning and loss caused by sea level rise. The history of successful restoration of Consequently, restoration of the marsh Spartina alterniflora (smooth cord grass) edge has little likelihood of persistence. marshes is sufficiently reassuring for us to An important management adaptation to recommend direct restoration to com- climate change is to pursue marsh restora- pensate for DWH injuries to Gulf coastal tions in the Mississippi Delta and elsewhere Spartina marshes. However, several cautions that incorporate realistic projections of and conditions require attention beyond relative sea level rise and opportunity for adherence to the principles of proper habi- transgression landward to maximize the tat restoration presented in the box on the likelihood of persistence under dynamic next page. First, because Spartina alterni- future conditions (Peterson et al. 2008). flora plants are available commercially and Marsh restoration can be accompanied the horticultural guidelines are well known, by filling in erosion-inducing channels cut there is some risk of restorers planting it through the marsh and by erecting oyster in locations that are more appropriate for reefs as living breakwaters so as to reduce other marsh macrophytes. For example, wave energy and induce sedimentation on Juncus romerianus (black needle rush) is the planted marsh to enhance its ability to appropriate for higher marsh elevations and persist as sea levels rise. for areas subjected to irregular flooding

The Louisiana Sea Grant College Program deployed shell bags along eroded shore at its Sea Grant Oyster Hatchery in Grand Isle. Photo: Louisiana Sea Grant College Program/Louisiana State University

42 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Sea grass habitat restoration persist long term. In the Gulf of Mexico, Sea grass, or submerged aquatic vegetation this would mean that species such as turtle (SAV), provides nursery habitat for many grass (Thallassia testudinum) may be more economically important species in the Gulf desirable long-term targets of restoration of Mexico. It is most abundant off the west than species such as grass (Halodule coast of Florida, which contains the largest wrightii). Sea grasses differ among them- expanse of sea grass in the United States. selves in optimal habitat conditions; some Sea grass has experienced alarming global sea grasses occupy shallower and even declines over the past 50 years because intertidal elevations, whereas others cannot of a variety of perturbations, including tolerate aerial exposure. Thus choice of the propeller damage from commercial and proper species for the restoration site can recreational boats, industrial pollution, be important to success. eutrophication, sedimentation and coastal A mollusk in sea grass in the development (Waycott et al. 2009). Sea Although a climax species of sea grass may Florida Keys. Photo: Sean Nash grass also suffered injury from the DWH be the desired endpoint of restoration, oil and emergency response activities, clever methods have been devised to allow although the west coast of Florida was least natural processes to contribute to resto- affected by the DWH spill. Restorations of ration success. For example, planting an sea grass have been successful (Fonseca et early-succession species with a typically fast al. 2000), although the success rate is not growth rate can stabilize soils and mitigate as high as it is with marsh grasses. Many erosion at sites that might prove other- sea grass meadows experience dynamic wise inhospitable to slow-growth climax seasonal and yearly changes, more so in species (Fonseca et al. 1998). Fertilization aboveground (shoots and leaves) biomass of newly transplanted sea grasses has than in belowground (roots and rhizomes). also been provided “naturally” by insert- This dynamism can present a challenge ing stakes in and around the planted area, to habitat restoration because habitat which are then used as perches by terns persistence is often identified as a metric and cormorants. Guano produced by these of successful habitat restoration. Late-suc- birds is rich in nutrients, thereby providing cession species of sea grass may represent fertilizer to speed growth and recovery of preferred targets for restoration because the newly planted sea grass. Stakes can be they are less ephemeral and more likely to removed and bird defecation discouraged

Principles for Proper Habitat Restoration (modified from Teal and Peterson 2009) • Set goals for the restored habitat • Develop a plan for how propagules, system, including establishing struc- larvae, etc., can become established, tural and functional characteristics including natural and artificial of the biogenic habitat needed for methods. success. Have an acceptable timeline with allowable variability. State how • Plan, design and model how exten- these were chosen. sive water circulation similar to that which characterizes natural wetlands • Incorporate ecological engineer- will be achieved, using engineered ing (self design) into the planning. and natural processes. Consider the larger surrounding landscape in which the restoration • Establish criteria for and choose will occur. Plan for sustainability reference sites, develop methods for and response to long-term changes, data collection and monitoring and especially in sea level. plan for adaptive management • Plan for management oversight such as independent advisory groups, regulators and stakeholders.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 43 after sea grasses have become established Despite these stresses, the oyster fisheries The success of the oyster so as to avoid impacts of over-fertilization of the Gulf, especially in Louisiana, Texas fishery in the Gulf may that transform sea grass habitat into algal- and the Florida Panhandle, have persisted, dominated systems (Valiella and Cole 2002). while mid-Atlantic oyster fisheries have suf- have diverted attention We recommend SAV restoration actions fered near-economic extinction. The success away from assessing, to replace DWH oil spill losses in the Gulf. of the oyster fishery in the Gulf may have restoring and sustaining Restoration of injured sea grass is particu- diverted attention from assessing, restoring the natural habitat struc- larly critical in areas such as protected sites and sustaining the natural habitat structure ture of oyster reefs, which around the Chandeleur Islands, where sea of oyster reefs, which plays an important grass beds serve as a nursery for many com- role in providing ecosystem services play an important role in mercially and recreationally important fish, (Lenihan 1999, Grabowski and Peterson providing the ecosystem including several depleted reef fish, blue 2007). In subtidal environments, tall reefs services. crabs and penaeid shrimps (Fodrie and expose oysters to faster water flows, which Heck 2011). prevent sedimentation, can induce faster growth, suppress parasite impacts and Oyster reef habitat restoration create better physiological condition. In Oyster reefs provide habitat and ecosystem addition, tall reefs provide more oyster reef services, such as water filtration, through- habitat for fish, crabs and shrimp, and allow out East, Gulf and West Coast estuaries oyster filtration to clarify estuarine waters (Grabowski and Peterson 2007, Beck et al. over a larger fraction of the water column. 2011). Although oyster reefs in the Gulf suffered damage from the DWH spill and Oyster bed restoration should be motivated prior disturbances, evidence indicates that by the need to restore injuries from the they can be recovered through restora- DWH incident in the estuaries of the north- tion (e.g., Lenihan and Peterson 1998, ern Gulf of Mexico but should be focused Lenihan et al. 2001, Schulte et al. 2009). on providing ecosystem services of the Oyster mortalities extended over hundreds oysters and their reefs. Restorations should of acres after the DWH oil release, mostly include establishing oyster reef sanctuar- as collateral damage from emergency ies and assessing whether re-creating tall response efforts. To keep floating oil from subtidal reefs, probably characteristic of entering sensitive marshes, the freshwater pristine Gulf estuaries, make this habitat was diverted through the Mississippi Delta more naturally sustainable and improve and provided out-welling water flows. its ability to provide ecosystem services. The resulting reduction in salinity around Furthermore, linear oyster reefs parallel to estuarine shorelines can be built to serve as existing oyster reef habitat induced oyster Commercial fishermen use mortality. natural breakwaters, protecting the shore- dredgers to scrape the seafloor line habitats and development from wave of oysters, damaging habitat Beyond the impacts of the DWH spill, erosion and inducing local sedimentation as well as species populations. causes of oyster declines are complex. to help counteract subsidence and global Photo: Kristi Durazo Stresses include overharvesting of live (eustatic) sea level rise. These oyster reefs oysters for food, overharvesting of oyster can substitute for ecologically damaging shell substrate for industrial use, sedimenta- bulkheads and other engineered shoreline tion on reefs, mismanagement of fresh- protection devices (Peterson et al. 2008). water flows causing either excessively high (e.g., Apalachicola River) or excessively low Some of the Gulf oyster reef restoration (e.g., Mississippi Delta) salinities and the should be designed to test the effectiveness impacts of the protozoan parasite Perkinsus of this shoreline habitat protection func- marinus, commonly known as “Dermo” tion. In relatively quiescent environments (MacKenzie 1996). Although Dermo affects along estuarine shorelines that are exposed Gulf of Mexico oysters, longer growing sea- to modest , naturally sustaining sons and faster oyster growth have typically oyster reefs have the potential to act as an allowed oysters in the Gulf to reach market- ecologically beneficial alternative to bulk- able size before dying from its effects. How- heads and revetments on the shore itself. ever, extended drought and restricted flow The presence of a fixed shoreline protection of freshwater lead to increased infection structure, even if constructed landward rates that in turn lead to increased mortality of the marsh, guarantees ultimate loss of (Carnegie 2009). marsh habitat and its ecosystem services

44 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem A temporary “burrito levee” was put in place at Grand Isle, LA, in 2008 while Hurricane Ike approached. After the hurricane, the Army Corps of Engineers installed geotubes to create an artificial to reduce the impact of storm surge on the island. Photo: Team New Orleans/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

as sea level rises and the structure prevents about a year, if the excavation pits are shal- transgression of the marsh up-slope to low. However, deeper excavation pits serve higher land (Peterson et al. 2008). Oyster as sedimentation basins and fill with fine, reefs grow upward, maintaining a peak organic-rich sediments. The oxygen demand elevation at the same level relative to the arising from the microbial degradation of water surface. Therefore, using oyster reefs the organic materials collecting in deeper as natural breakwaters takes advantage of pits, where bottom water flows are sup- natural physical-biological feedbacks to pro- pressed, can lead to anoxic seafloor habitat vide resilience of both shoreline protection where benthic invertebrates cannot survive and also of habitat ecosystem services (Beck (Rakocinski et al. 1996). et al. 2011). Similarly, the process of filling the beach Beach and mud flat habitat restoration with these dredged sediments is a “pulse Beach nourishment—the process of dredg- disturbance” (a quick perturbation), killing ing sediments from source sites on the sea- the benthic invertebrates that provide the floor and filling ocean beaches—needs to prey of shorebirds such as sanderlings and The dredging necessary be viewed cautiously within Gulf restoration several species of plovers, and surf fish plans (Peterson and Bishop 2005). Although such as pompano. Recovery of the beach for beach nourishment habitat and its service of providing food vacuums up and kills the beach nourishment has been an accepted practice for shoring up coastlines and for these shorebirds and surf fish depends sessile bottom inverte- protecting beach residences and infrastruc- on how well the dredged sediments match brates at the source sites, ture from erosion, the process has negative natural sands of the beach. Adding muddy depriving bottom-feeding consequences for coastal ecosystems. For sediments induces periodically elevated tur- bidity for as long as the dredged materials fishes, crabs such as instance, the dredging necessary for beach nourishment vacuums up and kills the ses- remain on the beach as natural wave action blue crabs, and penaeid sile bottom invertebrates at the source sites, erodes and transports the sediments away shrimps of their food depriving bottom-feeding fishes, crabs such (Peterson and Bishop 2005). This turbidity resources. as blue crabs, and penaeid shrimps of their degrades coastal water quality, interfer- food resources. Consequently, beach nour- ing with the ability of visually orienting ishment represents habitat degradation, not predatory seabirds such as pelicans and of restoration, and should be viewed as such such as mackerel from detect- during planning for Gulf coastal restoration. ing and capturing their prey. The addition of sediments that are unnaturally coarse Recovery of the benthic invertebrates— also causes longer-term stress to the sandy clams, polychaete worms and crustaceans— beach ecosystem (Peterson et al. 2006). at the source sites can be rapid, taking These disturbances may last for years

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 45 because coarse sand, gravel and -size shallow sedimentary bottoms along shore, Cleanup proposals using materials, commonly including shell and and of the deeper seafloor, are not well untested technology shell hash, are unacceptable habitat for developed. Because natural recovery rates some critically important invertebrates, such of unvegetated sedimentary bottom after should be treated with as bean clams, which are of value as prey physical disturbance can be rapid, taking skepticism and pursued for pompano, juvenile flounders and shore- only months to a year, natural recovery is only after cautious test- birds (Peterson et al. 2006). These larger the preferred option for these habitats with ing indicates promising sediments are retained on sandy beaches compensatory restoration for the temporary outcomes. indefinitely because they are heavier and loss of mud flat ecosystem services being less readily transported than finer particles. provided by restoration of more structured The natural abrasion and wave action on estuarine habitats that have been in decline. ocean beaches takes decades or centuries to Where sedimentary bottoms have been break up some of the shell and other coarse contaminated by oil deposition, some clean- materials. up may be required. Bioremediation through the addition of nutrients to speed up micro- Where beach nourishment is conducted in bial degradation of oil has the negative response to the DWH incident, the habi- consequence of enhancing eutrophication in tat damage (loss of prey for surf fish and an environment where excess nutrient load- shorebirds) should be quantified empirically ing is already a huge problem. Where oil and this collateral damage mitigated by may lie buried in conditions of anoxia and an appropriate compensatory restoration thus pose long-term risks of remobilization project. Injury caused by beach nourish- and exposure of vertebrate consumers that ment to threatened or endangered species excavate prey, then some engineering inter- would require special attention, intensive ventions, such as oxygen injection (Boufadel monitoring and adaptive management et al. 2010), may be justifiable as restoration (Peterson and Bishop 2005). We recom- actions on high-value shores. Neverthe- mend that benthic invertebrates suitable as less, pilot studies should be conducted to prey for shorebirds and surf fish be supple- demonstrate levels of benefit and potential mented wherever beach filling has occurred harm and to guide adaptive changes of to restore the injured prey resources. In methodology before any large-scale applica- addition, on any beach that has received tion of this technology. In addition, oxygen shell, rocky gravel or cobbles in excess of its injection may not be feasible over the wide natural abundance on similar unmodified spatial scales typical of oil exposures to beaches, the coarse materials should be intertidal shorelines. In general, rely- sorted immediately after filling and removed ing on natural chemical, biological and light- from the beach environment to prevent induced degradation of oil grounded on soft multiyear inhibition of recovery of benthic sediments, with regular monitoring of prog- invertebrate prey. ress toward recovery is the wisest approach. Although they do not serve as recreational Perceived opportunity generates numerous sites to nearly the same degree as ocean proposals offering application of untested beaches, mud flats are also important for technology, which should be treated with the Gulf ecosystem. Technologies for resto- skepticism and pursued only after cautious ration of mud flats and other unvegetated testing indicates promising outcomes.

46 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Recommendation 2 Investigate effects of dispersed oil and dissolved natural gas on deep-sea ecosystems and test capacity for restoration of ecosystem services.

»» Conduct field observations and novel Sedimentary bottoms are characterized by mesocosm experiments to infer toxi- motile organisms such as polychaetes, brittle cological impacts of oil on deep-sea stars and other echinoderms, protozoa and particle feeders to provide quantitative small meiofaunal organisms, with infauna estimates of damage. dominated by polychaetes and bivalves. Because the seafloor serves as a final des- »» Test and implement restoration tination for the downward rain of organic strategies, such as Sargassum enhance- particles, they become concentrated there, ment, to stimulate recovery of particle leading to higher concentrations of animals feeder populations. on the ocean floor than are found in the overlying water column. Heterotrophic »» Through field observations and labora- bacterial production continues to occur in tory mesocosm experiments, evaluate the sediment surface of the deep-sea floor. the fate of the heterotrophic microbes This biological setting provides the backdrop An orange brisingid basket star produced in such massive amounts as rests on a coral reef at a depth for the injection and multi-month retention they degraded dissolved hydrocarbon of 450 meters in the Gulf. of massive amounts of organic carbon as a gases and dispersed oil droplets. At the top of the image is a result of the DWH blowout. school of Beryx fish swimming Although public perception persists that over the reef. Photo: NOAA- microbes rapidly degraded most of the Deep-sea changes triggered by the OER/BOEMRE natural gas and much of the oil from the DWH oil and gas discharge DWH spill, the biogeochemical conse- Virtually all of the gaseous hydrocarbons quences of greatly enhanced microbial and a large fraction of the oil released by production and the toxicological effects of the Deepwater Horizon well blowout were finely dispersed oil droplets on deep-sea retained in the water column deep beneath food webs are likely complex and largely the sea surface, concentrated in one or unknown. The flux of organic matter that more plumes of dispersed hydrocarbons typically fuels deep-sea food webs is derived at depths of 800 to 1,200 m (Camilli et al. from photosynthesis at the surface of the 2010, Joye et al. 2011). Our knowledge ocean. This primary production supports a of the specific biota and understanding of downward flux of sinking cells and detrital ecosystem processes at this depth in the organic matter that is consumed by many pelagic water column is limited because the different groups of protists and zooplankton ecosystem is not readily observable or ame- as it falls through the water column. This nable to experimentation. In contrast, sur- rain of particles also supports heterotrophic face waters are easily sampled from ships, microbial production throughout the water and even deep benthic communities can be The blowout and column. The magnitude of the particle flux catalogued from remotely operated vehicles decreases with depth, because particles (ROVs) or submarines. The observations that subsequent BP response slowly dissolve as a result of bacterial activity scientists have been able to make indicate have multiple, but largely and as the carbon consumed is respired. that these pelagic communities (Kessler et undetermined, ecological Fluxes are variable in space and time, but al. 2011), as well as the deep-sea benthic implications for deep-sea it is believed that on average, only one environments (Fisher 2010) of the northern organisms. percent to at most 10 percent of the carbon Gulf were, and probably still are, affected fixed by phytoplankton at the surface of the by the massive injections of organic matter ocean reaches a depth of 1,000 m. Addi- in the form of methane and other natural tional macroinvertebrate consumers, varying gases, oil droplets and emulsions from the in nature as a function of bottom geology blowout. Much of the methane seems to and carbon flux, are found on the bottom have been processed by microbes (Kessler of the deep ocean. Rocky, hard bottoms et al. 2011), resulting in an increase in the support deep-water corals such as Lophelia, biomass of microbes able to grow using the crinoids and other sessile invertebrates. energy from methane. These bacteria are

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 47 Figure 11 How the Oil Spill Affects the Micobial The deep sea is already difficult for scientists to access, but there is little doubt that the microbial food chain in the Gulf has been affected by the oil spill. Impacts from the spill may be direct (i.e., poisoned bottom-dwelling organisms) or indirect (i.e., a bacterial and species population boom) with many unknowns, including how much oil rose to the surface and how much sank to the bottom. Without further research, the impacts on this region and the ocean as a whole may remain unknown. Source: T. Hollibaugh, pers. com.

48 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem A field of the soft coral Callogorgia sp. in the Gulf of Mexico. Photo: NOAA-OER/ BOEMRE

The dispersed nature potential food for the grazing food chain. We have little information on the ultimate of the oil allowed it to The emulsions that were formed by the fate or effects of the Corexit dispersant physical processes unique to the deep- added at depth to the escaping hydro- encounter and probably water blowout are in the same size range carbons, but we do know that Corexit is foul and disable the as the sinking cells and detrital particles moderately toxic to test organisms, that feeding organs of many that are the food of deep-sea protists and it renders the oil more bioavailable and particle feeders of the zooplankton. Oil in highly dispersed and that components of the dispersant appear oceanic water column partially degraded forms was highly avail- to be capable of persisting for months able to and doubtless ingested directly by without substantial chemical degradation and of the seafloor. grazers (particle feeders) over a wide range (Kujawinski et al. 2011). Petroleum of ocean depths. hydrocarbons have also been found on the seafloor, and there are indications of mor- The dispersed nature of the oil allowed it tality among benthic organisms coming into to encounter and probably foul and disable contact with them (Fisher 2010). Thus the the feeding organs of many of these par- blowout and subsequent BP response have ticle feeders of the oceanic water column multiple, but largely undetermined, ecologi- and of the seafloor. Dead jellyfish, includ- cal implications for deep-sea organisms. ing salps (a grazer on fine particles), were commonly reported by biologists during Outstanding questions concerning the the spill. It seems likely that the oil effects effects of the DWH oil spill on deep-sea on particle feeders throughout the water food webs column caused major disruption of the We can hypothesize these impacts of food web leading to higher trophic levels, the DWH spill on pelagic and deep-sea including several marine mammals and benthic communities, as described above; large fish. Even pelagic consumers at however, we currently lack the knowledge higher trophic levels may have been directly to evaluate their significance. One of the harmed by encounters with highly dispersed most obvious, and perhaps easily assessed, oil droplets. Did the toxicity of the oil inter- processes is the effect of direct toxicity on mixed with dispersants kill many of these benthic organisms. Oil on the bottom is higher-order consumers and modify the likely to have other consequences besides deep-sea pelagic food webs? Crustaceans direct toxicity. Possible additional effects (especially amphipods) and echinoderms are include smothering benthic organisms and known to be especially sensitive to toxicants stimulating blooms of benthic hydrocar- (Lenihan et al. 2003), so the disabling of the bon-degrading microbes, respiration with food webs may have been selective. possible local anoxia and the production of

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 49 toxic sulfide as a consequence of alternative feeders than typically small, free-living respiration pathways (sulfate reduction). bacterial cells in the ocean (Hazen et al. The toxicity and lability of the hydrocar- 2010). This may have resulted in enhanced bons reaching the bottom are likely to trophic transfer of both bacterial biomass be different depending on whether they and of any toxic hydrocarbons associated come directly from the discharge plume, with the flocs. indirectly from surface sedimentation or are mixed with the blowout muds. The relative Respiration of hydrocarbons in the water contribution to benthic deposits of weath- column uses oxygen and, in the case of ered oil sinking from the surface slick, of the plume resulting from the DWH blow- microbially processed oil from the dispersed out, resulted in an area of lower oxygen plume, or of oil mixed with drilling fluid that could be detected 500 km from the that was expelled during the initial blowout wellhead a month after the well had been capped (Kessler et al. 2011). Although and in subsequent efforts to stop flow from Bluefin tuna swim in the oxygen depletion associated with this the well is not yet known. We do know Gulf. Photo: NOAA/Marine that the oil from the spill has entered into feature was not great enough to be life- Photobank the pelagic food chain in shallower coastal threatening to most organisms, it may have waters of the Gulf (Graham et al. 2010), caused altered behavior of vertically migrat- but we do not know whether hydrocarbon- ing fish and invertebrates. Also, respiration degrading microbes entered deep-sea food produces carbon dioxide that reacts with webs to any appreciable degree through water to form carbonic acid, which then consumption by particle feeders, many of dissociates to cause ocean acidification. Many possible disrup- which were probably killed or disabled by Calculations (W.-J. Cai, pers. com.) indicate tions or shifts in the food fouling of feeding and respiratory apparatus. that respiration associated with microbial web may be occurring as oxidation of methane sufficient to decrease a result of the oil. The hydrocarbons dispersed in the deep- the dissolved oxygen concentrations at water plume represented a massive organic depth by 50 percent of saturation would subsidy to the pelagic and deep benthic result in an approximately 0.1 unit decrease communities (Joye et al. 2011), but we do in pH. Decreases of this magnitude affect not know exactly what the communities did biogeochemical processes (Beman et al. with this carbon infusion. Many possible 2011) as well as calcification and probably disruptions or shifts in the food web may also speciation and bioavailability of trace be occurring as a result of the oil. Was this metals. This decrease in pH may be particu- huge bacterial biomass simply respired in a larly significant in the deep sea because of series of microbial loops? Did it enter macro the relationship between pressure and cal- food chains of the sea leading to fish and cium carbonate solubility (i.e., carbonate is other organisms of the pelagic and benthic more soluble at depth). This is particularly in realms? Or is much of it recalcitrant organic the northern Gulf, where subsurface waters matter that resists degradation? Hydro- are already excessively acidified because of carbons are not a “balanced meal” for heterotrophy associated with the seasonal microbes, so this growth of heterotrophs dead zone underlying the Mississippi River would then increase demand for nitrogen, plume (Cai et al. in review). The acidifica- phosphorus, iron, copper and other micro- tion associated with a mesopelagic plume nutrients needed to produce more bacte- could affect calcified benthic organisms rial biomass. Such increased demand on such as foraminifera, echinoderms, mollusks resources might then limit further growth or stony corals such as Lophelia where the of bacteria or other deep-sea microbes. The plume intersected the bottom. resulting microbial production in the deep sea is not likely to support greatly increased The boundaries and interactions of deep- production of the higher trophic levels sea communities also remain unclear. that feed on bacteria (e.g., Pomeroy 1974, The shelf break of the Gulf of Mexico is 1979, Ducklow et al. 1986). Nevertheless, a prime habitat for sperm whales, which bacterial growth on hydrocarbons dispersed are especially concentrated in the can- in the plume appears to have resulted in the yons, where they feed largely on squid. production of flocculent material and micro- Do deep-sea squid benefit from microbial colonies that are more available to higher production if one traces back the origins trophic levels for consumption by particle of their diets? Alternatively, did mortality

50 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem The spill provides an of particle feeders at various trophic levels flow and production in both pelagic and opportunity to enhance result in depletion of squid prey and thus benthic food chains. Thus, restoration have bottom-up impacts on even higher- planning needs to address both restoration scientific understanding order predators? Post-spill surveys of the of deep-sea pelagic and benthic food-web because it represented benthic communities in the vicinity of the production. One direct method of restoring a massive intervention Deepwater Horizon wellhead have revealed this food web production relies on enhance- on a scale wide enough some locations containing dead Lophelia ment of the floating Sargassum-associated for responses to emerge and crinoids on hard bottoms, covered by community. Enhancement of Sargassum, dark, as yet unanalyzed, material (Fisher and thereby its community of associated despite background 2010) and large areas without living invertebrates and fish, could generate variability. polychaetes and with recently killed brittle a meaningful downward flux of natural stars, also accompanied by dark surface organic materials. These materials, in turn, deposits high in polyaromatic hydrocarbons would serve as nutrition for the particle (S.B. Joye, pers. com.). Analyses that might feeders of the ocean from shallow waters allow causation to be inferred are incom- through the mesopelagic (i.e., middle of the plete as of this writing. Thus, we are far water column) and then the benthopelagic from an adequate understanding of “oil zones on down to the benthos. spill oceanography” for the deep sea based In the following section describing the res- upon microbial processes and toxicological toration of Sargassum ecosystem services, effects. Yet the spill provides an opportu- we outline a feasible culturing method for nity to enhance scientific understanding enhancing Sargassum and its ecosystem because it represented a massive interven- services. Because Sargassum and associated tion on a scale wide enough for responses organisms that use it as habitat suffered to emerge despite background variability. injury from the DWH oil spill, and therefore Research that answers these questions is require compensatory restoration, Sargas- an essential part of the restoration process: sum enhancement as a means of restor- Without information on damages, no resto- ing lost deep-sea production must involve ration will follow. Legitimate concern over enhancement of this surface system beyond long-term, delayed impacts will persist if the what is required to compensate for direct science remains incomplete and the deep- Sargassum community damage itself to sea processes continue to be a black box of avoid giving double credit. unknowns. Furthermore, oil exploration and extraction continue in the deep waters of Restoring lost pelagic and benthic produc- the Gulf and its intensity is growing. tion over wide areas of the coastal ocean is feasible, based on our understanding of Restoration of deep-sea ecosystem how the deep-sea food webs are subsidized despite uncertainty by surface ocean production. Nevertheless, Because of the probable mortality of the concepts require testing and the pro- particle feeders in the water column from cesses require quantification. This should be exposure to fine particulate oil and of done on a small scale as proof of concept suspension and deposit feeders of the and then scaled up accordingly to com- deep-sea floor from fouling by adhesive pensate for estimated losses to the oceanic oil deposits, the most important deep-sea resources. injury is likely to be disruption of energy

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 51 Recommendation 3 Determine effects of the DWH oil spill on the Sargassum community and restore its lost habitat services to fish and wildlife.

»» Conduct realistic mesocosm experi- stages of loggerhead and other sea turtles ments to complement field observations (hatchlings), as well as bluefin tuna, cobia, made during the spill to assess acute wahoo, mahimahi and juvenile stages and chronic mortality of Sargassum and of other fish of commercial and recre- its animal associates by floating oil and ational value. Oil interacts with UV light to dispersants. aggravate phototoxicity, putting many of these surface organisms at relatively high »» Restore Sargassum by prohibiting risk. Fouling by the sticky oil mousse that commercial harvest, and by culturing it represents the floating form is likely to have in lab settings to test whether Sargas- been the cause of much mortality among sum augmentation increases survival or Sargassum-associated animals. production of its animal associates and, if it does, scaling up augmentation to Given the large area of coincidence match expected benefits with estimated between Sargassum and the surface slick Oiled Sargassum in Louisiana. damages. of mousse, impacts to this community Photo: Carolyn Cole/Los could be highly significant. We recommend Angeles Times Unlike most biogenic habitats created by analysis of damage assessment data for the macroorganisms, oceanic Sargassum is not Sargassum community in combination with rooted in place. It is concentrated at the sea mesocosm studies to assess the sensitivity surface by localized downwellings at frontal of Sargassum and associated organisms Oiling is likely to have zones, such as commonly characterize the to oiling and to establish (if possible) the had negative effects on western wall of the Gulf Stream and other contribution of Gulf of Mexico Sargassum many of Sargassum’s boundary currents such as the Loop Current to the Gulf Stream population. of the Gulf of Mexico, and in windrows cre- associated animal assem- ated by Langmuir circulations cells. Sargas- As an initial restoration action, commer- blages, including sea sum thus exists at the boundary between cial harvesting of Sargassum should be turtle hatchlings, bluefin the atmosphere and the sea surface. It prohibited in U.S. territorial waters of the tuna, cobia, wahoo, serves as structural habitat, providing Gulf. The benefits of a harvest prohibition mahimahi, and juvenile physical refuges for juvenile and small fish, would need to be quantified and com- crustaceans and other invertebrates such as pared with the estimated damage to the stages of other fish of nudibranchs. Many of the associated organ- Sargassum-associated community to assess commercial and recre- isms graze directly on Sargassum or con- whether this prohibition alone would match ational value. sume epiphytes growing on the seaweed the scale of oil spill damage to the Sargas- surface. These associated invertebrates sum community. It is likely that prohibition and small fish are preyed upon by seabirds, of harvest would fall short of providing larger fish and sea turtles. Consequently, an full quantitative compensation. Hence, the entire food web is centered on the floating phycological horticulture of healthy live plants and travels with them. Sargassum should be tested for technologi- cal feasibility at reasonable cost to provide More than half of the oil released by the biomass of plants for supplementation to DWH well blowout reached the sea surface replace any remaining uncompensated and then remained at sea for weeks to damage. months, trapped in eddies spun off the Loop Current. As a result, the floating In adopting some combination of culture Sargassum habitat, which is entrained and or ending commercial harvest of Sargas- transported by the same surface currents, sum as a vehicle for restoring injury, tests was heavily exposed to oil. Although brown would be necessary to determine how algae are not particularly sensitive to oil associated animals responded to added toxicity, oiling is likely to have had nega- Sargassum biomass. The most likely contri- tive effects on many of their associated butions of augmented Sargassum biomass animal assemblages, including early life to its associated animals are structural

52 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem protection against predation and stimula- plant biomass could provide the quantita- tion of bottom-up production of consumer tive basis for scaling the restoration of species in the food web. The quantitative Sargassum-associated animals. Additional relationships between Sargassum biomass resource-specific restoration would prob- and production of associated animals could ably still be necessary for the large num- be tested by experiments in the field. For bers of hatchling sea turtles killed in oiled example, experiments could be conducted Sargassum because of their special status in which differing amounts of Sargassum under the Endangered Species Act. It is are maintained inside floating enclosures, possible that provision of more Sargassum open at the top and bottom to allow preda- habitat could enhance hatchling survival tion but with enclosing mesh of a size that sufficiently to compensate for estimated prevents exchange of associated animals oiling mortality, but if experiments fail to among Sargassum patches. These patches, demonstrate compensation then additional differing in biomass, would then be seeded means of replacing lost sea turtles would with different densities of the associated be needed, probably based upon actions fish and invertebrate community. Following already developed in the species-specific their survival and growth as a function of recovery plans.

Crop dusting near Ripley, MS, contributes to water pollution through chemical runoff. Photo: Roger Smith

Recommendation 4 Modify farming practices in the Mississippi River basin to reduce nutrient loading in the Gulf of Mexico.

»» Establish demonstration watersheds »» Adjust U.S. farm policy to allow region- upstream in the Mississippi River ally tailored crop diversification and basin that would test the economic reduction of subsidies in the Farm Bill benefits to farmers and the nutrient without loss of income to the farmers runoff reductions achievable by because of reductions in fertilizer costs. transforming and locally managing regional farm policy.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 53 Improvements in coastal water quality in the be developed in each watershed. Incentives northern Gulf of Mexico could help achieve to optimize environmental and economic two major restoration goals: conserving and outcomes could be included in new federal restoring coastal Louisiana wetlands and farm policies. reducing the size of the Gulf hypoxic zone, the dead zone. Coastal wetland restoration Background on U.S. Farm Policy is thwarted by the high nutrient concentra- The predominant factor affecting land use tions in river water diverted into wetlands in the Corn Belt is the federal farm policy. (Kearney et al. 2011,Turner 2010, Howes This set of policies drives land use practices et al. 2010). Spring nutrient loading of the that ultimately affect riverine nitrogen northern Gulf induces formation of the concentrations. For example, agricultural dead zone each summer (Figure 2, Rabalais landscapes receiving higher government et al. 2007, USEPA Science Advisory Board payments per area of farmland exhibit 2007). The increase in nutrient loading (Broussard et al. submitted): 1) a higher A “crop cover” riparian buffer from the Mississippi-Atchafalaya River in concentration of specialized crops; 2) a in Iowa reduces polluted runoff the past 60 years is principally a result of larger proportion of fertilized farmland from fields. Photo: University more intense agricultural land use in the (Crumpton et al. 2006); 3) farmland with of Maryland Press Releases upper basin (Figure 2, Crumpton et al. lower cropland diversity; and 4) surface 2006, Alexander et al. 2008, Turner and waters with relatively high concentrations Rabalais 2003). Reducing nutrient delivery of nitrate. Several other factors potentially from the Mississippi River watershed would contribute to the observed changes in have benefits for local communities (USEPA production agriculture and surface water 2006, 2010) and improve the fisheries in quality, e.g., climatic variability, soil type, the Gulf. urban expansion, wastewater treatment facilities and confined animal feedlot opera- Water quality improvements to the coastal tions. The transition to current agricultural waters of the Gulf near the Mississippi River practices, however, probably would have delta must be made at the source. Because been more gradual without federal sup- much of the excess nutrients in the Gulf can port, because government programs are be traced upstream to the Midwest—the intended to reduce the risk in farming Corn Belt (Figure 2)—we recommend focus- operations (Key and Roberts 2006) and ing on this area to help solve nutrient load- favor the survival of larger operations with ing problems. To this end, we propose two the resources to pursue land and capital general actions: 1) establish demonstration acquisition (Key and Roberts 2007, Roberts watersheds upstream in the Mississippi and Key 2008). River basin that would test the economic benefits to farmers and the nutrient runoff Farm Bill subsidies vary depending on crops reductions achievable by transforming and and region, but here are some illustrative locally managing regional farm policy; and points. Federal government farm payments 2) adjust U.S. farm policy accordingly to authorized by the Farm Bill accounted allow regionally tailored crop diversifica- for 32 percent of the total U.S. net farm tion and reduction of subsidies in the Farm income in 2005 (Broussard et al. submitted). Bill without loss of income to the farmers Farm subsidies in 2002 were $22 billion. because of reductions in fertilizer costs. Some states average more in farm subsi- Demonstration watersheds would shift farm dies than their net income. In other words, control to the regional level, allowing each without the subsidies, the net farm income region to make decisions that reflect its would often be negative. The total subsidies unique crop priorities and growing condi- amount to about $417 per capita for the tions. Crops tailored to each farming region Mississippi River watershed. Conservation could lead to a reduction in nutrient export programs and commodity programs are from the landscape, improved soil quality working at cross purposes where commod- and sequestered carbon while sustaining ity program payments influence landowner the working lands and economies of local decisions to convert grasslands to croplands communities. Second, changes should be (Claassen et al. 2004). Farm payments, made to subsidies and policies under the therefore, are a potent policy instrument U.S. Farm Bill. Farming regions should be that could be used to influence alternative released from national constraints on crop- environmental and economic outcomes ping priorities so that regional priorities can that protect soil and water resources while

54 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem promoting local food security and jobs and levels of government and include multiple maintaining farm profitability. stakeholders to determine the societal worth of ecological services produced by Optimizing for these multiple goals is these multi-functional production systems known as capitalizing on the potential of and to establish mechanisms that appropri- “multi-functional” agriculture (Jordan et al. ately compensate farmers for production of 2007). It is distinct from the valuable but these services. Administrative bodies that spatially restricted current federal pro- integrate across political, economic and grams that subsidize the retirement of land social boundaries (Roux et al. 2008) are from active production. These programs required to successfully apply management have produced substantial environmental practices in ecological units stretching from benefits (Sullivan et al. 2004) but public small upland watersheds to coastal waters. investment in these programs is unlikely to A consortium of state and federal interests increase in the foreseeable future. There that embrace positive changes is required: is evidence that major additional benefits Land grant colleges and universities are may be gained from a “working landscape” critical potential members, for example. approach that improves the performance It is also critical to involve the local com- of active farmland by rewarding farmers for munities that drink the water, swim and delivering environmental benefits as well fish in the streams and eat the food from as food and biomass (Jordan et al. 2007). the local farms. Such an effort to integrate A variety of strong political constituencies land management across a wide spectrum now expects a very different set of outputs of interests and authorities is underway in from agriculture, and the U.S. farm sector a larger sub-basin of the Chippewa River in could meet many of these expectations by Minnesota (Boody et al. 2005), where the harnessing the capacities of multi-functional focus is on development of grasslands for agriculture. Here we recommend capital- biofuel and meat and dairy food produc- izing on the potential of multi-functional tion. The multi-stakeholder processes of agriculture through the specific actions learning, deliberation, negotiation and outlined below. experimentation that are essential to devel- oping new production systems under the Establish “demonstration” watersheds demonstration watersheds will not occur We propose the creation of a network without organizational mandates, resources of research and demonstration water- and policies supporting participation. sheds that will establish and evaluate new bio-economic enterprises based on Adjust U.S. farm policy to encourage multi-functional production systems. These crop diversification and regional One way to encourage demonstration watersheds would be farming priorities sustainable conservation authorized as regional management units We suggest that government commodity to develop farm policies that more closely and the development of programs can be used to support a wider reflect regional growing conditions and variety of crop types, particularly on smaller ecological services is to crop priorities. Regional demonstration farms (Roberts and Key 2008), can decrease require that farms imple- watersheds could improve relationships the risks of diversifying crops in impaired ment conservation prac- between farm policies and on-the-ground agricultural landscapes (Dimitri et al. 2005) tices in order to receive crop outcomes and lead to environmental and can stimulate economic markets for benefits suggested by this report as well as government-issued other crops (Jordan et al. 2007). Addition- by others (Jordan et al. 2007, Batie 2009). ally government farm programs for soil commodity payments. They could explore alternative uses of fed- conservation could protect valuable soil eral farm funds at sufficiently large tempo- resources (Claassen et al. 2007) by encour- ral and spatial scales to match the needs of aging investment in long-term soil fertility the agricultural communities living in them. and agricultural sustainability. A portion of the DWH oil spill restoration funds would be the catalyst for this change. One way to encourage sustainable conser- vation and the development of ecological These demonstration watersheds must services is to require that farms implement be sufficiently scaled (ca. 5,000 km2) to conservation practices in order to receive address the complexity of natural, human government-issued commodity payments. and social factors. They should be man- Examples of conservation management aged by groups that encompass multiple practices that could reduce nitrogen

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 55 leaching and coastal hypoxia include adop- with more than 15 percent perennial crops; tion of traditional and innovative conser- 4) the creation of region-specific solutions vation practices (Nassauer et al. 2007), that result in new opportunities for the maintaining living plant cover on the soil for emerging bio-economy; and 5) in toto and the majority of the growing season (Jordan in parts, models of sustainable ecosystem et al. 2007), reduced dependency on field management that incorporate democratic drainage systems (Nassauer et al. 2007), participation at the community level and a and increased production of perennial field legacy of guidance for future generations. crops—all of which could support a market- We conclude that farm subsidies can be driven economy (Cox et al. 2006, Glover used to provide the infrastructure and et al. 2007, Jordan et al. 2007, Nassauer incentives to become a basis for a sus- et al. 2007). tainable agricultural bio-economy. These Each region has its own set of circum- subsidies could be released from national stances, its unique soil fertility, drainage, constraints on cropping priorities and transportation and culture. It is best, assigned regional priorities by the water- therefore, if agricultural management shed governing entities (in a process that includes and reflects these regional factors is determined in a competitive review), by empowering local decision-making. The whose goal is to protect and enhance outcomes anticipated from freeing farmers environmental and economic outcomes to establish locally appropriate crops rather over 50 years. But funding is needed to than planting corn to receive incentive pay- support the transition. Through initiatives ments under the Farm Bill will be: 1) a 50 proposed above, we judge that this can percent reduction in the nitrogen loading be done with relatively modest public from the watersheds within 25 years; 2) investments (ca. $10 million annually for more diverse crop choices; 3) a landscape five sites over 25 years).

Recommendation 5 Reduce fish and wildlife casualties resulting from aquatic debris.

»» Conduct field programs to remove attributed to oil and gas operations (Miller Seabirds and sea turtles and simultaneously determine types, and Jones 2003). We recommend funding can become entangled locations and sources of debris. projects to systematically survey and remove marine, estuarine and riverine debris in all in discarded gillnets »» Develop programs to limit and prevent Gulf states affected by the DWH oil spill. and other netting. Sea debris discards at the source and to These projects have the potential to garner turtles mistake plastic regularly remove debris at hot spots significant public support in part because bags for jellyfish and where it collects. they would improve the aesthetics of the consume them, often shoreline. Marine debris in many forms is now ubiqui- resulting in death. tous around the planet (UNEP 2009), and, Removal of debris from the seafloor and notwithstanding many laws, regulations surface, shoreline habitats, estuaries and and programs targeting marine debris, this other waterways is motivated not merely problem is likely to increase in the 21st cen- by aesthetics but also by wildlife and habi- tury (NRC 2008). Marine debris comes from tat protection. The emergency responses many sources, including several that are to the DWH oil spill generated tons of ocean based, such as cargo ships, commer- debris, which persists as collateral injury cial fishing boats and recreational craft. In to habitat and to fish and wildlife of the the Gulf, the offshore oil and gas industry northern Gulf. Furthermore, removal of is a significant source of debris (NRC 1995, preexisting debris is critical to the effective- 2008). Up to 10 percent of all debris on ness of species recovery plans and improved Padre Island National Seashore has been management more generally. For example,

56 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem a removal program for Louisiana stream dividends in education that may reduce debris was designed to avoid stream flow future debris introduction. Public participa- blockage and resultant flooding (S. Laska tion can impart useful feelings of ownership pers. com.). Marine debris removal pro- and responsibility for stewardship of the grams are funded by various nongovern- publicly owned resources of the Gulf. Field mental organizations (NGOs), industry and debris removal teams must be trained to government agencies. NOAA programs, for minimize unintended habitat damage, how- example, target disused, discarded and lost ever. For example, landing small boats on fishing gear such as crab pots, longlines and marsh shorelines and walking through soft fishnets that can persist for years, trapping, sediments of coastal marshes can reduce entangling and killing wildlife. their habitat value. The potential for injury to, contamination of and removal of arti- Support for existing marine debris pro- facts from archaeological sites is sufficiently grams and mobilization of new ones for high that standardized training for teams Derelict traps abandoned by the northern Gulf could help restore Gulf removing shoreline debris is necessary. fishermen are harmful to coral resources, including sea turtles, seabirds, reefs. Photo: Amy Uhrin/NOAA/ marine mammals and other wildlife harmed Marine Photobank Debris removal should target not only mate- by DWH oil. For example, many clapper rials left behind after emergency response rails were among the birds killed by the oil. to the DWH oil spill but also those gener- Crab pots cast up onto marshes trap and ated by ongoing human activities. Debris kill rails and other marsh birds, and removal generated during emergency response of discarded crab pots can speed recovery activities includes unretrieved boom, mostly Debris removal should of rail populations. In addition, crab pots present in marshes, and trash discarded target not only materi- abandoned or lost on the estuarine bottom by response workers and from the fleet trap and kill a wide range of fish and als left behind after of boats. Debris that has been generated crustaceans that were injured by DWH oil. over longer time frames is important to emergency response to In the five Gulf states, volunteers with the distinguish from that generated during spill the DWH oil spill but also 2009 International Coastal Cleanup picked response, because organizing the search for those generated by up 728 discarded or lost crab, lobster or fish and removal of debris in a spatially explicit ongoing human activities. traps, which represent only what was found fashion is important to targeting future on a single day in relatively accessible loca- efforts in regular debris removal projects. tions (Ocean Conservancy 2010). Debris removal projects should require Seabirds and sea turtles can become standardized data recording to character- entangled in discarded gillnets and other ize all debris by type and location; effort netting. Sea turtles mistake plastic bags for should also be recorded (e.g., number of jellyfish and consume them, often result- participants, area searched, etc.). Survey ing in death. Bottlenose dolphin and other designs should be based upon knowledge marine mammals suffer death and injury of locations and types of fishing and other from entanglements with nets, and pygmy activities. They should be combined with sperm whales and sperm whales, both understanding of physics of transport found in the Gulf, are vulnerable to the and deposition to construct, empirically test ingestion of plastic bags and plastic sheets. and refine evidence-based models of debris Although it is difficult to establish the ulti- accumulation. This allows future removal mate impact of entanglement and ingestion projects to be more efficient and effective at the population level (NRC 2008), the and may even serve to help identify appro- deaths of marine mammals, sea turtles and priate education or regulatory programs other wildlife caused by marine debris are to limit generation of debris. This quan- largely avoidable and fall within the scope titative information and these models of of necessary Gulf restoration to enable debris generation should also be employed other recovery actions to be effective. to mount successful educational or regula- Many marine debris programs engage tory programs to prevent discard of marine the public as volunteers and hence pay debris.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 57 Recommendation 6 Restore water flows, riparian habitats and water quality to reduce nutrient loading and enhance ecosystem services of smaller rivers.

»» Survey the smaller rivers of the Gulf riverine flow on estuarine and marine pro- to determine their water and habitat ductivity and ecosystems is less well under- quality and their flow challenges. stood (Baron et al. 2002, Fitzhugh and Richter 2004). The effects are not isolated »» Assess potential effects of environmen- but interact with anthropogenic stressors tal change on the ecosystem services of such as fishing, habitat loss and eutrophi- these river networks. cation. Furthermore, they are embedded within larger regional and global changes, »» Preserve the more pristine rivers and such as atmospheric pollutant deposition restore damaged rivers using plans and sea level rise, that are expected to fur- adapted to progressive environmental ther alter hydrologic cycles and the nature changes. of interactions at the land-sea interface Natural resource managers and planners in (Jackson et al. 2001, Pringle 2001, Milly et states along the Gulf of Mexico are scram- al. 2008, Breitburg et al. 2009). The Old River Auxiliary Control bling to develop management plans that Structure on the Mississippi and A related and equally important effect take into account anthropogenic impacts Atchafalaya rivers in Louisiana. of altered river flow on aquatic organ- on freshwater flow, water quality, fisher- Photo: Team New Orleans/U.S. isms relates to nutrient delivery—both the ies and other services of watersheds in a Army Corps of Engineers minimum requirements to support the realistic fashion, following the provisions ecosystem and the maximum threshold of the U.S. Coastal Zone Management Act, that precipitates over-enrichment. The high the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation productivity of coastal ecosystems associ- and Management Act and other important ated with major river systems is generally legislation. Contributing to the urgency attributed to the addition of land-derived is the ecological and economic damage nutrients to otherwise nutrient-limited caused by the series of hurricanes striking marine waters, and the resulting trophic the region from 2004 to 2008 and then the Human alterations of transfer of enhanced primary production DWH oil spill. A particular concern is the river flow and nutrient up marine food webs to harvested species disconnect between science and manage- (Caddy 2000, Grimes 2001). This bottom- loading associated with ment, resulting in freshwater use plans up effect of nutrients is evident in studies industrial and agricul- that lack sufficient scientific input (Brewer that show higher fishery yields in ecosys- tural development are and Stern 2005, Tribbia and Moser 2008). tems with higher nutrient inputs originating A major scientific challenge is determining implicated in some of the upstream (Caddy 1993, Nixon and Buckley where, when and to what degree marine world’s most spectacular 2002, Breitburg et al. 2009). Excessive systems are likely to be affected by global nutrient loading can lead to a variety of downstream fishery and climate change (IPCC 2007), including secondary phenomena, such as harmful ecosystem collapses, regional precipitation and hydrologic altera- algal blooms and hypoxia (Paerl et al. 1998, including Florida Bay, tions arising from climate change. One Diaz 2001, Landsberg 2002), with negative can expect significant changes in species’ the Nile River and San consequences for fishery production. The distribution and abundance, as well as Franciso Bay. ecological mechanisms that mediate these reshuffling of their trophic interactions as dual effects of nutrient loading are not well organisms respond to their changing envi- known, but river flow, which fundamen- ronment (Parmesan and Yohe 2003, Cole- tally affects the timing and magnitude of man and Petes 2010). The question is: How nutrient delivery to estuarine and offshore can we predict and manage the responses? waters, is clearly important (Paerl et al. Alteration of river flow regimes is a major 2006). Human alterations of river flow and threat to aquatic species (Richter et al. nutrient loading associated with industrial 2003). To date, research on its effects has and agricultural development are implicated focused primarily on freshwater species in some of the world’s most spectacular within river basins, while the effect of downstream fishery and ecosystem

58 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Successful Nutrient Remediation

Examples of successful nutrient remedia- By the early 1970s, the nutrient over- tion are rare. Two are available, how- enrichment of Bayou Texar appeared to ever, from the Gulf: Tampa Bay, FL, and be causing extensive fish kills, noxious Bayou Texar, near Pensacola, FL. algal blooms, high algal biomass and closures to recreational use (Moshiri et When a nutrient-reduction plan was al. 1981). A retention reservoir and weirs implemented in Tampa Bay in 1984, in the upstream channels were built in sea grasses had been reduced to 20 1974, and sewage plants were repaired. percent of the area covered 100 years The authors reported an almost total earlier (Johansson and Lewis 1992). The reduction in fish kills and the elimination sea grass cover in Hillsborough Bay and of algal blooms. Wide public uses of the Reduction of nutrients helps Middle Tampa Bay doubled from 1986 estuary then resumed. recovery of sea grass. Photo: to 1989 and was continuing to improve Sean Nash into the late 1990s.

collapses, including Florida Bay (Fourqurean ecosystems in diverse and interdependent and Robblee 1999), the Nile River (Nixon ways (see box above). and Buckley 2002), the Black Sea (Kideys 2002) and San Francisco Bay (Sommer et The data on variation in nutrient load- al. 2007). ing among Gulf estuaries have not been updated for more than a decade (Turner Nutrient over-enrichment has long been 2001). The variability in loading is directly viewed as a general threat to estuarine and related to human population density and coastal water health. Sixty-seven percent of land use. This information needs to be the surface area of U.S. estuaries exhib- updated to: (1) identify the less modified its moderate to high degrees of nutri- estuaries so that protective measures can ent over-enrichment (Boesch 2002), and be put in place; (2) document systems in the condition is well documented in the transition toward nutrient degradation so Gulf of Mexico (e.g., Diaz and Rosenberg that remedies can be implemented before 2008). Poor water quality may enhance the any irreversible threshold is passed; and (3) likelihood of harmful algal blooms, which restore highly degraded estuaries through threaten fisheries (Hegaret et al. 2007) and development of locally relevant manage- contaminate shellfish beds, requiring them ment plans. We recommend establish- to be closed to harvest. Sewage (identified ing and implementing a comprehensive by the presence of fecal coliform bacteria) research plan to evaluate critical watersheds is a major contributor to poor water quality. in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico, from Indeed, it is the density of fecal coliform the Mississippi Sound to the Apalachicola bacteria that triggers the closing of oyster Bay. This evaluation of smaller Gulf rivers beds to harvest. Overall, increased nitrogen would benefit several riverine restoration loading is directly related to the loss of sub- projects, including those that target farming merged grass beds, a key fisheries habitat. practices upstream (Recommendation 4) The restoration path of overnourished estu- and those that focus on habitat restoration aries, however, may not mirror the trajec- sustainability by coupling wetland restora- tory of degradation (Duarte et al. 2009). tion with filling of dredged channels. We This is because nutrient over-enrichment also recommend that these reviews be is not merely the result of higher loading used to establish protections of pristine and of one or more nutrients to a water body highly functional rivers and to implement but is embedded in a set of cultural and restorations to control problems identified geomorphological modifications affecting in other rivers.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 59 THEME 2 Protect Existing Gulf Habitats and Populations

Although restoration of injured habitats, described in our recommen- dations under Theme 1, clearly represents an important responsibility of the DWH natural resources trustees, protection of habitat sup- porting sensitive life stages and critical processes such as spawning, nesting and overwintering of fish, birds and other wildlife also has exceptional long-term benefits. Habitat protection represents a less risky action than direct restoration, which may fail or not endure. On an acre-for-acre basis, habitat protection is typically much less expen- sive than direct restoration. Moreover, organizations and resources are already actively focused on preserving habitats in the Gulf, and DWH funds can be used to augment existing programs or improve enforcement of current legislation that protects habitat. The follow- ing four recommendations are focused on preserving valuable habi- tat in the Gulf and enforcing existing legislation designed to protect wildlife and resources.

Recommendation 7 Preserve functionally valuable habitat for fish and wildlife sanctuaries to enhance injured species recovery.

»» Conduct a systematic review of federal and state agencies legally respon- available large parcels of prime habitat, sible for carrying out natural resource rating them by the importance of uses damage assessment and compensatory by injured species. restoration) reasoned that recovery of fish and wildlife required sustained protection »» Purchase land and/or development of their habitats, including those in adjacent rights for habitat of highest rated value uplands, and chose habitat protection as to injured species. a principal tool for restoration. Extensive efforts were made to consult with federal »» Establish permanent stewardship for and state resource agencies, NGOs, private these habitat protections by merging landowners, municipalities and others to them with national parks, wildlife identify and evaluate alternative parcels in sanctuaries or other responsible public the spill area as habitat for injured species land management programs. of fish and wildlife (EVOSTC 1994). In some An osprey presides over a Wildlife sanctuaries established for the cases, additional fieldwork was undertaken nest on the Pascagoula River benefit of species injured by oil spills and specifically for that purpose (e.g., Kuletz et in Mississippi. Photo: Jennifer other anthropogenic stresses have proven al. 1994). These evaluations also took into Cowley/The Constituency for a to be effective at aiding the recovery of account the potential for incorporation of Sustainable Coast those species. After the Exxon Valdez oil the habitat parcels into various conservation spill, the natural resources trustees (the systems (e.g., parks, and refuges) to ensure

60 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Recovery of an injured species may best be assisted by action to protect vital habitats outside the spill area. Northern gannets, for example, nest in the maritime provinces of Canada.

Brown pelicans fly over St. Vincent National Wildlife Refuge in Apalachicola, FL. Photo: Nicole Rankin/USFWS Southeast

management and long-term stewardship for impacts of climate change, which may recovery of injured species. threaten some otherwise suitable habitats. For example, purchase of rapidly subsid- This concept and process provide a model ing or low-lying lands cannot be justified for restoration after the DWH oil spill. by assuming perpetual provision of their Several NGOs, including The Nature Con- ecosystem services as dry land habitats. Nev- servancy and local and regional land conser- ertheless, as coastal lands become flooded, vancies, already invest effort in identifying they may still deliver valuable ecosystem ser- significant parcels of undeveloped or rela- vices as submerged lands and still be worth tively intact land in private hands that pro- purchasing. Expert judgment should prevail vide vital habitats for sustaining ecosystem in choosing land parcels to ensure that services and fish and wildlife populations. future generations of people and wildlife To help with recovery from the DWH spill, continue to benefit. efforts should focus on the northern Gulf of Mexico spill area but also take into account We recommend that a broad program of a wider geographic area in response to the habitat protection (including, as appropri- habitat requirements of injured species. In ate, fee-simple purchase or purchase of other words, recovery of an injured species development rights) be organized. This may best be assisted by action to protect program would first solicit local and regional vital habitats outside the spill area. In the knowledge about available privately owned cases of injured species of migratory birds, lands and their habitat values for species of many of which range widely, there may concern. Purchase of land parcels could be be need and opportunity for actions even prioritized by available ecological data and more distant than the spill area. Northern economic considerations. This would ensure gannets, for example, nest in the maritime that funds are most effectively spent on provinces of Canada, while pelagic species habitats that will yield the highest benefit such as Audubon’s shearwater nest in the for their cost. Finally, permanent steward- Greater Antilles. ship for these lands should be arranged to ensure their long-term delivery of ecosystem A major difference between habitat protec- services. State and federal agencies, NGOs Two large shrimp prowl the tion programs after the Exxon Valdez oil spill coral bottom in the Flower and networks of protected areas could serve Garden Banks National Marine and the current situation in the northern as stewards of newly purchased habitats, Sanctuary, Gulf of Mexico. Gulf of Mexico is the present need to com- including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Photo: G.P. Schmahl/NOAA pare and rank alternative potential habitat National Wildlife Refuge System and NOAA’s purchases in the context of anticipated National Marine Sanctuaries Program.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 61 Recommendation 8 Implement and augment existing recovery actions for species of management concern injured by the DWH oil spill.

»» Use metrics established in prior quantitative balance between injury and population status reviews to help assess restoration is termed restoration scaling. damage to injured species of concern. The scale of compensatory restoration is computed by Resource Equivalency Analysis »» Implement restoration actions identi- when applied to a species, or Habitat fied and detailed in preexisting recovery Equivalency Analysis, when applied to plans for species of concern. loss of ecosystem services from an injured habitat (NOAA 1995, English et al. 2009). Many of the species that suffered popula- Computations produce an estimate of how tion losses from the DWH oil spill and from extensive a project must be to replace the collateral damage caused by response losses attributable to the oil spill. actions can be considered species of concern from population declines that For an injured species that is also federally predate the DWH incident and from special listed under the ESA, the federal agencies status granted by federal legislation or A bottlenose dolphin swims will have available a formal Species Recov- state declarations. These include threat- in the heavily polluted ery Plan. These plans include prioritized Galveston Bay off Texas. Photo: ened and endangered species protected by recommendations for recovery actions, Flip Nicklin/Minden Pictures/ the Endangered Species Act (ESA), marine which can greatly facilitate effective restora- National Geographic Stock mammals protected under the Marine tion for such species. For example, after the Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), and a North oil spill near Point Judith, Rhode number of severely depleted fish popula- Island, restoration of injuries to the federally tions managed under the Magnuson- listed piping plover included protection Stevens Fishery Conservation and Man- from people and dogs on potential nest- agement Act (MSA). These laws mandate ing grounds around coastal barrier inlets. development and implementation of recov- Sufficient data had been collected from ery or rebuilding plans for these species monitoring previous interventions at other of high value, interest, and concern. The locations to provide a basis for scaling of plans are drafted by groups of experts and this restoration approach and moving ahead are regularly updated. They include specific with some confidence in success (Donlan et recommended restoration actions that are al. 2003). For many species not included in well founded in existing science and tend ESA listings, concern at the state level has to be detailed. The recovery or rebuilding led to development of formal recovery or plans also include information on available management plans for species of state con- metrics of abundance and historical records cern, which also provide well-informed and of change in abundance. Consequently, professionally developed guidance to resto- the restoration planning to redress damage ration actions likely to be successful. Many caused by the DWH incident can be facili- ecologically similar species also share the tated and made immediately up-to-date same suite of stressors and have sufficient scientifically by making direct use of these similarity in ecology so that plans developed intensive species status evaluations and for endangered and threatened species can the detailed set of restoration actions they apply more broadly. For example, the black contain. skimmer, which suffered relatively high Restoration activities must be based on mortality after the DWH oil spill, exhibits a quantitative estimates of the injury to each declining population in many states. Like resource and quantitative estimates of the the piping plover, the black skimmer also benefits of the enhancement actions to requires undisturbed coastal barrier habitat achieve truly compensatory restoration. for nesting, yet development of coastal bar- As it applies to a specific resource, such as riers and increased human uses such as off- the brown pelican, or a habitat, such as a road driving have greatly reduced suitable salt marsh, the process of determining the nesting areas. Consequently, compensatory

62 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Preservation of Habitat for the Kemp’s Ridley Sea Turtle

The ongoing recovery of the Kemp’s an inholding in the Laguna Atascosa ridley sea turtle has led to expansion of National Wildlife Refuge. Acquisition of its nesting range beyond Rancho Nuevo this area would protect nesting areas for in Mexico to include regular nesting three species of endangered sea turtles, on southern Texas beaches, a region including Kemp’s ridley, and help main- beyond substantial direct spill impacts tain water quality in the adjacent Laguna of the DWH spill. The Texas Department Madre, which provides critical turtle feed- of Parks and Wildlife has identified a ing and resting habitat. key privately owned parcel that is now

Three-hour-old Kemp’s ridley turtles are released into the Gulf at South Padre Island, TX, restoration for black skimmer mortalities Gulf, so compensatory restoration will be in 2008. Photo: Jeromy Gregg caused by oil and likely collateral damage needed. One potential restoration action by beach cleanups that disrupted breeding could be to properly shut down and seal should contemplate making use of restora- so-called orphan wells in the Gulf coastal tion actions identified for the piping plover zone, of which there are many—in the by protecting coastal barrier nesting sites low hundreds in Louisiana waters alone. for both species. To the extent that these abandoned wells are releasing oil and possibly other pollut- Because all the sea turtles of the Gulf and The Kemp’s ridley sea ants on a chronic basis, they are polluting Atlantic coasts are listed as either threat- turtle is the most seri- the sea surface where marine mammals ened or endangered, species recovery plans come to breathe and fouling coastal and ously endangered of all also exist that will facilitate identification estuarine habitats frequented by bottlenose Gulf sea turtles and com- of appropriate compensatory restoration dolphins. Shutting these abandoned wells prises a relatively high actions for injured sea turtles (see box would contribute to the enhancement of above). The Kemp’s ridley sea turtle is the proportion of observed environmental quality, supporting healthier most seriously endangered of all Gulf sea sea turtle deaths after populations of multiple species, including turtles and comprises a relatively high dolphins. Management plans for bottlenose the DWH oil release. proportion of observed sea turtle deaths dolphin under the MMPA could help guide after the DWH oil release, many of which the necessary conversion of reduction of may be related to the oil. NOAA and the surface oil from well plugging to enhanced U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are jointly survivorship of the dolphins so as to convert considering listing some geographically benefits to the same units as spill damages. and evolutionary distinct subpopulations of the now-threatened loggerhead sea turtle Before implementing any untested restora- as endangered, so the information on spill tion action, pilot projects may need to be impacts on the loggerhead may contrib- conducted to serve as proof-of-principle ute to a status change for the Gulf sub- and to allow credit to be estimated quan- population. The green and leatherback sea titatively based on accepted metrics of turtles may also have suffered injury from population increase. This is especially true the DWH oil and/or emergency response for species that lack an existing, shovel- actions, and their Species Recovery Plans ready restoration plan, but even for those may serve to guide restoration. that do, the site-specific aspects of how The MMPA has also focused the atten- a restoration action may function require tion of wildlife biologists on protection, confirmation and quantification. Similarly, enhancement and recovery of marine monitoring needs to be included for all mammal populations, thereby serving to restoration actions so that adaptive man- guide potential compensatory restoration agement can be applied to achieve actions. The DWH oil spill appears to have the restoration targets. led to deaths of bottlenose dolphins in the

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 63 A Coast Guard member examines a turtle exclusion device at the Gulf Regional Fisheries Training Center in New Orleans. Photo: Petty Officer 3rd Class Casey J. Ranel/U.S. Coast Guard

Recommendation 9 Maintain and enforce existing legislative protections for water, habitat, fish and wildlife to preserve public health and provide valued resources.

»» Enforce existing federal and state laws the Fishery Conservation and Management designed to protect air, habitat and Act of 1976 (later renamed the Magnuson- water quality and to sustain natural Stevens Fishery Conservation and Manage- resources. ment Act). These major federal statutes provide needed protections to sustain »» Develop state-level environmental public health and to perpetuate the valu- legislation that is tailored to specific able services that ocean ecosystems provide needs of Gulf states and is adaptive to naturally to the public: fish production, changing environmental conditions. opportunities for wildlife watching and water sports, and more. Restoration of »» Promote more holistic interpretations the Gulf ecosystems in the aftermath of of environmental legislation by encom- the DWH tragedy will depend on mainte- passing indirect impacts and targeting nance of and improved compliance with non-point pollution sources. these laws. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, These statutes and others have contributed Congress reacted to decades of increas- to the protection of our country’s oceans, ingly unhealthy air and water pollution but degradation of ocean resources has and unsustainable exploitation of natural not been halted. NEPA requires federal resources by enacting a set of environmen- agencies to analyze the environmental tal statutes designed to protect, restore and impacts of major federal actions that will maintain the country’s natural resources and significantly affect the quality of the human to manage those resources in a sustainable environment. Over the years, however, manner. These laws include NEPA (1969), the scope and quality of those analyses CAA (1970), the MMPA of 1972 (the first appear to have declined. The MMPA sets time the term “best available science” was ambitious goals for minimizing mortality of invoked), the Federal Water Pollution Con- ocean mammals, but those goals have not trol Act Amendments of 1972 (CWA), the been achieved. The success of the CWA Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuar- is evident in data records of the National ies Act (the Ocean Dumping Act), ESA and Status and Trends Program on metals and

64 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem organic contaminants at more than 300 under the MSA and the CWA. The essen- sites around the U.S. coast (Kimbrough tial fish habitat provisions in the 1996 et al. 2008). The CWA is also responsible reauthorization of the MSA (16 U.S.C. for tremendous enhancement of sewage §§ 1801-1882) placed habitat at the center treatment and improvements nationally in of NOAA’s goals to restore and preserve quality of wastewater discharge. Neverthe- ecosystems and develop sustainable fisher- less, levels of pathogens are still increas- ies. These provisions defined essential fish ing in shellfish waters of estuaries and at habitat as “those waters and substrate nec- ocean beaches. Although gratifying in their essary to fish for spawning, breeding, feed- intent and in some cases far-reaching in ing or growth to maturity” and required their effect, these laws placed the burden fishery management plans to “minimize to of proof of harm and defining the metric the extent practicable adverse effects on of that harm on the government and the such habitat caused by fishing.” Some have Street runoff in adjoining states public. The outcome, especially in arenas asserted that these provisions encouraged affects the Gulf. Photo: Link where there is considerable uncertainty, adoption of an ecosystem-based approach Roberts/Marine Photobank is risk-prone decision making. But when to fishery management (Koenig et al. considered from an ecosystem services 2000). At a minimum, they recognized the perspective, the greater the uncertainty, profound importance of healthy habitat to the greater the precaution required (Dayton fishery production (Dayton et al. 1995). The 1998, NRC 2004). focus on habitat damage caused by fishing gear (Jones 1992, Watling and Norse 1998, Non-point source nutri- Yet there also has been increasing recog- NRC 2002) and exploitation of commercial ent pollution is the single nition of the importance of precaution species (Goeden 1982, Estes and Duggins when facing uncertainty in ecosystem most devastating source 1995, McClanahan et al. 1999, Graham management. The U.N.’s 1992 Rio Declara- et al. 2011b) is no surprise, given that the of impacts on coastal tion addressed the problem of scientific MSA focuses on fisheries-induced impacts. waters and habitat (e.g., uncertainty about the use of environmental But the act’s provisions do not address the hypoxic zone off resources. It stated that when “there are many land-based impacts, including point Louisiana), yet because threats of serious or irreversible damage, and non-point source pollution, that have a lack of full scientific certainty shall not be the sources are diffused significant effect on coastal habitats. Those used as a reason for postponing cost-effec- impacts are nominally subject to a different throughout many states, tive measures to prevent environmental federal statute, the CWA. regulation of this pollu- degradation.” This approach recognizes tion is difficult. that lack of information does not mean The CWA (33 U.S.C. §§ 1251 et seq.), once lack of an impact, and that activities need considered among the most far-reaching to proceed with due caution when data pieces of environmental legislation in the are lacking. To assess the full impact of an country, provides the primary protection immediate target activity (e.g., effect of against water pollution with a goal of fishing on a fished population), all collateral restoring and maintaining the chemical, ecological effects must be included to be physical and biological integrity of U.S. truly precautionary (Gerrodette et al. 2002). waters. CWA’s coverage extends seaward Although NEPA requires analysis of cumula- for all purposes out to three miles offshore tive impacts, this provision does not appear and out at least to the 200-mile limit of to be practiced consistently in the United the nation’s exclusive economic zone with States (NRC 2004). Craig (2002) suggested respect to point source discharges and the that the political forces at play to block leg- establishment of ocean discharge criteria. islation that would enact truly precautionary Under the latest draft guidance (issued by policies have been considerable. Gerrodette the Environmental Protection Agency and et al. (2002) stated that federal regulatory the Army Corps of Engineers in April 2011) bodies tend to pursue easier, short-term establishing the scope of inland waters regulatory problems (e.g., protection for covered by the act, the following are marine mammals) rather than long-term, presumptively protected: 1) traditional complex issues (e.g., from navigable waters; 2) interstate waters; land-based runoff, sustainable fishing prac- 3) wetlands adjacent to either traditional tices or protection of wetlands). navigable waters or interstate waters; 4) non-navigable tributaries to traditional Federal legislation provides important navigable waters so long as the tributaries measures of protection for coastal habitats contain water at least seasonally;

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 65 and 5) wetlands that directly abut relatively implementation and enforcement author- permanent waters. In addition, the draft ity to the states. Also like the CWA, the guidance provides that certain other waters CAA allows states to enact more stringent are protected under the act if a fact-spe- emissions limits but prevents them from cific analysis determines that they have a allowing greater levels of air pollution emis- “significant nexus” (some sort of physical, sion than allowed by federal law. Among chemical or biological connection) to either the pollutants controlled by the act are a traditional navigable water or an inter- emissions of nitrogen, which can enter state water. Importantly, this nexus provi- water through atmospheric deposition and sion provides protection to tributaries to adversely affect water quality by enhancing traditional navigable waters and interstate acidity and contributing to nutrient-based water, wetlands adjacent to these tributar- eutrophication problems. ies, and certain other waters, even if they The ESA (16 U.S.C. §§ 1531–1544) is are not geographically proximate to these intended to provide for the conservation Factory smokestacks are a tributaries. of species that are in danger of extinction source of pollution in Florida. Photo: Monica McGivern Regulatory authority under the CWA can throughout all or a significant portion of complicate its enforcement. The EPA has their range. Management is split between ultimate federal authority for regulation of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (ter- point-source discharges (§ 402), while the restrial and freshwater species) and the Army Corps of Engineers has some author- National Marine Fisheries Service (marine ity, subject to ultimate review by EPA, for and anadromous species). The overarching regulation of discharges of dredged or fill purposes of the ESA are to provide a means material (§ 404). The EPA can delegate its for conserving endangered and threatened authority over pollution control to the states species along with the ecosystems on which but can take back control if a state does they depend (16 U.S.C. § 1531(b)). The As global climate not carry out the requirements of the law. ESA defines an endangered species as one change is modifying the However, non-point pollution issues defy that “is in danger of extinction throughout this rather simple separation. Non-point all or a significant portion of its range.” Gulf Coast, there is a source nutrient pollution is the single most (16 U.S.C. § 1532(6)). The ESA defines a pressing need for legisla- devastating source of impacts on coastal threatened species as one that “is likely tive adaptation at the waters and habitat (e.g., the hypoxic zone to become an endangered species within federal and state levels to off Louisiana), yet because the sources are the foreseeable future” (Id. at 1532(20)). address emerging needs diffused throughout many states, regulation ESA-implementing regulations repeat these of this pollution is difficult. Another prob- definitions without further elaboration for protections of habitat, lematic issue for regulation is stormwater​ (50 C.F.R. § 424.02(e), (m)). The determina- water quality, air quality, runoff, which is also generally non-point tion of whether a species is threatened or fish and wildlife. source pollution. Federal authority is gener- endangered is governed by threats to its ally restricted from interfering with state habitat, overutilization, natural stressors authority in these non-point pollution cases, such as disease or predation, or any “other and attempts to remove these restrictions natural or manmade factors affecting its on federal authority have been blocked continued existence” (16 U.S.C. § 1533(a) by Congress, ostensibly because they (1); 50 C.F.R. § 424.11(c)). Determination of pertain to land use management (Craig an endangered or threatened species under 2000). Other restrictions on the enforce- the ESA must be made based on scientific ment of the CWA came from two recent evidence and must exclude considerations Supreme Court rulings, which devalued the of economic impacts (16 U.S.C. § 1533(b) ecosystem services certain lands provide (1)(A), 50 C.F.R. § 424.11(b)). and essentially changed the equation of Under the terms of the ESA, the federal enforcement. government must avoid actions that The CAA (42 U.S.C. §§ 7401 et seq.) jeopardize the continued existence of listed is designed to protect and enhance the species. Thus, for example, the federal quality of the nation’s air resources. The government has required turtle excluder act limits emissions of various air pollut- devices to be placed in shrimp trawl nets in ants, including a number of hazardous the Gulf of Mexico and southeast Atlantic substances such as nitrogen oxides. Like Ocean to protect several species of sea the CWA, the CAA vests ultimate authority turtles that are listed as endangered under in the EPA but allows the EPA to delegate the ESA. Threats to enforcement of the

66 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Laws often do not Endangered Species Act come from com- especially as transferred by poorly con- take account of diffuse mercial interests, but more recently and trolled storm-water flows, is covering and bizarrely from the spending bill for FY 2011, killing oyster reef habitat. Nutrient load- stressors and nonpoint which included a rider de-listing a species of ing from atmospheric nitrogen deposition sources of pollution, wolf as endangered. Because this is the first and storm-water runoff from agricultural allowing continued time Congress has taken legislative action and developed lands is causing microalgal habitat degradation to remove ESA protections from a listed proliferation in coastal and estuar- from indirect stressors. species, many conservation and environ- ies at the expense of sea grass mead- mental groups are concerned that members ows. Mowing and burning of salt marsh of Congress might attempt to de-list more macrophytes is commonly allowed simply targeted species via riders on future bills. to reveal water views. All of this damage to essential habitat for fish and wildlife pro- Challenges to the legislation that protects duction occurs despite federal protections. the environment, species and their ecosys- These loopholes in protections need to be tems include enforcement, rapidly shifting closed to promote long-term environmen- needs for regulation because of climate tal health and the delivery of economically change and narrow interpretations of laws. valuable ecosystem services. As global climate change is modifying the environment along the Gulf Coast, there is We urge that some of the restoration funds a pressing need for legislative adaptation for Gulf coastal habitats and resources at the federal and state levels to address be used to review the current failures of emerging needs for protection of habitat, these landmark environmental and natural water quality, air quality, fish and wildlife resource protection laws and to develop (see box below). Laws often do not take precautionary modifications to sustain account of diffuse stressors and non-point environmental quality, habitats, and fish sources of pollution, allowing for continued and wildlife in the face of growing chal- habitat degradation from indirect stressors. lenges posed by environmental change. We An example of this insufficiently holistic further suggest that information campaigns view can be seen in the degradation of sev- be supported in all the Gulf states to inform eral Gulf habitats. Sedimentation from land the public about the economic and societal erosion and non-point source pollution, value of this legislation.

Protecting Mangroves

Mangroves have expanded their range defoliation, and destruction, while in shoreline areas of the Gulf, often requiring private property owners to replacing salt marsh plants. This pro- obtain permission before trimming any cess is doubtless continuing as winter mangrove. Despite the intent of the law, temperature minima continue to rise in the authority devolved to local govern- the region. Mangroves represent one of ments with the result that corporate the key foundation species that define interests and private property rights certain shoreline habitats of tremendous determine the health and fate of this importance as providers of ecosystem important coastal habitat in Florida services, including support of fish and (Ueland 2005). The distribution of man- A school of fish swims among wildlife. Mangroves were afforded no groves in the continental United States is mangrove trees in Florida. protection under law until 1996, when primarily on Gulf and Atlantic coasts of Photo: Bianca Lavies/National the Mangrove Protection Act (Mangrove South Florida, although black mangroves Geographic Stock Trimming and Preservation Act) was are now appearing in Alabama and passed in Florida. The intent of this law Louisiana, extending the need for their was to protect and preserve mangrove protection to other Gulf states. habitat from unregulated removal,

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 67 Recommendation 10 Create networks of protected habitats to enhance fish stocks and other valuable species.

»» Establish marine protected areas on First, restoration goals depend on historical the inshore shelf to allow recovery of baselines, but these are difficult to establish overexploited reef fish. because systems have been degraded over many years. Second, the flux of materials »» Protect connected series of habitats and organisms connects systems in ways in the Big Bend coastal area of Florida that do not map cleanly to property or gov- from the estuary to the De Soto Canyon ernment jurisdictional boundaries. Research that are used sequentially in the devel- is needed to identify connectivity among opment and migration of reef species. habitat patches and thereby allow creation of an array of MPAs and areas open to »» Establish deep-sea biological preserves harvest that will function best. Finally, our to protect organisms such as coral that rudimentary understanding of remote deep- provide habitat structure and install sea ecosystems—a focal area for oil and gas observing systems to monitor the mys- exploration and extraction—limits our abil- terious and intriguing deep-sea system. Shrimp are processed at a ity to design networks of deep-sea reserves facility in Dulac, LA. Photo: Gulf fisheries, as well as the overall that could serve to preserve important Paul Goyette ecosystem in which they occur, are seri- ecosystem functions. We highlight these ously compromised by overfishing, habitat issues with three specific examples. degradation, eutrophication and other anthropogenic influences (USEPA 2008). Shifting Baselines The failure to sustain such valuable fisher- Establishing goals for habitat recovery ies, slow progress in restoring stocks and requires determining the pre-impact state uncertainties about the multiple processes we wish to achieve. Clearly, human effects that cause the declines in yield imply that on the marine environment have accumu- new approaches are needed. The establish- lated over hundreds and even thousands ment of marine protected areas (MPAs) is of years. As a result, our current view of an important conservation approach that human impacts is based on our perception simultaneously protects biodiversity and of what constitutes a pristine system, rather promotes rebuilding of depleted fish stocks, than on historical data that predate our especially demersal fishes of reefs (NRC more recent dramatic influences on marine 2001b, Gaines et al. 2010). Unfortunately, ecosystems. Indeed, appropriate baselines the amount of habitat currently protected in predate oil and gas production in the Gulf, the ocean is far below that recommended which began in tidal lands of Texas and by scientists. Louisiana around 1920, making historical data collected through programs support- MPAs can be unpopular with fishermen ing the oil and gas industry inadequate for because of the initial closure of fishing many applications. Shrimp trawling in the grounds to form them. But the availability Gulf, which began in the early 20th century, of restoration funding for the Gulf provides may prove to have been the most destruc- an opportunity to compensate fishermen tive to habitat (see Dayton et al. 1995) on for their temporarily decreased catch. a broad areal basis over a somewhat longer After stocks rebuild within the MPAs and Ernest Hemingway poses with (more than 100 years) period of time. In its replenish areas outside them by spillover of sailfish in Key West, FL, in the pre-trawled state, the soft-bottom shal- 1940s. Photo: State Library and juveniles and adults or by elevating larval low shelf habitat now trawled for penaeid Archives of Florida abundances and recruitment into fished shrimps contained substantial amounts of areas, fishery yields are expected to grow. biogenic habitat provided by erect bryo- Critical questions remain about which zoans, sponges and other epibiota, which habitats to protect, how much to set aside, are extremely sensitive to mortality from and where to locate MPAs to be most bottom disturbance caused by trawling. effective. Progress in this area is impeded to Yet we lack specific descriptions of the some extent by three fundamental issues. baseline conditions that would reveal the

68 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem To assess the health of the bay scallop population, researchers conduct surveys at several sites along Florida’s west coast each spring. Photo: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

Restoration goals continental shelf habitat structure, bio- areas. If empirical tests reveal changes to depend on historical diversity and biomass prior to intensified the benthic soft-sediment communities that trawling. To what extent has trawl-induced lead to enhanced production of fish, shrimp baselines, but these habitat modification altered these commu- and crabs, then establishment of multiple are difficult to establish nities and their contributions to ecosystem trawl-exclusion refuges should be pursued. because systems have function, ecosystem services and resource Research should also be conducted on spa- been degraded over production? How has their loss affected tially explicit ocean management options to many years. juvenile fish and fish recruitment? minimize loss of shrimp catch arising from area closures while maximizing ecosystem Clearly an assessment of the impact of that services arising from the restoration of habitat modification is warranted. Two historic epibiotic habitat. approaches seem reasonable to pursue: ret- rospective research of museum collections and historical cruise reports; and experi- Connectivity through habitats and mental studies using MPAs. We suspect that ontogeny retrospective research will provide evidence Marine habitats are connected both by the that shrimp trawling has dramatically modi- flow of nutrients and by the movement of fied the soft-bottom benthic communities organisms, especially as they grow from of the inshore shelf along large areas of larval to adult stages. MPAs must be estab- the northern Gulf of Mexico. An empirical lished in a coherent manner that recognizes assessment of the benthic communities how the reserve and non-reserve portions would require evaluating trawled grounds of the ecosystem are connected and how and neighboring, otherwise environmentally organisms change their habitat use through identical, areas closed to shrimp trawling. ontogeny (development) (St. Mary et al. Research programs focusing on these sites 2000; see box, Page 70). This connectivity is should: 1) evaluate the magnitude and nicely illustrated off the Florida Panhandle2 nature of indirect impacts of trawling and and Big Bend,3 areas that are relatively of restoration of habitat provided by the pristine, define a biodiversity hot spot and emergent epibiota as it recovers in areas are home to a variety of important fisher- closed to bottom trawling; 2) quantify ies species. The area (Figure 7) is bathed changes in the habitat value, as measured by freshwater flowing from a number of in terms of use by fish, crustaceans (includ- rivers (the Apalachicola being the largest) ing shrimps) and other marine organisms; and infused by groundwater and seepage and 3) document how observed effects of from dozens of coastal springs (Rosenau protection spill over to influence production et al. 1977, Taniguchi et al. 2002, Scott et and ecosystem services, including augmen- al. 2004). This input of freshwater carry- tation of commercial fisheries, in nearby ing nutrients together with the seasonally

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 69 Designing Marine Reserve Corridors with Ontogeny in Mind

Two related aspects of a species’ may be impossible to pinpoint settlement ontogeny to take into account when sites with any degree of accuracy. In designing corridors and reserves are this case, it may be necessary to identify the duration of the larval stage and multiple reserves down current from the primary sites of settlement. Many one another to ensure that the larvae species depend on currents to transport spawned from the protected spawning larvae from spawning sites over vari- population are also protected when they able distances to reach suitable nursery recruit to nursery grounds. There is an habitat. For species in which larval exceptional case, however, for species for duration is short and dispersal distances which juvenile abundance in geographic are minimal (e.g., approximately 10 km), locations has been evaluated (e.g., see A gag grouper swims off the a single reserve may suffice. For spe- Koenig and Coleman 1998). Here, a Carolina coast. Photo: T. Potts/ cies in which larval duration is relatively reasonable approximation can be made NOAA protracted (more than 30 days) and about where the greatest level of recruit- transport distances long (e.g., tens to ment occurs. For gag, this is clearly in the hundreds of kilometers), protecting the sea grass beds of the Big Bend. entire corridor is impractical because it

variable circulation patterns (He and Weis- percent of spawning populations (Coleman berg 2003) drive regional productivity and et al. 1996). To protect these populations, connectivity (Toner 2003, Zavala-Hidalgo the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management et al. 2006, Morey et al. 2009, Walsh et al. Council in 2000 established two year-round 2009). This is particularly important to reef marine reserves, Madison Swanson Marine fish with complex life cycles that use very Reserve and Steamboat Lumps Marine different habitats and change diets over the Reserve (Coleman et al. 2004b, Coleman course of a lifetime. Unfortunately, most et al. in press). The reserves have effectively studies of MPAs have focused on productiv- increased the percentage of spawning ity via larval transport without consideration males in the population from the overfished of ontogeny or the effects of processes condition of one percent to near historical occurring in coastal watersheds (but see levels of 15 percent (Koenig and Coleman St. Mary et al. 2000). in prep). Gag grouper (Mycteroperca microlepis) Although the marine reserves have resulted provides a clear example of a fish with in a rebalancing of the sex ratio for gag, a complex life cycle that needs multiple other habitats and life stages lack pro- habitat protections. Adult gag live off- tection. For example, spawning of gag shore on drowned patch reefs on the generally coincides with the development continental shelf edge at 60 to 100 m of a nutrient plume emanating from the depths during most of the year. Females Apalachicola River that can extend for hun- are scattered across the shelf while males dreds of miles down the west Florida shelf remain along the shelf edge year-round. and may be an important determinant of Adult females, in the months before the year class strength in this and other species spawning season, move inshore to feed on (Morey et al. 2009). The buoyant fertilized fish emigrating from sea grass beds during eggs hatch in several days. The pelagic the first cold periods of fall (Coleman et al. larval stage lasts 30 to 60 days, after which 1996), thereby building up their biomass the larvae metamorphose into juveniles and for egg production (Nelson et al. in press). settle into shallow sea grass beds. The juve- They then move to the shelf edge to join nile stage persists for up to seven months, males on spawning sites in late winter. with immature fish leaving the sea grass These spawning aggregations have been beds and migrating to shallow-water targeted by fishermen since the 1970s. (20 to 30 m) reefs dominated by sponge As a result, the sex ratio became severely and soft coral, where they remain for biased, with males making up only one several years before joining spawning

70 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem populations offshore at the shelf edge. A special case can also be made for provid- The complex life cycle of the gag grou- ing protection for a deep-sea area known as per means that this species is affected by the De Soto Canyon (Figure 6). This region, factors that impinge on freshwater water- off the Alabama-Florida coast, is a valley sheds, sea grasses, nearshore shallow reefs (800 to 1,000 m) that cuts through the and deep offshore reefs, all of which experi- broad continental shelf in the northeast- ence anthropogenic stress. ern Gulf. The canyon is peculiarly shaped, probably formed by intrusion of the Loop Many other species show analogous linkage Current and characterized by that across vastly different types of habitats. bathes the continental shelf in nutrient-rich Species with habitat needs that change water (Gilbes et al. 1996). It has an offshore through ontogeny are much more likely extension into deep water from the Florida to spill over the boundaries of marine Panhandle and thus has important connec- reserves (Ward et al. 2001). An organism tivity with the outflow from the Apala- that emigrates from one habitat to another chicola River. During the oil spill, it became faces the gantlet of getting from point A to clear that the geological structure of the point B without harm. Thus, in designing canyon, coupled with local currents, served marine reserves and other spatial protec- as a conduit for oil to reach the canyon at tion measures, managers must consider depth, raising concerns that it could intrude constructing networks of protected areas upon the shelf. That possibility remains ranging across different habitats. Placing or and is of keen interest. The area is known managing MPAs incorrectly could result in to have lush planktivorous communities no net increase in target fish populations, of sponges, soft corals and ahermatypic or worse, result in harm (Crowder et al. hard corals, including a black-coral habitat 2000). This is especially true when one part that is at least 2,000 years old (Prouty et of a species’ life history makes it vulner- al. 2011) and fairly extensive Lophelia coral able to capture by fishermen and managers banks. There are also abundant planktivo- leave the fish unprotected in those places rous fishes that support a rich fish fauna (Farrow 1996, St. Mary et al. 2000). Juve- important to fisheries production, including niles may be fished out while en route to abundant large demersal fishes and sharks. their offshore destination or females may be Sperm whales are regular users of the De efficiently captured as they aggregate just Soto Canyon, where they forage for giant prior to spawning. Dense aggregations and squid. The pristine nature of the canyon, high fluxes of fish can facilitate ease of cap- its trophic support for many apex preda- ture and these features often are associated tors such as sharks and whales, and its role with MPA boundaries (Ward et al. 2001). in harboring iconic species of deepwater corals and other habitat-providing benthic Because gag grouper is seriously overex- An organism that travels invertebrates compel us to recommend ploited and its life cycle includes stages from one habitat to establishment of a large fraction of the and places of especially high vulnerabil- De Soto Canyon as an MPA to protect its another faces the gantlet ity to capture by fishermen as it moves resources from degradation. of getting from point A sequentially among habitats, we suggest to point B without harm. development of a protective cross-boundary By connecting reserves with marine cor- Thus, marine reserves and corridor that following a relict Pleistocene ridors that encompass a focus species’ other spatial protection river delta extending from the Apalachicola ontogenetic habitat range, the chances of River to the shelf edge (deltas described in species recovery are increased. But marine measures must consider Gardner et al. 2005). This corridor would corridors have other advantages besides constructing networks include swaths of critically important providing protection over the life history of protected areas. habitats, including oyster reefs, salt marshes of a target animal. Corridors can protect and sea grass beds, from Apalachicola to heterogeneous habitat types (for example, Anclote Key. These architecturally complex from the marsh to the shelf break), which habitats are inextricably linked inshore and in turn means a more diverse species offshore and across horizontal and vertical assemblage can be protected than if a strata (Vetter and Dayton 1998, He and large homogeneous area were protected Weisberg 2003, Heck et al. 2008) and are (Carr et al. 2003). Small, interconnected or essential to the propagation and, now, well-placed reserves may be good first steps restoration of many Gulf species. in reserve creation. It is true that smaller

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 71 reserves are more likely to garner political lies directly between these two canyons in approval (Ward et al. 2001). In this case, an area with the highest surface primary creating a network of reserves that can production in the Gulf (Biggs et al. 2008). complement and strengthen the resilience Biodiversity has a mid-depth maximum at as a whole system may be more practically approximately 1,200 m (based on data in attainable than creating a single massive Rowe and Kennicutt 2008), which is some- reserve. Corridors for large, pelagic animals, what shallower than that encountered in such as bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus), the western Atlantic (Rex and Etter 2010). would be prohibitively large because of In general, the biomass of the fish, the their extensive range. A network of smaller larger invertebrates (megabenthos) and the reserves, well chosen to protect critical sediment-dwelling invertebrates (the mac- nursery, feeding or breeding grounds, robenthos) are lower at any given depth may be more feasible. Ballantine (1995, in the Gulf than that in the North Atlantic 1997) argues that individual characteristics and Pacific deep basins (Rowe 1971, Rowe A CTD (conductivity, tempera- of reserves and their connectivity are less 1983, Wei et al. in prep. b). The extensive ture, depth) device detects important than designing a network that databases that have resulted from historical how the conductivity and tem- is comprehensive and representative of baseline studies (Appendix II) may allow us perature of the water column habitats, is redundant in habitats and is to directly compare earlier values to post- change relative to depth. sufficiently large to ensure sustainability of spill values, if similar follow-up sampling Photo: NOAA resources. can be conducted. Incomplete knowledge of the fate of The Deep Sea: The Challenge of the the oil released from the DWH wellhead Remote and Thus Invisible greatly limits our ability to infer impacts on The deep northern Gulf and its continental benthic and pelagic communities of the margin have been studied intensively for deep sea. Some of the oil almost certainly half a century with support from federal was deposited on the seafloor, but the agencies tasked with documenting living NOAA oil fate calculator does not make resources and predicting the effects of the any estimates of the quantity. The sinking oil and gas industry on the ecosystem. (See of drilling muds released from the wellhead Appendix II for an abbreviated regional list provides one mechanism of transport to the of government documents generated by seafloor, while more widespread transport consulting firms and academic institutions No comprehensive moni- may have been provided by the fall of under contracts with the Bureau of Land toring system exists for marine snow and bacterial agglomeration Management, the Minerals Management of finely dispersed oil into larger particles the whole northern Gulf, Service [MMS] and now the Bureau of (Hazen et al. 2010, Joye et al. 2011). The where oil and gas drilling Ocean Energy Management, Regulation ability to observe particles in the deep sea is and Enforcement [BOEMRE].) Based on is so intensely focused. limited to transmission from ROVs, and the these studies and associated peer-reviewed number of remote sensors in the deep sea literature, we know that the deep-bottom in the Gulf is low. Consequently, assess- assemblages of macroinvertebrate fauna ment of ecosystem injury and potential and groups of bottom-associated demersal for restoration of deep-sea ecosystem fishes are separated into four major depth services will require more extensive catch- zones stretching from Florida to Mexico up studies than were needed to stage the (Pequegnat et al. 1990, Powell et al. 2003, natural resource damage assessments in the Wei et al. 2010, Wei et al. in prep. a), more accessible sea-surface and shoreline whereas the smaller meiofaunal inverte- habitats. brates can be found in a more patchy distribution pattern (Baguley et al. 2006). The oceanographic research community It is well established that biomass of benthic has been making strides toward installing invertebrates and fish declines exponentially instruments in the oceans to collect much with depth across the northern Gulf at a more extensive information about physi- regular and predictable rate. The greatest cal, chemical and biological conditions and biomass occurs on the upper continental processes. This development in the field has slope within two major canyons: the extended to the deep sea, with pilot studies Mississippi Trough (Soliman and Rowe of the potential for deploying deep ocean- 2008) and the De Soto Canyon (Wei et al. bottom observatories (DOBOs) to enhance in prep. b). The Deepwater Horizon site understanding of what is currently invisible

72 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Coral Formations Indicate Hydrocarbon Fluid Seeps

Scientific discoveries have accompa- occurrences of Lophelia thickets at rela- nied the research associated with oil tively small distances (a few km) from the exploration. Two remarkable features of DWH drill site on the Macondo Prospect. the deep Gulf seafloor that have been Both NOAA and BOEMRE have spon- documented recently are the occurrence sored diverse field programs designed of extensive hydrocarbon fluid seeps to construct predictive maps of these along the continental slope (ca. 100 to biologically iconic features, along with more than 3,000 m deep) (Brooks et sampling to determine their physiologi- al. 1987 and others, see Appendix II) cal dependence on a food chain derived and intermittent coral heads (Lophelia from seep hydrocarbons (Cordes et al. This scleractinian coral (Lophelia pertusa, principally) and their associated 2007, Roberts 2010). It is remarkable pertusa) lives about 450 m deep invertebrates. The peculiar assemblages that these assemblages of high biomass in the Gulf of Mexico. Photo: of the upper continental slope associated lie among soft-bottom communities of NOAA with oil and gas deposits known gener- relatively low biomass. Subsidy of edible ally as seep communities and associated organic materials from the seep sites Lophelia pertusa coral assemblages are to the surrounding macrofauna, based now given special consideration during on stable isotope fractions (C del-13), exploratory drilling for oil and gas appears to be limited (Carney 2010), because of regulations developed by the raising the question of what supports the MMS. This involves specifying minimal high coral community biomass. Increased distances required between the wellhead understanding of the functioning of and these communities. these unique assemblages continues to emerge from ongoing and recently The Lophelia heads and clumps are completed studies (Roberts 2010, Cordes consistently encountered along the et al. 2007). But the DWH oil spill implies upper continental slope. They require that current scientific knowledge of these solid substrate, and these are found at intriguing systems and their habitat value older seep sites with diminishing flows is insufficient. A marine reserve protect- of hydrocarbons where carbonates have ing these communities might best be been deposited. Ironically, these remark- designed to encompass the range of able assemblages are encountered where environments and the scope of biological oil and gas prospects are also high, with, differences among Lophelia communities. for example, numerous documented

to science. Such bottom observatories can 2004). Now, after the DWH tragedy, there is house an acoustic Doppler current profiler a clear role for such instruments to moni- (ADCP), fluorometers, probes to monitor tor operations and perhaps through rapid chemical and physical variables, side-scan reactions to signs of trouble prevent future sonar, fish finders, cameras looking up into safety failures during oil and gas exploration the water and onto the bottom, heat flow and production. The move of the oil and sensors, seismometers and other instru- gas industry into deep oceans suggests that ments. An initial site at which to conduct the industry should be engaged or even manipulative experiments with pilot DOBOs required to develop and deploy DOBOs at has been established in the sub-Arctic (Solt- some wellheads. Open access in real time to wedel et al. 2005). BP has deployed two data showing what is happening at deep- large bottom observatories (called DELOS, ocean habitats would also provide new for deep environmental long-term observ- avenues for informing and educating scien- ing systems) off Angola near a wellhead tists and the public about these remarkable and at distance from a wellhead (Vardaro habitats. DOBOs would facilitate monitor- et al. in press). The initial motivation among ing of conditions and processes, research deep-sea biologists for such observatories and public education of an intriguing and on abyssal plains was to evaluate long-term remote environment. signals of climate change (Ruhl and Smith

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 73 A remotely operated vehicle is used to collect samples from the ocean floor. Photo: Gulf of Mexico Deep Sea Habitats Expedition/NOAA/OAR/OER

As a portion of the restoration of DWH miles upstream of the Gulf. Key hot spots injury to the deep-ocean benthic com- of biological activity also deserve installa- munities, including the Lophelia assem- tion of real-time blages, we recommend establishment of packages. These include methane seep an underwater monitoring system that is communities, Lophelia coral heads (see box, designed to uncover emerging degradation Page 73) and the Florida escarpment adja- of valuable deep-ocean communities as it cent to and including the De Soto Canyon. first appears so that adaptive management A network of information on the physics of oil and gas drilling could be practiced and chemistry of the offshore environment and further damage minimized. This would could be established, perhaps through new represent a method of sustaining the integ- BOEMRE regulation, by requiring offshore rity of Lophelia and other deep-sea benthic drilling and production operations to communities. At present no comprehensive report water column physics (with in-place monitoring system exists for the whole ADCPs), water column and seafloor video, northern Gulf, where oil and gas drilling is and surface water chemical parameters to so intensely focused. We recommend that an open-access operator that would make this monitoring provide open access across such information available to the govern- the entire northern Gulf shelf. A model for ment, public, NGOs and environmental this monitoring system is the Texas Auto- managers. Information on this remote eco- mated Buoy System (TABS), which has posi- system would be useful to managers, but tioned buoys across the continental shelf of the educational opportunities of such open- Texas, with funding from the Texas General access, real-time information for schools Land Office, to monitor the fate of future and the general public is of paramount offshore spills and provide open access to importance in building appreciation for and the resulting data. River system monitor- conservation of many now poorly known ing should be included to determine the deep-sea systems. success in revolutionizing farming practices

74 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem THEME 3 Integrate Sustainable Human Use with Ecological Processes in the Gulf of Mexico

The astounding biodiversity of the Gulf ecosystems—in the shoreline habitats, the coastal systems and the deep sea—is tightly connected to local economic prosperity, culture and human welfare. The Gulf supports human communities and livelihoods as well as natural eco- systems. Successful restoration necessarily includes support for its human residents, especially because Gulf communities are increas- ingly vulnerable to the consequences of global climate change. In our final five recommendations, we argue that engagement with coastal communities is a critical component of the Gulf restoration program. These final recommendations outline plans for more sustainable fisheries, ways to inform Gulf populations about the effects of climate change and engage them in meaningful dialogues on how they might respond to it, and programs that will help monitor the Gulf ecosys- tems to sustain the delicate balance of human and natural uses.

Recommendation 11 Engage Gulf Coast communities to adapt to increasing coastal inundation while sustaining fish and wildlife.

»» Share with Gulf coastal communities infrastructure along the Gulf Coast more spatially detailed information about the resilient in the face of relative sea level environmental changes expected from rise, land loss and increased exposure to global climate change, including sea coastal hazards of intense storms and level rise, increased hurricane damage floods. The coastline of the Gulf of Mexico and flooding. is being inexorably and rapidly redrawn as the combination of land subsidence »» Develop science-based scenarios in and rising eustatic sea level (these two collaboration with the community that processes together are referred to as rela- depict the consequences and risks of tive sea level rise) set the stage for more maintaining residence in coastal hazard extensive flooding, erosion and damage and flood zones. to habitats and human structures during »» Promote community engagement to hurricanes. One indication of the scope of 2010 Sea turtle nests contain- encourage sound decisions that provide this geomorphological change is inundation 2 ing hatchlings are laid on Ala- integrated resilience for people and the of an average of about 65 km of coastal bama’s beaches. Photo: Bonnie ecosystems upon which they depend. marshes in Louisiana each year (Barras et al. Strawser/USFWS Southeast 2003). Grounded oil from the DWH spill has We acknowledge a critical need to design enhanced loss of marsh habitat, and thus and implement strategies for making the loss of storm buffering capacity, directly by ecosystems, human communities and suffocating marsh grasses and indirectly

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 75 Houseboat Row on South Roosevelt Boulevard in Key West, FL, after Hurricane Georges in September 1998. Photo: Monroe County Public Library/The Dale McDonald Collection by physical damage of marsh edges from Economic costs of climate change and Storm wind damage breakaway booms, leaving underlying soils defenses against it in the Gulf insurance for home- highly vulnerable to further erosion. As a consequence of climate change, large areas along the Gulf Coast are being pro- owners and businesses All along the Gulf Coast, coastal devel- gressively inundated, leaving adjacent land, is becoming prohibitively opment, oil and gas infrastructure, and people and property considerably more expensive if it is available navigation channels have degraded and vulnerable to flooding and storm damage destabilized oyster reefs, marshes, beaches at all, with many private (IPCC 2007). At risk are millions of Gulf and barrier islands, thereby diminishing insurers abandoning the coastal residents within many miles the ecosystem services that these habitats of the current coastline, and more than high and uncertain risks should be providing. What habitat remains $2.4 trillion in property and coastal infra- associated with this Gulf is more susceptible to further erosion by structure (Entergy Corporation 2010). In the Coast region. storm-generated waves, currents and 48 contiguous counties from Galveston Bay winds, and changes in the hydrological in Texas to Mobile Bay in Alabama, there framework in which they were created. In are more than 27,000 km of highways, four Louisiana, wetland loss is especially severe of the top-five-tonnage ports in the United because of extensive dredging of oil and States and more than 60 public-use air- gas navigation canals through wetlands, ports. The region is one of only four places which enhance erosion. At the same time, in the United States where railcars can be the land is subsiding, in some areas as fast exchanged between the eastern and west- as 20 to 30 mm per year, and the current ern halves of the country. Nearly two-thirds rate of eustatic sea level rise of around of all U.S. oil imports are brought through 3 mm per year is increasing rapidly with the Henry Hub on the Louisiana coast global climate change. Losses of salt (Fayanju 2010). The ports at New Orleans marsh, oyster reef and coastal barriers and other lower Mississippi River cities are affect more than fish and wildlife. This vital to the Midwest’s agricultural enterprise habitat loss increases the vulnerability of and to local agriculture. coastal residents to loss of life and property during hurricanes because the biologi- On average, the Gulf Coast suffers annual cal barriers provided by these foundation losses of $14 billion because of storm organisms that should dissipate erosive and damage. Over the next 20 years, develop- damaging storm-wave energy and help ment and land subsidence could push suppress movement of storm surge inland cumulative losses to approximately $350 are no longer providing this service to billion. Storm damage reconstruction would Gulf coastal residents, particularly in the consume seven percent of total capital Mississippi Delta. investment and three percent of regional

76 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem GDP (Entergy Corp. 2010). The loss and With likely increases in energy costs and degradation of coastal wetlands and other rising sea levels, maintenance expenses are nursery habitats results in decreasing expected to become even more prohibi- capacity to produce fish and wildlife, with tive (Day et al. 2005). Additional economic consequent economic declines in commer- advantages of coastal habitat protection cial fishing, recreational fishing and tourism, and restoration are co-benefits of produc- which depend upon fish and wildlife abun- tion of shellfish and finfish, improvement of dance. Storm wind damage insurance for water quality, and contributions to tourism homeowners and businesses is becoming and recreational activities. For example, prohibitively expensive if it is available at all, nursery habitats associated with oyster reef with many private insurers abandoning the restoration are estimated to yield approxi- high and uncertain risks associated with the mately one ton of finfish and large crusta- Gulf Coast region. ceans per acre per year with landing values 1900 The hurricane that of approximately $40,000 (Grabowski and Options for managing these risks range destroyed Galveston, TX, was Peterson 2007). from engineered defenses such as levees the deadliest in U.S. history. Photo: Library of Congress and bulkheads to protection and restoration Risks to Gulf communities from of natural habitats that reduce the damag- climate change ing effects of hurricanes on coastal commu- Challenges to the human communities that nities by absorbing storm energy. Costs and border the sea have always been present benefits of these options vary. According to worldwide. Delta areas affected by river an economic analysis by McKinsey and Co. channelization, such as the Mississippi and Swiss Re, the cost-benefit ratio of levee River Delta, have magnified risks of relative systems ranges from 0.7 to 3.8 depending sea level rise with subsidence rates well on the value of infrastructure being pro- in excess of present eustatic sea level rise tected. Cost-benefit ratios for restoration of and projections of dramatically greater natural habitats varied comparably from 0.7 water levels as the climate continues to for beach nourishment to 3.3 for wetlands warm. Given the place attachment experi- restoration (Entergy Corporation 2010). enced by natural resource harvesters and Planned retreat of human residence from residents more broadly, a concerted effort high-risk areas can be the most cost-effec- to remain in the coastal areas is under- tive response that simultaneously prevents standable among Delta inhabitants. The loss of life. Different choices of response to choice between engineered structures and risk of storm damage have great conse- ecosystem restoration for storm protec- quences to the long-term ability of the Gulf tion is largely directed by communities that Coast to sustain production of fish and desire to remain in place. Whereas people wildlife, with rebuilding of natural marsh living in the most low-lying and vulnerable and coastal barrier habitats providing more areas will eventually be forced to relocate as protection for natural ecosystem processes water levels and storms take their toll, many and fish and wildlife than vertically engi- see themselves as exemplars of what will neered interventions (Houck 2006). happen to coastal peoples worldwide with relative sea level rise. If they remain and One possible advantage of protecting and can persist in sustaining and using coastal restoring coastal habitat instead of engi- resources to make a living, they may see neering levees, seawalls and dikes has to themselves as potential models of adapta- do with maintenance costs. Restoration of tion to areas of flood and storm risk. oyster reefs can create living breakwaters 2005 Hurricanes Katrina and that can build themselves up faster than If sea level rises as projected, hundreds Rita cause massive flooding and destruction on the Gulf Coast. predicted sea level rise rates and thus pro- of thousands of people could be put at Photo: NOAA vide continued protection against shoreline extreme risk. We do not know when erosion and land loss (Reed 2000, Zedler people will decide that it is time to move 2004). In contrast, concrete and other and where they will go, but significant engineered structures deteriorate over time economic, social and cultural costs should and become undermined so that must be be expected. The complexity of human maintained, repaired and built up to main- communities challenges our ability to tain needed protection levels. Operation accomplish socially, economically, politically and maintenance costs for these structures and psychologically successful relocations. It exceed $195 billion annually (CBO 2010). is important to support coastal communities

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 77 Top Gulf Coast Executives in Pursuit of Resiliency

Scientists consider hurricanes, climate Assessment, Response and Technology change, tornadoes, floods, ecosystem (CHART) at the University of New Orleans degradation and contamination often has a decade of experience attempting without the benefit of collaboration to open the dialogue of environmental with the communities most affected by risk reduction to the entire community, them. Technical experts have authority from the engaged citizens to the highest for information development and are government, business, NGO and faith- often “stovepiped” into enforcement of based organization leaders. A recent the specific regulations for which they workshop titled “Executive Program in are responsible without interacting more Resilience and Risk Management” inau- broadly with other experts or the public. gurated efforts to impress upon leaders A house near Cocodrie, LA, is Such narrow compartmentalization of that their participation and guidance is elevated as a defense against government leads to many problems. necessary to build resilient communities. storm surge flooding. Photo: Among these can be failure to consider Fifty leaders—parish (county) presidents, Paul Goyette the big picture of resiliency. city and parish council members, bank officials, port commissioners, and other Yet efforts have been made to engage executives—co-mingled at circular tables with community leaders, and these to confront their respective challenges efforts have become more urgent in and to seek solutions. the wake of Hurricane Katrina and the (www.chart.uno.edu) DWH tragedy. The Center for Hazards

along the Gulf Coast to achieve both suc- With this co-developed knowledge and cessful adaptation in the near term and, shared experience, teams could present when necessary, successful relocation in the scenarios to communities that describe the longer term. Recognition of the value of the risks associated with maintaining residence human communities and their residents and in coastal hazard, flood and inundation support for their way of life is important in zones. With better understanding of these forming the collaborative processes needed risks, communities might elect to migrate to achieve these goals of risk reduction. together and thereby preserve their social coherence and sense of place. A more resil- Recommended approaches to help Gulf ient and coherent community could make communities achieve resilience sound decisions about how to reduce risk More applied research, more pilot projects to life and property, maintain the services and greater commitment to the successful of natural ecosystems and their way of life outcomes as described above are neces- without the establishment of damaging sary to help Gulf communities achieve interventions into nature, such as seawall, resilience in the face of their daunting jetty, groin and levee construction, that challenges. These successful adaptations seriously degrade the production of fish will not occur without support for and a and wildlife. Given the expectations for the commitment to a process of engagement number of coastal residents who will be between the scientific and local communi- similarly affected not only around the coast ties. We recommend that Gulf ecological of the Gulf of Mexico but also worldwide, restoration projects work with residents the achievement of paired human and including community leaders to help spread ecosystem resilience here would be widely recognition of the impacts of climate applicable to multiple at-risk coastal change on the Gulf’s human communities. communities.

78 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Recommendation 12 Manage Gulf fisheries sustainably by recognizing ecosystem processes.

»» Develop a suite of ecosystem economics at the scale at which fisher- models that will improve capacity to ies operate, how they interact with other forecast fishery yields and the impacts human activities, and how these in concert of environmental changes. affect ecosystem services, broadly con- strued. Indeed, we now find that fisheries »» Apply these ecosystem-based models management is becoming more and more to fishery management in the Gulf. reliant on defining what those services are, from enhancing water quality, shoreline Living marine resources extracted from protection or tourism to the conservation the world’s oceans provide critical and of biological diversity at all levels while pro- substantial ecosystem services to humans tecting the aesthetics of the natural world. in the form of nutrition and livelihoods. Many communities throughout the Gulf The concept of ecosystem-based manage- of Mexico persist only because of these ment has emerged as a means to deal A 364-pound Goliath grouper services. However, the factors that can with these conflicts and reverse the more was caught in the Gulf of traditional management agenda. Ecosys- Mexico off Key West, FL, in improve the management and produc- tem-based management aims to ensure 1984. The species is now tion of one resource may lead to impair- long-term sustainable delivery of services critically endangered. Photo: ment of another. As a result, management Monroe County Public Library/ goals focused on single outcomes (such as and define an ecosystem’s ability to recover Collection of Don DeMaria maximization of short-term yield for one from acute and chronic impacts (Rice and species of fish) often unintentionally lead to Rochet 2005, Leslie and Kinzig 2009). reductions in the quality of other services by Although ecosystem-based management decreasing ecosystem diversity over space appears to be largely focused on direct and time (Peterson et al. 1998, Costanza effects of industrial fisheries (e.g., Pikitch et al. 2007). Such shifts in exploitation et al. 2004), it is critically important that it schemes not only reduce the overall value address indirect effects (including spe- of services provided, but they also can cies interactions), bycatch, environmental create societal conflict, pitting one user change and the full suite of sectors—com- group against another. mercial, recreational and artisanal fisheries (Crowder et al. 2008). In other words, truly The poor status of fisheries worldwide bears resilient ecosystem-based management this out, forcing us to move beyond simple must include not only the animal ecosystem catch trajectories and economic calculations but also the human community that relies of ex-vessel values and their multipliers to on it and the physical environmental system consider the intersection of ecology and in which it is imbedded.

Table 2 Resource Assessed Good Fair Poor Missing Overall

National Coastal Condition Fish Tissue 81 11 8 0 Good Report (2008) for primary health indicators in the Gulf Water Quality 35 49 14 2 Fair of Mexico coastal zone. Dissolved Oxygen — — 5 — Fair All numbers are percentages. The overall rating for 2008 Coastal Wetlands — 82 18 — Poor represents a slight decrease from the conditions observed in Sediment 79 1 18 2 Poor the previous report, released in Benthos 35 17 45 3 Poor 2005. Source: USEPA 2008

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 79 Red snapper has been over- fished for decades in the Gulf. Photo: Steve Harwood

Challenges to ecosystem-based fishery that bring additional impacts to fisheries management in the Gulf productivity by degrading habitats that are Fisheries are recognized as a major force critical to many species’ life cycles. Shrimp shaping the structure and function of trawlers, for instance, have for more than a ecosystems (Botsford et al. 1997, Jackson century raked the Gulf seafloor, removing et al. 2001) and are an important driv- the architectural complexity provided by ing force acting on the ecosystem of the bottom-dwelling filtering and photosynthe- Gulf (USEPA 2008). We recognize, too, sizing species, including sponges, bryozo- that there are other forces at work in this ans, ascidians, soft and hard corals, algae ecosystem, including introduced species, and sea grass. Yet no fundamental fisheries habitat loss and macroscopic environmental management plan has been enacted in the changes. These forces interact with fisheries Gulf that incorporates habitat management and affect ecosystem processes by disrupt- or restoration. ing normal species interactions, altering foraging behaviors and changing distribu- Most important fisheries species spend tion patterns that can dramatically increase some portion of their life cycles in coastal species vulnerabilities. habitats. The productivity of these habitats is in part influenced by proximity to water- Although most fisheries in the Gulf sheds and thus is affected by freshwater concentrate on top-level predators (see management decisions (Sklar and Browder box, Page 81), others focus on important 1998) as well as by influx of land-based forage species, either for human consump- industrial and agricultural pollutants. All of tion (e.g., vermilion snapper) or industrial these habitats have declined significantly and agricultural use (e.g., menhaden). over the past 50 years (Handley et al. 2007, This general focus of the largest species of Waycott et al. 2009, Beck et al. 2011). fish is coupled with intensive pressure on Indeed, the overall condition of the Gulf the largest individuals within populations, of Mexico ecosystem has declined, and its which severely truncates the size and age habitats are considered to be in fair to poor structure of populations, thereby driving condition, based on the Environmental down overall fecundity and reproductive Protection Agency’s most recent National success as smaller, less experienced and less Coastal Condition Report (2008) (Table 2). fecund fish make up the bulk of spawning populations. Thus, there are both top- Despite these conditions, there remains down influences that ratchet down the resistance to adopting an ecosystem-based food web, and bottom-up influences on management approach in the Gulf of productivity that limit food availability. This Mexico. That resistance comes from fisher- is coupled with destructive fishing practices men, from those in charge of defining the

80 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Overfishing of Apex Species Has Cascading Effects Down the Food Web

Fishing has targeted the largest species, scallops unsustainably during its seasonal depleting them preferentially and then migrations between wintering and sum- moving down the food web (Pauly et mering grounds. al. 1998). Removal of apex consumers Other impacts of the loss of apex con- can have dramatic consequences on sumers acting through trophic cascades the abundances and dynamics of spe- include historic overfishing of green sea cies lower on the trophic scale. Trophic turtles, leading to a lack of grazing on cascades can be induced by depletion turtle grass, which in turn resulted in of top consumers in the ecosystem, senescence of the older ungrazed blades Sharks are caught on a fishing resulting in release from predation of that may have promoted the fungal line off the coast of Florida. populations down the food chain, which disease that now afflicts turtle grass in Photo: Flip Nicklin/Minden may themselves be important preda- the Caribbean (Jackson et al. 2001). Pictures/National Geographic tors (Myers et al. 2007). For example, Overfishing of great sharks has been epi- Stock increased fishing pressure on the 11 demic in the Gulf of Mexico, in pelagic most abundant great sharks along the environments far from shore (Baum and Atlantic seaboard during the past 35 Myers 2004) and in coastal embayments years has resulted in declines in abun- (O’Connell et al. 2007). In international dance ranging from 87 percent to more waters, including those of the Gulf of than 99 percent. In turn, 12 of the 14 Mexico, shark finning is still practiced, most abundant elasmobranch prey and the slaughter of great sharks con- (smaller sharks, rays and skates) of the tinues to supply Asian markets for shark great sharks exhibited simultaneous pop- fin soup. To maintain the integrity of the ulation explosions (Myers et al. 2007). pelagic and coastal ecosystems of the One of these, the cownose ray, caused Gulf, targeted management actions to the loss of a century-long fishery for bay protect and restore the great sharks and scallops in North Carolina by consuming other apex species are urgently needed.

For more than a century, status of fished stocks (the scientists at move ecosystem-based fisheries manage- shrimp trawlers have state and federal institutions), and those ment forward (Francis et al. 2007). charged with implementing fishing regula- The management of fisheries in the Gulf raked the Gulf seafloor, tions (managers at state natural resource of Mexico has not resulted in sustaining removing sponges, corals, agencies; and at the federal level, the Gulf fish populations or harvests. Even now, algae and sea grass. Yet, of Mexico Fishery Management Council). there are calls to open fisheries for species Fishermen are generally suspicious of new no fundamental fisheries that are considered critically endangered management actions, particularly those that management plan has throughout their range (e.g., goliath grou- might limit fishing opportunities in the short per [Epinephelus itajara]) and to increase been enacted that incor- term, while stock assessment scientists are quotas for others that have been overfished porates habitat manage- often uncomfortable working outside their for decades and have severely truncated ment or restoration. discipline. Disagreements on science and age and size structures (e.g., red snapper management aside, there is a lack of fund- [Lutjanus campechanus]). A fundamental ing to make ecosystem-based management change in approach that includes proactive, a reality. precautionary management with long- Recommendations for sustainable, term sustainability in mind is required. The ecosystem-based fishery management focus should be on monitoring ecosystem in the Gulf indicators and management effectiveness, Our primary goals now are to move beyond learning from applying adaptive manage- the concept, bash the myths (Murawski ment, ensuring that marine communities 2007), define what managers need remain intact and avoiding those practices (Rosenberg and Sandifer 2009) and adopt that degrade ecosystem functions. Cross- a set of operational principles that will cultural, cross-jurisdictional and interagency

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 81 collaboration is needed to develop an inte- freeing more resources for preservation Even now, there are calls grated approach to ecosystem assessment of ecosystem integrity. In particular, the to open fisheries for (Levin et al. 2009) using system models. currently low level of coastal development These models include Atlantis — allows preservation of critical fisheries-sup- species that are consid- a complex dynamic ecosystem model to porting habitats, a far easier and less expen- ered critically endangered evaluate suites of management scenarios sive proposition than restoring degraded throughout their range (Fulton et al. 2005) — and Ecopath with systems. and to increase quotas Ecosim (e.g., Okey et al. 2004) to evaluate a Specific recommendations for the Big Bend for others that have been range of management options and to find system, which can serve to facilitate model emergent properties that help forecast risk overfished for decades. development and evaluation for other of fisheries declines. regions, include the following: We advocate developing a suite of eco- 1. Map habitats of discrete and unique system models for the Gulf of Mexico to Gulf ecosystems, such as those extend- provide managers with adequate scenario- ing from the De Soto Canyon to hard- building capabilities that encompass all bottom reefs across the west Florida aspects of ecosystem management options. shelf, especially including systems In concert, comprehensive survey and defined by foundation species. experimental (including adaptive manage- ment) approaches must be developed and 2. Define trophic interactions of species implemented to improve data going into using a diversity of approaches, such the models and, consequently, our ability as the application of stable isotope and to forecast change. Some aspects of data fatty acid analyses combined with inten- collection will be quite straightforward, sive diet studies conducted at the finest such as developing spatially explicit habitat taxonomic resolution possible. maps, catch statistics, and phytoplankton 3. Use marine reserves as experimental and environmental data surveys (GSMFC units to evaluate effects of trawling on 2008). Others will be more complex, such habitat as well on as fish populations as defining food web dynamics of exploited to protect spawning populations and predators and prey and other interspecific restore sex ratios for protogynous spe- interactions. The approach to management cies such as gag grouper and the age must be adaptive, particularly for actions and size structure of all fish popula- that are novel and/or whose outcomes are tions, including apex predators (e.g., highly uncertain. In essence, management grouper species, amberjack, sharks) actions serve as tests of the adequacy of the and forage species (roughtongue bass model if sufficient monitoring exists of key [Pronotogrammus martinicensis] and model components. red barbier [Hemanthias vivanus]). Although ultimately a full Gulf model may 4. Use models to evaluate the ecosystem- be ideal, regional models will be more level effects of different management tractable in the near term (e.g., Big Bend, strategies. For example, evaluate how north Gulf, west Florida shelf and Florida closure of the bottom longline fishery Keys.). Ideally, local dynamics can be nested in the Gulf of Mexico would affect within the more general regional models to populations of sharks, red grouper address site-specific management issues. (Epinephelus morio) and sea turtles, We especially advocate a focus on marine as well as the rest of the ecosystem to and coastal regions that are socioeconomi- which these key species are dynamically cally valuable (e.g., the Florida Keys) and linked. among the least affected and most produc- tive in the Gulf of Mexico (e.g., the Big The fishery management actions that Bend). For instance, the relatively pristine we recommend as part of the ecosystem Big Bend region is particularly important for restoration of the Gulf will require innova- testing ecosystem-based management to tive local and international cooperation and achieve resilience and sustainability, because actions, a difficult but necessary task. this system will require less effort to restore,

82 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Of the severe impacts on Gulf habitats and fauna, shrimp trawling may have been the most destructive on a broad aereal basis over a long period of time.

A shrimper culls his catch, which consists mostly of bycatch, off the coast of Texas. Photo: Norbert Wu/Minden Pictures/National Geographic Stock

Recommendation 13 Assess damage from shrimp trawling and potential fishery benefits of no-trawling reserves.

»» Conduct reviews of museum collec- Bycatch from trawling has resulted in seri- tions and other historical information ous declines in populations of threatened on bottom communities of intensely and endangered sea turtles, taken a toll on trawled areas to infer the pre-trawling juvenile fishes before they can recruit into baseline. the fisheries, and driven down populations of many other species not otherwise fished »» Find, and record video of, non-trawled but important to food webs as forage spe- areas that are similar to trawled areas cies and scavengers. to determine differences. The major problem with assessing the »» Conduct small-scale, experimental impacts of shrimp trawling is lack of an tests of consequences of establishing adequate historical baseline: What was no-trawling reserves to test capacity to the status of the continental shelf habi- restore habitat and habitat-dependent tat, biodiversity (species composition) and fisheries. biomass before the intensified trawling that began in the early 1900s? Several Of the severe impacts on Gulf habitats and comprehensive global databases are being fauna, shrimp trawling may have been the developed (GBIF, OBIS, etc.), but gleaning most destructive on a broad areal basis relevant information on species lists, mean over a long period of time. Intense trawl- sizes and distributions over time would be ing removes large epibiotic animals such daunting, especially because the databases as sponges that provide three-dimensional are not yet complete for the Gulf. Conse- structure, habitat and refuge for juvenile quently, several less quantitative approaches fish. Trawling also regularly and repeatedly may have to be developed to infer original disturbs the bottom sediments, thereby conditions. Oral histories are subjective but maintaining the invertebrate communi- useful, especially for finding ostensibly lost ties in a constant state of early succession information. Photographic archives are also dominated by opportunistic small organisms helpful; we can measure fish sizes when rather than the longer-lived bivalve mol- photographed at dock-side over time. Some lusks, which provide water filtration services documentation in the literature is available (Botsford et al. 1997, Dayton et al. 1995). (Farley 2005). Perhaps the best approach

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 83 is to enlist the assistance of museum areas neighboring trawled areas that are curators at long-established institutions environmentally identical except that they where original specimens, collected before are closed to shrimp trawling. These areas trawling intensified, can be measured and may be untrawled because of obstructions weighed. These would include initially the or military bans on commercial fishing. Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology Video to capture activities and visible life in Cambridge, MA, the American Museum in both areas can serve to document and of Natural History in New York City, and even quantify the effects of trawling on the National Museum of Natural History in the ocean bottom. Comparisons of these Washington, DC. areas should be undertaken as partial tests to determine how epibiotic benthos may Coastal social anthropologists and archae- be removed by repeated shrimp trawling ologists should be recruited to establish and how that removal affects habitat use by baselines, including, for example, surveys of fish, crustaceans and larger marine species, 1921 A woman with a 185- the evolution of seafood menus over time including those of economic value. pound tarpon. Photo: State (G. Jones pers. com.), regional economic Library and Archives of Florida archives in port cities (such as resources in If such research reveals intriguing changes the Rosenberg Library in Galveston, TX, to the benthic soft-sediment communities dating to the early 19th century). Similar and if empirical field comparisons imply information may be available in small, consequent impacts on fish and crusta- regionally maintained historical archives ceans, then establishment of multiple trawl- The major problem with across the northern Gulf, but assembling exclusion refuges should be considered. assessing the impacts of such information piece by piece would DWH monies could fund research efforts shrimp trawling is lack to evaluate the magnitude and nature of take time and perseverance by dedicated, of an adequate historical funded scholars. indirect impacts of restoration of structural biogenic bottom habitat and to quantify baseline. Oral histories, If retrospective research provides evidence any increases in ecosystem services that photographic archives, that shrimp trawling has modified the soft- may follow, including augmentation of museum specimens and bottom benthic communities of the inshore commercial fisheries. Research on spatially economic archives can shelf along large areas of the northern Gulf explicit ocean management should be of Mexico, then a subsequent empirical done to help determine where to establish help provide information. assessment of the benthic communities on no-trawling reserves to minimize loss of trawled and untrawled grounds should be shrimp catch arising from the closures and conducted. To compare trawled areas to maximize the value of the restoration of an untrawled state, we should look first for historic epibiotic habitat.

Recommendation 14 Endow Gulf capacity building in social-environmental monitoring and problem solving.

»» Invest DWH monies to establish an • A Gulf Center for Ecological Analy- endowed fund with earnings directed sis and Synthesis (GCEAS) modeled by a broad-based board of advisers to after the national center (NCEAS) in support a range of programs for Gulf California. restoration: • An annual scientific symposium • A regionally distributed Long Term on Gulf science intended to foster Ecological Research (LTER) site in the collaboration, information exchange Gulf to compensate for the lack of and Gulf capacity building in eco- representation of the region in the system restoration. NSF-funded LTER network • One or more NOAA National Estua- rine Research Reserves to serve as models for monitoring and research in valuable estuaries.

84 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Despite the existence A major challenge in ecological research to regional databases can be combined to solve of a national network support wise and adaptive management of critical ecosystem problems to benefit Gulf marine and coastal resources is the absence restoration. of National Science of reliably available long-term funding for Foundation-funded Long monitoring ecosystem condition, environ- Regional Long-Term Ecological Research Term Ecological Research mental drivers and multidisciplinary ecosys- Network (R-LTERN) sites, not a single one is tem processes that link changing conditions The National Science Foundation’s LTER located along the Gulf with changing environmental drivers. We program supports long-term scientific study urge that a substantial portion of the funds of critical ecosystems and facilitates cross- of Mexico shores. for Gulf coastal restoration be invested so system comparisons. The program includes that the interest can be used indefinitely 26 diverse sites (e.g., a coral reef, the South to support ecosystem monitoring efforts Pole, a temperate prairie, a tropical forest, (including natural and social variables), a city) spread across the globe, yet only one research on mechanisms of change (espe- of these (the Florida Coastal Everglades cially those associated directly and indirectly LTER) is near the Gulf of Mexico. We call with global change) and adaptive manage- for a Regional LTER Network consisting of ment of valuable habitats and resources. three to 15 sites throughout the Gulf and modeled on the NSF program. Each site The coast along the Mississippi Delta has would: 1) generate long-term ecological been identified by a recent U.S. Global and environmental data urgently needed Change Research Program report as the to assess changes in the Gulf ecosystem; area in the coastal United States most at 2) provide infrastructure for additional risk of negative ecological impacts of global (externally funded) process-oriented field change on estuarine ecosystem services studies; and 3) facilitate collaborative field (Titus and Richman 2001). Yet no institu- research and student training. tions focused on long-term monitoring of Gulf coastal ecosystems exist. Despite With such a network, the Gulf could existence of a national network of National become an exemplar for the regional Science Foundation-funded LTERs, not study of large complex ecosystems that are a single one is located along the Gulf of jointly driven by natural and anthropogenic Mexico shores. Similarly, there is insuffi- factors. The R-LTERN would complement cient investment by NOAA in establishing the developing network of data streams National Estuarine Research Reserve System for the physical environment in the Gulf (NERRS) sites in the Gulf, where funding (e.g., through the various ocean observing allows estuarine ecosystem monitoring systems—the Gulf of Mexico Coastal Ocean and research. As a result, we have little Observing System and those for Florida long-term information on changing envi- and the Southeast, FLCOOS and SECOOS, ronmental drivers, biological components already in existence). It also would augment and human interventions in the Gulf. This existing long-term biological monitoring lack of data harms the region because it programs such as the Florida Fish and Wild- is difficult to infer causation of ecosystem life Conservation Commission’s fisheries change, such as that following the Deep- independent monitoring (FIM) of exploited water Horizon blowout, without baseline fish populations. The physical and biological values. We urge that restoration funds be data are critical to understanding the Gulf directed to fund research at a spatially dis- ecosystem, its dynamics and the role played tributed LTER site and one or more NERRS by various environmental phenomena. estuaries in the Gulf. No location exists at which Gulf ecosystem data are maintained Sea grass recovery project in Gulf Center for Ecological Analysis the Florida Keys. Photo: Florida and no institution exists to solicit proposals and Synthesis Fish and Wildlife Conservation and fund the winners to conduct ecological The distinctness, high productivity and Commission data synthesis and analysis. This synthetic biodiversity of the coastal ecosystems of approach has been championed by NSF the Gulf that are simultaneously stressed by through the National Center for Ecological many anthropogenic perturbations under- Analysis and Synthesis in Santa Barbara, score the need for a Gulf Center for Ecolog- CA. This center is reaching the end of its ical Analysis and Synthesis (GCEAS). Such a funding life as a national center. Its func- center would promote and fund unbiased, tions should be assumed by a Gulf counter- rigorous analyses of major environmental part, where growing computer power and issues of the Gulf ecosystem to guide

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 85 Specific Recommendations for a Gulf Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis

Resolving environmental problems a specific and defined set of goals with requires synthesis of data, quantitative an approximate two- to four-year time analysis and modeling (e.g., involving frame. For example, two to four groups, mathematics, statistics and computa- with staggered initiation dates, may tional informatics) and application that address environmental problems defined spans disciplines, including biology, in consultation with state and regional chemistry, sociology, economics and environmental institutions and agencies engineering. Teams at the GCEAS should and an international advisory board. be highly integrative and transcend the To make sure new ideas are developed boundaries of ecological and social sci- and considered and old assumptions Bathymetric maps guide ences where appropriate, such as in the scientists as they explore the rigorously reevaluated, the advisory study of ecological-social dynamics of seafloor for coral and reef sites. board and research teams of the center fisheries restoration. Because problems Photo: NOAA-OER/BOEMRE should have national and international change, the expertise required to solve participation. By partnering with NCEAS these issues also should be dynamic. and its Ecoinformatics program, the Rather than create a center with defined GCEAS could immediately build on the personnel, the GCEAS would support California center’s years of experience dynamic collaborations established ad in interdisciplinary working groups, hoc to adaptively respond to emergent postdoctoral mentorship and complex environmental and management issues database compilation, management and important to the region. The center distribution. Through NCEAS we also would use income from the endowment would gain immediate connections with created by provision of restoration funds DataONE (Data Observation Network for to create and support interdisciplinary, Earth), which is a new NSF initiative that collaborative research teams consisting currently has no Gulf Coast participants. of faculty mentors, postdoctoral fellows, DataONE is poised to become the central graduate students and undergraduates. environmental distributed data network. These teams would use the data gener- This partnership would therefore jump- ated by the R-LTERN, as well as existing start the GCEAS and facilitate a focus on data assembled from federal and state synthesis and propel the Gulf into this monitoring programs and by scientists emerging research arena. Partnering with throughout the world. The intellectual the Northern Gulf Institute’s Ecosystems heart of the program would be the Data Assembly Center would enhance interdisciplinary postdoctoral fellows, the ability to distribute data and facilitate cross-mentored by faculty from different collaborations with other Gulf institutions. institutions. Research teams would have

management and policy and build and 2. Facilitate the management and con- sustain a resilient human-natural ecosystem servation of biological resources and into the indefinite future (see box above). resolve pressing environmental issues; A GCEAS, emphasizing the compilation, 3. Invigorate collaborative research within synthesis, analysis, integration and interpre- the Gulf region; and tation of ecological and environmental data and theory, would: 4. Enhance the role of the Gulf universi- ties in interacting with federal and 1. Advance understanding of the ecosys- state agencies to develop and apply tems of Florida and the broader Gulf of ecosystem-based management policy Mexico/Caribbean region; central to breaking down traditional management compartmentalization and forging sustainable management of Gulf ecosystems and resources.

86 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem The partnerships created This center should be modeled on the trans- research on rapidly shifting ecological pro- in the wake of the Exxon formative success of the National Center of cesses. A symposium such as this represents Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, funded by a vital form of capacity building that will Valdez oil spill forged NSF and the state of California. pay many dividends in enhancing science relationships that have and management in the Gulf restoration paid great dividends in An annual scientific symposium focused process. coordinating research, on Gulf restoration and sustainability One major flaw in historical management of NOAA National Estuarine Research information analysis and natural resources has been the partitioning Reserves in the Gulf synthesis, and agency of management authority among separate Several existing federal programs can be management plans. agencies and departments in federal and enhanced to play an integral role in restora- state governments. In addition, academic, tion of the Gulf region. The National Estu- environmental NGO and private scientists ary Program (NEP), established by Congress have historically not been integrated into in 1987 as part of the Clean Water Act, the management processes. The trustee- works to restore and maintain water qual- driven damage assessment and restoration ity and ecological integrity of estuaries of process that followed the Exxon Valdez oil national significance. The NEP works with spill imposed partnerships among agency local communities to develop environmental scientists from federal and state agencies goals and blueprints for achieving these and included academic, NGO and private goals. There are seven NEPs located in the researchers in a way that broke down Gulf, but none in Mississippi. agency boundaries and took a major step NERRS was established in 1972 with the toward development of holistic, ecosystem- Coastal Zone Management Act. There are based management. The partnerships 29 NERRS sites, including five in the Gulf, created in the wake of the Exxon Valdez located in every coastal state except Loui- oil spill forged friendships and interac- siana. These reserve sites serve a variety of tions on a personal level that have paid purposes but are primarily for community- great dividends in coordinating research, based educational and long-term research. information analysis and synthesis, and Federal funding comes with participation in agency management plans. The process has the NERRS program, which requires match- endured for more than 20 years in large ing funds once established. The governor part by continuing support of an annual sci- officially initiates the nomination process, ence symposium at which new results and but support from the educational and scientific advances are shared openly and research community is a necessary infra- widely and where scientists, managers and structure requirement. Because of its critical policymakers interact in substantive and role in the Gulf, Louisiana should be added meaningful ways on issues of fundamental to the NERRS program. Based on the area significance. of coastal wetlands in the United States, This beneficial aspect of the Exxon Valdez Louisiana should have three NERRS sites, or experience can be repeated in the Gulf if even more if we consider its wetland loss sufficient funds from the DWH payments and fisheries values. DWH oil spill-derived are invested and the investment income is funds could be used to: 1) facilitate a suc- used in part to support a Gulf-wide annual cessful Louisiana application for several scientific symposium. This symposium NERRS sites and one NEP site in Mississippi; would serve to strengthen and expand and 2) supplement funding at other Gulf the partnerships that break down bound- NERRS and NEP sites to provide a long-term aries among agencies and bring together source of support for monitoring, research, people whose interests and responsibilities education and community involvement. necessitate integrated, ecosystem-based

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 87 Students participate in the Louisiana Sea Grant College Program’s “Ocean Commotion” educational fair at Louisiana State University. Photo: Louisiana Sea Grant College Program/Louisiana State University

Recommendation 15 Communicate within Gulf communities to inspire informed environmental decisions.

»» Develop and test novel and interactive on the issues of risks and opportunities There is a growing real- processes, educational materials and posed by a changing natural and human ization that science can’t creative information delivery methods environment is a daunting one. Coastal to engage and inform Gulf residents of residents have utilized their surroundings do to people, it must do all ages about the value of natural eco- with gusto and sometimes with little atten- with people, who become systems and the implications of climate tion to their impact on those surroundings. ‘engaged citizens’ to be change. Some residents report that the lushness of effective in the hoped-for the coastal environment enabled them to restoration. »» Establish coalitions of knowledgeable, believe that the resource was limitless; that approachable and articulate scientific no amount of use could make a dent in its and social experts to engage with Gulf ability to exist and to rebound. Corporate residents through educational programs interest in extracting these initially robust and community meetings. coastal resources contributed to this belief. For instance, lumbering of cypress on Effective communication about the ongoing the Louisiana coast occurred without the and future challenges and risks of living resistance of residents (Conner and Toliver in and making a living from Gulf ecosys- 1990); later it became apparent that the tems is essential to engaging communi- removal of first-growth trees was detrimen- ties in successful and resilient restoration tal to the swamps, reducing many of them efforts. Climate change is a particularly to treeless open landscapes. But now that crucial and complex issue to address, and the damage is done, residents are uncertain it will be done best with a range of com- about where to begin restoration and how munication approaches. Nowhere in the to work toward achieving a robust, healthy United States are the very underpinnings environment. The DWH spill presents a new of the economy and culture so at risk from opportunity to focus on what it will take to climate change, specifically rising sea level, continue to inhabit the Gulf Coast safely enhanced frequency of major hurricanes with a superb quality of life and perpetu- and increased flooding. And yet the ques- ation of the rich cultural traditions of the tion of how to engage with communities regions comprising the Gulf Coast.

88 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Efforts within Louisiana and other Gulf their perceptions of risks and underlying states are now focused on developing biases (Fischhoff 2007). Success prob- programs and outreach materials on risks ably depends on developing collaborative and impacts that are accessible to the public partnerships between biophysical scientists rather than just for technical audiences. who understand and can communicate Scientists in the area have become “citizen the natural science of climate change, and scientists” in their attempts to provide Gulf social scientists who study the dynamics Coast risk assessments to the public (Rosa of establishing community resilience and and Clarke in press). There is a growing utilize effective methods of respectful public realization that science can’t do to people; engagement and communication. it must do with people who become Education and outreach represent more “engaged citizens” (Laska et al. 2010) to formal components of the engagement be effective in the hoped-for restoration. process. Informing Gulf residents about New, participatory approaches to com- Volunteers learn to replant the impacts of the DWH oil release is an munity engagement are being developed shoreline in New Orleans’ City obligation of the NRDAR process and Park. Photo: Louisiana Sea for dealing with the climate change issues should be accomplished through multiple Grant College Program/ (Chambers 2009). The condescending media, including personal appearances of Louisiana State University “classroom” model where experts and scientific experts within the Gulf communi- government officials lecture an audience is ties, social media and websites. Educating being replaced by models of engagement Gulf residents and various stakeholders and meetings where experts and com- about the consequences of global climate munities talk together about issues. This change should be viewed as a generation- community engagement model is a way of long process at minimum, in part because involving coastal residents in the decisions the accumulating evidence of the local and actions necessary to protect their own degree of relative sea level rise and cumula- interests and those of the Gulf ecosystem. tive storm and flood damage will serve to A successful engagement program will refine the understanding and the message. start with forging partnerships involving A responsive problem-solving and adap- a wide range of stakeholders in the Gulf tive approach to global change should be coastal region. Recent Gulf-wide research taught in the schools, beginning with K-12 demonstrates the interest within the various curricula and continuing through college stakeholder groups in acquiring information to create future generations of informed about climate change and outlines recom- citizens equipped to meet the challenges of mendations for how it could be provided living in and managing a dynamic ecosys- (Vedlitz et al. 2007). Nevertheless, the effec- tem. Adding educators to the collaboration tiveness of these efforts will depend upon between social scientists and biophysical careful consideration of the characteristics scientists would help in the development of and needs of the communities, including appropriate curriculum for classrooms.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 89 90 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Conclusion: Human and Ecosystem Prosperity are Intrinsically Linked in the Gulf of Mexico

Perhaps no other The past two decades have seen growing than the oyster’s value as an exploited food coastal economy in the commitment among academics to the (Grabowski and Peterson 2007). We now identification and quantification of the eco- recognize that oyster filtration serves to U.S. is so closely tied to nomic values of natural ecosystem services clarify estuarine waters, promoting growth the health and productiv- that tend to be taken for granted in many and expansion of sea grass habitat, which ity of the marine and environmental management decisions. But is, in turn, a critical nursery for shrimp, blue estuarine ecosystem as despite this growing academic commitment crabs and many finfish. The biodeposition that of the northern Gulf to value ecosystem services, the socioeco- of oyster feces and pseudofeces induces nomic benefits of ecosystem restoration denitrification, which helps reverse destruc- of Mexico coast. are still rarely identified and even less often tive nutrient loading and eutrophication quantified despite the numerous connec- naturally, without the use of costly engi- tions among restoration, economic develop- neered wastewater treatment to remove ment and societal well-being (Aronson et inorganic nitrogen nutrients. The oyster al. 2010). We should not make this mistake reef with its diverse associated algal and in developing the restoration plan and invertebrate community serves as an impor- actions for the Gulf of Mexico. It is espe- tant habitat for finfish such as redfish and cially critical that we value the multitude of sea trout as well as blue and stone crabs, ecosystem and human services provided by which provide economic value to the region critical components of the Gulf ecosystem, (Peterson et al. 2003a). Oyster reefs also act because human prosperity and economic as natural breakwaters, protecting coastal health of the Gulf depend on the restora- marshes, shorelines and development along tion of its ecosystem services. the shores from erosion and storm damage. Oyster shell is constructed largely of calcium The fate of the oyster may mirror the fate carbonate and serves as a natural local of the Gulf of Mexico as a whole—its buffer to rising ocean acidity, allowing larval residential communities, its economic and juvenile shellfish to develop and retain health, its flora and fauna, its water and their developing shells, thereby surviving land. We know much about the economi- this component of changing climate. The cally valuable ecosystem services provided very creation of shell mounds (reefs) of oys- by the oyster and the reefs it forms (e.g., ters reveals how oysters sequester carbon Grabowski and Peterson 2007, Beck et and bury it so that it does not contribute to al. 2011), and we know that the oyster atmospheric carbon dioxide. Consequently, is deeply embedded in the northern Gulf restoring and sustaining oyster reef habitat culture and economy. Of course, those feeds directly into human enterprise and outside the Gulf know the oyster primar- welfare in the northern Gulf of Mexico. ily as a delicacy; for this reason, natural oyster populations have been decimated by The oyster and oyster reef habitat example intense demand and consequent overhar- represents a single illustration of how vesting. But the ecosystem services provided human welfare can be served by sustain- A Louisiana fur trapper makes by oysters are numerous and have eco- ing healthy coastal ecosystems, and similar his way to work in the bayou. Photo: Willard Culver/National nomic value to other human enterprises, stories can be told for other Gulf habitats Geographic Stock perhaps worth an order of magnitude more and natural resources. Perhaps no other

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 91 coastal economy in the United States is so contains a wealth of wildlife sanctuaries closely tied to the health and productiv- for flourishing populations of water birds ity of the marine and estuarine ecosystem of many types, many of which redistribute as that of the northern Gulf of Mexico. themselves seasonally across the entire Commercial and recreational fishing busi- country while attracting bird watchers in nesses of the Gulf Coast are important not droves to places such as Dauphin Island. only to the local economy but also to the national economy. The combined value of Because humans and human enterprise the region’s commercial and recreational are an integral component of the Gulf fisheries is the largest in the nation (NMFS ecosystem, we must treat it as a coupled 2010). Hunting and trapping provide natural-human system to achieve sustain- income and define traditional Gulf Coast able prosperity in this region. Balancing cultures. Tourism in the region depends the preservation of ecosystem services with on unpolluted waters, clean beaches and industrial development will be necessary a healthy aquatic environment. A vibrant in the Gulf of Mexico to restore a vibrant and growing retirement industry likewise coastal economy and culture that may flourishes only so long as the environmental remain resilient to the many serious envi- quality is sustained: Retirees can choose to ronmental perturbations ahead. resettle elsewhere. The northern Gulf Coast

92 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Appendix I

Recommended restoration principles for the northern Gulf of Mexico based on experiences of the Exxon Valdez oil spill restoration process, knowledge of restoration ecology, evidence of Gulf degradation, and an August 26, 2010, letter from Dennis Kelso of the Ocean Conservancy to David Hayes and Jane Lubchenco

1. The overarching goal of the Gulf restoration is to bring 10. Think creatively (“rethink possible”) about restora- back a robust and resilient northern Gulf ecosystem tion options while benefitting from insights and effort that sustains fish and wildlife and coastal economies reflected in existing plans for species and habitat resto- indefinitely. ration. Here comes opportunity for an unprecedented scope of coordinated actions – a one-time chance that 2. Although the NRDA-based compensatory restoration should not be squandered. has certain legally mandated constraints, a broader Gulf Coast Restoration Plan should be pursued using other 11. Seek opportunities to leverage restoration funds by funds, such as fines for pollutant discharges, as called collaborations with partners, but maintain strict guide- for in President Obama’s directive June 15, 2010. lines set by the other restoration principles, including especially the ecosystem-based coordination with other 3. In part because historical baseline levels of most impor- projects and the clean relevance to natural resource tant natural resources and shoreline habitats reflect sub- restoration targets. stantial human-caused degradation over decades and centuries, as in implementing the Exxon Valdez oil spill 12. Take special and explicit account of the dynamic nature settlement, restoration at the Gulf should be defined of the Gulf ecosystem and shorelines such that restora- to include enhancement of natural resources over and tion actions are compatible with, adaptive to, and sus- above pre-DWH levels. tainable in the face of dynamic change. The institutional mantra of “in-place, in-kind” restoration preference 4. Restoration should focus on natural resources that have may lead to longer term failures without thorough been harmed and lost as a consequence of the spill consideration of the future conditions. and the systematic degradation that has progressively compromised, and continues to challenge, the Gulf 13. Where appropriate and consistent with the other ecosystem. The limits to what is appropriate use of res- principles for restoration, choose projects that enhance toration funds should be clearly set under this principle regional expertise and institutional capacity, thereby so as to avoid public disillusionment and lose support leaving a legacy of improved potential for achieving and collaboration. societal as well as ecological resilience. 5. Care should be taken to ensure that restoration projects 14. Use restoration funding to ensure that the whole story cause no harm. This principle implies use of pilot dem- of spill impact and recovery is told. This principle is most onstration projects in some cases and rigorous scientific critical as it applies to solving the mysteries of novel reviews before implementation. impacts of the hydrocarbons to the deep-sea pelagic and benthic resources and ocean ecosystem processes. 6. Projects that favor one set of resources over another should only be supported after confident determination 15. Contemplate the legacy of restoration that will persist of overwhelming net benefits. long after the formal restoration process has been concluded so as to incorporate projects and goals that 7. Adopt an ecological, ecosystems-based approach to the insure that the ecosystem receives support indefinitely. broad restoration plan, as well as to individual projects, Such enduring support from the Exxon Valdez restora- so as to promote synergistic benefits across multiple tion included public acquisition of important, ultimately species and habitats and avoid counterproductive con- threatened, parcels of critical fish and wildlife habitat flicts among separate projects. and investment in science of understanding how the 8. Create a comprehensive restoration plan with inte- natural ecosystem functions so that management and grated components that is approved and implemented conservation of natural resources and ecosystem ser- jointly by trustees across the Gulf coastal region. Avoid vices are enhanced. partitioning of restoration funds into state-by-state 16. Acknowledge, celebrate, and foster public ownership “block grants,” which could impair efforts to achieve a of the restoration process so that public participation coordinated set of restoration actions. is routine and meaningful, restoration decisions are 9. Resist the pressures to fund “economic or community transparent, and information on ecosystem injury and development” projects, which do not achieve restora- recovery is regularly shared in multiple fashions. tion of the base of sustainable natural resources, and normal agency management, which would lead to public disillusionment with the restoration motivation.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 93 Appendix II

Selected relevant published studies for background on deepwater biology in the Gulf of Mexico from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE), formerly Minerals Management Service (MMS)

Chemo I First dedicated Gulf of Mexico In-depth study of the two most significant chemosynthetic community study, primarily Lophelia sites above 1,000 meters (3,280 feet) depth Schroeder, W.W. 2007. Seafloor Characteristics and MacDonald, I.R., W.W. Schroeder and J.M. Brooks. 1995. Distribution Patterns of Lophelia pertusa and Other Sessile Chemosynthetic Ecosystems Study, Final Report. Prepared Megafauna at Two Upper-Slope Sites in Northeastern by Geochemical and Environmental Research Group. U.S. Gulf of Mexico. U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans. OCS Study MMS Orleans. OCS Study MMS 2007-035. 49 pp. 95-0023. 338 pp. www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/4/4256.pdf www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3323.pdf

Companion USGS Lophelia study for MMS Chemo II Second Gulf of Mexico dedicated Sulak, K.J. et al., eds. 2008. Characterization of Northern chemosynthetic community study, primarily Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Hard Bottom Communities with above 1,000 meters (3,280 feet) depth Emphasis on Lophelia Coral—Lophelia Reef Megafaunal MacDonald, I.R., ed. 2002. Stability and Change in Gulf of Community Structure, Biotopes, Genetics, Microbial Mexico Chemosynthetic Communities. Volume II: Technical Ecology, and Geology. 2004-2006. Report. Prepared by the Geochemical and Environmental http://fl.biology.usgs.gov/coastaleco/OFR_2008-1148_ Research Group, Texas A&M University. U.S. Department of MMS_2008-015/index.html the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans. OCS Study MMS 2002-036. 456 pp. Chemo III Interim Report 1 Chemosynthetic www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3072.pdf communities below 1,000 meters (3,280 feet) Brooks, J.M., C. Fisher, H. Roberts, B. Bernard, I. McDonald, R. Carney, S. Joye, E. Cordes, G. Wolff, E. Goehring. Synthetic mud study 2008. Investigations of Chemosynthetic Communities Continental Shelf Associates Inc. 2004. Final Report: Gulf of on the Lower Continental Slope of the Gulf of Mexico: Mexico Comprehensive Synthetic Based Muds Monitoring Interim Report 1. U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Program Volume 1: Technical. Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/2/3049.pdf Orleans. OCS Study MMS 2008-009. 332 pp. www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/4/4320.pdf Continental Shelf Associates Inc. 2008. Final Report: Gulf of Mexico Comprehensive Synthetic Based Muds Monitoring Program. Volume I: Technical. Chemo III Interim Report II Chemosynthetic www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/2/3050.pdf communities below 1,000 meters (3,280 feet) Continental Shelf Associates, Inc. 2008. Final Report: Gulf Brooks, J.M., C. Fisher, H. Roberts, B. Bernard, I. McDonald, of Mexico Comprehensive Synthetic Based Muds Monitor- R. Carney, S. Joye, E. Cordes, G. Wolff, E. Goehring. ing Program. Volume II: Technical. 2009. Investigations of Chemosynthetic Communities www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/2/3051.pdf on the Lower Continental Slope of the Gulf of Mexico: Interim Report 2. U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Lophelia I Orleans. OCS Study MMS 2009-046. 360 pp. CSA International Inc. 2007. Characterization of Northern www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/4/4877.pdf Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Hard Bottom Communities with Emphasis on Lophelia Coral. U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans. OCS Study MMS 2007-044. 169 pp. + app. www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/4/4264.pdf

94 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem NOAA expedition websites Ongoing Lophelia II MMS/NOAA OER study NOAA. “Ocean Expedition.” Expedition to the Deep Slope, Profile: May 7–June 2, 2006. BOEMRE. Exploration and Research of Northern Gulf of http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/06mexico/ Mexico Deepwater Natural and Artificial Hard Bottom Habi- welcome.html tats with Emphasis on Coral Communities: Reefs, Rigs and NOAA. “Ocean Explorer.” Expedition to the Deep Slope, Wrecks (GM 08-03) June 4–July 6, 2007. www.gomr.boemre.gov/homepg/regulate/environ/ongoing_ http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/07mexico/ studies/gm/GM-08-03.html welcome.html

NOAA expedition websites: Chemo III draft final report complete and in review NOAA. “Ocean Explorer.” Lophelia II 2008: Deepwater DSR II journal now out with 18 papers related to the Coral Expedition: Reefs, Rigs, and Wrecks. Sept. 20–Oct. 2, Chemo III study. 2008. http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/08lophelia/wel- Roberts, H.H. (ed.). 2011. Gulf of Mexico Cold Seeps. Deep come.html Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography. www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_toc NOAA. “Ocean Explorer.” Lophelia II 2009 key=%23TOC%236035%232010%23999429978%2326 Deepwater Coral Expedition: Reefs, Rigs, and Wrecks 42734%23FLA%23&_cdi=6035&_pubType=J&_auth=y&_ Aug. 19–Sept. 12, 2009. acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&m http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/explorations/09lophelia/wel- d5=f47b5b34742ea0073594e30836c16db4 come.html

Major Gulf-wide deepwater benthos study Lophelia II Cruise Reports Rowe, G.T., and M.C. Kennicutt II. 2009. Northern Gulf TDI-Brooks International Inc. Deepwater Program: Explora- of Mexico Continental Slope Habitats and Benthic Ecology tion and Research of Northern Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Study: Final Report. U.S. Department of the Interior, Miner- Natural and Artificial Hard Bottom Habitats with Emphasis als Management. Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New on Coral Communities: Reef, Rigs, and Wrecks “Lophelia II.” Orleans. OCS Study MMS 2009-039. 456 pp. Cruise 1 Report. 2008. www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/4/4842.pdf www.tdi-bi.com/Lophelia/Data/Loph_Cru1_Rpt-Final.pdf

TDI-Brooks International Inc. Deepwater Program: Explora- tion and Research of Northern Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Earlier major Gulf-wide benthic study Natural and Artificial Hard Bottom Habitats with Emphasis Gallaway, B.J., L.R. Martin and R.L. Howard (eds.). Northern on Coral Communities: Reef, Rigs, and Wrecks “Lophelia II.” Gulf of Mexico Continental Slope Study Annual Report Year Cruise 2 Report. 2009. 3 Volume I: Executive Summary. 1988. www.tdi-bi.com/Lophelia/Data/Loph_Cru2_Rpt-post.pdf www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3773.pdf TDI-Brooks International Inc. Deepwater Program: Explora- Gallaway, B.J., L.R. Martin and R. L. Howard (eds.). Northern tion and Research of Northern Gulf of Mexico Deepwater Gulf of Mexico Continental Slope Study Annual Report Year Natural and Artificial Hard Bottom Habitats with Emphasis 3 Volume II: Technical Report. 1988. on Coral Communities: Reef, Rigs, and Wrecks “Lophelia II.” www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3774.pdf Cruise 3 Report. 2009. www.tdi-bi.com/Lophelia/Data/RV%20Brown%20Lopheli- Gallaway, B.J. (ed.). Northern Gulf of Mexico aII%20Cru3%20Report-prt.pdf Continental Slope Study. Final Report. Year 4. Volume I: Executive Summary. 1988. This project’s baseline data served as a key resource for www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3695.pdf an NRDA cruise on the R/V Nancy Foster that departed July 16, 2010. Gallaway, B.J. (ed.). 1988. Northern Gulf of Mexico Continental Slope Study, Final Report: Year 4. Volume II: Companion USGS study Lophelia II cruises taking place in Synthesis Report. Final report submitted to the Minerals similar time frame as above. Management Service, New Orleans. Contract No. 14-12- 0001- 30212. OCS Study/MMS 88-0053. 378 pp. www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3696.pdf

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 95 Early multidisciplinary Gulf-wide benthic studies Continental Shelf Associates Inc. 1992. Mississippi-Alabama Shelf Pinnacle Trend Habitat Mapping Study. OCS Study/ Pequegnat, W. Ecolgical Aspects of the Upper Continental MMS 92-0026. U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Slope of the Gulf of Mexico. Prepared for U.S. Department Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Regional Office, of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 1976. New Orleans. 75 pp. + app. www.gomr.boemre.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/4/4105.pdf www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3629.pdf Pequegnat, W. The Ecological Communities of the Brooks, J.M., and C.P. Giammona (eds.). Mississippi- Continental Slope and Adjacent Regimes of the Northern Alabama Study Annual Report, Year 2. Gulf of Mexico, Text, Photographic Atlas, and Appendices. Volume 1: Technical Narrative. 1990. OCS Study/MMS-89- Prepared for U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals 0095. U.S. Department of Interior, Minerals Management Management Service. 1983. Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Regional Office, New Orleans. Contract No. 14-12-0001-30346. 348 pp. www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3670.pdf MMS/USGS mesophotic coral studies Brooks, J.M., C.P. Giammona and R.M. Darnell (eds.). Continental Shelf Associates Inc. and Texas A&M University, Mississippi/Alabama Marine Ecosystem Study. Annual Geochemical and Environmental Research Group. 2001. Report Year 1, Volume I : Technical Narrative. 1989. OCS Mississippi/Alabama Pinnacle Trend Ecosystem Monitoring, Study/MMS-88-0071. U.S. Department of Interior, Minerals Final Synthesis Report. U.S. Department of the Interior, Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Regional Office, Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, USGS BSR New Orleans. Contract No. 14-12-0001-30346. 258 pp. 2001-0007 and Minerals Management Service, Gulf of www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3703.pdf Mexico Regions, New Orleans, OCS Study MMS 2001-080. 415 pp + apps. www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3136.pdf Significant study related to impacts from drilling in Continental Shelf Associates Inc. and Texas A&M University, water depths of about 1,000 meters (3,280 feet) Geochemical and Environmental Research Group. 1999. Continental Shelf Associates Inc. Effects of Oil and Gas Northeastern Gulf of Mexico Coastal and Marine Ecosystem Exploration and Development at Selected Continental Slope Program: Ecosystem Monitoring, Mississippi/Alabama Sites in the Gulf of Mexico. Volume II: Technical Report. Shelf; Third Annual Interim Report. U.S. Department of www.gomr.boemre.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3875.pdf the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, USGS/BRD/CR-1999-0005 and Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, OCS Study MMS 99-0055. 211 pp. www.gomr.mms.gov/PI/PDFImages/ESPIS/3/3210.pdf

96 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Appendix III

Fact Sheet

Restoration principles

1. Restoration should be conducted within a context of where turbulent discharge of hot, pressurized oil and understanding the historical baseline conditions and gas entrained cold seawater, producing a variety of functioning of the pristine coastal ecosystem before dispersed phases that included small oil droplets, gas human intervention, even though reestablishing the bubbles, oil-gas emulsions and gas hydrates. pristine state is not a realistic restoration goal. 3. Much of that oil and essentially all of the gaseous 2. Restoration actions to maintain and create resiliency hydrocarbons were retained at substantial depths below should be based on an understanding of how past and the sea surface, where methane and other hydrocar- ongoing stressors have compromised resilience to future bon gases stimulated the production of heterotrophic perturbations. microbes in intrusion layers 800 to 1,200 m deep. 3. Addressing impacts of the DWH oil release should be 4. The agglomeration of oil particles, inorganic sediments integrated into a holistic understanding of how all and marine snow, mediated by adhesive bacterial stressors may potentially combine to destabilize the exudates, triggered downward oil transport and some ecosystem by passing through a critical threshold and deposition onto the seafloor. into an undesirable state of the system. 5. About half of the oil reached the surface but it weath- 4. Restoration should be holistic, not piecemeal, and ered substantially during ascent to form orange-brown should be durable and sustainable under the conditions rivulets and became less cohesive than expected for a of dynamic change expected in the Gulf for a century surface release of crude oil. and longer. Traditional tests of restoration appropriate- 6. After weeks of transport in oceanic eddies, during ness of “in-place” and “in-kind” are likely to fail the which oil affected floating Sargassum habitat, its associ- criteria for sustainability under a changing climate, ated biota, and other animals using the sea surface, rising sea level and more intensely stormy regime unless some of the weathered oil grounded on and damaged resilience to such environmental changes is successfully marsh, beach, sea grass, and oyster reef habitats across built into restoration actions. five Gulf of Mexico states. 5. The preparation of this report is motivated by the 7. Among several aggressive responses to the spill was unique opportunity emerging from the DWH oil spill to application of 1.8 million gallons of chemical disper- carry out meaningful, effective and durable restoration sants, not only dropped upon the sea surface but also of Gulf ecosystems, addressing not only impacts of oil injected into the plume at the wellhead. but also long-standing degradation in a coordinated program. 8. The occurrence of a deep-water spill of this magnitude and with these characteristics was unprecedented. 6. The rationale for assembling this group of scientists was based upon breadth of expertise, experience with ecosystem dynamics and past restoration efforts, and Ecosystem and natural resource impacts of the oil benefits of melding local Gulf knowledge with broader and gas release national experience. 1. Oil on the sea surface fouled, injured and killed many 7. Release of the report is scheduled to precede resto- seabirds, especially gulls, terns, northern gannets, ration decisions made by the various organizations brown pelicans and black skimmers, as well as sea charged with different aspects of Gulf ecosystem turtles and bottlenose dolphins. restoration. 2. Dispersed oil throughout the water column put at risk early life stages of many commercially valuable marine Characteristics of the Deepwater Horizon animals, such as bluefin tuna, blue crabs, penaeid oil and gas release shrimps and many fish. 1. The Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil well blowout led to 3. Delivery of ecosystem services from oiled shoreline habi- the largest oil spill in U.S. waters, releasing 4.9 million tats was suppressed, with variable durations of injury barrels of oil. probably dependent on the degree to which oil became buried in anoxic conditions. 2. Unlike previous spills in shallow water, the DWH blowout occurred in deep waters (1,500 meters),

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 97 4. Coastal bird and wildlife oiling and losses occurred in 2. Subsidence, sea level rise and marsh channelization shoreline habitats, affecting ground- and low-nesting from historical petroleum-industry activities led to losses birds, rails and other marsh birds, waders, shorebirds in coastal habitats, coastal barrier protections and eco- and scavengers. system services. 5. Concern over food contamination led to closure of 3. Excessive nutrient (largely nitrogen) loading from agri- commercial and recreational fisheries for shrimps, culture and other anthropogenic sources extending into oyster, blue crabs, reef fish and other finfish, resulting the Mississippi River watershed and airshed and along in higher abundances of many species throughout the the Gulf Coast has caused eutrophication of estuar- 2010 summer and confounding our ability to separate ies and the continental shelf and resulted in a massive direct toxic effects from indirect effects of reduced hypoxic area the size of Massachusetts where commer- fishing. cially viable populations of shrimp and fish are absent. 6. Collateral damage associated with many response 4. The exploitation of apex predators such as sharks and actions included the effects of dispersant toxicity, habi- bluefin tuna have propelled the ecosystem toward the tat damage from berm construction, loss of invertebrate functional extinction of this in the Gulf, prey from beach disturbance, physical damage to marsh removing a potentially regulating process that inhibits edges by breakaway booms, mortality of surface organ- unnatural trophic cascades, stabilizes community com- isms during oil burning and oil skimming, and destruc- position and sustains the abundances of other fished tion of oyster reefs caused by river diversions. species. 7. The long persistence of oil in Sargassum habitat harmed 5. Disturbance from bottom trawling and dredging has the associated sea turtles, juvenile bluefin tuna, wahoo, preferentially removed habitat-providing, epibiotic cobia and other higher trophic-level species through benthic invertebrates from the shelf seafloor and now acute and chronic exposures. repeatedly resets the succession of soft-sediment ben- thic communities to early successional stages populated 8. Benthic invertebrates of the deep sea such as iconic by opportunistic species. corals, sponges and echinoderms on hard bottoms and infaunal invertebrates in soft-sediment habitats were 6. Enhanced concentrations of carbon dioxide in the damaged by apparent oil deposition within an undeter- atmosphere from fossil fuel combustion are increasing mined distance from the wellhead. the acidification of coastal ocean waters. This global acidification signal is being amplified, especially in 9. Pelagic organisms were exposed to the highly dispersed bottom waters, as a consequence of eutrophication. oil droplets as well as dispersant to an unprecedented degree, harming particle feeders such as salps near 7. Development of low-lying lands and coastal barriers has the surface and analogous animals in the deep sea via degraded and destroyed shoreline habitats and led to chemical toxicity and the physical fouling of feeding engineering of structural responses and dredge-and-fill and respiratory organs. projects to protect housing and infrastructure at risk, but such responses interfere with natural rollover and 10. Ecosystem consequences of exposures to toxicants at transgression of barrier islands and resilience of natural the base of the pelagic food chains and the massive shoreline habitats. organic carbon subsidy to the shallow and deep ocean remain uncertain, requiring new advances in oil spill 8. Sea level rise puts major Gulf cities such as New Orleans oceanography to assess. The indirect impacts are likely and Houston at risk of flooding and, in combination to play out over longer time frames. with hurricanes, makes the long-term human occupa- tion of the Mississippi Delta and coastal barrier shore- lines of all Gulf states problematic if not unsustainable. Gulf ecosystem stressors This set of conditions poses extreme socioeconomic 1. The increased frequency of intense hurricanes arising challenges: How can resilience of human communities, from global change exposes the Gulf Coast to greater local culture and ecosystems be sustained or created risks of catastrophic flooding, shoreline erosion and when maintaining coastal residency increasingly risks associated geomorphic changes such as land loss in property and life, yet retreating inland by entire com- vulnerable areas and reductions in elevation of coastal munities challenges the fabric and glue of social cohe- barriers. sion and place-based history?

98 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Proposed restoration actions

THEME 1 Assess and repair damage from the DWH and other stresses 1. Restore shoreline habitats directly and indirectly damaged by the oil release. 2. Investigate effects of oil on deep-sea ecosystems and test capacity of restoration for ecosystem services. 3. Determine effects of the DWH oil spill on Sargassum and restore it as a habitat for associated fish and wildlife. 4. Modify farming practices in the Mississippi basin to reduce nutrient loading. 5. Reduce fish and wildlife casualties resulting from water debris. 6. Restore water flows, water quality, riparian habitats and ecosystem services of smaller rivers.

THEME 2 Protect existing habitats and populations 7. Preserve functionally valuable habitat for fish and wild- life sanctuaries to enhance injured species recovery. 8. Implement and augment existing recovery plan actions for species injured by the DWH oil spill. 9. Maintain and enforce existing legislative protections for habitat, fish and wildlife to promote public health and ecosystem services. 10. Create networks of protected habitats to enhance fish stocks and valuable species.

THEME 3 Integrate sustainable human use with ecological processes 11. Engage Gulf Coast communities to adapt to increasing coastal inundation while sustaining nurture of fish and wildlife. 12. Manage Gulf fisheries sustainably by recognizing ecosystem processes. 13. Assess damage from shrimp trawling and potential fishery benefits of no-trawling protections. 14. Endow Gulf capacity building in social-environmental monitoring and problem solving. 15. Communicate within Gulf communities to inspire informed environmental decisions.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 99 Endnotes

Note from p. 19 1. The Santa Barbara blowout released 100,000 barrels of crude oil, a small fraction of the 4.9 million barrels released during the 85 days of gushing oil at the Macondo site, yet the 1969 incident also fouled and killed many seabirds and coated beaches and rocky shores.

Notes from p. 69 2. The Florida Panhandle is a 320-kilometer stretch between Alabama and Apalachicola that is characterized by barrier island buffers.

3. The Florida Big Bend is a 320-kilometer stretch between Apalachee Bay and Anclote Key characterized by the absence of barrier island buffers.

100 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem References Cited

Able, K. W., D. M. Nemerson, P. R. Light, and R. O. Bush. Batie, S. S. 2009. Green payments and the US Farm Bill: 2002. Initial response of fishes to marsh restoration at a information and policy challenges. Frontiers in Ecology and former salt hay farm bordering Delaware Bay. Pages 749- the Environment 7:380-388. 773 in M. P. Weinstein and D. A. Kreeger, editors. Concepts Baum, J. K., and R. A. Myers. 2004. Shifting baselines and and Controversies in Ecology. Kluwer Academic the decline of pelagic sharks in the Gulf of Mexico. Ecology Publishers, Dordrecht. Letters 7:135-145. Allen, E. B., W. W. Covington, and D. A. Falk. 1997. Baumann, R. H., and R. E. Turner. 1990. Direct impacts Developing the conceptual basis for restoration ecology. of outer continental shelf activities on wetland loss in the Restoration Ecology 5:275-276. central Gulf of Mexico. Environmental Geology and Water Alexander, R.B., R.A. Smith, G.E. Schwarz, E.W. Boyer, Sciences 15:189-198. J.V. Nolan and J.W. Brakebill. 2008. Differences in phos- Beck, M. W., R. D. Brumbaugh, L. Airoldi, A. Carranza, phorus and nitrogen delivery to the Gulf of Mexico from L. D. Coen, C. Crawford, O. Defeo, G. J. Edgar, B. Hancock, the Mississippi River Basin. Environmental Science and M. C. Kay, H. S. Lenihan, M. W. Luckenbach, C. L. Toropova, Technology 42: 822-830. G. Zhang, and X. Guo. 2011. Oyster reefs at risk and recom- Anthony, K. R. N., J. A. Maynard, G. Diaz-Pulido, mendations for conservation, restoration, and management. P. J. Mumby, P. A. Marshall, L. Cao, and O. Hoegh-Guldberg. BioScience 61:107-116. 2011. Ocean acidification and warming will lower coral reef Beman, J. M., C. E. Chow, A. L. King, Y. Feng, J. A. Fuhrman, resilience. Global Change Biology 17:1798-1808. A. Andersson, N. R. Bates, B. N. Popp, and D. A. Hutchins. Aronson, J., J. N. Blignaut, S. J. Milton, D. Le Maitre, 2011. Global declines in oceanic nitrification rates as a K. J. Esler, A. Limouzin, C. Fontaine, M. P. de Wit, consequence of ocean acidification. Proceedings of the W. Mugido, P. Prinsloo, L. van der Elst, and N. Lederer. National Academy of Sciences 108:208-213. 2010. Are socioeconomic benefits of restoration adequately Bernhardt, E. S., M. A. Palmer, J. D. Allan, G. Alexander, quantified? A meta-analysis of recent papers (2000-2008) K. Barnas, S. Brooks, J. Carr, S. Clayton, C. Dahm, in Restoration Ecology and 12 other scientific journals. J. Follstad-Shah, D. Galat, S. Gloss, P. Goodwin, D. Hart, B. Restoration Ecology 18:143-154. Hassett, R. Jenkinson, S. Katz, G. M. Kondolf, P. S. Lake, R. Baguley, J., P. Montagna, W. Lee, L. Hyde, and G. Rowe. Lave, J. L. Meyer, T. K. O’Donnell, B. Pagano, B. Powell, and 2006. Spatial and bathymetric trends in Harpacticoida E. Sudduth. 2005. Synthesizing U.S. river restoration efforts. (Copepoda) community structure in the northern Gulf of Science 308:636-637. Mexico deep-sea. Journal of Experimental Biggs, D., C. Hu, and F. Mullerkarger. 2008. Remotely sensed and Ecology 330:327-341. sea-surface chlorophyll and POC flux at Deep Gulf of Mexico Ballantine, W. J. 1995. Networks of “no-take” marine Benthos sampling stations. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical reserves are practical and necessary. Pages 13-20 in N. L. Studies in Oceanography 55:2555-2562. Shackell and J. H. M. Willison, editors. Marine protected Bjorndal, K. A., B. W. Bowen, M. Chaloupka, L. B. Crowder, Areas and Sustainable Fisheries. Science and Management S. S. Heppell, C. M. Jones, M. E. Lutcavage, D. Policansky, A. of Protected Areas Association, Nova Scotia, Canada. R. Solow, and B. E. Witherington. 2011. Better science needed Ballantine, W. J. 1997. Design principles for systems of for restoration in the Gulf of Mexico. Science 331:537-538. “no-take” marine reserves. Fisheries Center, University of Boesch, D. F. 2002. Challenges and opportunities for science British Columbia, Vancouver. in reducing nutrient over-enrichment of coastal ecosystems. Baron, J. S., N. L. Poff, P. L. Angermeier, C. N. Dahm, Estuaries 25:886-900. P. H. Gleick, N. G. Hairston, R. B. Jackson, C. A. Johnston, Boody, G., B. Vondracek, D. A. Andow, M. Krinke, J. Westra, B. D. Richter, and A. D. Steinman. 2002. Meeting ecological J. Zimmerman, and P. Welle. 2005. Multifunctional agricul- and societal needs for freshwater. Ecological Applications ture in the United States. BioScience 55:27-38. 12:1247-1260. Botsford, L. W., J. C. Castilla, and C. H. Peterson. 1997. Barras, J., S. Beville, D. Britsch, S. Hartley, S. Hawes, The management of fisheries and marine ecosystems. J. Johnston, P. Kemp, Q. Kinler, A. Martucci, J. Porthouse, D. Reed, K. Roy, S. Sapkota, and J. Suhayda. 2003. Historical and projected coastal Louisiana land changes: 1978-2050: USGS open file report 03-334. 39 pages. USGS.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 101 Boufadel, M. C., Y. Sharifi, B. Van Aken, B. A. Wrenn, and Carnegie, R. B. 2009. Diseases of concern in molluscan K. Lee. 2010. Nutrient and oxygen concentrations within aquaculture. Southern Regional Aquatic Center Publication the sediments of an Alaskan beach polluted with the No. 4704. Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environmental Science & Technology Carney, R. S. 2010. Stable isotope trophic patterns in echi- 44:7418-7424. noderm megafauna in close proximity to and remote from Breitburg, D. L., J. K. Craig, R. S. Fulford, K. A. Rose, Gulf of Mexico lower slope hydrocarbon seeps. Deep-Sea W. R. Boynton, D. C. Brady, B. J. Ciotti, R. J. Diaz, Research II 57:1965-1971. K. D. Friedland, J. D. Hagy, D. R. Hart, A. H. Hines, Carr, M. H., J. E. Neigel, J. A. Estes, S. Andelman, E. D. Houde, S. E. Kolesar, S. W. Nixon, J. A. Rice, D. H. R. R. Warner, and J. L. Largier. 2003. Comparing marine and Secor, and T. E. Targett. 2009. Nutrient enrichment and terrestrial ecosystems: implications for the design of coastal fisheries exploitation: interactive effects on estuarine living marine reserves. Ecological Applications 13:S90-S107. resources and their management. Hydrobiologia 629:31-47. Chambers, R. 2009. Introduction to: participatory learning Brewer, G. D., and P. C. Stern (Eds.). 2005. Decision Making and Action 60: community-based adaptation to climate for the Environment: Social and Behavioral Science Research change. International Institute for Environment Priorities. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C. and Development, London. 296 pages. Chapoton, R. B. 1970. History and status of the Gulf of Britsch, L. D., and J. B. Dunbar. 1993. Land loss rates: Mexico’s menhaden purse seine fishery. Journal of the Elisha Louisiana . Journal of Coastal Research Mitchell Scientific Society 86:183-184. 9:324-338. Chapoton, R. B. 1971. The future of the gulf menhaden, Brooks, J. M., M. C. Kennicutt II, C. R. Fisher, S. A. Macko, the United State’s largest fishery. Proceedings of the Gulf K. Cole, J. J. Childress, R. R. Bidigare, and R. D. Vetter. 1987. and Caribbean Fisheries Institute 24:134-143. Deep-sea hydrocarbon seep communities: evidence for energy and nutritional carbon sources. Science 238: Claassen, R., V. E. Breneman, S. Bucholtz, A. Cattaneo, 1138-1142. R. C. Johansson, and M. J. Morehart. 2004. Environmental compliance in U.S. agricultural policy: past performance and Broome, S. W., E. D. Seneca, and W. W. Woodhouse. 1986. future potential. United States Department of Agriculture, Long-term growth and development of transplants of the Economic Research Service, Washington, D.C. salt-marsh grass Spartina alterniflora. Estuaries 9:63-74. Claassen, R., M. Aillery, and C. Nickerson. 2007. Integrating Broussard, W., R. E. Turner, and J. Westra. Submitted. commodity and conservation programs: design options Federal farm policies and agricultural landscapes influence and outcomes. U.S. Department of Agriculture-Economic surface water quality. Research Report, Washington, D.C. Burkholder, J., D. Tomasko, and B. Touchette. 2007. Coats, R. N., P. B. Williams, C. K. Cuffy, J. B. Zedler, and and eutrophication. Journal of Experimental D. Reed. 1995. Design guidelines for tidal channels in Marine Biology and Ecology 350:46-72. coastal wetlands. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Caddy, J. F. 1993. Toward a comparative evaluation of Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. human impacts on fishery ecosystems of enclosed and semi- Coleman, F. C., C. C. Koenig, and L. A. Collins. 1996. enclosed seas. Reviews in 1:57-95. Reproductive styles of shallow-water groupers (Pisces: Caddy, J. F. 2000. Marine catchment basin effects versus Serranidae) in the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the conse- impacts of fisheries on semi-enclosed seas. ICES Journal quences of fishing spawning aggregations. Environmental of Marine Science 57:628-640. Biology of Fishes 47:129-141.

Cai, W. J., W. J. Huang, M. C. Murrell, J. C. Lehrter, S. E. Coleman, F. C., C. C. Koenig, G. R. Huntsman, J. A. Musick, Lohrenz, Y. Wang, X. Guo, P. Zhao, K. Gundersen, and A. M. Eklund, J. C. McGovern, R. W. Chapman, G. R. J. T. Hollibaugh. in review. Eutrophication-driven hypoxia Sedberry, and C. B. Grimes. 2000. Long-lived reef fishes: the and increasing atmospheric pCO2 enhance ocean acidifica- grouper-snapper complex. Fisheries 25:14-20. tion and denitrification. Nature Geoscience. Coleman, F. C., W. F. Figueira, and J. S. Ueland. 2004a. The Camilli, R., C. M. Reddy, D. R. Yoerger, B. A. S. Van Mooy, impact of United States recreational fisheries on marine fish M. V. Jakuba, J. C. Kinsey, C. P. McIntyre, S. P. Sylva, and J. V. populations. Science 305:1958-1960. Maloney. 2010. Tracking hydrocarbon plume transport and Coleman, F. C., P. Baker, and C. C. Koenig. 2004b. A review biodegradation at Deepwater Horizon. Science 330:201-204. of Gulf of Mexico Marine Protected Areas: successes, fail- ures, and lessons learned. Fisheries 29:10-21.

102 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Coleman, F. C., and L. E. Petes. 2010. Life history trade-offs Crowder, L. B., E. L. Hazen, N. Avissar, R. Bjorkland, in marine organisms: consequences of climate change. in C. Latanich, and M. B. Ogburn. 2008. The impacts of W. H. Rodgers, Jr., J. Barcelos, A. Moritz, and M. Robinson- fisheries on marine ecosystems and the transition to Dorn, editors. Climate Change: A Reader. Carolina Academic ecosystem-based management. Annual Review of Ecology, Press, Durham, NC. Evolution, and Systematics 39:259-278.

Coleman, F. C., K. C. Scanlon, and C. C. Koenig. In press. Crumpton, W.G., G.A. Stenback, B.A. Miller, and Groupers on the edge: shelf-edge spawning habitat in and M.J. Helmers. 2006. Potential Benefits of Wetland Filters for around marine reserves on the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Tile Drainage Systems: Impact on Nitrate Loads to Mississippi The Professional Geographer. River Subbasins. Final project report to U.S. Department of Agriculture Project number: IOW06682. Collie, J., G. Escanero, and P. Valentine. 1997. Effects of bottom fishing on the benthic megafauna of Georges Bank. Culbertson, J., I. Valiela, E. Peacock, C. Reddy, A. Carter, Marine Ecology Progress Series 155:159-172. and R. Vanderkruik. 2007. Long-term biological effects of petroleum residues on fiddler crabs in salt marshes. Marine Congressional Budget Office (CBO). 2010. Public spending Pollution Bulletin 54:955-962. on transportation and water infrastructure. Dame, R. F., R. G. Zingmark, and E. Haskin. 1984. Oyster Conner, C., A. Conway, B. Benedict, and B. Christensen. reefs as processors of estuarine materials. Journal of 1982. Modeling the Apalachicola system: a hydrodynamic Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 83:239-247. graphic and water quality model with a hydrodynamic and water quality atlas of Apalachicola Bay. 89 pages. Darst, M. R., and H. M. Light. 2008. Drier forest composi- Gainesville, FL. tion associated with hydrologic change in the Apalachicola River Floodplain, Florida. 81 pages. Scientific Investigations Conner, W.H. and J.R. Toliver. 1990. Long-term trends in Report, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA. the bald-cyrpess (Taxodium distichum) resource in Louisiana (U.S.A.). Forest Ecology and Management 33/34: 543-557. Davis, D. W. 1973. Louisiana canals and their influence on wetland development. Ph.D. Dissertation, Louisiana State Cordes, E., S. Carney, S. Hourdez, R. Carney, J. Brooks, and University, Baton Rouge, LA. C. Fisher. 2007. Cold seeps of the deep Gulf of Mexico: community structure and biogeographic comparisons Day Jr., J. W., D. Pont, P. F. Hensel, and C. Ibañez. 1995. to Atlantic equatorial belt seep communities. Deep Sea Impacts of sea-level rise on deltas in the Gulf of Mexico and Research Part I 54:637-653. the Mediterranean: the importance of pulsing events to sustainability. Estuaries 18:636-647. Costanza, R., B. Fisher, K. Mulder, S. Liu, and T. Christopher. 2007. Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multi-scale Day Jr., J., J. Barras, E. Clairain, J. Johnston, D. Justic, empirical study of the relationship between species richness G. Kemp, J. Ko, R. Lane, W. Mitsch, and G. Steyer. 2005. and net primary production. Ecological Economics 61: Implications of global climatic change and energy cost 478-491. and availability for the restoration of the Mississippi delta. Ecological Engineering 24:253-265. Cox, T. S., J. D. Glover, D. L. Van Tassel, C. M. Cox, and L. R. DeHaan. 2006. Prospects for developing perennial grain Dayton, P. K., S. F. Thrush, M. T. Agardy, and R. J. Hofman. crops. BioScience 56:649-659. 1995. Environmental effects of marine fishing. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 5:205- Craig, R. K. 2000. Local or national- the increasing federal- 232. ization of nonpoint source pollution regulation. Journal of Environmental Law and Litigation 15:179-233. Dayton, P. K. 1998. Reversal of the burden of proof in fisheries management. Science 279:821 -822. Craig, R. K. 2002. Sustaining the unknown seas: changes in U.S. ocean policy and regulation since Rio ’92. Department of Energy (DOE). 2011. Strategic Petroleum Environmental Law Reporter 32:10190-10218. Reserve. fossil.energy.gov/programs/reserves/spr/

Crossett, K. M., T. J. Culliton, P. C. Wiley, and T. R. Diaz, R. J. 2001. Overview of hypoxia around the world. Goodspeed. 2004. Population trends along the coastal Journal of Environmental Quality 30:275-281. United States:1980-2008. National Oceanic and Diaz, R. J., and R. Rosenberg. 2008. Spreading dead zones Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, MD. and consequences for marine ecosystems. Science 321: Crowder, L. B., S. J. Lyman, W. F. Figueira, and J. Priddy. 926 -929. 2000. Source-sink population dynamics and the problem of siting marine reserves. Bulletin of Marine Science 66:799-820.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 103 Diercks, A. R., R. C. Highsmith, V. L. Asper, D. Joung, Fischhoff, B. 2007. Nonpersuasive communication about Z. Zhou, L. Guo, A. M. Shiller, S. B. Joye, A. P. Teske, matters of greatest urgency: climate change. Environmental N. Guinasso, T. L. Wade, and S. E. Lohrenz. 2010. Science & Technology 41:7204-7208. Characterization of subsurface polycyclic aromatic hydrocar- Fisher, C. 2010, November 3. The Final Dive. November 3 bons at the Deepwater Horizon site. Geophysical Research Log. NOAA. Retrieved from http://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/ Letters 37:1-6. explorations/10lophelia/logs/nov3/nov3.html. Dimitri, C., A. Effland, and N. Conklin. 2005. The 20th Fitzhugh, T. W., and B. D. Richter. 2004. Quenching urban Century transformation of U.S. agriculture and farm policy; thirst: growing cities and their impacts on freshwater ecosys- Economic Research Service Economic Information Bulletin tems. BioScience 54:741-754. Number 3. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Fodrie, F. J., and K. L. Heck. 2011. Response of coastal fishes to the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster. PLoS ONE. Donlan, M., M. Sperduto, and C. Herbert. 2003. Compensatory mitigation for injury to a threatened or Fonseca, M. S., W. J. Kenworthy, and G. W. Thayer. 1998. endangered species: scaling piping plover restoration. Guildlines for the conservation and restoration of seagrasses Marine Ecology Progress Series 264:213-219. in the United States and adjacent waters. 222 pages. NOAA Coastal Ocean Office, Silver Spring, MD. Doughty, R.W. 1984. Sea turtles in Texas: a forgotten com- merce. The Southwestern Historical Quarterly 88: 43-70. Fonseca, M., B. E. Julius, and W. J. Kenworthy. 2000. Integrating biology and economics in restoration: Duarte, C. M., D. J. Conley, J. Carstensen, and M. Sánchez- how much is enough and why? Ecological Engineering Camacho. 2009. Return to Neverland: shifting baselines 15:227-237. affect eutrophication restoration targets. Estuaries and Coasts 32:29-36. Fourqurean, J. W., and M. B. Robblee. 1999. Florida Bay: a history of recent ecological changes. Estuaries 22:345-357. Ducklow, H. W., D. A. Purdie, P. J. L. Williams, and J. M. Davies. 1986. Bacterioplankton: a sink for carbon in a Francis, R. C., M. A. Hixon, M. E. Clarke, S. A. Murawski, coastal marine community. Science 232:865-867. and S. Ralston. 2007. Ten commandments for ecosystem- based fisheries scientists. Fisheries 32:217-233. Duke, T., and W. L. Kruczynski. 1992. Status and trends of emergent and submerged vegetated habitats, Gulf of Frazier, D. E. 1967. Recent deltaic deposits of the Mississippi Mexico, U.S.A. 161 pages. U.S. Environmental Protection River, their development and chronology. Transactions of the Agency. Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies 17:287-315.

English, E. P., C. H. Peterson, and C. M. Voss. 2009. Ecology Fulton, E., A. Smith, and A. Punt. 2005. Which ecological and economics of restoration scaling. 193 pages. Coastal indicators can robustly detect effects of fishing? ICES Journal Response Research Center, University of New Hampshire, of Marine Science 62:540-551. Durham, NH. Gabryscrh, K., and L. S. Coplin. 1990. Land Surface Entergy Corporation. 2010. Building a resilient energy Subsidence resulting from groundwater withdrawals in the Gulf Coast: executive report. 11 pages. Houston-Galveston Region, Texas, through 1987. 53 pages. U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D. C. Estes, J. A., and D. O. Duggins. 1995. Sea otters and kelp forests in Alaska: generality and variation in a community Gaines, S.D., C. White , M.H. Carr, and S.R. Palumbi. 2010. ecological paradigm. Ecological Monographs 65:75-100. Designing marine reserve networks for both conservation and fisheries management. Proceedings of the U.S. National Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council (EVOSTC). 1994. Academy of Sciences. Doi:10.1073/pnas.0906473107. Exxon Valdez oil spill restoration plan. 98 pages. Exxon Valdes Oil Spill Trustee Council, Anchorage, AK. Gardner, J., P. Dartnell, L. Mayer, J. Hughesclarke, B. Calder, and G. Duffy. 2005. Shelf-edge deltas and drowned barrier- Farley, B. 2005. Fishing Yesterday’s Gulf Coast. Texas A&M island complexes on the northwest Florida outer continental University Press, College Station, TX. shelf. 64:133-166. Farrow, S. 1996. Marine protected areas: emerging Gerrodette, T., P. K. Dayton, S. Macinko, and M. J. Fogarty. economics. Marine Policy 20:439-446. 2002. Precautionary management of marine fisheries: Fayanju, S. 2010, September 17. Roads, railways, run- moving beyond burden of proof. Bulletin of Marine Science ways...and restoration: the case for a swamp stimulus. 70:657-668. Environmental Defense Fund. Retrieved from Gilbes, F., C. Tomas, J. J. Walsh, and F. E. Müller-Karger. http://blogs.edf.org/restorationandresilience/. 1996. An episodic chlorophyll plume on the West Florida Shelf. Continental Shelf Research 16:1201-1224.

104 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Gilbes, F., F. E. Müller-Karger, and C. E. Del Castillo. 2002. Heck, K. L., T. J. B. Carruthers, C. M. Duarte, A. R. Hughes, New evidence for the West Florida Shelf plume. Continental G. Kendrick, R. J. Orth, and S. W. Williams. 2008. Trophic Shelf Research 22:2479-2496. transfers from seagrass meadows subsidize diverse marine and terrestrial consumers. Ecosystems 11:1198-1210. Glover, J. P., C. M. Cox, and J. P. Reaganold. 2007. Future farming: a return to roots? Scientific American 297:81-89. HéGaret, H., G. H. Wikfors, and S. E. Shumway. 2007. Diverse feeding responses of five species of bivalve mollusc Goeden, G. B. 1982. Intensive fishing and a “keystone” when exposed to three species of harmful algae. Journal of predator species: ingredients for community instability. Shellfish Research 26:549-559. Biological Conservation 22:273-281. Houck, O. 2006. Can we save New Orleans? Tulane Grabowski, J. H., and C. H. Peterson. 2007. Restoring Environmental Law Journal 19: 68 pages. oyster reefs to recover ecosystem services. Pages 281-298 Ecosystem Engineers - Plants to Protists. Academic Press. Howes, N. C., D. M. FitzGerald, Z. J. Hughes, I. Y. Georgiou, M. A. Kulp, M. D. Miner, J. M. Smith, and J. A. Barras. Graham, B., W. R. Reilly, F. Beinecke, D. F. Boesch, T. D. 2010. Hurricane-induced failure of low salinity wetlands. Garcia, C. A. Murray, and F. Ulmer. 2011a. Deep water: the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107: Gulf oil disaster and the future of offshore drilling: report 14014-14019. to the president. 398 pages. National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling, Huang, W., and M. Spaulding. 2002. Modelling residence- Washington, D.C. time response to freshwater input in Apalachicola Bay, Florida, USA. Hydrological Processes 16:3051-3064. Graham, N. A. J., P. Chabanet, R. D. Evans, S. Jennings, Y. Letourneur, A. M. MacNeil, T. R. McClanahan, M. Hughes, A. R., K. J. Bando, L. F. Rodriguez, and S. L. C. Öhman, N. V. C. Polunin, and S. K. Wilson. 2011b. Williams. 2004. Relative effects of grazers and nutrients Extinction vulnerability of coral reef fishes. Ecology Letters on seagrasses: a meta-analysis approach. Marine Ecology 14:341-348. Progress Series 282:87-99.

Graham, W. M., R. H. Condon, R. H. Carmichael, I. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. D’Ambra, H. K. Patterson, L. J. Linn, and F. J. Hernandez Jr. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution 2010. of working groups I, II, and III to the fourth assessment Oil carbon entered the coastal planktonic food web during report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Environmental Research 104 pages. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Letters 5:1-18. Geneva, CH.

Grimes, C. B. 2001. Fishery production and the Mississippi Jackson, J. B. C. 1997. Reefs since Columbus. Coral Reefs River discharge. Fisheries 26:17-26. 16:S23-S32.

Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission (GSMFC). 2008. Jackson, J. B. C., M. X. Kirby, W. H. Berger, K. A. Bjorndal, Southeast Area Monitoring and Assessment Program L. W. Botsford, B. J. Bourque, R. H. Bradbury, R. Cooke, (SEAMAP). www.gsmfc.org/default.php?p=sm_ov.htm. J. Erlandson, J. A. Estes, T. P. Hughes, S. Kidwell, C. B. Lange, H. S. Lenihan, J. M. Pandolfi, C. H. Peterson, R. S. Steneck, Handley, L., D. Altsman, and R. DeMay (eds.). 2007. M. J. Tegner, and R. R. Warner. 2001. Historical overfish- Seagrass status and trends in the northern Gulf of Mexico: ing and the recent collapse of coastal ecosystems. Science 1940-2002. 267 pages. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific 293:629-638. Investigations Report, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston VA. Jackson, J. B. C. 2010. The future of the oceans past. Hazen, T. C., E. A. Dubinsky, T. Z. DeSantis, G. L. Andersen, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society: Biological Y. M. Piceno, N. Singh, J. K. Jansson, A. Probst, S. E. Borglin, Sciences 365:3765-3778. J. L. Fortney, W. T. Stringfellow, M. Bill, M. E. Conrad, L. M. Tom, K. L. Chavarria, T. R. Alusi, R. Lamendella, Jackson, J. B. C., K. Alexander, and E. Sala (Eds.). 2011. D. C. Joyner, C. Spier, J. Baelum, M. Auer, M. L. Zemla, Shifting Baselines: The Past and the Future of Ocean R. Chakraborty, E. L. Sonnenthal, P. D’haeseleer, H.-Y. N. Fisheries. Island Press, Washington, D.C. 284 pages. Holman, S. Osman, Z. Lu, J. D. Van Nostrand, Y. Deng, Johansson, J. O. R., and R. R. Lewis, III. 1992. Recent J. Zhou, and O. U. Mason. 2010. Deep-sea oil plume enriches improvements of water quality and biological indicators in indigenous oil-degrading bacteria. Science 330:204 -208. Hillsborough Bay, a highly impacted subdivision of Tampa He, R., and R. H. Weisberg. 2003. A loop current intrusion Bay, Florida, USA. Pages 1199-1215 in R. A. Vollenweider, case study on the west Florida shelf. Journal of Physical R. Marchetti, and R. Viviani, editors. Science of the Total Oceanography 33:465-477. Environment. Elsevier, New York.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 105 Jones, J. B. 1992. Environmental impact of trawling on Koenig, C. C., F. C. Coleman, C. B. Grimes, G. R. Fitzhugh, the seabed: a review. New Zealand Journal of Marine and K. M. Scanlon, C. T. Gledhill, and M. Grace. 2000. Protection Freshwater Research 26:59-67. of fish spawning habitat for the conservation of warm- temperate reef-fish fisheries of shelf-edge reefs of Florida. Jordan, N., G. Boody, W. Broussard, J. D. Glover, D. Keeney, Bulletin of Marine Science 66:593-616. B. H. McCown, G. McIsaac, M. Muller, H. Murray, J. Neal, C. Pansing, R. E. Turner, K. Warner, and D. Wyse. 2007. Koenig, C. C., A. N. Shepard, J. K. Reed, F. C. Coleman, Sustainable development of the agricultural bio-economy. S. D. Brooke, J. Brusher, and K. M. Scanlon. 2005. Habitat Science 316:1570-1571. and fish populations in the deep-sea Oculina coral ecosys- tem of the Western Atlantic. Pages 795-805 in P. W. Barnes Joye, S. B., I. R. MacDonald, I. Leifer, and V. Asper. 2011. and J. P. Thomas, editors. Benthic Habitats and the Effects of Magnitude and oxidation potential of hydrocarbon gases Fishing. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD. released from the BP oil well blowout. Nature Geoscience 4:160-164. Koenig, C. C., and F. C. Coleman. In prep. Protection of grouper and red snapper spawning in marine reserves: Kearney, M., C.A. Riter, and R. E. Turner. 2011. demographics, movements, survival and spillover effects Freshwater diversions for marsh restoration in Louisiana: in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. Twenty-six years of changing vegetative cover and marsh area. Geophysical Research Letters 38, L16405, Kujawinski, E. B., M. C. Kido Soule, D. L. Valentine, doi:10.1029/2011GL047847. A. K. Boysen, K. Longnecker, and M. C. Redmond. 2011. Fate of dispersants associated with the Deepwater Horizon Kennish, M. J. 2002. Environmental threats and environ- oil spill. Environmental Science & Technology 45:1298-1306. mental future of estuaries. Environmental Conservation 29:78-107. Kuletz, K. J., D. K. Marks, N. L. Naslund, N. G. Goodson, and M. B. Cody. 1994. Information needs for habitat protection: Kesel, R. H. 1988. The decline in the suspended load of marbled murrelet habitat identification. Restoration project the lower Mississippi River and its influence on adjacent 93051b. Exxon Valdez oil spill restoration project final wetlands. Environmental Geology and Water Sciences report. 70 pages. Technical Report, Fish and Wildlife Service, 11:271-281. Anchorage, AK. Kessler, J. D., D. L. Valentine, M. C. Redmond, M. Du, Kurlansky, M. 2002. Salt: A World History. Walker Publishing E. W. Chan, S. D. Mendes, E. W. Quiroz, C. J. Villanueva, Company, Inc., New York, New York. 498 pages. S. S. Shusta, L. M. Werra, S. A. Yvon-Lewis, and T. C. Weber. 2011. A persistent oxygen anomaly reveals the fate of spilled Landsberg, J. 2002. The effects of harmful algal blooms on methane in the deep Gulf of Mexico. Science 331:312-315. aquatic organisms. Reviews in Fisheries Science 10:113-390.

Key, N., and M. J. Roberts. 2006. Government payments Laska, S., K. Peterson, M. E. Alcina, J. West, A. Volion, and farm business survival. American Journal of Agricultural B. Tranchina, and R. Krajeski. 2010. Enhancing Gulf of Economics 88:382-392. Mexico coastal communities through participatory com- munity engagement. NOAA Coastal Services Center, Key, N., and M. J. Roberts. 2007. Cropland concentrating Charleston, SC. faster where payments are higher. Amber waves 5:30-35. Lee, D., S. Penland, D. Lavoie, L. Martinez. 2006. Barrier Kideys, A. E. 2002. Fall and rise of the Black Sea ecosystem. Island Comprehensive Monitoring Program (BICM) shoreline Science 297:1482-1484. change analysis of coastal Louisiana: 1855-2005. Kimbrough, K. L., W. E. Johnson, G. G. Lauenstein, www.ladigitalcoast.uno.edu/maps.html. J. D. Christensen and D. A. Apeti. 2008. An Assessment Lenihan, H. S., and C. H. Peterson. 1998. How habitat deg- of Two Decades of Contaminant Monitoring in the radation through fishery disturbance enhances impacts of Nation’s Coastal Zone. Silver Spring, MD. NOAA Technical hypoxia on oyster reefs. Ecological Applications 8:128-140. Memorandum NOS NCCOS 74. 105 pp. Lenihan, H. S. 1999. Physical-biological coupling on oyster Knowlton, N., and J. B. C. Jackson. 2008. Shifting baselines, reefs: how habitat structure influences individual perfor- local impacts, and global change on coral reefs. PLoS Biology mance. Ecological Monographs 69:251-275. 6:0215-0220. Lenihan, H. S., C. H. Peterson, J. E. Byers, J. H. Grabowski, Koenig, C. C., and F. C. Coleman. 1998. Absolute abun- G. W. Thayer, and D. R. Colby. 2001. Cascading of habitat dance and survival of juvenile gags in sea grass beds of the degradation: oyster reefs invaded by refugee fishes escaping Northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Transactions of the American stress. Ecological Applications 11:764-782. Fisheries Society 127:44-55.

106 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Lenihan, H. S., C. H. Peterson, S. L. Kim, K. E. Conlan, Mississippi Comprehensive Wildlife Management Plan R. Fairey, C. McDonald, J. H. Grabowski, and J. S. Oliver. (MCWMP). 2007. Mississippi Comprehensive Wildlife 2003. Variation in marine benthic community composition Management Plan: Chapter 4. Habitat type. Section 14. allows discrimination of multiple stressors. Marine Ecology Estuary and Mississippi Sound (inside or associated with bar- Progress Series 261:63-73. rier islands). 22 pages.

Leonard L., T. Clayton, and O. Pilkey. 1990. An analysis of Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). 2005. Ecosystems replenished beach design parameters on U.S. east coast and Human Well-Being: Wetlands and Water. World barrier islands. Journal of Coastal Research 6:15-36. Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

Leslie, H. M., and A. P. Kinzig. 2009. Resilience science. Pages Miller, J. E., and E. R. Jones. 2003. A study of shoreline trash: 55-73 in K. McLeod and H. Leslie, editors. Ecosystem-based 1989-1998 Padre Island National Seashore. National Park Management for the Oceans. Island Press, Washington DC. Service, U.S. Department of the Interior. Levin, P. S., M. J. Fogarty, S. A. Murawski, and D. Fluharty. Milly, P. C. D., J. Betancourt, M. Falkenmark, R. M. Hirsch, 2009. Integrated ecosystem assessments: developing the Z. W. Kundzewicz, D. P. Lettenmaier, and R. J. Stouffer. scientific basis for ecosystem-based management of the 2008. Climate change: stationarity is dead: whither water ocean. PLoS Biology 7:23-28. management? Science 319:573-574. Livingston, R. J., R. L. Iverson, R. H. Estabrook, V. E. Keys, Minello, T. J., and L. P. Rozas. 2002. in Gulf coast and J. Taylor, Jr. 1974. Major features of the Apalachicola wetlands: fine-scale distributions, landscape patterns, and Bay system: physiography, biota, and resource management. restoration implications. Ecological Applications 12:441-455. Florida Scientist 37:245-271. Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Livingston, R. J. 1997. Trophic response of estuarine fishes to Force. 2001. Action plan for reducing, mitigating, and con- long-term changes of river runoff. Bulletin of Marine Science trolling hypoxia in the northern Gulf of Mexico. 36 pages. 60:984-1004. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wetlands, Livingston, R. J., X. Niu, F. G. Lewis, and G. C. Woodsum. Oceans and Watersheds, Washington, D.C. 1997. Freshwater input to a Gulf estuary: long-term control Moore, J. E., B. P. Wallace, R. L. Lewison, R. Žydelis, of trophic organization. Ecological Applications 7:277-299. T. M. Cox, and L. B. Crowder. 2009. A review of marine Livingston, R. J. 2000. Eutrophication Processes in Coastal mammal, sea turtle and seabird bycatch in USA fisheries and Systems: Origin and Succession of Plankton Blooms and the role of policy in shaping management. Marine Policy Effects on Secondary Production, 1st edition. CRC Press, 33:435-451. Boca Raton, FL. 327 pages. Morey, S. L., P. J. Martin, J. J. O’Brien, A. A. Wallcraft, and Livingston, R. J. 2001. Bloom successions in coastal systems. J. Zavala-Hidalgo. 2003a. Export pathways for river dis- Honolulu, HI. charged in the northern Gulf of Mexico. Journal of Geophysical Research 108:Article 3303. Livingston, R. J. 2007. Phytoplankton bloom effects on a gulf estuary: water quality changes and biological response. Morey, S. L., W. W. Schroeder, J. J. O’Brien, and J. Zavala- Ecological Applications 17:S110-S128. Hidalgo. 2003b. The annual cycle of riverine influence in the eastern Gulf of Mexico basin. Geophysical Research Letters Lotze, H. K., H. S. Lenihan, B. J. Bourque, R. H. Bradbury, 30:Article 1867. R. G. Cooke, M. C. Kay, S. M. Kidwell, M. X. Kirby, C. H. Peterson, and J. B. C. Jackson. 2006. Depletion, degrada- Morey, S. L., D. S. Dukhovskoy, and M. A. Bourassa. 2009. tion, and recovery potential of estuaries and coastal seas. Connectivity between variability of the Apalachicola River Science 312:1806-1809. flow and the biophysical oceanic properties of the northern West Florida Shelf. Continental Shelf Research 29:1264- Mabus, R. 2010. America’s Gulf coast: a long term recovery 1275. plan after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 130 pages. Morris, J. T. 1991. Effects of nitrogen loading on wet- MacKenzie, C.L. Jr. 1996. History of oystering in the United land ecosystems with particular reference to atmospheric States and Canada, featuring the eight greatest oyster estu- deposition. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics aries. Marine Fisheries Review 58: 1-78. 22:257-279.

McClanahan, T. R., N. A. Muthiga, A. T. Kamukuru, Mortazavi, B., R. L. Iverson, W. M. Landing, and W. Huang. H. Machano, and R. W. Kiambo. 1999. The effects of marine 2000a. Phosphorus budget of Apalachicola Bay: a river-dom- parks and fishing on coral reefs of northern Tanzania. inated estuary in the northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Marine Biological Conservation 89:161-182. Ecology Progress Series 198:33-42.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 107 Mortazavi, B., R. L. Iverson, W. M. Landing, F. G. Lewis, and National Research Council (NRC). 2002. Effects of Trawling W. Huang. 2000b. Control of phytoplankton production and Dredging on Seafloor Habitat. National Academies and biomass in a river-dominated estuary: Apalachicola Bay, Press, Washington, D.C. 227 pages. Florida, USA. Marine Ecology Progress Series 198:19-31. National Research Council (NRC). 2003. Oil in the Sea Mortazavi, B., R. L. Iverson, and W. Huang. 2001. Dissolved III: Inputs, Fates, and Effects. National Academies Press, organic nitrogen and nitrate in Apalachicola Bay, Florida: Washington, D.C. 280 pages. spatial distributions and monthly budgets. Marine Ecology National Research Council (NRC). 2004. Improving the Use Progress Series 214:79-91. of the “Best Scientific Information Available” Standard Morton, R. A. 2008. Historical changes in the Mississippi- in Fisheries Management. National Academies Press, Alabama barrier-island chain and the roles of extreme Washington, D.C. 118 pages. storms, sea level, and human activities. Journal of Coastal National Research Council (NRC). 2008. Tackling Marine Research 246:1587-1600. Debris in the 21st Century. The National Academies Press, Moshiri, G. A., N. G. Aumen, and W. G. Crumpton. 1981. Washington, D.C. 218 pages. Reversal of the eutrophication process: a case study. Pages Neal, J. T. 1997. Mine-induced sinkholes over the US 373-390 in B. J. Neilson and L. E. Cronin, editors. Estuaries strategic petroleum reserve (SPR) storage facility at Weeks and Nutrients. Humana Press, Clifton NJ. Island, Louisiana: Geologic mitigation and environmental Murawski, S. 2007. Ten myths concerning ecosystem monitoring. 5 pages. approaches to marine resource management. Marine Policy Neal, J. T., S. J. Bauer, and B. L. Ehgartner. 1998. Mine- 31:681-690. induced sinkholes over the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve Myers, R. A., J. K. Baum, T. D. Shepherd, S. P. Powers, and (SPR) storage facility at Weeks Island, Louisiana: geological C. H. Peterson. 2007. Cascading effects of the loss of apex causes and effects. 15 pages. predatory sharks from a coastal ocean. Science 315:1846- Nelson, J. R., R. Wilson, F. C. Coleman, and C. C. Koenig. 1850. In press. Flux by fin: fish mediated carbon and nutrient flux Nassauer, J. I., M. V. Santelmann, and D. Scavia. 2007. in the northeast Gulf of Mexico. Ecological Applications. From the Corn Belt to the Gulf: Societal and Environmental Nicholson, W. R. 1978. Movements and population structure Implications of Alternative Agricultural Futures. Resources of Atlantic menhaden indicated by tag returns. Estuaries for the Future, Washington. 237 pages. 1:141-150. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 2010. Fisheries Nixon, S. W., and B. A. Buckley. 2002. “A strikingly rich Economics of the United States, 2009. U.S. Dept. zone”—nutrient enrichment and secondary production in Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-F/SPO-118. coastal marine ecosystems. Estuaries 25:782-796. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Norse, E. A., and J. Amos. 2010. Impacts, perception, and (NOAA). 1995. Habitat equivalency analysis: an overview. policy implications of the Deepwater Horizon oil and gas Damage Assessment and Restoration Program, National disaster. Environmental Law Reporter 40:11058-11073. Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, MD. O’Connell, M. T., T. D. Shepherd, A. M. U. O’Connell, and R. A. Myers. 2007. Long-term declines in two apex preda- National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). tors, bull sharks (Carcharhinus leucas) and alligator gar 2009. NOAA National Sea Grant College Program: strategic (Atractosteus spatula), in Lake Pontchartrain, an oilgohaline plan 2009-2013. 28 pages. estuary in southeastern Louisiana. Estuaries and Coasts National Research Council (NRC). 1995. Clean Ships, Clean 30:567-574. Ports, Clean Oceans: Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes Ocean Conservancy. 2010. Trash travels: from our hands at Sea. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C. to the sea, around the globe, and through time. Ocean 384 pages. Conservancy, Washington, DC. 60 pages. National Research Council (NRC). 2001a. Compensating Okey, T., G. A. Vargo, S. Mackinson, M. Vasconcellos, For Wetland Losses Under the Clean Water Act. National B. Mahmoudi, and C. A. Meyer. 2004. Simulating commu- Academies Press, Washington, D.C. 421 pages. nity effects of sea floor shading by plankton blooms over the National Research Council (NRC). 2001b. Marine protected West Florida Shelf. Ecological Modelling 172:339-359. areas: tools for sustaining ocean ecosystems. National Orth, R. J., and J. van Montfrans. 1990. Utilization of Academies Press, Washington, DC. marsh and seagrass habitats by early stages of Callinectes sapidus: a latitudinal perspective. Bulletin of Marine Science 46:126-144.

108 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Paerl, H. W., J. L. Pinckney, J. M. Fear, and B. L. Peierls. 1998. Peterson, C. H., R. T. Barber, H. K. Cottingham, H. K. Lotze, Ecosystem responses to internal and watershed organic C. A. Simenstad, R. R. Christian, M. F. Piehler, and J. Wilson. matter loading: consequences for hypoxia in the eutro- 2008. In preliminary review of adaptation options for cli- phying Neuse River Estuary, North Carolina, USA. Marine mate-sensitive ecosystems and resources. Pages 7-1--7-108 Ecology Progress Series 166:17-25. in S. H. Julius and J. M. West, editors. National Estuaries. Report by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program Paerl, H. W., L. M. Valdes, B. L. Peierls, J. E. Adolf, and and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research, U.S. L. W. Harding. 2006. Anthropogenic and climatic influ- Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. ences on the eutrophication of large estuarine ecosystems. and Oceanography 51:448-462. Palmer, Peterson, C. H., S. S. Anderson, G. N. Cherr, R. F. Ambrose, M. A., R. F. Ambrose, and N. L. Poff. 1997. Ecological theory S. Anghera, S. Bay, M. Blum, R. Condon, T. A. Dean, and community restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 5: M. Graham, M. Guzy, S. E. Hampton, S. Joye, J. Lambrinos, 291-300. B. Mate, D. Meffert, S. P. Powers, P. Somasundaran, R. B. Spies, C. M. Taylor, R. Tjeerdema, and E. E. Adams. In Palmer, M.A., R.F. Ambrose, and N.L. Poff. 1997. Ecological press. A tale of two spills: novel science and policy implica- theory and community restoration ecology. Restoration tions of an emerging new oil spill paradigm. BioScience. Ecology 5:291-300. Peterson, G. W., and R. E. Turner. 1994. The value of salt Pandolfi, J. M., J. B. C. Jackson, N. Baron, R. H. Bradbury, marsh edge vs interior as a habitat for fish and decapod H. M. Guzman, T. P. Huges, C. V. Kappel, F. Micheli, crustaceans in a Louisiana tidal marsh. Estuaries 17:235-262. J. C. Ogden, H. P. Possingham, and E. Sala. 2005. Are U.S. coral reefs on the slippery slope to slime? Science 307: Peterson, G., C. R. Allen, and C. S. Holling. 1998. Ecological 1725-1726. resilience, biodiversity, and scale. Ecosystems 1:6-18.

Parmesan, C., and G. Yohe. 2003. A globally coherent fin- Pikitch, E. K., C. Santora, E. A. Babcock, A. Bakun, gerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. R. Bonfil, D. O. Conover, P. Dayton, P. Doukakis, D. Fluharty, Nature 421:37-42. B. Heneman, E. D. Houde, J. Link, P. A. Livingston, M. Mangel, M. K. McAllister, J. Pope, and K. J. Sainsbury. Pauly, D., V. Christensen, J. Dalsgaard, R. Froese, and 2004. Ecosystem-based fishery management. Science F. Torres Jr. 1998. Fishing down marine food webs. Science 305:346-347. 279:860-863. Pomeroy, L. R. 1974. The ocean’s food web, a changing Pequegnat, W. E., B. J. Gallaway, and L. H. Pequegnat. paradigm. BioScience 24:499-504. 1990. Aspects of the ecology of the deep-water fauna of the Gulf of Mexico. American Zoologist 30:45-64. Pomeroy, L. R. 1979. Secondary production mechanisms of continental shelf communities. Pages 163-186 in Peterson, C. H., and R. N. Lipcius. 2003. Conceptual prog- R. J. Livingston, editor. Ecological Processes in Coastal and ress towards predicting quantitative ecosystem benefits Marine Systems. Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York. of ecological restorations. Marine Ecology Progress Series 264:297-307. Powell, S. M., R. L. Haedrich, and J. D. McEachran. 2003. The deep-sea demersal fish fauna of the northern Gulf of Peterson, C. H., J. H. Grabowski, and S. P. Powers. 2003a. Mexico. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Science Estimated enhancement of fish production resulting from 31:19-33. restoring oyster reef habitat: quantitative valuation. Marine Ecology Progress Series 264:249-264. Pringle, C. M. 2001. Hydrologic connectivity and the management of biological reserves: a global perspective. Peterson, C. H., S. D. Rice, J. W. Short, D. Esler, J. L. Bodkin, Ecological Applications 11:981-998. B. E. Ballachey, and D. B. Irons. 2003b. Long-term ecosystem response to the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Science 302:2082- Pritchard, E. S. (Ed.). 2005. Fisheries of the United States 2086. 2004. NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Science and Technology, Fisheries Statistics Division, Silver Peterson, C. H., and M. J. Bishop. 2005. Assessing the Spring, MD. 109 pages. environmental impacts of beach nourishment. BioScience 55:887-896. Prouty, N., E. Roark, N. Buster, and S. Ross. 2011. Growth rate and age distribution of deep-sea black corals in the Gulf Peterson, C. H., M. J. Bishop, G. A. Johnson, L. M. D’anna, of Mexico. Marine Ecology Progress Series 423:101-115. and L. M. Manning. 2006. Exploiting beach filling as an unaffordable experiment: benthic intertidal impacts propa- Putland, J. N., and R. L. Iverson. 2007a. Ecology of Acartia gating upwards to shorebirds. Journal of Experimental tonsa in Apalachicola Bay, Florida, and implications of river Marine Biology and Ecology 338:205-221. water diversion. Marine Ecology Progress Series 340:173- 187.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 109 Putland, J. N., and R. L. Iverson. 2007b. Microzooplankton: Roberts, M. J., and N. Key. 2008. Agricultural payments major herbivores in an estuarine planktonic food web. and land concentration: a semiparametric spatial regres- Marine Ecology Progress Series 345:63-73. sion analysis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 90:627-643. Rabalais, N. N. 2002. Nitrogen in aquatic ecosystems. AMBIO 31:102-112. Rosa, E. A., and L. Clark. In press. A collective hunch? Risk as the real and the elusive. Journal of Environmental Studies Rabalais, N. N., R. E. Turner, and D. Scavia. 2002. Beyond and Sciences. science into policy: Gulf of Mexico hypoxia and the Mississippi River. BioScience 52:129-142. Rosenau, J. C., G. L. Faulkner, C. W. J. Hendry, and R. W. Hull. 1977. Springs of Florida. Florida Bureau of Geology Rabalais, N. N., R. E. Turner, B. K. Sen Gupta, D. F. Boesch, Bulletin 31:438-453. P. Chapman, and M. C. Murrell. 2007. Hypoxia in the north- ern Gulf of Mexico: does the science support the plan to Rosenberg, A. A., and P. A. Sandifer. 2009. What do manag- reduce, mitigate, and control hypoxia? Estuaries and Coasts ers need? Pages 13-30 in K. McLeod and H. Leslie, editors. 30:753-772. Ecosystem-based Management for the Oceans. Island Press, Washington DC. Rabalais N.N., R.E. Turner, Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium, and Louisiana State University. 2010. Roux, D. J., P. J. Ashton, J. L. Nel, and H. M. MacKay. 2008. Area of Mid-Summer Bottom Water Hypoxia. Improving cross-sector policy integration and cooperation in www.gulfhypoxia.net/research/Shelfwide%20Cruises/. support of freshwater conservation. Conservation Biology 22:1382-1387. Rahmstorf, S., A. Cazenave, J. A. Church, J. E. Hansen, R. F. Keeling, D. E. Parker, and R. C. J. Somerville. 2007. Rowe, G. T. 1971. Benthic biomass and surface productiv- Recent climate observations compared to projections. ity. Pages 441-454 in J. Costlow, editor. Fertility of the Sea. Science 316:709. Gordon and Breach, New York.

Rakocinski, C.F., Heard, R.W., LeCroy, S.E., McLelleand, J.A., Rowe, G. T. 1983. Biomass and production of the deep-sea and Simons, T. 1996. Responses by macrobenthic assem- benthos. Pages 97-121 in G. Rowe, editor. The Sea, Vol. 8, blages to extensive beach restoration at Perdido Key, Florida, Deep-Sea Biology. Wiley-Interscience, New York. USA. Journal of Coastal Research 16:368-378. Rowe, G. T., and M. C. Kennicutt. 2008. Introduction to the Reed, D. J. 2000. Coastal biogeomorphology: an integrated Deep Gulf of Mexico Benthos Program. Deep Sea Research approach to understanding the evolution, morphology, and Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography 55:2536-2540. sustainability of temperate coastal marshes. Pages 347- Ruhl, H. A., and K. L. Smith Jr. 2004. Shifts in deep-sea com- 361 in J. E. Hobbie, editor. Estuarine science: A Synthetic munity structure linked to climate and food supply. Science Approach to Research and Practice. Island Press, Washington, 305:513-515. D.C. Scavia, D., J. C. Field, D. F. Boesch, R. W. Buddemeier, Reed, D. J. 2002. Sea-level rise and coastal marsh sustain- V. Burkett, D. R. Cayan, M. Fogarty, M. A. Harwell, ability: geological and ecological factors in the Mississippi R. W. Howarth, C. Mason, D. J. Reed, T. C. Royer, delta plain. Geomorphology 48:233-243. A. H. Sallenger, and J. G. Titus. 2002. Climate change Rex, M., and R. Etter. 2010. Deep-sea biodiversity: pattern impacts on U. S. coastal and marine ecosystems. and scale. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. 354 Estuaries 25:149-164. pages. Scheffer, M., S. Carpenter, J. A. Foley, C. Folke, and B. Rice, J., and M. Rochet. 2005. A framework for selecting a Walker. 2001. Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems. Nature suite of indicators for fisheries management. ICES Journal 413:591-596. of Marine Science 62:516-527. Schulte, D. M., R. P. Burke, and R. N. Lipcius. 2009. Rice, S. D., R. B. Spies, D. A. Wolfe, and B. A. Wright. 1996. Unprecedented restoration of a native oyster metapopula- Proceedings of the “Exxon Valdez” oil spill symposium, tion. Science 325:1124-1128. American Fisheries Society symposium 18. Bethesda, MD. Scott, T. M., G. H. Means, R. P. Meegan, R. C. Means, Richter, B. D., R. Mathews, D. L. Harrison, and R. Wigington. S. B. Upchurch, R. E. Copeland, J. Jones, T. Roberts, and 2003. Ecologically sustainable water management: manag- A. Willet. 2004. Springs of Florida. Florida Geological Survey, ing river flows for ecological integrity. Ecological Applications Tallahassee, FL. 5 pages. 13:206-224. Sklar, F. H., and J. A. Browder. 1998. Coastal environmental Roberts, H. H. 2010. Gulf of Mexico cold seeps. Deep Sea impacts brought about by alterations to freshwater flow in Research Part II 57:1835-2060. the Gulf of Mexico. Environmental Management 22:547-562.

110 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Smith, J. W. 1991. The Atlantic and Gulf menhaden Teal, J. M., and S. B. Peterson. 2009. The use of science in fisheries: origins, harvesting technologies, biostatistical the restoration of northeastern U.S. salt marshes. Pages monitoring, recent trends in fisheries statistics, and forecast- 267-283 in B. R. Siliman, E. D. Grosholz, and M. D. Bertness, ing. Marine Fisheries Review 53:28-39. editors. Human Impacts on Salt Marshes. University of California Press. Soliman, Y., and G. Rowe. 2008. Secondary production of Ampelisca mississippiana Soliman and Wicksten 2007 Thomsen, M., and K. Mcglathery. 2006. Effects of accu- (Amphipoda, Crustacea) in the head of the Mississippi mulations of sediments and drift algae on recruitment of Canyon, northern Gulf of Mexico. Deep Sea Research Part II: sessile organisms associated with oyster reefs. Journal of Topical Studies in Oceanography 55:2692-2698. Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 328:22-34.

Soltwedel, T., E. Bauerfeind, M. Bergmann, N. Budaeva, Titus, J. G., and C. Richman. 2001. Maps of lands vulnerable E. Hoste, N. Jaeckisch, K. Von Juterzenka, J. Matthiessen, to sea level rise: modeled elevations along the US Atlantic V. Mokievsky, E. Nothig, N. Queric, B. Sablotny, E. and Gulf coasts. Climate Research 18:205-228. Sauter, I. Schewe, B. Urban-Malinga, J. Wegner, M. Toner, M. 2003. Chlorophyll dispersal by eddy-eddy interac- Wlodarska-Kowalczuk, and M. Klages. 2005. Hausgarten: tions in the Gulf of Mexico. Journal of Geophysical Research multidisciplinary investigations at a deep-sea, long-term 108:1-12. observatory in the Arctic Ocean. Oceanography 18:46-61. Tribbia, J., and S. C. Moser. 2008. More than information: Sommer, T., C. Armor, R. Baxter, R. Breuer, L. Brown, what coastal managers need to plan for climate change. M. Chotkowski, S. Culberson, F. Feyrer, M. Gingras, B. Environmental Science & Policy 11:315-328. Herbold, W. Kimmerer, A. Mueller-Solger, M. Nobriga, and K. Souza. 2007. The collapse of pelagic fishes in the upper Turner, R. E. 1997. Wetland loss in the northern Gulf of San Francisco Estuary. Fisheries 32:270-277. Mexico: multiple working hypotheses. Estuaries 20:1-13.

St. Mary, C. M., C. W. Osenberg, T. K. Frazer, and Turner, R. E. 2001. Of manatees, mangroves, and the W. J. Lindberg. 2000. Stage structure, density dependence Mississippi River: is there an estuarine signature for the Gulf and the efficacy of marine reserves. Bulletin of Marine of Mexico? Estuaries 24:139-150. Science 66:675-690. Turner, R. E., and N. N. Rabalais. 2003. Linking landscape Stedman, S., and T. E. Dahl. 2008. Status and trends of and water quality in the Mississippi River basin for 200 years. wetlands in the coastal watersheds of the Eastern United BioScience 53:563-572. States 1998-2004. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Turner, R. E. 2004. Coastal wetland subsidence arising from Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. local hydrologic manipulations. Estuaries 27:265-272.

Sullivan, P., D. Hellerstein, L. Hansen, R. Johansson, Turner, R. E., N. N. Rabalais, R. B. Alexan, G. McIsaac, and S. Koenig, R. Lubowski, W. McBride, D. McGranahan, R. W. Howarth. 2007a. Characterization of nutrient , organic M. Roberts, S. Vogel, and S. Bucholtz. 2004. The conser- carbon, and sediment loads and concentrations from the vation reserve program: economic implications for rural Mississippi River into the Northern Gulf of Mexico. Estuaries America. Pages 1-112. U.S. Department of Agriculture- and Coasts 30:773-790. Econominc Research Service. Turner, R.E., E.M. Swenson, C.S. Milan and J.M. Lee. 2007b. Swenson, E. M., and R. E. Turner. 1987. Spoil banks: effects Hurricane signals in salt marsh sediments: inorganic sources on a coastal marsh water-level regime. Estuarine, Coastal and soil volume. Limnology and Oceanography 52: 1231- and Shelf Science 24:599-609. 1238.

Taniguchi, M., W. C. Burnett, J. E. Cable, and J. V. Turner. Turner, R. E., N. N. Rabalais, and D. Justic. 2008. Gulf of 2002. Investigation of submarine groundwater discharge. Mexico hypoxia: alternate states and a legacy. Environmental Hydrological Processes 16:2115-2129. Science & Technology 42:2323-2327.

Teal, J. M., and R. W. Howarth. 1984. Oil spill studies: Turner, R. E. 2009. Doubt and the values of an ignorance- a review of ecological effects. Environmental Management based world view for restoration: coastal Louisiana wetlands. 8:27-43. Estuaries and Coasts 32:1054-1068.

Teal, J. M., and L. Weishar. 2005. Ecological engineering, Turner, R. E., B. L. Howes, J. M. Teal, C. S. Milan, adaptive management, and restoration management in E. M. Swenson, and D. D. Goehringer-Toner. 2009. Salt Delaware Bay salt marsh restoration. Ecological Engineering marshes and eutrophication: an unsustainable outcome. 25:304-314. Limnology and Oceanography 54:1634-1642.

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem 111 Turner, R. E. 2010. Beneath the salt marsh canopy: loss of Vermeer, M., and S. Rahmstorf. 2009. Global sea level linked soil strength with increasing nutrient loads. Estuaries and to global temperature. Proceedings of the National Academy Coasts 33:1-10. of Sciences 106:21527-21532.

Ueland, J. S. 2005. Ecological modeling and human dimen- Vetter, E. W., and P. K. Dayton. 1998. Macrofaunal com- sions of mangrove change in Florida. Dissertation, Florida munities within and adjacent to a detritus-rich submarine State University, Tallahassee, Fl. canyon system. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography 45:25-54. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2009. Marine litter: a global challenge. 232 pages. United Nations Walker, R. T., W. D. Solecki, and C. Harwell. 1997. Land use Environment Programme, Nairobi. dynamics and ecological transition: the case of south Florida. Urban Ecosystems 1:37-47. United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (UN FAO). 2005. Country profile: United States of America. Walsh, J. J., R. H. Weisberg, J. M. Lenes, F. R. Chen, D. A. Dieterle, L. Zheng, K. L. Carder, G. A. Vargo, U.S. Department of Interior (USDOI) and U.S. Geological J. A. Havens, and E. Peebles. 2009. Isotopic evidence for Survey (USGS). 2008. Nutrient contributions to the Gulf, dead fish maintenance of Florida red tides, with implications by state. National Water-Quality Assessment Program. for coastal fisheries over both source regions of the west water.usgs.gov/nawqa/sparrow/gulf_findings/by_state.html. Florida shelf and within downstream waters of the south U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2006. Atlantic . Progress In Oceanography 80:51-73. Wadeable streams assessment: a collaborative survey of the Wang, P., T. M. Beck, and T. M. Roberts. 2011. Modeling nation’s streams. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, regional-scale sediment transport and medium-term Office of Water and Office of Research and Development, morphology change at a dual-inlet system examined with Washington, D.C. 113 pages. the Coastal Modeling System (CMS): a case study at Johns U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2008. Pass and Blind Pass, west-central Florida. Journal of Coastal National Coastal Condition Report III, chapter 5 part 3: Gulf Research 59:49-60. Coast coastal condition. Pages 144-162. U.S. Environmental Ward, T. J., D. Heinemann, and N. Evans. 2001. The role of Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. marine reserves as fisheries management tools: a review of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2010. concepts, evidence and international experience. 192 pages. National lakes assessment: a collaborative survey of the Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra, Australia. nation’s lakes. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Watling, L., and E. A. Norse. 1998. Disturbance of the Office of Water and Office of Research and Development, seabed by mobile fishing gear: a comparison to forest Washington, D.C. 118 pages. clearcutting. Conservation Biology 12:1180-1197. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Science Advisory Waycott, M., C. M. Duarte, T. J. B. Carruthers, R. J. Orth, Board (USEPA Science Advisory Board). 2007. Hypoxia in the W. C. Dennison, S. Olyarnik, A. Calladine, J. W. Fourqurean, northern Gulf of Mexico: an update. 34 pages. United States K. L. Heck, A. R. Hughes, G. A. Kendrick, W. J. Kenworthy, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. F. T. Short, and S. L. Williams. 2009. Accelerating loss of Valiela, I., and M. L. Cole. 2002. Comparative evidence that seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems. salt marshes and mangroves may protect seagrass meadows Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106: from land-derived nitrogen loads. Ecosystems 5:92-102. 12377-12381.

Vardaro, M., K. L. Smith Jr., G. Rowe, I. Priede, P. Bagley, Wei, C.-L., G. T. Rowe, G. F. Hubbard, A. H. Scheltema, B. Bett, H. Ruhl, D. Bailey, B. Bazika, Sangolay, A. Walls, and G. D. F. Wilson, I. Petrescu, J. Foster, M. K. Wicksten, J. Clarke. In press. Deep-ocean environmental long-term M. Chen, R. Davenport, Y. Soliman, and Y. Wang. 2010. observatory system at bathyal depths in the southeast Bethymetric zonation for deep-sea macrofauna in relation to Atlantic off the coast of Angola: preliminary studies. export of surface phytoplankton production. Marine Ecology Progress Series 399:1-14. Vazquez, F. G., V. K. Sharma, and L. Perez-Cruz. 2002. Concentrations of elements and metals in sediments of Wei, C.-L., G. T. Rowe, R. L. Haedrich, and G. S. Boland. In the southeastern Gulf of Mexico. Environmental Geology prep. a. Long-term observations of epibenthic fish zonation 42:41-46. in the deep northern Gulf of Mexico.

Vedlitz, A., L. T. Alston, S. B. Laska, R. B. Gramling, Wei, C.-L., G. T. Rowe, E. E. Briones, C. Nunnally, and M. A. Harwell, and H. D. Worthen. 2007. Project final Y. Soliman. In prep. b. Standing stocks and body size of report: use of science in Gulf of Mexico decision making deep-sea macrofauna: what is the baseline prior to the 2010 involving climate change. Project funded by the U.S. BP oil spill in the Northern Gulf of Mexico? Environmental Protection Agency under cooperative agreement No. R-83023601-0. 276 pages.

112 A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Weishar, L., J. Teal, and R. Hinkle. 2005. Designing large- scale wetland restoration for Delaware Bay. Ecological Engineering 25:231-239.

Wells, R. J. D., J. H. Cowan, and W. F. Patterson. 2008. Habitat use and the effect of shrimp trawling on fish and invertebrate communities over the northern Gulf of Mexico continental shelf. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Journal of Marine Science 65:1610-1619.

White, W. A., and T. A. Tremblay. 1995. Submergence of wetlands as a result of human-induced subsidence and fault- ing along the upper Texas Gulf Coast. Journal of Coastal Research 11:788-807.

Wiener, J. G., and M. B. Sandheinrich. 2010. Contaminants in the upper Mississippi River: historic trends, responses to regulatory controls, and emerging concerns. Hydrobiologia 640:49-70.

Zavala-Hidalgo, J., A. Gallegos-García, B. Martínez-López, S. L. Morey, and J. J. O’Brien. 2006. Seasonal upwelling on the western and southern shelves of the Gulf of Mexico. Ocean Dynamics 56:333-338.

Zedler, J. B. 2004. Compensating for wetland losses in the United States. Ibis 146:92-100.

Design by Imaginary Office www.imaginaryoffice.com A barrier island in Louisiana’s Philadelphia, PA 19103 Barataria Bay is surrounded 215-575-9050 by boom after the April Washington, DC 20004 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil 202-552-2000 spill. Photo: Tyrone Turner/ National Geographic Stock www.PewEnvironment.org