Ecosystem Science Capabilities Required to Support NOAA’s Mission in the Year 2020

S. A. Murawski and G. C. Matlock (editors)

U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service – National Ocean Service

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-74 July 2006 Science Capabilities Required to Support NOAA’s Mission in the Year 2020

S. A. Murawski and G. C. Matlock (editors)

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-74 July 2006

U.S. Department of Commerce Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Vice Admiral Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr., USN (Ret.) Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere

National Marine Fisheries Service Dr. William T. Hogarth, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries

National Ocean Service John H. Dunnigan – Assistant Administrator for Ocean Service

Suggested Citations:

Murawski, S.A., and G.C. Matlock (editors). 2006. Ecosystem Science Capabilities Required to Support NOAA’s Mission in the Year 2020. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-F/SPO-74, 97 p.

Individual sections:

Carter, G., P. Restrepo, J. Hameedi, P. Ortner, C. Sellinger, J. Stein, and T. Beechie, 2006. Freshwater Issues. pp. 29-39. In: S.A. Murawski and G.C. Matlock (editors). Ecosystem Science Capabilities Required to Support NOAA’s Mission in the Year 2020. U.S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-F/SPO-74, 97 p.

A copy of the report may be obtained from:

National Marine Fisheries Service Office of Science and Technology 1315 East-West Highway, 12th Floor Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 or

National Ocean Service National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science 1305 East West Highway, Room 8110 Silver Spring, Maryland 20910

Or Online at: http://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/tm/

Overview: Commission on Ocean Policy’s report Ecosystem Science Capabilities (USCOP, 2004), and the Required to Support NOAA’s Administration’s response to that report in the U.S. Ocean Action Plan (CEQ, Mission in the Year 2020 2004).

Acting through its Ecosystem Goal The mission of the National Oceanic and Team (http://.ecosystems.noaa.gov), Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is NOAA has begun to better integrate the to understand and predict changes in the ecological research, observing, and Earth’s environment and conserve and forecasting components undertaken by manage coastal and marine resources to its “line offices” (i.e., NOAA Fisheries, meet our nation’s economic, social and NOAA National Ocean Service, NOAA environmental needs (NOAA, 2004). In Research, NOAA Satellites and meeting its marine stewardship Information Service, and NOAA responsibilities, NOAA seeks to ensure National Service). NOAA’s the sustainable use of resources and five-year research plan (NOAA, 2005b) balance competing uses of coastal and emphasizes how the agency will better marine , recognizing both integrate its current activities, using the their human and natural components Goal Team structure as a framework. In (NOAA, 2004). Authorities for contrast, its 20-year vision for science executing these responsibilities come and research encompasses broad themes from over 90 separate pieces of Federal for the agency in meeting its ecosystem legislation, each with unique stewardship responsibilities, as “NOAA requirements and responsibilities. Few will provide the scientific underpinnings of these laws explicitly mandate an for an ecosystem approach to ecosystem approach to management management of coastal and ocean (EAM) or supporting science. However, resources, so that complex societal managers, the science choices are informed by comprehensive , and increasingly, the public, and reliable scientific information” are recognizing that significantly greater (NOAA, 2005c, p. 6). connectedness among the scientific disciplines is needed to support The agency needs to know what types of management and stewardship science, skills, and products will be responsibilities (Browman and Stergiou, necessary to inform emerging ecosystem 2004; 2005). Neither NOAA nor any management challenges if it is to move other science agency can meet the from simply better integrating its current increasing demand for ecosystem activities to meeting its strategic 20-year science products addressing each of its research vision. This document was mandates individually. Even if it was developed to identify a strategic possible, doing so would not provide the portfolio of research, monitoring, data integration necessary to solve the integration, and decision support increasingly complex array of capabilities underpinning more holistic management issues. This focus on the approaches to NOAA’s stewardship and integration of science and management management of coastal and ocean responsibilities into an ecosystem view resources. is one of the centerpieces of the U.S. For purposes of this discussion Ecosystem science supporting these concerning the scientific support characteristics must therefore be necessary for an EAM, NOAA defines integrated on appropriate geographic an EAM as: scales relevant to the particular problem or issue being addressed. Some of these An ecosystem1 approach to management management foci will be local (e.g., a (EAM) is one that provides a bay or estuary), while many others will comprehensive framework for living scale upwards, including a global scale. resource decision making. In contrast to All will require greater integration of individual species or single issue ecosystem knowledge across traditional management, EAM considers a wider disciplines that can be easily range of relevant ecological, reassembled at problem-relevant time environmental, and human factors and space scales. Given the wider bearing on societal choices regarding diversity of stakeholder groups that will resource use. participate in ecosystem-level problem solving, new information products - EAM is differentiated from more including those that integrate and narrowly focused management by a simultaneously interpret biological, number of defining characteristics. social, and physical trends - must EAM is: (1) geographically specified, (2) emerge. Finally, new management adaptive in its development over time as (governance) institutions will also likely new information becomes available or evolve from those currently in existence as circumstances change, (3) takes into or yet to be formed, and will require the account ecosystem knowledge and use of natural and social science uncertainties, (4) considers the fact that information to inform difficult, but multiple simultaneous factors may necessary, coastal and ocean ecosystem influence the outcomes of management management decisions. One of the (particularly those external to the vexing issues these institutions will face ecosystem), and (5) strives to balance is the divergent value systems held by diverse societal objectives that result stakeholder groups (e.g., utilitarian from resource decision making and versus preservation views of marine allocation. Additionally, because of its ecosystems). U.S. institutions and complexity and emphasis on stakeholder science support systems must be involvement, the process of prepared to evaluate management from implementing EAM needs to be (6) these diverse perspectives. incremental and (7) collaborative (Murawski, 2006, pp. 1-2). This set of “white papers” is not intended to be comprehensive with respect to all of the existing and 1 An ecosystem is a geographically specified system of organisms (including humans), the emerging issues, but rather, focuses on a environment2, and the processes that control its few priority topics that researchers and dynamics. coastal managers have identified as multidisciplinary themes of EAM 2 The environment is the biological, chemical, requiring NOAA’s attention. These physical, and social conditions that surround organisms. When appropriate, the term themes were assigned to NOAA senior environment should be qualified as biological, scientists and research managers who are chemical, and/or social.

2 at the forefront of these issues, and who with other sectors and issues. In fact, represent a cross-section of the various there is a growing demand from these line offices within the agency current institutions for ecosystem-level collaborating on them. This examination information and advice for which of pivotal issues will help NOAA, its science is not yet fully equipped to partners, and its stakeholders more fully provide (Rice, 2005). Thus, there is an implement an EAM. It will contribute to urgent need to address these issues and how NOAA organizes itself and priorities. manages its activities, and how it will interact with other Federal, state, and Finally, this exercise in futurism is not local management organizations. Most the first, and will not be the last, to importantly, these papers will inform consider emerging marine science and long-term research planning activities of policy “mega-trends.” In 1984, the the agency. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission posited a vision of The six white papers consider the emerging themes by the year 2000 (IOC, following ecosystem-related themes: 1984). Chief among their predictions were the increased importance of Page interdisciplinary approaches to 1. Ecosystem Responses to research and ecosystem studies (Field et Climate Variability………………… 6 al., 2005). More recently, in visioning ocean science for 2020, Field et al. 2. Management of Living Marine (2005) provide a number of tantalizing Resources in an Ecosystem predictions for science and management Context………………………..…… 15 challenges for which science must prepare, including: (1) the increased 3. Freshwater Issues…………….… 29 reliance on more capable remote sensing, (2) the importance of the 4. Marine Zoning and Coastal Zone information revolution to ocean science, Management……………………….. 40 (3) the “globalization” of modeling capacity, (4) discovering functional 5. …………. 52 (molecular ), (5) increased emphasis on global climate 6. Science Requirements to Identify change, (6) waste disposal in the oceans, and Balance Societal Objectives…... 64 (6) understanding of the deep sea floor biosphere, (8) the emerging importance Of course, better science capabilities of the land-sea interface and the coasts, alone will not be sufficient to meet the (9) the growth of interdisciplinary increasing challenges in managing the sciences, (10) greater involvement of Nation’s coastal and ocean ecosystems. society in managing the ocean’s limited However, ocean governance systems resources, (11) transitioning to have not been static. Even within sustainable fisheries, and (12) capacity traditional use sectors (e.g., fisheries, building in marine science in both the energy exploration and recovery), there developing and developed world. This is an evolution towards broadening volume provides a NOAA-centric view mandates to consider their interactions of important challenges for ecosystem

3 management and the role that its science The authors acknowledge and appreciate can play in informing and helping to the efforts of the numerous individuals create a sustainable future for our who reviewed these white papers, and Nation’s ocean and coastal ecosystems. particularly those of Ms. Lynn Dancy.

4 Acronyms HAB harmful algal bloom IOOS Integrated Ocean Observing ABC acceptable biological catch System AIS aquatic LMR living marine resource ARO NOAA Fisheries’ Alaska MERHAB NOAA’s Monitoring and Regional Office Event Response for Harmful Bmsy stock necessary to Algal Blooms Program support MSY MPA marine protected area CCSP U.S. Science MSE management strategy evaluation Program MSFCMA Magnuson-Stevens Fishery CFM coastal flooding model Conservation and CHPS Community Hydrologic Management Act Prediction System MSY maximum sustainable yield CZM coastal zone management NASA National Aeronautics and Space EAM ecosystem approach to Administration management NEXRAD Next Generation Radar ECOHAB NOAA’s Ecology and NOAA National Oceanic and of Harmful Algal Atmospheric Administration Blooms Program NGO non-governmental organization EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone NMSP NOAA’s National Marine EFH essential fish Sanctuary Program ENSO El Niño-Southern Oscillation NPCREP North Pacific Climate EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Regimes and Ecosystem Agency ESA Endangered Species Act NPFMC North Pacific Fishery ESU evolutionary significant unit Management Council FAO Food and Agriculture OFL overfishing level Organization of the United PBA NOAA program baseline Nations assessment Flim threshold maximum fishing PPBES NOAA’s Program Planning mortality limit Budgeting and Execution Fmsy fishing mortality rate associated System with MSY SAFE Stock Assessment and Fishery FMP fishery management plan Evaluation FY fiscal year SIMOR Subcommittee on Integrated GEOSS Global Earth Observing System Management of Ocean of Systems Resources GIS geographical information system TAC total allowable catch GLOBEC U.S. Global Ocean Ecosystems Dynamics

5 White Paper #1 consequence of global warming and subsidence, sea levels continue to rise Ecosystem Responses and the rate of rise is projected to accelerate. Precipitation and resulting to Climate Variability rates of runoff are predicted to change significantly over the next century. These variations and changes in Authors: environmental conditions have profound Kenric Osgood, NOAA Fisheries, implications for ecosystems and the Office of Science and Technology human activities that are dependent on Ned Cyr, NOAA Fisheries, Office of them by changing the distributions and Science and Technology productivity of living resources. Tom O’Connor, NOAA National Ocean Service, National Centers for Climate changes potentially have large Coastal Ocean Science impacts on living marine resource Jeff Polovina, NOAA Fisheries, Pacific (LMR) including the Great Islands Science Center Lakes (McGinn, 2002). Along the U.S. David Schwab, NOAA Research, Great west coast, El Niño events cause shifts in Lakes Environmental Research distributions of many marine Laboratory species and greatly impact ocean Phyllis Stabeno, NOAA Research, productivity (Pearcy and Schoener, Pacific Marine Environmental 1987), while decadal scale climate shifts Laboratory impact the structure and productivity of North Pacific and Bering Sea ecosystems (Hollowed and Wooster, I. Description of the Issue 1992; Hare and Mantua, 2000; Peterson and Schwing, 2003). Shifts such as the Background change from shrimp to groundfish in the Gulf of Alaska in the Variations in the world’s climate have late 1970s reflect decadal changes in significant implications for the ocean climate (Anderson and Piatt, productivity and structure of marine and 1999), as do large shifts in Pacific coastal (including Great Lakes) salmon production (Mantua et al., 1997). ecosystems ranging from the tropics to The Bering Sea is undergoing a the poles. Climate-driven variability of northward biogeographical shift in environmental conditions is manifest on response to changing temperature and many time and space scales, including atmospheric forcing (Overland and year-to-year variation, multi-year (e.g., Stabeno, 2004; Grebmeier et al., 2006), El Niño-Southern Oscillation [ENSO]), and in the North Atlantic many marine and decadal scales (e.g., Pacific Decadal fish species have been observed to shift Oscillation, North Atlantic Oscillation, their distributions poleward in response and Arctic Oscillation). In addition to to increases in water temperature this shorter-term variability, the Earth’s (Murawski, 1993; Parker and Dixon, climate system has demonstrably 1998; Perry et al., 2005). Long-term warmed on both global and regional declines in krill stocks have been scales since the pre-industrial era, observed in the Southern Ocean and impacting ice extent (IPCC, 2001). As a

6 links between annual krill density and occurs each summer over the northern sea-ice cover have been established Gulf of Mexico shelf may increase in (Atkinson et al., 2004). Similarly, in the size and intensity if runoff from the Bering Sea and Arctic Ocean, reductions central U.S. increases (Justic et al., in sea ice coverage have negative 2003). Rising temperatures have implications for ice dependent species, implications for the productivity and but positive implications for other viability of coral reef ecosystems as species that may be able to take mass coral bleaching has occurred in advantage of the changing conditions, association with episodes of elevated sea thus having consequences that cascade temperatures (Hoegh-Guldberg, 1999). through the food webs (ACIA, 2004). Coral reefs, and other calcifying marine Changed climate forcing affects organisms including important plankton important physical features in the ocean, components, are also susceptible to thereby impacting marine species that anthropogenic ocean acidification due to take advantage of these features. For increasing carbon dioxide (CO2), example, the Transition Zone decreasing their ability to build their Chlorophyll Front is a sharp boundary in calcium carbonate (CaCO3) structures the waters north of the Hawaiian Islands (Feely et al., 2004; Orr et al., 2005; between the stratified, low surface Kleypas et al., 2006). chlorophyll water and the cooler, vertically mixed, high surface There exists the need for science to chlorophyll water. This productive identify how climate variability impacts feature is used as a migration pathway ecosystems and how different by sea turtles and tunas (Polovina et al., ecosystems respond to climate forcing, 2001), and its winter location appears to differentiate the impacts of short-term important to the survival of monk seal variability (year-to-year, multi-year) pups. Climate change will also from longer term variability (decadal influence the thermal regime in the Great and longer), and to identify the most Lakes, impacting the growth rate cost-effective ways to adapt to the potential of important fish species changes or reduce the risk of negative (Brandt et al., 2002). impacts. Without this information, society cannot rationally assess the costs Rising sea level directly impacts coastal and benefits of policy options to mitigate ecosystems (Boesch et al., 2000), the impacts of climate variability or inundating wetlands and shallow water adapt human uses to account for the and increasing, salinity, wave magnitude and timing of climate- action, and storm surges. In regions induced changes. where coastal development interferes with the landward migration of coastal ecosystems as sea level rises, the NOAA’s Role in Framing Climate- ecosystems may disappear. Shifts in Ecosystem Issues precipitation change the amount, timing, and contents of freshwater runoff, The National Oceanic and Atmospheric thereby impacting coastal and estuarine Administration (NOAA) has areas (Boesch et al., 2000). For responsibilities to monitor, understand, example, the large hypoxic zone that and predict the impacts of global climate

7 change on marine and coastal and the living resources contained ecosystems. Specifically, NOAA has therein, and to provide the knowledge responsibilities to: and tools needed to incorporate climate • monitor and model changes in variability into the management of living coastal production as a consequence marine and coastal resources. This topic of predicted climate changes in the area entails a wide variety of projects to rate and amount of runoff and in the investigate and provide a predictive timing of spring phytoplankton capability of the impacts of changing blooms; climate on coastal and marine • evaluate and predict climate impacts, ecosystems. In addition to projects including increases in CO2, on coral focused on what have become known as ecosystems; climate regime shifts (e.g., ecosystems • adapt how it manages marine alternating between anomalous warm fisheries, marine mammals, and and cool states (Hollowed and Wooster, protected marine species by 1992)), this topic also includes studies to accounting for the impacts of climate investigate: coastal and marine variability and change on impacts from any change in ecosystems; and the physical environment due to • utilize predictions of climate status changing climate; the impact of to forecast the impact of such change diminishing ice cover (e.g., impacts on coastal ecosystems. diminishing sea ice on marine mammals and fisheries within the Bering Sea As an agency, NOAA has the ecosystem); and how climate variability capabilities and legislative mandates to and change impact the productivity of exert leadership in conducting this work. Pacific salmon within their oceanic and Without NOAA investment, society’s freshwater habitats. ability to adapt to changes in coastal and marine ecosystems will be severely Coastal response to sea-level rise: limited. To plan development that will protect coastal property and ecosystems, state To address these needs, NOAA has and local governments need accurate and identified the following high-priority precise elevation maps showing the topic areas: extent of coastal inundation due to projected sea level rise. Projects within Climate regimes and ecosystem this topic will collect topographic and productivity: bathymetric data to create detailed Profound shifts in biological elevation maps which, along with productivity, species distributions, and hydrographic modeling, comprise ecosystem structure are often ecological precise coastal flooding models (CFMs). responses to climate variability, and are While CFMs are required to protect of great consequence to fishery- human-made infrastructure, projects dependent communities and the under this topic also provide for commercial fishing industry. Projects protecting ecosystems by modeling the within this topic aim to predict the responses of the various types of probable consequences of climate wetlands and shallow water habitats to change on coastal and marine systems

8 increases in water depth, salinity, waves, shallow and deep water corals and and storm surges. calcifying plankton, will decrease as CO2 concentrations continue to rise. Nutrient-climate interactions: Many of these organisms are of direct Climate change models predict major economic importance to human shifts in the amount of precipitation populations, while the others are experienced by various regions of the important in the marine . United States. In addition, the coastal Projects within this topic will gain a glaciers of Alaska are melting. Such better understanding of how ocean changes may lead to increased runoff of biology and chemistry will respond to freshwater and its nutrients into coastal higher CO2 and concomitant lower pH and estuarine areas, making them more conditions so that predictive models of susceptible to eutrophication. For these processes and their impacts on marine systems, this will also enhance marine ecosystems can be developed. stratification, further increasing the susceptibility to eutrophication. These projects will monitor and model changes Influences External to NOAA that will in coastal eutrophication as a Drive Future Needs consequence of predicted climate changes in the rate and amount of runoff. It is increasingly apparent that coastal and marine ecosystems are not in a Coral bleaching: steady state and that resource managers Bleaching occurs when corals are must be prepared to adapt to changing stressed by a synergistic combination of conditions. In addition to the stressors, including increases in sea importance of annual to decadal scale surface temperature. These projects will climate variability to ecosystems, global improve the current network of climate change is predicted to have observational sensors and provide an increasingly significant effects over the integrated approach capable of next fifteen years. Such change will forecasting the time, place, and potential impact both the mean state of the severity of coral bleaching events. environment and its variability. By not Successful forecasting of coral bleaching accounting for climate variability and events will allow managers and change in its information exchange with stakeholders to prepare for, forestall, resource managers, NOAA risks and/or minimize the devastating effects providing management advice that does of bleaching on coastal ecosystems and not match evolving environmental resource loss resulting from bleaching conditions and thereby risks events. mismanagement of coastal and marine ecosystems. As any large-scale climatic Decalcification: change will result in both winners (i.e., The carbonate equilibrium of the oceans species who do better in a new climate is shifting in response to increasing regime) and losers (i.e., species who do atmospheric CO2 concentrations. There not thrive under such change), failure to is also mounting evidence that consider climate in management calcification rates of several major decisions can and will result in over- or groups of marine calcifiers, including under-harvesting of living resources and

9 poor management of non-harvested consequences of climate variability and species. This will clearly impact not change on marine ecosystems. Its only the ecosystems, but also the strategy is to develop the ability to individuals and communities that are predict the consequences of climate dependent upon coastal and marine change on ecosystems by monitoring resources. Long-range planning will be changes in coastal and marine improved if a predictive capability for ecosystems, conducting research on climate impacts on ecosystems is climate-ecosystem linkages, and developed. Accounting for climate incorporating climate information into variability and change is an important predictive physical-biological indicators component of implementing an and models. ecosystem approach to marine resource management as called for in the U.S. NOAA’s Climate and Ecosystems Ocean Action Plan (CEQ, 2004). In the Program was initiated in fiscal year (FY) coming decades, as anthropogenic 2004 with one project. The North stressors continue to impact coastal and Pacific Climate Regimes and Ecosystem marine ecosystems through coastal Productivity (NPCREP) project is development and resource exploitation, developing an understanding of how climate impacts are likely to become climate fluctuations and change affect increasingly important. Through studies the eastern Bering Sea and Gulf of to monitor, understand, and predict the Alaska ecosystems. NPCREP is impacts of global climate change on utilizing a combination of retrospective, marine and coastal ecosystems, NOAA monitoring, process, and modeling will address needs identified in the U.S. studies to advance the understanding of Climate Change Science Program climate impacts on the fisheries in the (CCSP) Strategic Plan (U.S. Climate region, thereby generating the necessary Change Science Program, 2003). foundation for understanding climate- ecosystem relationships. Through the increased understanding being obtained, II. Science Capabilities Necessary to NPCREP is developing indicators of Support Future Decision-Making climate impacts and models to predict the probable consequences of climate Present capabilities change on the eastern Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska ecosystems. These NOAA has made large investments products are given to fisheries managers towards understanding the physical at the North Pacific Fishery climate system and describing the Management Council (NPFMC) so that mechanisms that govern climate climate variability and change can be variability and change. However, very incorporated into management decisions little work has been done to understand affecting the LMRs in these regions. the impacts of climate variability or the implications of future climate change on In addition to its Climate and coastal and marine ecosystems. For this Ecosystems Program, NOAA is involved reason, NOAA initiated a Climate and in a number of projects related to the Ecosystems Program with the objective impacts of climate on marine of understanding and predicting the ecosystems:

10 • NOAA has helped support projects of the most appropriate products and in the Georges Bank/Northwest models. Atlantic Region and the Northeast • There is no ongoing NOAA project Pacific (with components in the addressing the effect of climate California Current and the Coastal change on coastal eutrophication or Gulf of Alaska) that are coordinated modeling activity directly predicting by the U.S. Global Ocean the locations and intensity of Ecosystems Dynamics (GLOBEC), a climate-driven coastal research program addressing how eutrophication. However, existing global climate change may affect the monitoring programs making in situ- and production of marine or satellite-based measurements of animals. water quality and chlorophyll • Since 2004, NOAA has been concentrations are beginning to creating CFMs with a precision of 20 create the long-term database cm in order to map coastal required to document such responses inundation under the existing and to climate change. projected rate of sea level rise. Included is an ecological component to model changes in coastal habitats New or Enhanced Capabilities that will as a function of rates of sea level rise be Required and landscape characteristics. These models are designed for local Enabling the incorporation of climate managers to accommodate sea level impacts into management plans, by rise and its ecological consequences predicting the probable consequences of into coastal development plans. climate variability and change on coastal • NOAA’s Coral Reef Watch Program and marine ecosystems and delivering has developed a variety of satellite- the knowledge and predictive tools to and in situ-based products that managers, is essential. To support this monitor the environmental goal, NOAA needs to: 1) expand its conditions of coral reef ecosystems, capability to develop biophysical and is linking ecosystem models indicators and models so coastal and with current and past climate data to marine resource management can adapt enable understanding of the to predicted climate-induced changes in relationship between climate fishery, coastal, and coral reef resources; parameters and coral ecosystem 2) expand its capability to monitor response. changes in coastal and marine • NOAA scientists are incorporating ecosystems through a network of in situ indices of environmental variation and remote observing systems; and 3) into assessments of the status of gain an understanding of the living resource populations. Some of mechanisms and rates that control these investigations are providing ecosystem response to climate variability useful information to managers; and change. Predictive biophysical however, these efforts should be indicators and models will allow for the better connected and coordinated to proactive management of living ensure information exchange and use resources, the most efficient manner in which to manage resources. Monitoring

11 changes in ecosystems will allow for ground truth the output from these reactive management and provide data models and develop approaches to essential for the development of directly or indirectly extend them to indicators and models. Understanding address higher dynamics. the mechanisms and rates that control The development of spatially resolved ecosystem productivity and energy flux models to predict and assess the is critical for the development of implications of climate variability and predictive indicators and models. change on ecosystems is crucial for planning adaptation strategies. These NOAA requires an integrated climate- predictive models will provide a ecosystem observing system to provide framework within which mitigation or climate variability data as well as adaptation strategies and policy options synoptic ecosystem structure and can be explored. productivity information. Such input parameters would be used to document Science and Research needed to ecosystem responses to climate changes, Support these Capabilities to develop a better understanding of climate effects on ecosystems, and to There is sufficient technology to achieve develop more timely biophysical a better understanding and more accurate indicators and models that support and precise predictive capability of management and policy actions. ecosystem responses to climate Additional days-at-sea aboard next- variability and change. While new generation oceanographic and fisheries observation technologies and advances survey vessels are required to make the in modeling techniques would accelerate critically needed observations (via the rate of achievement, the fundamental deployment of moorings and satellite- need for a predictive ability to be tracked drifters, as well as surveys of achieved is advancement in the hydrography, fish stocks, protected conceptual understanding of the resources, and plankton) and to conduct mechanisms through which climate at-sea research to understand the impacts ecosystems. This requires processes and mechanisms of climate process-based research focused on impacts on ecosystems. improving the understanding of the linkages between climate forcing and Ocean models will be important tools to ecosystem responses at various time and investigate and describe physical and space scales. This understanding is biological responses resulting from essential to enable the development and climate variability. Currently both testing of indicators of climate impacts watershed-scale and regional ocean on ecosystems as well as models to models are being used as research tools predict the probable consequences of to describe ocean responses resulting climate variability and change on from recent climate variability. Some of particular regions. Without the these ocean-atmosphere coupled models knowledge of the mechanisms linking also include a lower trophic level ecosystem responses to climate, component to describe spatial and scientists and managers will be forced to temporal aspects of plankton dynamics. rely on correlations between climate A priority of future research will be to forcing and ecosystem responses. Often,

12 these correlations break down over time Observing System (IOOS) through the because there is no mechanistic link Alaska Ocean Observing System and the among the parameters. They will almost Northwest Association of Networked certainly break down under changed Ocean Observing Systems, and climate forcing, since the linkages programs supported by other agencies between the critical mechanisms that and non-governmental organizations impact productivity will likely change. (NGOs) (e.g., programs supported by the National Science Foundation, the North Pacific Research Board, and the Exxon III. Partnerships Necessary to Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council). Effectively Address the Emerging NOAA’s work on developing CFMs for Issues a portion of the North Carolina coast - work that could evolve into a national To effectively address the impacts of effort - requires the active participation climate on marine ecosystems, NOAA of scientists with local knowledge and must partner with other Federal state support in obtaining precise agencies, as well as state and local topography. NOAA’s monitoring of agencies, to leverage their expertise and coastal eutrophication within the resources. Coordination of programs at National Estuarine Research Reserves is the Federal level is conducted through done in partnership with states. the Ecosystem Interagency Working Group of the U.S. CCSP. NOAA utilizes knowledge gained on ecosystem IV. Benefits to NOAA, Constituents, responses to climate variability within and Society from this Effort the U.S. and from around the world by academia, government agencies and There are significant benefits to be programs, and other entities. NOAA derived from better understanding and scientists, along with their partners from forecasting of ecosystem responses to academia and private industry who are climate variability. Projects within this supported by research grants, are topic have a high potential to positively conducting the single existing project impact management of these ecosystems within NOAA’s Climate and Ecosystems and have a wide range of additional Program. A significant portion of the benefits. For instance, they would funding for all proposed Climate and enable NOAA to address the urgent and Ecosystems projects would support continuing needs of living resource academic researchers through grants in managers and move NOAA toward its order to enhance collaborations and stated goal of ecosystem-based provide necessary scientific expertise. management. NOAA would be able to In addition, due to the scope of the observe, understand, and predict information needed to address the ecological effects of climate variability questions of the program, a wide range and change on major coastal and marine of linkages and partnerships with other ecosystems of the United States. Users programs are necessary. For example, would be provided the information NPCREP, the Climate and Ecosystems needed for decisions about responses of Program project, is linked with other LMRs and coastal zones to climate- NOAA projects, the Integrated Ocean induced perturbations. Consideration of

13 the potential impacts of climate Managers of coral reef resources would variability on ecosystems and coastal benefit from predictions of climate zones would become an explicit impacts on coral reefs by allowing them component of LMR and coastal zone to quantify the risk of different reefs to management (CZM) plans. climate impacts, identify regions to maximize conservation, and reduce other Fisheries managers would be able to stressors on reefs during predicted times more accurately predict the optimum of increased climate induced stress. yield for fishery stocks, thereby These predictions will also help minimizing the amount of unrealized scientists better understand the cold harvest or overharvesting of species. water corals that are found within U.S. They could use the predictive waters. information to modify fishing effort, timing, or location for particular species; Climate variability and change have change the gear type used; or change significant implications for the which species are targeted for a region. distribution and abundance of species The knowledge and predictive tools and for the productivity and functioning generated by these investigations would of ecosystems as climate sets the be of great value to the management of boundaries within which species are marine mammals and other protected adapted. As species are excluded from species, ensuring that potential direct presently inhabited geographic regions and indirect climate impacts on their due to changed climate, some may populations are considered. This disappear completely while others may information would also help fishers with shift their geographic distributions if their fishing strategies and their there is sufficient time and habitat. In equipment investment planning, thus regions where major species shifts occur, benefiting fishery-dependent human the newly structured ecosystems may be communities. more or less productive than the present ones, but management policies adapted Coastal managers would benefit from for the present ecosystem will not apply the development of precise maps of in the changed ecosystem. Changes in predicted coastal inundation due to these ecosystems and their management climate-induced sea level rise, models of will have a great impact on human ecosystem responses to increased water communities and sectors dependent upon depth and salinity, and models of susceptible LMRs. changes in coastal eutrophication as a consequence of climate variability. With these models, coastal managers can plan development that will have minimal impact on coastal ecosystems, taking into account climate impacts.

14 White Paper #2 recognition that fishing is but one competing use of ecosystems that Management of produces a broad set of ecological and societal benefits. But the benefits are Living Marine Resources not achieved without costs; thus, there is in an Ecosystem Context a need to manage LMRs in an ecosystem context. The critical need for a more holistic approach to managing the use of Authors: LMRs has been well articulated in a Doug DeMaster, NOAA Fisheries, number of recent publications, including Alaska Fisheries Science Center the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy Mike Fogarty, NOAA Fisheries, report (USCOP, 2004), U.S. Ocean Northeast Fisheries Science Center Action Plan (CEQ, 2004), Pew Oceans Doran Mason, NOAA Research, Great Commission report (2003), Rappoport Lakes Environmental Research (1998), report to Congress by the Laboratory Ecosystem Principles Advisory Panel Gary Matlock, NOAA National Ocean (1999), report by the United Nations’ Service, National Centers for Coastal Food and Agriculture Organization Ocean Science (FAO, 2003), a series of essays Anne Hollowed, NOAA Fisheries, published by the Marine Ecology Alaska Fisheries Science Center Progress Series (Browman and Stergiou, 2004), and a series of National Research I. Description of the Issue Council (NRC) publications (1994, 1999b, 1999c, 2001, 2002), as well as One of the four goals articulated in numerous references contained therein. NOAA’s Strategic Plan is to “protect, restore and manage coastal and ocean resources through an ecosystem The NOAA Perspective on approach” (NOAA, 2004). This goal Management of LMRs flows from the mandates and direction of such Federal laws, executive orders, There are more than 90 Congressional courts, and international treaties as the laws, treaty obligations, executive Magnuson-Stevens Fishery and orders, regional agreements, NOAA- Conservation Management Act specific policies, memoranda of (MSFCMA), Endangered Species Act understanding with other Federal (ESA), National Environmental Policy agencies, and court orders that drive the Act (NEPA), Marine Mammal requirements of NOAA’s Ecosystem Protection Act, Coral Reef Conservation Mission Goal (NOAA, 2005c). Over the Act, Coastal Zone Management Act, last 20 years, NOAA has worked to National Marine Sanctuaries Act, establish the scientific underpinning for International Commission for the an ecosystem approach to management Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, and (EAM) of coastal and ocean LMRs, so Inter-American Tropical Tuna that complex societal choices are Commission. These directives reflect informed by comprehensive and reliable society’s desire for policies and scientific information (DeMaster and institutions to manage the environment. Sandifer, 2004; NOAA, 2005b). The When combined, they reflect the

15 types of products and services NOAA many national and international intends to provide to constituents and organizations. By necessity, it requires agency managers include: (1) forecasts discourse between researchers and and mitigation strategies related to managers, and in the future, NOAA will harmful algal blooms (HABs), invasive need to increasingly incorporate species, and air and water quality; (2) constituent input into this discourse. ecological assessments and predictions The key assumption under this approach of impacts from climate change on ocean is that management tools that do not productivity (e.g., coral bleaching and perform well in computer simulations loss of sea ice in the Bering Sea; see are very likely to fail in the real world. White Paper #1); (3) decision support That doesn’t mean that management tools for adaptive, ecosystem-based tools that perform well will necessarily management of fisheries, other marine produce satisfactory results in the real resources, and coastal development; (4) world, but they are certainly more likely improved assessments of sea level to be successful than non-tested change on coastal resources and management approaches. One form of ecosystems; (5) better integration of decision support tools used to evaluate observing system data for use by the impacts of harvest policy is a managers responsible for the health of management strategy evaluation (MSE). coastal ecosystems; and (6) fishery NEPA requires that agencies conduct productivity forecasts incorporating the this type of review to provide public effects of climate change. disclosure of potential impacts of management actions. The MSE is an For each of these products (e.g., attempt to provide quantitative, rather forecasts, assessments, decision support than qualitative, information for tools), it will be necessary to take decision-makers. Thus, NOAA account or otherwise incorporate scientists play a crucial role in the uncertainty associated with parameter process by providing the analysis tools estimation and process error (e.g., and forecasts that will facilitate uncertainty of how a change in one collaborations among managers, component of an ecosystem influences researchers, and constituents to the others). This is typically done by encourage the development of policies evaluating the performance of competing with full knowledge of the necessary approaches using output from computer tradeoffs between the likelihood of simulations that are run under a wide sustainable use of a LMR, its range of scenarios (FAO, 2003). Field community, or its ecosystem and the data collected in support of these models likelihood of acceptable social or are often not collected from a wide economic performance. variety of system states, so there must be inference regarding underlying processes A Common Lexicon for Ecosystem dictating changes (e.g., Concepts by predators). The evaluation of performance must be closely coordinated As discussed in the overview, NOAA with resource managers and policy has adopted a common lexicon to makers. Such an approach has become promote a shared understanding and one of the basic tenets of an EAM by

16 usage of ecosystem concepts (NOAA, prerequisite to the success of this 2004; FAO, 2003): management approach. An a priori assessment of possible ecosystem states An ecosystem is a geographically must become the foundation for the specified system of organisms selection of preferred management (including humans), the actions. environment, and the processes that control its dynamics. Progress towards implementing an EAM for LMRs can occur in stages along a The environment is the biological, continuum. For example, management chemical, physical, and social under an ecosystem approach can be conditions that surround organisms. categorized into at least three levels. The When appropriate, the term first level is single species management environment should be qualified as of targeted resources, with issues of biological, chemical, physical, and/or protected species, non-target species, social. habitat, and species interactions incorporated as important An EAM is management that is considerations. The second level is a adaptive, geographically specified, multi-species aggregate and system level takes account of ecosystem approach. This management level knowledge and uncertainties, incorporates important ecological and considers multiple external environmental factors, such as trophic influences, and strives to balance structure, , climate diverse social objectives. anomalies or influences, on the condition of the ecosystem. The third A fishery can refer to the sum of all level is a comprehensive, multiple sector fishing activities on a given resource. approach that captures activities and It may also refer to the activities of a values associated with all external single type or style of fishing on a influences (i.e., fishing and non-fishing particular resource. The term is used sectors) impacting the condition and in both senses. sustainability of ecosystems. The focus is not only on LMR conservation or The phrase “ecosystem approach to extraction, but also on uses of and management” (instead of “ecosystem impacts on marine ecosystems by management”) is used throughout the transportation, military, oil and gas document in deference to the preferred sectors, etc. international convention. An EAM is incremental, as neither the scientific nor Background fiscal underpinnings are usually available to quickly and fully implement A number of recent publications provide ecosystem approaches in every location. perspectives and approaches on how LMR management changes ecosystems LMRs will be managed in an ecosystem and their components. Specifying goals context over the next fifteen years: for the condition of LMRs, the ecosystem of which they are a part, and 1. Report to Congress by the Ecosystem the human enterprise of fishing is a Principles Advisory Panel (1999, p. 3):

17 “The benefits of adopting ecosystem- ecosystem services requires a process based fishery management and research that engages scientists and decision- are more sustainable fisheries and makers. Interdisciplinary linkages are marine ecosystems, as well as more necessary because of the climate and economically-healthy coastal societal controls on ecosystems, the communities. We have identified actions feedbacks involving social change, and required to realize these benefits. We the decision –making relevance of urge the Secretary and Congress to forecasts.” make those resources available.” (Note: the eight ecosystem principals 4. Hilborn (in Browman and Stergiou recommended by the Panel are presented [2004, pp. 275-276]): in Appendix A). “No one questions that the majority of the world’s fisheries are heavily used, 2. Murawski (2000, p. 649): many are overfished, some have “Ecosystem considerations may be collapsed, and good biological and incorporated into economic management suggests by modifying existing overfishing substantial reductions in fishing paradigms or by developing new pressure are needed for sustainable approaches to account for ecosystem management.”; “I, and others (Garcia et structure and function in relation to al. 2003, Sissenwine & Mace 2003), harvesting. Although existing concepts believe that we need a form of ecosystem of overfishing have a strong theoretical management that emphasizes the basis for evaluating policy choices and interaction between fish, fishermen and much practical use, they do not provide government regulators and concentrates direct guidance on issues such as on incentives and participation with user biodiversity, serial depletion, habitat groups. This difference can be degradation, and changes in the food considered as a choice between a web caused by fishing.” and “Ecosystem participatory approach with incentives considerations do not need to substitute as a ‘carrot’, and a centralized for existing overfishing concepts. government using regulations as a Instead, they should be used to evaluate ‘stick’.”; and “To argue that we need and modify primary management more data intensive management and guidance for important fisheries and more regulation by central governments species.” in the fisheries of the world that have little data and little regulation is 3. Clark et al. (2001, p. 657): untenable.” “Planning and decision-making can be improved by access to reliable forecasts 5. Pew Oceans Commission (2003): of ecosystem state, ecosystem services, The Pew Oceans Commission identified and natural capital. Availability of new governance structure as one key issue in data sets, together with progress in developing more robust U.S. fisheries computation and statistics, will increase management. our ability to forecast ecosystem change. An agenda that would lead toward a 6. Jennings (in Browman and Stergiou capacity to produce, evaluate, and [2004, p. 279]): communicate forecasts of critical “EAF [Ecosystem Approaches to

18 Fisheries] is part of the ecosystem not routinely evaluated in current approach. The broad purpose of the species-by-species or fishery-based EAF is to plan, develop and manage management programs.”; “Controlling fisheries in a manner that addresses the fishing mortality, and manipulating its multiple needs and desires of societies, application on particular size or age without jeopardizing the options for classes, are the keys to achieving the future generations to benefit from the typical objectives of sustainability, high full range of goods and services yield, and efficiency. Often, this is done (including, of course, non fisheries by setting a Total Allowable Catch benefits) provided by marine (TAC) based on the relationship between ecosystems.” catch and fishing mortality. Another approach is to limit fishing effort (days 7. Mace (in Browman and Stergiou at sea or some other effort metric) since [2004, p. 291]): fishing mortality is proportional to “The lack of adequate monitoring of effort. Controlling fishing mortality marine species, habitats and through either a TAC or limit on fishing oceanographic factors is perhaps the effort requires considerable scientific most difficult problem of all to address, information about the fishery and primarily because of the prohibitive resource species.”; and “Moving from costs associated with conducting surveys ’intelligent tinkering’ to a more direct of marine resources and the high costs focus on ecosystem properties and of simply monitoring catches in many outcomes will necessarily involve closer countries. Realistic cost-benefit analyses ties between science and management.” may well indicate that the costs of comprehensive scientific research far 9. U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy exceed both short- and long-term (2004, p. 411): potential economic benefits to the fishing “The many potentially beneficial uses of industry. As a result, while a few ocean and coastal resources should be countries may be improving their acknowledged and managed in a way monitoring capabilities (e.g. the United that balances competing uses while States), others are losing funds for preserving and protecting the overall research and monitoring. Recent integrity of the ocean and coastal progress includes several ambitious environments.”; and “Downward trends programs under the auspices of the in marine biodiversity should be Global Ocean Observing System reversed where they exist, with a desired (GOOS), Global Ocean Ecosystem end of maintaining or recovering natural Dynamic Programs (GLOBEC), and the levels of biological diversity and (CML).” ecosystem services.”

8. Sissenwine and Murawski (in 10. Pikitch et al. (2004, p. 347): Browman and Stergiou [2004, pp. 292- “Protecting essential habitat for fish and 295]): other important ecosystem components “Incorporation of ecosystem-based from destructive fishing practices approaches into fisheries management increases fish diversity and abundance. involves accounting for a number of Thus, ocean zoning, in which type and important classes of interactions that are level of allowable human activity are

19 specified spatially and temporally, will successful for present and future be a critical element of EBFM. … We generations.” believe EBFM can be implemented in systems that differ in levels of Overview of Managing LMRs in an information and uncertainty through the Ecosystem Context judicious use of a precautionary approach. This means erring on the side There is increasing recognition of the of caution in setting management targets need for management of LMRs in an and limits when information is sparse or ecosystem context. Globally, declines in uncertain. Greater uncertainty would be fishery resources, alteration of critical associated with more stringent habitats, incidental capture of non-target management measures. Because species, and the effects of climate ecosystem management involves a wide variability all point to the need for a range of objectives, great ecosystem more holistic approach to understanding complexity, and a high level of human impacts on marine ecosystems uncertainty in predicting impacts, EBFM and the interplay of natural and inevitably requires that some level of anthropogenic agents of change. precaution be exercised. Ideally, EBFM Nonetheless, as noted in the U.S. Ocean would shift the burden of proof so that Action Plan (2004, p. 18), progress fishing would not take place unless it toward restoring and maintaining healthy could be shown not to harm key recreational and commercial fishing has components of the ecosystem. been made in recent years. For example, Progression from data-poor to data-rich since 2000, “17 major stocks have been EBFM will be facilitated by adaptive rebuilt and/or removed from the list of management and greater understanding overfished stocks (dropping from 56 to of how ecosystems respond to alternative 39); almost all (over 93 percent) of the fishing strategies.” remaining overfished stocks have rebuilding plans in place, the number of 11. Hall and Mainprize (2004, pp. 18- species subject to overfishing has 19): decreased by 37 (48 percent); and the “In a fisheries context, perhaps the most number of stocks with an “unknown” important discussion of all must be status level has decreased by 48 (25 about what constitutes a desirable or an percent).” undesirable state for an ecosystem and how one weighs the importance of the The U.S. Ocean Action Plan strongly various attributes… Identifying endorsed the concept of EAM following stakeholders, distinguishing between the report of The U.S. Commission on fishing and environmental impacts, Ocean Policy. The Commission noted initiating comprehensive consultations, that (2004, p. 411) finding alternative incentives and choosing ideal measures for “U.S. ocean and coastal resources management are all critical should be managed to reflect the considerations. Only once this is relationships among all ecosystem achieved will we be on the road to components, including human and producing healthy fisheries that are nonhuman species and the environments ecologically and economically in which they live. Applying this

20 principle will require defining relevant consideration of not only these geographic management areas based on harvesting impacts, but also the effects ecosystem, rather than political, of factors on the integrity of marine boundaries.” ecosystems and resource productivity such as coastal development, pollution, The Commission highlighted the need to shipping, and oil and gas extraction. A consider the interaction among system summary of objectives for regionally- components and emphasized that based EAM developed by NOAA ecosystem approaches to management Fisheries staff is provided in Appendix B are inherently place-based. Because the (NOAA Fisheries, 2004). properties of an ecosystem are different from those of its parts (see text box), an Spatial Restrictions on Fishing to EAM of LMRs will necessarily differ Manage LMRs from traditional single species approaches while maintaining some Spatial restrictions on fishing to manage elements of these approaches. LMRs have long been recognized and used as tools to reduce or redistribute Harvesting has both direct and indirect fishing mortality. However, these effects on marine ecosystems. Direct restrictions are usually directed at a effects include removal of biomass and subset of species, specific fishing gear, potential impacts on habitat and non- and over limited time frames. Seldom target species. Indirect effects include has the use of complete and permanent alteration in trophic structure through spatial prohibitions on all fishing activity species-selective harvesting patterns that (e.g., marine protected areas or MPAs) change the relative balance of predators been used to manage LMRs (although and their prey. Multi-species their use is increasing in recent years). considerations in fishery management However, in many areas MPAs have account for these interactions for been touted as a new way to achieve harvested species and the need to species conservation. For overfished consider factors such as the food and stocks, reducing fishing mortality will energetic requirements of non-harvested theoretically increase them, but the species such as marine mammals, tradeoffs regarding ecosystem health and seabirds, and turtles. Further social and cultural benefits between consideration of the role of habitat in reduced fishing mortality over the entire resource and system productivity and the fishing grounds and no fishing mortality effect of environmental forcing on within a prescribed area have yet to be system dynamics provides a more fully evaluated, or demonstrated widely inclusive and necessary ecosystem in practice. Further, the benefits and perspective. Collectively, these factors costs of imposing the restrictions to can result in shifts in productivity states implement MPAs and achieve society’s that must be accounted for in other non-fishing objectives have management. Further, it requires that received little attention. For example, if tradeoffs are explicitly considered in one were to create a MPA in which the management decisions (e.g., between taking of fish and entry of vessels were predators and their prey). The prohibited, what would be the result on development of a full EAM will require ships or non-fishing recreational vessels

21 wanting to transit the area? Would catch Performance-Based Management of and release fishing be allowed? Would LMRs the removal of a submerged shipwreck be allowed? These questions should be As noted earlier, NOAA’s goal to addressed within the context of “protect, restore and manage coastal and accomplishing multiple, possibly ocean resources through an ecosystem simultaneously competing objectives. In approach” (NOAA, 2004) will only be short, using spatial restrictions to achieved through incremental manage LMRs should be examined improvements to existing practices. within an ecosystem context and with Initially, risk adverse management will the aforementioned MSE tool. One way be based on appropriately conservative to frame the general discussion for each harvest management strategies that are potential spatial restriction could be: consistent with the above stated NOAA How does the spatial restriction on goal for managing living marine fishing contribute to optimizing (or at resources in an ecosystem context. least reconciling) the competitive objectives of preserving biodiversity, Figure 1 (from NOAA’s Strategic Plan sustaining fisheries and other uses, and [NOAA, 2004]) connects performance preserving cultural artifacts within a objectives with outcomes of NOAA’s ? Ecosystems Mission Goal.

ECOSYSTEMS MISSION GOAL OUTCOMES PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES

Increase number of fish stocks managed at sustainable levels

Increase number of protected species that reach stable or increasing

population levels

Increase number of regional coastal and marine ecosystems delineated with approved indicators of ecological health and socio- • Healthy and productive coastal economic benefits that are monitored and understood and marine ecosystems that Increase number of invasive species populations eradicated, benefit society contained, or mitigated

Increase number of habitat acres conserved or restored Increase portion of population that is knowledgeable of and acting • A well informed public that acts as stewards for coastal and marine ecosystem issues as a steward of coastal and Increase number of coastal communities incorporating ecosystem marine ecosystems and sustainable development principles into planning and

management

22 Strategies to accomplish the Ecosystems I. Science Capabilities Necessary to Mission Goal (from NOAA’s Strategic Support Future Decision-Making Plan [NOAA, 2004, pp. 4-5]) include: NOAA’s ecosystem research portfolio • Engage and collaborate with our addresses specific management issues, partners to achieve regional including aquaculture, coastal resource objectives by delineating regional management, corals, fisheries ecosystems, forming regional management, habitat restoration, ecosystem councils, and invasive species, protected areas, and implementing cooperative strategies protected species. In its most recent to improve regional ecosystem five-year plan (NOAA, 2005b), NOAA health. identified thirteen key research actions • Manage uses of ecosystems by for the foci of the Ecosystems Mission applying scientifically sound Goal: (1) study ocean phenomena, (2) observations, assessments, and study coral ecosystems, (3) promote research findings to ensure the research on inter-disciplinary and sustainable use of resources and to biophysical integration of observation balance competing uses of coastal systems, (4) promote technological and marine ecosystems. development, (5) investigate sources, • Improve resource management by fates, and effects of anthropogenic advancing our understanding of influences, (6) explore submerged ecosystems through better simulation landscapes and the effects of physical and predictive models. Build and changes on coastal and marine advance the capabilities of an ecosystems, (7) map and characterize ecological component of the NOAA previously uncharted habitats, (8) global environmental observing develop and demonstrate system to monitor, assess, and environmentally compatible culture predict national and regional systems for commercial, overexploited, ecosystem health, as well as to threatened, and endangered species, (9) gather information consistent with forecast and asses temporal scales of established social and economic ecosystem variability, (10) create indicators. biophysical coupled models of water • Develop coordinated regional and mass movements and their effects on national outreach and education biological productivity (including efforts to improve public fisheries and population understanding and involvement in distribution), (11) study aquatic stewardship of coastal and marine biodiversity, (12) understand the ecosystems. dynamics of social and economic • Engage in technological and systems and their relation to ecosystem scientific exchange with our management, and (13) conduct domestic and international partners interdisciplinary research to better to protect, restore, and manage understand marine biological, chemical, marine resources within and beyond and physical processes and their the Nation’s borders. implications for human health.

23 One way to organize the science d. promote technological capabilities necessary to manage LMRs development in an ecosystem context is to consider e. investigate sources, fates, the framework recommendations of the and effects of Food and Agriculture Organization of anthropogenic influences the United Nations, or FAO (FAO, f. explore submerged 2003) regarding research needed to landscapes and the effects implement an EAM for fisheries. These of physical changes on include research organized around the coastal and marine following five areas: (1) ecosystems and ecosystems fishery impact assessments, (2) socio- g. map and characterize economic considerations, (3) assessment previously uncharted of management measures, (4) habitats assessment and improvements of the h. forecast and asses management process, and (5) monitoring temporal scales of and assessment. The FAO perspective ecosystem variability on an EAM is fully consistent with i. create biophysical NOAA’s definition of EAM (i.e., “Most coupled models of water importantly, the approach aims to ensure mass movements and that future generations will benefit from their effects on biological the full range of goods and services that productivity (including ecosystems can provide by dealing with fisheries recruitment and issues in a much more holistic way” population distribution) (FAO, 2003, p. v). The primary aim of j. study aquatic biodiversity the agency is to transition from the k. expand knowledge of traditional single species management how fishing impacts approach to management in an target and non-target ecosystem context. Below is a species and their realignment of the thirteen areas of key associated ecosystems research identified by NOAA in 2005 II. Socio-economic categorized by the five areas identified considerations by FAO. In addition and as appropriate, a. understand the dynamics NOAA has added science capabilities of social and economic identified by the FAO that were systems and their relation considered important in managing LMRs to ecosystem in an ecosystem context: management b. conduct interdisciplinary I. Ecosystems and fishery research to better impact assessments understand marine a. study ocean phenomena biological, chemical, and b. study coral ecosystems physical processes and c. promote research on their implications for inter-disciplinary and human health biophysical integration of c. develop appropriate observation systems multispecies bio- economic models

24 d. conduct research into the include uncertainty and factors that influence the risk assessment in day-to-day behavior of management, etc. vessel operators b. develop procedures to e. Apply an integrated improve the participatory environmental and processes by stakeholders economic accounting in the management framework to the process assessment and analysis c. develop ways to better of interactions between communicate the fisheries and other sectors implications of different of the economy management strategies III. Assessment of management V. Monitoring and assessment measures a. promote technological a. develop and demonstrate development environmentally b. develop simple and compatible culture efficient appraisal systems for commercial, methods overexploited, threatened, c. develop adaptive and endangered species management approaches b. develop technology in the to assist with data-poor area of fishing gear and situations practices to improve gear d. develop multiple selectivity and reduce the analytical techniques to impact of gear on underpin the decision- ecosystems making process c. develop procedures to e. develop, as possible, a set integrate traditional of generic indicators that ecosystem knowledge can be widely applied to into management different ecosystems and d. identify the species and different fisheries ecosystems that are suitable for stock In addition, in its strategic plan (NOAA, enhancements programs 2005b), NOAA identified four key e. assess the potential role technology sectors on which it depends of MPAs as a to describe, understand, and predict management tool and changes in the status of LMRs. These evaluate their are: (1) sensors capable of gathering effectiveness where information on biological, chemical, and already implemented physical components of the IV. Assessment and improvement environment, (2) platforms (e.g., of the management process research and survey vessel fleets, a. implement research on unmanned aerial vehicles and how to evaluate autonomous undersea vehicles, and management aircraft), (3) information technology, and performance, how to (4) telecommunications. Over the next

25 fifteen years, NOAA scientists will effective ecosystem research and exploit these technologies in developing management. These include: an integrated Global Earth Observing System of Systems (GEOSS), and to • Federal authorities such as NOAA, maintain existing capabilities for regional fishery management monitoring the status of LMRs and the councils, U.S. Environmental quality of the ecosystems they inhabit. Protection Agency, U.S. Corps of Engineers, U.S. Department of The research needed to provide NOAA Agriculture, U.S. Fish and Wildlife managers with the necessary information Service (USFWS), U.S. Geological to achieve the agency’s stated goals in Survey (USGS), U.S. Department of managing LMRs is taxon specific. That Defense, National Park Service, U.S. is, commercial fisheries in Federal Department of Transportation- waters are currently managed under the Maritime Administration, U.S. Coast primary mandates of the MSFMCA. Guard, and Minerals Management Managers require specific information to Service. meet these mandates. Similarly, marine mammal management is codified in the • State authorities such as state Marine Mammal Protection Act, while universities and colleges, interstate sea turtles are primarily managed under commissions, CZM agencies, the ESA. Again, the information needs fisheries management agencies, and of managers are dictated by a other natural resource/wildlife combination of mandates found in agencies. Federal law, regulations, and agency agreements. In addition, other statutes • Local authorities and institutions also direct or otherwise influence the such as independent research way NOAA manages LMRs. institutions, planning commissions, and zoning boards. Appendix C provides an overview of how LMRs are managed in an ecosystem • Tribes/tribal jurisdictions. context in the Bering Sea, which provides an example of the integration of • International commissions and research and management, as well as institutions implementing many potentially beneficial uses of international science and ocean and coastal resources. management agreements governing multiple countries, and resource management departments of other II. Partnerships Necessary to countries and their associated Effectively Address the research infrastructure. Emerging Issues • Management areas such as marine The intersection of jurisdictions and the managed areas/ MPAs; National overlap of expertise will identify Wildlife Refuges; National Marine necessary points of coordination among Sanctuaries; National Estuarine resource agencies, councils, Research Reserves; fishery commissions, and institutions for management areas; habitat

26 restoration and special habitat Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of 3.4 conservation areas; marine mammal million square miles, the U.S. manages management areas; threatened or the largest marine territory of any nation endangered species management in the world. areas; marine parks or historic wreck areas; military exclusion or NOAA has a unique mandate from operations areas; Congress to be a lead Federal agency in transportation/navigation routes; oil protecting, managing, and restoring and gas lease areas; and relevant marine resources. To meet this mandate, terrestrial and upland protected areas NOAA scientists and their external such as parks and coastal reserves. partners contribute world-class expertise in oceanography, marine ecology, Note: Management authorities or areas marine archeology, fisheries are considered relevant if they contribute management, conservation biology, directly or indirectly to the management natural resource management, and risk or control of at least one of the factors assessment. To achieve balance among having an impact on the ecosystem ecological, environmental, and social management area (see Appendix B for influences, NOAA has adopted an EAM details). as previously described.

NOAA’s mission to conserve, protect, IV. Benefits to NOAA, manage, and restore LMRs and coastal Constituents, and Society and ocean resources is critical to the from this Effort health of the U.S. economy. Research producing the best available scientific Coastal areas are among the most information is critical to the success of developed in the Nation. More than half this mission. In addition, NOAA has of the population lives on less than one- made a commitment to improve its fifth of the land in the contiguous United ability over the next 20 years in States. Coastal counties, including those predicting the impact of climate change along the Great Lakes, are growing three and variability on the productivity and times faster than counties elsewhere, survivability of species important to adding more than 3,600 people a day to commercial fisheries and subsistence their populations. Coastal and marine fishers. Absent this ability, calamitous waters support over 28 million jobs and changes in the abundance or distribution provide a tourism destination for 89 of LMRs would only be identifiable after million Americans each year (see the fact, if at all, and most likely not able Leeworthy and Wiley, 2001). The to be mitigated. It is critical that NOAA annual value of the ocean economy to develop and implement the research the U.S. is over $115 billion. The programs necessary to provide reliable amount added annually to the national predictions regarding LMR availability economy by the commercial and to provide adequate lead times to recreational fishing industry alone is regional managers and constituents. over $48 billion, with an additional $6 billion in direct and indirect economic Finally, developed countries such as the impacts from aquaculture. With its U.S. have a responsibility for

27 stewardship of marine ecosystems and functioning marine ecosystems, NOAA for setting standards to protect and seeks to provide an example for the rest manage the shared resources and of the world in comprehensively harvests of the oceans. Believing that it managing resources of the world’s is possible to balance sustainable oceans and coasts. economic development and healthy,

28 White Paper #3 By the year 2020, the human population in the United States will exceed 335 Freshwater Issues million, with the majority living in coastal counties that account for only 17 percent of the U.S. land area (excluding Alaska). Increasing population density, Authors: coupled with faster-growing economies Gary Carter, NOAA National Weather in coastal areas, will require resource Service, Office of Hydrologic management policies that are built upon Development a holistic approach to managing Pedro Restrepo, NOAA National ecological goods and services, while at Weather Service, Office of Hydrologic the same time accounting for human Development demands on water resources (Palmer et Jawed Hameedi, NOAA National al., 2004). This will, for example, Ocean Service, National Centers for increase the effects of drought on Coastal Ocean Science economic, social, and ecological Peter Ortner, NOAA Research, systems, including delivery of Atlantic Oceanographic and freshwater to estuaries and the coastal Meteorological Laboratory ocean (WGA, 2004). A consequence Cynthia Sellinger, NOAA Research, will be the need for an improved drought Great Lakes Environmental Research forecasting capability developed at the Laboratory appropriate spatial scale. Increasing John Stein, NOAA Fisheries, Northwest populations also bring increased Fisheries Science Center biological threats and the need to better Tim Beechie, NOAA Fisheries, forecast and mitigate their effects. For Northwest Fisheries Science Center example, aquatic invasive species (AIS) are a global problem threatening sectors of the U.S. economy by changing and I. Description of the Issue reducing the beneficial societal uses of its coastal ecosystems. The pathways by Freshwater is our most precious and which invasive species reach U.S. finite natural resource -- the total amount coastal ecosystems all involve human of freshwater in lakes, streams, rivers, activities, especially those related to and groundwater accounts for less than commerce and trade. Aquatic invasive one percent of water on the Earth. As species can have dramatic effects on human populations increase, so does ecosystems, including altered trophic for water to meet societal structures, reduced productivity, and an needs versus to maintain the needs of the increased risk of extinction of native earth’s biological systems. Additionally, species. Annual costs to the U.S. there are increasing demands for economy have reached hundreds of recreational use of water in streams, millions of dollars per year and are river, and lakes, and increasing increasing. While the impact of invasive awareness of interacting hydrological, species is not unique to freshwater ecological, and social systems required ecosystems and affects all coastal for a healthy environment, dynamic ecosystems, the Great Lakes is a “hot economy, and equitable allocation and spot” for invasive species introductions use of freshwater.

29 to major interior sections of the U.S. and percent; the remaining amount was to Canada, having 162 documented meet industrial and public water supply introductions representing fishes, needs. It is anticipated that future invertebrates, aquatic plants, algae, and increases in consumptive use, energy pathogens. production, and irrigation will accentuate the challenge of achieving an According to the Council of State equitable balance between ecosystem Government’s report entitled “Water conservation and the economic vitality Wars” (CSG, 2003, p. 1): of watersheds and estuaries.

“Water, which used to be considered a ubiquitous resource, is now scarce in some parts of the country and not just in the West as one might assume. The water wars have spread to the Midwest, East and South as well. . . . Recent water shortages are putting water rights conflicts in the spotlight. These conflicts are occurring within states, among states, between states and the federal government and among environmentalists and state and federal agencies.” These environmental and societal drivers shape the fundamental challenges for The report of the National Science and Technology Council’s Subcommittee on Figure 1. Freshwater use in the U.S. in 2000 as a percentage of total freshwater (surface and Water Availability and Quality (NSTC, groundwater) withdrawl (345.6 billion gallons per 2004, p. 17) explains that: day; Hutson et al., 2004).

“Without quantifiable and scientifically defensible estimates of environmental NOAA in the next fifteen years. The water requirements, water gridlock– primary challenges for NOAA are: intense competition among irrigation, navigation, municipal supply, energy, 1. Framing the tradeoffs that and the environment–is unlikely to be decision-makers will face in resolved.” balancing the conservation of freshwater and coastal In 2000, the total amount of withdrawals ecosystems with demands for (not necessarily consumption), including safe drinking water, crop saline water, in the United States irrigation, recreation, and flood approached 400 billion gallons per day control; (Hutson et al., 2004). Nearly 40% of 2. Forecasting climate change and this amount was used in thermo-electric climate variability effects upon power generation and about one-third for the freshwater-coastal ecosystem irrigation and agriculture use (Figure 1). and availability of water for Domestic use accounted for only one human uses;

30 3. Breaking down the persistent • Managing water resources based view that there are two separate on hydrological and ecological ecosystems (freshwater and linkages (rather than political coastal), and advancing a new boundaries) and equitable understanding of the critical allocation for people and coupling of resource pathways ecosystems; and food webs between the two • Developing a robust set of environments; indicators for sustainable water 4. Understanding the linkage management; between water quality and • Advancing inter-disciplinary quantity and public health and scientific research; developing models and forecasts • Closing the gaps between water to aid in reducing human health science and water policy; risks in freshwater and coastal • Developing a broad spectrum of ecosystems; and capabilities to assure water 5. Delivering relevant science and quality, sanitation, and security; information for effective and decision-making. • Improving education and outreach. NOAA and its partners must rise to these challenges on both national and In addition, the General Accounting international scales if the nation is to Office has noted that the U.S. lacks a maintain functioning freshwater, national system to assemble key estuarine, and coastal ecosystems that information on economic, support biodiversity and sustainable environmental, social, and cultural issues resource use, promote prosperous coastal (GAO, 2004). Support for effective communities, and pose minimal human decision-making on freshwater issues health risks. will require an integration of economic, environmental, and social/cultural issues around each of the recommendations II. Science Capabilities Necessary to made by the National Council for Support Future Decision-Making Science and the Environment (Schiffries and Brewster, 2004). The need for The recommendations of the National integration highlights the critical need to Council for Science and the meld physical and biological sciences Environment (Schiffries and Brewster, with social and economic sciences if 2004) on water sustainability and NOAA’s data and information products security underlined fundamentally new are to effectively support regional approaches for balancing societal water decision-making. needs with those of the Earth's ecosystems while assuring sustainability. Future water resource conflicts will be Specific recommendations that NOAA’s intense in freshwater systems. It is mission supports through its science therefore critical that NOAA’s scientific include: products help decision-makers understand fundamental tradeoffs between human needs for water and

31 environmental services provided by ability to respond to this challenge. freshwater in rivers and estuaries. Research, monitoring, modeling, Resolving these fundamental tensions forecasting, and education are all key will require that NOAA develop a sound elements used by NOAA in such scientific understanding of watersheds integrated science programs. NOAA’s and coastal regions as a single strong capabilities in ecosystem ecosystem, and deliver science products modeling and integrated sustained that inform decisions regarding observation programs for coastal allocations of a diminishing resource. ecosystems will enable stronger support Developing valuation systems (e.g., the of a wide range of activities and improve cost effectiveness of water recovery ecological forecasts. These integrated systems versus the ecological scientific capabilities allow NOAA to consequences of extracting larger help guide a wide range of ecosystem amounts of freshwater for agriculture, restoration and species recovery efforts power generation, and industrial that explicitly include humans as part of purposes) to assist in evaluating the ecosystem (e.g., South Florida, tradeoffs is equally important. NOAA Pacific salmon), and also to develop the must also deliver timely scientific NOAA National Center for Research on information in support of major Aquatic Invasive Species. This new decisions regarding climate variability center provides communication and and change, and protection of coordination for the agency’s research freshwater-dependent ecosystems from investments in support of understanding, the harmful effects of pollution and preventing, responding to, and managing habitat alteration arising from coastal AIS invasions in the U.S. coastal development. Prototypes of such ecosystems. approaches already exist (Kimmerer, 2002; Powell et al., 2002). The development of multi-scale socio- Meeting the Challenge: ecological models will be essential for NOAA Science Priorities informing policy and management decisions by providing a wider range of To help meet the Nation’s future alternatives for achieving resource challenges, NOAA sustainability and accounting for will need to collect and deliver accurate variability at different temporal scales ecosystem-level information to (Costanza et al., 2002). managers. This will require a shift from traditional small-scale research and Understanding and reducing human piecemeal management schemes to health risks from degradation of large-scale, holistic frameworks for both freshwater and marine ecosystems is a science and policy. The task must be to major challenge facing our Nation. predict the consequences to ecosystems NOAA’s Oceans and Human Health and society of alternative management Initiative has recently begun to strategies, and provide these predictions investigate how ecosystem conditions in to decision-makers in a timely and the oceans and Great Lakes affect human transparent fashion. Thus, NOAA must health and well being, and strengthening be prepared to play a key scientific role these capabilities will improve our in evaluating ecosystem responses to

32 alternative ecosystem management will allow scientists to couple different plans, many of which will be locally- models, improve forecasts, and expedite developed “bottom up” initiatives the research-to-operations timeline. encompassing diverse economic and These goals will be achieved by environmental interests. developing models directly in the same environment used in NOAA’s National NOAA’s research priority in meeting Weather Service river forecast one of the Nation’s biggest challenges – operations. CHPS will include the the looming conflict between ecosystem ability to couple models operating at conservation and increasing human use disparate temporal and spatial of water resources – will be to develop resolutions, such as groundwater models advanced models that accurately forecast and surface hydrology models. CHPS water supplies, as well as a new suite of will also build on standard sets of tools hydrologic models that describe how and protocols, and utilize open data freshwater environmental attributes will modeling standards. It will support data shift with climate change and land uses. assimilation, high-resolution distributed The use of high-resolution (i.e., 1 km forecasts, including uncertainty spatial resolution) distributed hydrologic estimates, data assimilation, and the models has not been practical in operational implementation of advanced operational forecasting until fairly water quantity and quality forecast recently. It is now feasible to develop models not currently available. This and implement high-resolution rainfall- open architecture of CHPS will runoff models due to the advent of high- encourage partnerships with other quality spatial data, the ability to process Federal and non-Federal organizations. that data using geographical information systems (GIS), and the improvement in Understanding and predicting how the spatial estimation of precipitation as shifting climate regimes will affect water a result of the Next Generation Radar supplies and freshwater-coastal (NEXRAD) network. As part of the ecosystems are NOAA’s second major calculations necessary to produce science priority. Climate cycles have streamflow forecasts, these models have strong influences on annual streamflows, the capability to obtain estimates of freshwater ecosystem structure and information, such as soil moisture, snow function, and abundance of important water equivalent, soil temperature, and aquatic species (Kiffney et al., 2002; other ecosystem habitat parameters, at Greene et al., 2005). Long-term climate the same high resolution. These new change is likely to alter flow regimes in forecasts will inform the decision- ways that will adversely affect water making process for agriculture, water, availability for both human consumption and ecosystem managers alike. and the recovery of important species (Mote et al., 2003; Beechie et al., 2006). NOAA is leading the way in NOAA will need increased capabilities implementation of these greatly to be able to forecast how such climate enhanced services by placing the changes will affect flood and drought proposed Community Hydrologic intensities, productivity of freshwater Prediction System (CHPS) at the core of and coastal ecosystems, drinking water, its Water Resources Initiative. CHPS and recreational and shellfish beaches.

33 NOAA must also be able to predict decisions will impact the delivery of where the ecological effects of decadal ecosystem goods and services, including scale wet or dry regimes will be most the abundance of commercial and dramatic, and provide scientific recreational aquatic species. Breaking information on the ecological down the persistent view that freshwater consequences of different freshwater and coastal ecosystems are separate and management approaches to meet the developing a new understanding of human demands for freshwater. integrated ecosystems will be needed to better characterize the consequences of Just as important as the development of water management decisions. new models is the procurement of data Freshwater and marine environments are required to drive those models, and tightly coupled by the delivery of identification of new uses for those sediments, contaminants, and nutrients observations. In collaboration with the from watersheds to estuaries and National Aeronautics and Space coastlines, as well as migrations of Administration (NASA), NOAA will be anadromous and catadromous species exploring the use of space-based between marine and freshwater habitats. observations to improve potential NOAA will require a greater capacity to evapotranspiration estimates, and to predict the ecosystem consequences of assimilate snow water equivalent and human actions such as reduced sediment soil moisture observations into the new supply by reservoir high-resolution hydrologic models. It is construction/operation and its effect on estimated that the use of new coastal erosion, increased delivery of observations, in coordination with better pollutants to the freshwater-coastal estimates from dual-polarization radars ecosystems, and altered nutrient fluxes and enhanced automated surface between freshwater and coastal observation stations, will greatly environments. In turn, this will require improve the skill in short- and long-term much improved scientific understanding forecasts of streamflows, in ranges from of the complex linkages between droughts to floods. NOAA is gaining freshwater and coastal food webs at the resources that will also increase the different spatial scales and temporal amount, type, and accuracy of water resolutions. Biomass fluxes between resource information available to NOAA freshwater and coastal environments - and its external customers. The mainly anadromous fishes such as integration efforts of NOAA’s Water striped bass, American shad, sturgeon, Resources Initiative will make use of the and Pacific and Atlantic salmon - are efforts of the National Integrated critical pathways by which food Drought Information System, NOAA’s resources and nutrients are transferred Environmental Real-time Observation between freshwater and saltwater food Network, the National Water Quality webs, and models that help predict how Monitoring Network, and the emerging changes in abundance of these species IOOS. impact freshwater-coastal ecosystems are sorely needed. Likewise, for species NOAA’s third science priority is the that make transitions between freshwater development of new ecosystem response and marine systems, models that models to help predict how resource accurately represent the drivers of these

34 populations will require integration of 1998) and indigestion of contaminated freshwater and marine processes (Greene fish and shellfish. et al., 2005). NOAA must also improve its capabilities in understanding and NOAA has a significant role in modeling critical drivers on species and identifying and reducing human health food webs, including water quantity and risks through its research and application quality changes, non-native species of its research findings at the intersection introductions, fishing, altering physical of meteorology, biological processes, and other human impacts. oceanography, hydrology, microbiology, toxicology, and watershed and coastal NOAA’s fourth science priority is to processes. This will require NOAA to provide managers with a better increase its multidisciplinary approach to understanding of the human health understand and forecast coastal-related consequences of freshwater and coastal human health impacts to improve public ecosystem degradation. A variety of health and natural resource policy and contaminants can adversely impact decision-making. Predictive models and drinking water, recreational waters, and monitoring networks will need to be fish and shellfish leading to illness (e.g., reconfigured to provide data and see Health Canada, 1995). Chemical information products relevant to water contaminants come from both point and quality impacts on human health. The non-point sources of pollution, with NOAA Center of Excellence for Great urban/suburban runoff and atmospheric Lakes and Human Health (Brandt et al., deposition increasingly becoming major 2004) is a multidisciplinary research sources. Microbial contaminants such as effort to understand the inter- viruses and bacteria can come from relationships between the Great Lakes sewage treatment plants, septic systems, ecosystem, water quality, and human agricultural livestock operations and health. There are other NOAA Centers wildlife, and combined sewer overflows of Excellence with a scientific focus on after storm events (Whitman and Nevers, ecosystem forecasting to minimize risks 2003). Another threat is HABs. For to human health at the watershed–coastal example, bloom-forming, toxic marine intersection, including the cyanobacteria occur worldwide in proposed Northern Gulf of Mexico nutrient-enriched freshwaters and have Cooperative Institute. caused human and animal illness/mortality. HABs can have NOAA will also need to expand its disastrous short- and long-term science-based ecosystem approach to consequences for water quality and restoring habitat structure and function resource utilization (e.g., see Paerl and in order to ensure that drinking water Millie, 1996). While drinking water flowing through watersheds and into the contamination is a major concern, Great Lakes and marine coastal areas do chemical contaminants, microbial not present a risk to human health. This contamination, and HABs also pose need is exemplified in the Great Lakes public health concerns through contact because its coastal waters are potable. with contaminated water during There are 121 watersheds feeding into recreation (Health Canada, 1998; WHO, the Great Lakes, with approximately 44 million people living in the Great Lakes

35 basin (20 million reside in the U.S.) and dynamics of these economic and social depending on the Great Lakes for spheres in order to develop more drinking water. Once in place, the efficient methods of delivering relevant NOAA Great Lakes Habitat Restoration scientific information. This drives the Program will address habitat loss and need to interweave social and economic degradation, two issues that span the models with physical, biological, and entire Great Lakes basin as well as other ecosystem models. coastal areas nationwide. Strong partnerships and sharing of expertise, Better monitoring is at the core of an knowledge, and resources are the key to effective EAM, and better synthesis of effective restoration and protection. data will be essential to effective decision-making regarding freshwater Finally, NOAA’s science must be management. The stakes are high in translated in transparent ways for use by meeting the human needs for freshwater managers and decision-makers in order while sustaining ecosystem goods and to yield its full benefit to society. services. The need for regional coastal NOAA will need to develop more observing systems has been highlighted efficient mechanisms for the delivery of recently in a number of studies as well as scientific information to managers and by the NOAA in its strategic plan, the policy makers. Regional ecosystem National Oceanographic Partnership management plans will likely be large Program, and the IOOS Development and complex, describing strategies and Plan. Continual assessment of the status actions aimed at improving the and trends in watershed and coastal functioning of an ecosystem. environments permits identification of Implementation of these plans, however, perturbations that may signal changes in will occur through multiple institutions the ecosystem, puts current trends into that govern or influence only a particular an historical framework, allows geographic sub-region of the ecosystem scientists to differentiate true or subset of the ecosystem’s functions, environmental change from variance, or both. To the extent that the and provides a context in which to assess ecosystem components are the impact of predicted changes. The interconnected, so too must the laws and development of a coastal component of regulations that institutions enact and IOOS is a fundamental need in coastal, implement; the stronger the connections marine, and Great Lakes regions. among the ecosystem’s components, the stronger must be the connections among the institutions. Moreover, III. Partnerships Necessary to socioeconomic factors such as Effectively Address the Emerging population growth, economic Issues development, and land use can be influenced by laws and regulation, but Largely due to jurisdictional boundaries, not fully determined by these formal agency mandates, and nascent scientific governance mechanisms. Instead, these strategies to support integrated factors are the aggregation of many management, the overall goal to balance small, individual decisions. NOAA the multiple demands of the limited must improve its understanding of the freshwater resources of the Nation (or

36 specific coastal watersheds) has closer and more effective partnerships remained elusive. with the Shared Strategy in Puget Sound, CalFed Bay-Delta Program, county and First and foremost, NOAA must provide local emergency managers, and river leadership for developing a holistic basin entities such as the Delaware River response to freshwater issues for the year Basin Commission, the Susquehanna 2020 and beyond. Meeting these River Basin Commission, and the enormous challenges will require Florida River Management Districts. partnerships with academia, the private This will further facilitate participation sector, other Federal agencies, and by local stakeholders to address specific international institutions to bring to the issues and reach mutually acceptable forefront: 1) technology necessary for management options. more environmentally sound use, allocation and conservation of freshwater; 2) ecological indicators and IV. Benefits to NOAA, Constituents, forecasts at multiple scales; and 3) an and Society from this Effort improved understanding of the interactions among the atmosphere, There is no resource more precious or biosphere, and hydrosphere as they finite than freshwater. Science-based affect the coupled marine/Great Lakes ecological frameworks using “next and watershed ecosystems. generation” hydrologic and ecosystem models and forecasts are needed to This will also require fostering stronger inform local, state, and Federal decision- partnerships with institutions that have makers as they set goals and targets for inland, coastal, and atmospheric adequate and reliable supplies of mandates, including the U.S. freshwater while meeting goals for Departments of Agriculture, Interior, and ecosystem goods and services. The need Defense; U.S. Environmental Protection and urgency for such a course of action Agency (EPA); USGS, and NASA. have been articulated for many years, NOAA should also strengthen scientific most recently by the National Science cooperation and information exchange and Technology Council (NSTC, 2004), with the international community in the U.S. Government Accountability order to cut across political and Office (GAO, 2004), the NRC (NRC, jurisdictional boundaries. The 2004), and the National Council of importance of such linkages is Science and the Environment (Schiffries exemplified in the Great Lakes where and Brewster, 2004). The societal joint management of water resources benefits accrued from NOAA’s with Canada is essential. The ecosystem science in this area are: International Joint Commission (a commission jointly appointed by the a. Providing scientific data and President of the United States and the expert counsel prior to any Governor in Council of Canada) brings changes in the water budgets that together international, Federal, state, may pose adverse environmental local, private, and tribal entities to focus or social consequences; on specific water management issues. In b. Forecasting the amounts and addition, NOAA will need to establish timeliness of streamflow for

37 human activities and sustaining provide a continuum of the production of ecosystem observations from the headwaters goods and services; and of watersheds to the coastal c. Providing scientific information ocean to provide a holistic and management support on the understanding of hydrologic supply and quality of water to cycles and biological status, protect, restore, and enhance trends, and interactions. aquatic ecosystems and human health. • Improve the knowledge base, technologies, and forecasts to NOAA’s water resources information minimize public health risks should support the full range of from consumptive use and stakeholders (e.g., farmers, utilities, contact recreation in coastal water managers, land managers, wildlife systems. managers, business owners, and decision-makers) with the science • Increase environmental literacy needed to make informed decisions on of the relation of climate and their operations, and allow them to plan land use to freshwater supply and for, rather than react to, the inevitable quality, as well as the tight changes from shifting climate regimes biologic and hydrologic coupling (e.g., decadal scale changes from “wet” between watersheds, estuarine to “dry” periods). The freshwater drainage areas, and adjacent allocation issue allows NOAA, working coastal waters. with partners, to help illustrate that protecting functioning ecosystems and conserving aquatic species will provide These priority efforts can only be the natural services that benefits, rather accomplished through partnerships then competes with, robust human based on an ecosystem approach to both societies. science and management. A regionally based, nested ecosystem framework with The following are priorities for science a shared strategy to management will be to support an ecosystem approach to needed. This shared strategy must freshwater management: acknowledge jurisdictions and management mandates, and provide a • Develop next-generation models forum for collective decision-making. to forecast ecosystem-scale This will require that observations and changes in water budgets in research are also done with a greater response to human demand and degree of collaboration and are guided climate and land use change at by and responsive to shared management annual and decadal scales. These needs, while still providing the science models also need to inform the to meet the management needs. selection of alternative Ecosystem-based agreements assuring management strategies. transparent data sharing and management will be essential to • Establish and facilitate integrated facilitate the necessary collaboration, as monitoring programs that well as to provide information on the

38 scale needed to inform shared decision- making. This is not just a theoretical construct, but has been initiated and put into action (e.g., with regard to South Florida Ecosystem Restoration under the aegis of Federal-state-tribal task force established in Federal law, and the Shared Strategy in Puget Sound, a voluntary, collaborative effort to recover ESA-listed Chinook salmon).

39 White Paper #4 marine ecosystems. In addition, a growing number of activities are taking Marine Zoning and Coastal place or are proposed in Federal waters from three to 200 miles offshore and in Zone Management international waters beyond the EEZ.

Authors: Over the coming decades, the use of Joseph A. Uravitch, NOAA National coastal and marine ecosystems will Ocean Service, Office of Ocean and increase. Coastal land will continue to Coastal Resource Management be in high demand for development, Tracy Collier, NOAA Fisheries, ports, and recreation. In addition, in Northwest Fisheries Science Center marine ecosystems on the continental Elizabeth Moore, NOAA National shelf, activities such as fishing, energy Ocean Service, National Marine generation, mineral extraction, Sanctuaries Program aquaculture, waste disposal, Thomas Noji, NOAA Fisheries, transportation, tourism, recreation, and Northeast Fisheries Science Center other uses will compete for space. Lauren Wenzel, NOAA National Ocean Service, Office of Ocean and Coastal The U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy Resource Management envisions a desirable future for the Susan White, NOAA National Ocean oceans and Great Lakes, a worthy goal Service, Office of Ocean and Coastal for NOAA to help achieve (USCOP, Resource Management 2004, p. 4): Roger Zimmerman, NOAA Fisheries, Southeast Fisheries Science Center “In this future, the oceans, coasts and Great Lakes are clean, safe, prospering, and sustainably managed. They I. Description of the Issue contribute significantly to the economy, supporting multiple beneficial uses such Background as food production, development of energy and mineral resources, Coastal areas and nearshore waters are recreation and tourism, transportation subject to an array of human activities of goods and people, and the discovery with steadily growing impacts on the of novel medicines, while preserving a natural ecosystems. While coastal high level of biodiversity and a wide watershed counties comprise less than range of critical natural habitats. 25 percent of the land area in the United States, they are home to more than 52 In this future, the coasts are attractive percent of the total U.S. population places to live, work and play, with clean (USCOP, 2004). With increasing water and beaches, easy public access, population and development pressure, sustainable and strong economies, safe coastal managers are faced with a need bustling harbors and ports, adequate to manage competing demands for roads and services, and special coastal and marine resources, minimize protection for sensitive habitats and the impacts of development and other threatened species. Beach closings, uses on the coastal and marine toxic algal blooms, proliferation of environment, and conserve coastal and

40 invasive species, and vanishing native well as plans for implementation, species are rare. Better land-use monitoring, and enforcement. Zoning is planning and improved predictions of also a tool for resource management, severe weather and other natural conservation, and restoration. hazards save lives and money.” In their discussion on ocean zoning in To achieve this vision, the busy seas and the Gulf of Maine, Courtney and coasts will demand governance solutions Wiggen (2003, p. 7) note that: to manage an intensifying and increasingly conflicting set of activities. “ocean zoning is… complex in that it With few exceptions, such as Oregon’s needs to address and manage activities ocean policy or state interests on on the ocean surface, in the airspace offshore impacts on coastal zone above, throughout the water column, resources, the past 30 years of CZM and on and beneath the seabed. It is generally have seen the vast majority of conceivable that one area of the ocean states and territories focusing on the “dry could support multiple uses (by different side” rather than the “wet side” of the sectors) or several management land and water margin. This is no longer objectives simultaneously and it is also the case. Already, states such as possible that one use or management Massachusetts and California are objective would preclude all others. exploring the potential of marine zoning Ocean zoning may also have a temporal as a tool to separate conflicting uses, dimension.” achieve conservation and economic objectives, and enhance safety. The Pew Like other ocean management tools, Oceans Commission also advocates ocean zoning often involves tradeoffs marine zoning to improve marine between competing uses. These resource conservation, actively plan conflicts may be more explicit within a ocean use, and reduce user conflicts zoning scheme as uses and use (Pew Oceans Commission, 2003). prohibitions are spatially delineated. However, zoning also offers an Similar to zoning on land, marine zoning opportunity to better assess the tradeoffs designates geographic areas for specific associated with different management uses, such as transportation, actions. Assessing the social and conservation, non-consumptive uses, economic costs and benefits of different energy development, or fishing. Zoning management options within a zoning is a way of reducing user conflicts by framework allows managers to look at separating incompatible activities and not only who gains and loses, but also allocating or distributing uses based on a where those gains and losses are likely determination of an area’s suitability for to occur, and to better predict unintended those uses in relation to specific consequences and their impacts. planning goals (Courtney and Wiggen, 2003). Ideally, zoning has numerous For example, many commercial and components including a map that depicts recreational fishers are concerned about the zones and a set of regulations or potential restrictions to fishing from standards applicable to each type of zone marine reserves or “no take” MPAs. created (Courtney and Wiggen, 2003), as Fisheries are a historically important and

41 socioeconomic relevant use of the Marine zoning can be an effective tool to coastal zone with a well established minimize the risk of damage to habitats constituent base. Because of the many and resources. Risk assessments require types and widespread nature of fisheries, three types of information: 1) the establishing marine reserves almost classification of ecosystem components anywhere in U.S. waters is invariably as delineated by their vulnerability to contentious to at least some fishers. The environmental stressors, such as food socioeconomic and cultural impacts on supply, mechanical , or historic uses of a specific area should be contamination; 2) the distribution and balanced with the sustainability and degree of effort of human activities in biodiversity protection that marine the areas of concern; and 3) the impact reserves have been shown to provide. of these activities on specific ecosystem components. The last requires While the Federal government retains knowledge of the sensitivity and the power to regulate commerce, recoverability of damaged habitats and navigation, power generation, national biota. Informed with these assessments, defense, and international affairs zoning can be established to conserve or throughout state waters, states have the minimize loss of , authority to implement zoning based on including rare or endangered species and their right to manage, develop, and lease fragile habitat structures. Furthermore, resources throughout the water column establishing zones restricting specific as well as on and under the seafloor human activities establishes baseline (USCOP, 2004). From a Federal conditions for evaluating the impacts of perspective, state ocean zoning plans the same types of activities in similar but should integrate state CZM programs unmanaged areas. Notably, although the with offshore activities. suite of human-activity stressors can be broad, risk assessments for these rely Marine zoning in Federal waters may be largely on a common set of data for modeled after use restrictions on Federal habitats, biota, and ecosystems public lands. As Courtney and Wiggen processes. (2003) note (p. 8), “federal lands share with the ocean several important MPAs are a component of a characteristics: public ownership, high comprehensive marine zoning plan. natural resource and economic value Applied widely throughout the world, including recreation; policy debate over MPAs are a management tool that resource conservation versus economic governments use to protect and restore utilization, multiplicity of agencies and resources in estuarine, nearshore, and laws; and a significance to local, offshore areas. The U.S. currently has regional, and national interests.” an estimated 2,000 marine managed However, marine ecosystems feature areas established by approximately 200 highly mobile resources and there is state and Federal programs (see often great difficulty in controlling http://www.mpa.gov). NOAA is now access to marine systems; thus, zoning in working with Federal and state agencies these areas might require a somewhat and other stakeholders to develop a different approach to zoning currently in national system of MPAs - including place on land. Federal, state, and perhaps tribal and

42 local sites - to protect representative zone, and these decision-makers need habitats as well as natural and cultural information, data, tools, and resources of national and regional technologies, as well as a directed importance. Beyond the EEZ, increased education program to assist them in economic activity and global minimizing the impacts of new conservation agreements will require a development, protecting sensitive areas, higher level of cooperation, and have and planning for the potential impacts of already led to calls for the creation of climate change, sea level rise, and high seas MPAs. coastal hazards. States also play an important role through the While MPAs are an integral part of a implementation of the Coastal Zone larger ocean zoning scheme, zoning is Management Act. In 2004, the Coastal also used as a tool within MPAs, most States Organization sponsored a survey notably domestically within national of state coastal resource managers to marine sanctuaries and internationally by better understand their science and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park in technology needs. Managers identified Australia. NOAA’s National Marine land use and habitat change as their top Sanctuary Program (NMSP) has the two management concerns at both the authority to establish zones to help national and regional level (CSO, 2004). protect sanctuary resources and qualities from the impacts of human uses. As Over the past half century, there has national marine sanctuaries have used been tremendous losses in tidal and zoning for over 20 years to protect nontidal wetlands, seagrass beds, and resources and manage conflicting uses, other vital habitats. The joint the NMSP’s experiences and techniques EPA/NOAA/USFWS/USGS National will be a valuable component of Coastal Condition Report II (EPA, 2005, considering broader ocean use zoning. p. ES-3), states that the “indicators that show the poorest conditions throughout In the coastal zone, land use planning, the United States are coastal habitat habitat restoration, land conservation, condition, sediment quality, and benthic and the development of new condition.” While many inputs of technologies to mitigate environmental nutrients and chemical contaminants impacts will continue to be the primary have been reduced through source approaches to reduce the impacts of reduction and point source controls, non- human activities. Current patterns of point sources of these pollutants growth that encourage low density continue to be significant threats to sprawl and consume agricultural and coastal and . forest land are a major threat to water quality and habitat. A few states are These habitats must be protected from now working to promote “smart growth” further degradation and restored to which advocates compact, transit- ensure healthy, functioning ecosystems oriented development and conservation as well as provide for the sustainable of resource lands. production for the Nation’s fisheries among other ecosystem services. Local governments are responsible for Protecting and restoring coastal habitats most land use decisions in the coastal requires a watershed approach to

43 comprehensively address threats from Specific authorities for NOAA’s physical alterations, pollution, and other responsibilities that relate to CZM and impacts. These efforts require not only marine zoning include: long-term ecosystem monitoring efforts, • Coastal Zone Management Act but directed research as well. Once (1972) thought to be the sole responsibility of • Coastal Zone Act government, land conservation and Reauthorization Amendments of restoration have increasingly been 1990 (CZARA) – Section 6217 undertaken by private conservation • MSFCMA (1976) organizations at the national, state, and • Oil Pollution Act (1990) local level. • Coral Reef Conservation Act (2000) The development of new technologies • ESA (1973) based on research and monitoring data to • National Marine Sanctuaries Act mitigate environmental impacts will (1972) and site-specific statutes become an increasingly important tool to • National Offshore Aquaculture restore and maintain healthy watersheds, Act (2005) coasts, and oceans. These range from Executive Order 12906 new techniques for stormwater • (Coordinating Geographic Data management, to oil spill cleanup Acquisition and Access) technologies, to vessel monitoring systems that help enforce fisheries • Executive Order 13158 (Marine regulations, to accurate and timely Protected Areas) forecasts and coastal modeling efforts. • Executive Orders 13178 and As new technologies become available, 13196 (Northwestern Hawaiian they will serve as valuable tools to help Islands Coral Reef Ecosystem resource managers protect and restore Reserve) coastal and marine ecosystems. A key challenge to integrated management of the coastal and marine NOAA’s Role environment is the fragmented nature of existing authorities, plans, and programs. NOAA’s mission – to understand and Current ocean plans and zones are predict changes in the Earth’s typically based on the requirements of a environment and conserve and manage particular sector and/or geographic coastal and marine resources to meet our location, with little recognition of its Nation’s economic, social and relationship to other uses, or to the environmental needs - outlines a major complexity of the underlying ecological role for the agency in preparing to meet system. This was noted by the U.S. these challenges (NOAA, 2005a). As Commission on Ocean Policy and the the NOAA Strategic Plan notes (p. 4), Pew Oceans Commission, both of which “NOAA has a specific mandate from recommended significant organizational Congress to be a lead Federal agency in changes to address the problem. In the protecting, managing, and restoring absence of these major changes, NOAA coastal and marine resources.” will need to take a leadership role in working with other Federal, state, and tribal authorities responsible for coastal

44 and marine decision-making. New • Seafloor Mapping – to improve structures and processes will need to be bathymetric data collection and established to provide a framework for information about the integrated decision-making, and composition of the seafloor. additional scientific understanding will be needed to inform these processes. • Effectiveness of Best Some efforts already have begun Management Practices (BMPs) – through the U.S. Ocean Action Plan and to provide data on the Executive Order 13158 (Marine effectiveness of recommended Protected Areas). practices to mitigate the impacts of human activities in the coastal zone and marine environment II. Science Capabilities Necessary to (e.g., pollution control, aggregate Support Future Decision-Making extraction, coastal engineering).

To address the complexity of coastal and • Monitoring – to continue to marine management issues, research and collect baseline biological, the synthesis of existing research for use physical, and chemical data in by managers and decision-makers is order to assess changes over needed in a wide range of areas as noted time. Monitoring is an essential below. A unified concept of habitat component of adaptive types and communities, and thus an management, and is needed to ecological classification, is of understand resource status and fundamental importance to a suite of trends, oceanic and marine issues such as the assessments of anthropogenic factors influencing CZM areas, MPAs, environmental resource health, and responses to quality reports, and fisheries management actions, and to management. It will be increasingly predict recovery trajectories. important to be cognizant of the structural, compositional, and functional • Species – to continue to collect properties of ecosystems and habitats as life history and habitat they relate to specific issues in the requirements in order to coastal zone, and to integrate these determine the appropriate types attributes together to form a more of management tools to employ, coherent, ecosystem-based approach to including spatial and temporal coastal management efforts. closures, spawning closures, habitat protection and restoration, Natural Science (NOAA National and take restrictions. Marine Protected Areas Center, 2003): • Habitat – to improve mapping • Resource characterization – to and trends analysis, and to improve the understanding of the enhance the understanding of the extent, location, life stages, and functional linkages between quality of natural and cultural habitat types (including resources in the coastal and watershed impacts) and habitat marine environment. sensitivity and recoverability.

45

• Connectivity – to understand the • Patterns and types of human uses linkages between species, their of coastal and marine life stages, and priority habitat environments – to identify how areas for conservation. and where coastal and marine areas and their resources are • Restoration science – to establish being used, both for extractive the scientific foundation for and non-consumptive purposes. restoring coastal and marine habitats and their functionality, • User conflicts – to understand including efforts to restore “dead how different uses conflict, how zones.” these conflicts can be minimized and how uses can be prioritized • Chemical contaminants – to in ways that provide maximum continue to identify chemical protection. impacts and true effects levels, including sub-lethal effects • Attitudes, perceptions, and which lead to reduced viability in beliefs – to identify the combination with other underlying motivations that may environmental stressors (Peterson influence human preferences, et al., 2003), effects on egg and choices and actions (see White larval stages, links to HABs, and Paper #6). identification of sources and sinks in coastal and ocean • Economics – to describe systems. economic conditions and trends associated with the allocation and • Mariculture – to improve the use of coastal and marine understanding of the impacts of resources, including market and coastal and shelf aquaculture on non-market values, costs and ecosystems. benefits, and positive and negative impacts associated with • Nonindigenous species – to activities, including impacts on improve the early detection, coastal communities and treatment, and prevention industry. techniques associated with invasive species. • Cultural heritage and resources – to characterize historical and • Cumulative effects – to traditional artifacts in and from understand the cumulative and coastal and marine areas. secondary impacts of multiple stressors on coastal and marine • Governance, institutions, and ecosystems. processes – to understand the formal and informal institutions responsible for managing coastal Social Science (NOAA National Marine and marine resources, and Protected Areas Center, 2003): elements of successful processes

46 to integrate coastal decision- science information in a spatial making. framework. This integration is a critical component of an EAM. As NOAA moves toward this integration, a Technology and Tools (CSO, 2004; Pew common approach is the use of map Oceans Commission, 2003; USCOP, overlays to illustrate different data sets 2004): for a geographic area, allowing managers to identify linkages between • Predictive models – to enable uses, conditions, and resources. researchers and decision-makers However, not all data can or should be to understand the potential presented spatially, and methods must be consequences of sea level rise, adopted to integrate this critical other coastal hazards, watershed contextual information. Another management BMPs, fisheries challenge is the effort required to management options, HABs, identity, obtain, and format data for a designation of EFH, etc. common geographic boundary.

• Technology – to provide new Such mapping tools have been used by tools needed for a wide range of MPAs in the U.S. and other countries to coastal science and management identify various zoning options for activities, including pollution public review. These experiences control, navigation, monitoring highlight the risks and rewards of such a equipment, and lower cost spatially integrated approach, as zoning remote sensing. maps can be problematic if introduced too early in the process, fail to include • Decision support tools – to key data, or are based on data distrusted enhance planning and public by stakeholders. However, they can be engagement (e.g., web-based GIS powerful consensus-building tools when applications), improve stakeholders are involved in the data emergency response (e.g., spills, collection and when data analysis and collisions), and engage coastal decision rules are transparent. decision-makers with the information needed for sound To facilitate decision-making, scientists management. and managers will need to engage in a continuous dialogue that guides research . priorities and delivers scientific results Research and technology development in in a form managers can use. This type these areas could significantly improve of dialogue will likely need to be managers’ ability to address the mediated through targeted education and challenges they face in conserving outreach programs that provide the link coastal and marine resources. In between the separate research science addition, approaches are needed to and coastal management audiences. meaningfully integrate natural and social

47 III. Partnerships Necessary to territorial, Federal, tribal, regional, Effectively Address the Emerging local, and international) and the Issues already robust management of coastal lands by the private sector The complex suite of resource- (e.g., private forests and land with dependent commerce, land- and water- conservation easements), the based resource users, and conservation nearshore marine environment is interests and goals requires an equally likely to see increased management complex, participatory mix of public and by NGOs in partnership with private sector partners to support science government (e.g., The Nature to management action. Participants Conservancy and other local and should include Federal, state, and tribal regional land trusts). agencies; universities and institutes; industry; and NGOs. Lessons also can • Opinion makers, opinion influencers, be learned from other countries and and information sources (e.g., the international organizations. Key media) play a significant role in partners include: enhancing public and decision-maker understanding of coastal and marine • Researchers, data/information ecosystem issues, problems, and collectors, and analysts are needed to solutions; encouraging participation research, collect, store, and analyze in decision-making; and influencing the data; test the technology; and behaviors that affect coastal and develop the information necessary to marine resources. The ability to support sustainable management. synthesize and transfer information to the public is critical to • Trainers and educators are needed to management success in this develop the applications, tools, increasing complex management coursework, and information environment. Resource management documents necessary to train, initiatives cannot be optimized, and educate, and transfer information to indeed are likely doomed to failure, on-site staff and managers who then without public “buy-in” and active apply what is learned. support.

• Resource managers are the front line • Resource users and other people making the daily decisions stakeholders are critical partners in affecting the health of the nation’s developing coastal management resources. They apply the initiatives, including marine zoning information and techniques to efforts. Resource users often have management problems; develop and significant impacts on natural and adapt resource management plans in cultural marine resources, and cooperation with the public; evaluate resource management decisions may the effectiveness of management have substantial economic and social actions; and identify research impacts on users. Activities of necessary to conserve and restore concern can be extractive (e.g., resources. In addition to traditional fisheries, oil and gas, sand and resource managers (e.g., state, gravel, seabed mining,

48 biopharmaceuticals, desalinization), and other resource uses, and land use non-extractive (e.g., tourism, planning to mitigate coastal hazards and recreation), constructive (e.g., climate change. development), agricultural, silvacultural, aquacultural, or conservation-focused. To be IV. Benefits to NOAA, Constituents, successful, coastal management and Society from this Effort efforts must provide opportunities for stakeholders to participate While the challenges of throughout the process. comprehensively addressing an Stakeholders can also bring a wealth integrated approach toward coastal of knowledge about marine management and ocean zoning are resources, uses, and impacts to considerable, the consequences of failing inform decision-making. to act are even more dramatic. The Ocean Conservancy, in partnership with • Government decision-makers, both many other NGOs, already has elected and non-elected government documented the phenomenon of officials, must be involved since they “shifting baselines,” or failing to see the ultimately make the policy decisions; cumulative changes in our environment determine program direction; because these changes occur over approve program cooperation and several generations (see coordination, both domestic and http://www.shiftingbaselines.org). foreign; and provide the funding and Coastal ecosystems around the Nation staff resources necessary for are bearing the impacts of excess ecosystem-based management. nutrients, habitat loss, invasive species, Competition for limited fiscal and depletion of , all of resources will likely continue and which have led to significant even increase, as will the degradation. This degradation is already competition for use of coastal and leading to economic as well as marine resources, including those at environmental losses and must be the trans-boundary and deep-ocean reversed. NOAA clearly has the levels. capability to conduct research, deliver information, and help society identify NOAA can address the vast majority of and set appropriate targets for long-term ecosystem management questions and conservation and sustainability. issues, and partner with the broad spectrum of agencies, organizations, In addition, rationalizing the use of industry, and the public identified above. space within the coastal zone and the Successful implementation will require marine environment will provide a stable not only unified action by the program environment for economic growth in components of the Ecosystem Goal relatively new sectors, such as Team, but also linkage with NOAA’s aquaculture and bio-prospecting. With Commerce and Transportation, Weather sound zoning to minimize conflicts, as and Water, and Climate Goal Teams to well as environmental safeguards, these address overlapping issues such as activities could become part of a conflicts between marine transportation

49 thriving, sustainably managed coastal • Transferring NOAA science, and marine economy. technology, and tools to Federal, state, and tribal partners NOAA is well positioned to play a responsible for managing the leadership role in helping local, state, Nation’s diverse coastal and and Federal decision-makers work with marine resources. stakeholders to develop a comprehensive approach to coastal and ocean NOAA’s mission includes a management. NOAA can provide this responsibility to “conserve and manage leadership, expertise, and tools by: coastal and marine resources to meet our Nation’s economic, social and • Improving and expanding its environmental needs.” The laws that ability to produce ecological drive NOAA’s programs and forecasts and warnings in coastal requirements also make clear that this and offshore regions, such as mission must be undertaken not just for those associated with recent the current generation, but for the sake HABs and with telemetry efforts of future generations. NOAA’s science associated with the IOOS to programs and partnerships are the improve near real-time coastal foundation of this effort, and must be data delivery to managers; more firmly linked to the management outcomes so critically needed in the • Providing the scientific support coastal and ocean environment. to build a truly integrated CZM capability for the U.S. that To this end, there are a number of focuses on the land-water specific management actions that NOAA interface, as well as the EEZ and can take: beyond; • Complete and release the zoning • Providing the scientific policy paper for the NMSP, which knowledge and management outlines how the NMSP considers support technology (including and creates zones within sanctuaries. data management and This policy paper can serve as an visualization) necessary to example for other organizations on objectively address the how to develop and implement zones increasing impacts of land-based within MPAs; stressors and increasing use of the ocean and its resources; • Support the development of a national system of MPAs as a key • Developing strategies based on element of a future marine zoning the best available natural science, plan. The national system of MPAs social science, and economic is now being developed by NOAA data to manage fisheries and and the U.S. Department of Interior other competing uses of the in cooperation with other Federal, Nation's marine resources in state, and tribal agencies as well as concert with the development of stakeholder groups. It will enhance a national system of MPAs; and the management of and linkages

50 among existing MPA sites and • Along with other Federal agencies, programs, as well as facilitate continue to work in partnership with regional planning processes to coastal states and tribes as they begin identify conservation priorities in to develop regional governance need of additional protection; structures and management strategies. NOAA should bring • Work through the Subcommittee on together technical, scientific, and Integrated Management of Ocean management staff responsible for Resources (SIMOR), formed as part key resources and uses within the of the U.S. Ocean Action Plan to same regions to form cross- guide Federal agency coordination of disciplinary, cross-NOAA working ocean management. Through groups. Through these regionally- SIMOR, NOAA can help develop focused groups, NOAA can enhance coordinated approaches to ocean its capacity to integrate data within a zoning. Federal agencies can take a spatial framework that will be leadership role in moving toward fundamental to future zoning efforts. zoning in Federal waters to accommodate the increasing number and types of uses; and

51 White Paper #5 pollutants, coliform, and other pathogens, and toxic algae) or Ecological Forecasting contaminated food (e.g., fish and shellfish).

Sustaining productive ecosystems, and Authors: restoring damaged ones, depends on the Stephen Brandt, NOAA Research, ability to understand and predict the Great Lakes Ecological Research impacts of human activities and natural Laboratory processes on those systems and to Jim Hendee, NOAA Research, Atlantic forecast ecological change. Policy Oceanographic and Meteorological makers, natural resource managers, Laboratory regulators, and the public often call on Phil Levin, NOAA Fisheries, Northwest scientists to estimate the potential Fisheries Science Center ecological changes caused by these Jonathan Phinney, NOAA Research, natural and human-induced stressors and Headquarters to determine how those changes will David Scheurer, NOAA National impact people and the environment. Ocean Service, National Centers for During the last decade, using Coastal Ocean Science technological and scientific innovations, Frank Schwing, NOAA Fisheries, scientists have developed and tested Southwest Fisheries Science Center forecasts in ways that were previously

not feasible (Clark et al., 2001),

signaling the emergence of a new and I. Description of the Issue challenging science called “ecological

forecasting.” The health of the U.S. economy is

inextricably linked to the health of our What is Ecological Forecasting? Nation’s ecosystems and the goods and

services they deliver to our economy. Ecological forecasts predict the impacts Each year, U.S. ecosystems provide over of physical, chemical, biological, and $227 billion in added value to the U.S. human-induced change on ecosystems economy (CENR, 2001) as well as other and their components (CENR, 2001). harder-to-quantify services and benefits Extreme natural events, climate change, such as waste detoxification and land and resource use, pollution, and , air and water invasive species are five key drivers of purification, maintenance of biological ecosystem change (CENR, 2001) that diversity, and recreational and spiritual interact across wide time and space renewal (Daily et al., 1997). Coastal scales (i.e., hours to decades and local to ecosystems, in particular, provide a global; Figure 1). Ecological forecasts wealth of fisheries resources and aim to understand, predict, and provide recreational benefits, and are a potential information to mitigate the impacts of source of life saving pharmaceuticals. these stressors on ecosystems. In much These important ecosystems can also the same way that a weather or directly impact human health from economic forecast can help society plan exposure to contaminated water (e.g., for future contingencies, an ecological from urban and agricultural runoff,

52 mitigation of natural events and human activities (e.g., land-use practices, fishing); reduced risks to human health; reduced impacts of natural hazards; enhanced communication among scientists, managers, and the public; and overall, more effective prioritization of science.

Types of Ecological Forecasts

There are many types of potential ecological forecasts. Some will be predictions of what is likely to happen in a particular location in the short-term like weather forecasts (e.g., sea nettle swarms in the Chesapeake Bay, the landfall of harmful algal blooms (HABs), beach closings, drinking water Figure 1. Time/Space Scale of Ecosystem Response. quality, the movement of oil spills, and The five key ecosystem stressors – pollution, land and coral reef bleaching events). Others will resource use, invasive species, extreme natural events, focus on much longer-term and larger- and climate change – can challenge the integrity of scale phenomena (e.g., year-to-year ecosystems and impede the delivery of their goods and services. These stressors can act alone or together, variation in fish stocks, extinction risk of and their cumulative effects are poorly understood. endangered species, new invasive Ecosystem responses are as varied as the inputs that species encroachments, rates of habitat strain them, playing out in scales from hours to restoration, effects of climate change on decades and from local to global. Figure is biota, and water quality and quantity). reproduced from NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 1, p. 2. Specific issues within each of these forecast helps managers make informed categories of stressors are listed below: decisions regarding alternative management scenarios and take Extreme natural events – Such events appropriate actions to affect those may include extreme changes in water conditions and better manage the resources, severe spring storms and Nation’s coastal resources. Ecological hurricanes, extreme climate variation forecasts give managers the tools to (e.g., an exceptionally cold or warm year answer “what if” questions about the compared to the average), shifts in ocean and coastal environments and marine populations, hypoxic/anoxic provide a bridge between science and events, and toxic algal blooms. The policy. Ecological forecasts also have ability to predict the occurrence of these the potential to provide widespread events and their ecosystem effects, as societal and economic value to the well as their interactions with other country. These values include improved causes of change, is important for decision-making for coastal stewardship;

53 planning management and response deterioration of coastal habitat. Current activities. needs include forecasts of changes in the health and productivity of ecosystems Climate change – Climate change may that are critical in providing food and include changes in sea level, large-scale recreation. ecosystem drivers (e.g., current patterns, storm tracks and frequency), nutrient Pollution - Concerns about the presence flow regimes and the extent of “dead of potentially harmful chemicals and zones”, the amount of precipitation, and excess nutrients in the environment river flow. Climate change may be remain a top concern. Current needs reflected as a change in the mean or include forecasts of the effects of air trend of a parameter, shifts in seasonal pollution and land-based activities (e.g., cycles, or extreme natural events (e.g., agricultural production, forest harvest, coral bleaching, ENSO). To plan for urban growth and residential and minimize impacts of these events, development, waste disposal, toxins) on resource managers need forecasts of the aquatic ecosystems. The damage to the interaction of climate change and ecosystem may be direct (e.g., variability (e.g., in sea surface hypoxia/anoxia, HABs), or may impact temperatures, freshwater input, coastal its goods and services (e.g., nutrients) with other stressors on contaminated fish and shellfish). ecological integrity; goods and services (e.g., fisheries, water quality and Invasive species - Invasive species are quantity), particularly the distribution species that are introduced intentionally and abundance of species; production of or accidentally from other geographic ecologically/economically important areas, and are capable of spreading species; and the availability of clean rapidly and replacing native species. water. These invaders exist in nearly all U.S. ecosystems, pose potential threats to the Land and resource use – Human use of integrity of biodiversity and ecosystems, land and resources can dramatically and cost billions of dollars annually to change the structure and function of an mitigate. Current needs include ecosystem. Fishing, for instance, can forecasts of the conditions favorable to remove predators or prey in the food the introduction, spread, and ecological web, which may then cause changes in impacts of potential and already- the abundance of less desirable species, . some of which can cause a degradation of the overall quality of the system. The Interactive and cumulative effects – ability to predict the ecosystem Large aquatic ecosystems are subject to consequences of various levels of fishing multiple causes of ecological change. effort is critical for the management of For example, an extreme natural event ecosystem resources. Additionally, may provide opportunities for new changes in coastal ecosystems may be species invasions, and the success of that linked to changes in land and resource invader may be enhanced by altered use which are often associated with climate (new precipitation and agriculture or local urbanization as well temperature patterns), use of land and as the resultant nutrient loadings and related resources, and the level of

54 pollution in the environment being ecological forecasting capability for invaded. The cumulative impact of resource managers through a partnership threats may be greater than the sum of across all NOAA line offices and with individual impacts. Building the ability universities and other Federal agencies to forecast the cumulative effects of across the country. The report of the these multiple stressors is one of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy most significant challenges for applied (USCOP, 2004) also highlights the ecology. importance of ecosystem-based management and its reliance on the Thus, ecological forecasts can span a development of predictive capabilities wide range of issues and space/time for ocean ecosystems, providing further scales, reflect a diverse user community, justification for NOAA to undertake and involve a multitude of biological ecological forecasting to support its factors (e.g., life history traits, behavior, ecosystem-based management species, population and ecosystem responsibilities. interactions) as well as physical and chemical factors. Ecological forecasts NOAA has recognized the importance of can also involve predictions that are ecological forecasting by including the independent of time and involve development of prediction and “scenario testing” or examination of forecasting tools as high priority areas it alternative management scenarios (e.g., in its recently published five-year and impacts of nutrient reductions, the 20-year research plans. In the NOAA setting of harvest levels, and ecological five-year plan, the development of effects of sea level rise). Models are routine forecasting products for issues often used to conduct forecasts, but these such as fish stock assessments, HAB are just one of many tools (e.g., forecasts, beach closings and water satellites, sensors, test kits) that can be quality are listed as part of an “end-to- used and integrated to provide valuable end” ecological observing system ecological forecasts for management capable of providing these forecasts for applications. resource managers and the public (NOAA, 2005b). In the NOAA 20-year NOAA’s Role in Ecological plan, ecological forecasting related Forecasting products are highlighted prominently in the list of example NOAA products and Ecosystem forecasts have been gaining services for 2025 (NOAA, 2005c). momentum for the past few years, These include: forecasts and mitigation particularly among academics (Clark et strategies related to: anoxia/hypoxia, al., 2001) and Federal agencies (NOAA, harmful algal blooms, beach closings, 2001). The National Science and invasive species, waves, air/water Technology Council’s Committee on quality and quantity; ecological Environment and Natural Resources assessments and predictions of impacts report on ecological forecasting (CENR, from climate change (e.g., coral 2001) stressed the Nation’s need for bleaching); decision support tools for developing forecasts of ecological adaptive, ecosystem-based management change. Since 2001, NOAA has of fisheries, coastal development, and formalized the development of an marine resources; improved assessments

55 of sea level change on coastal resources its comprehensive research investments, and ecosystems; fishery productivity NOAA is developing the knowledge forecasts that incorporate the effects of about ecosystem structure and function climate change. (i.e., physical, chemical, biological, and human interactions) necessary to A dedicated ecological forecasting develop ecological forecasts. These capability is critical for the agency to knowledge-based products include achieve the mission and goals set out in everything from applied research efforts the NOAA Strategic Plan (NOAA, 2004) to long-term observations. NOAA is to “understand and predict changes in also developing the infrastructure the Earth’s environment and conserve necessary to support ecological forecasts and manage coastal and marine through the development of regional resource” (Mission Statement); “protect, observing systems, coupled physical- restore, and manage the use of coastal biological models, sensors, and and ocean resources through ecosystem– computational and data based management” (Goal 1); and visualization/presentation capabilities. “increase its investments in short-and Together, these research and long-term research in development of infrastructure capabilities have led to a advanced technology to understand, suite of successful ecological forecasts describe, and predict changes in the with many more currently in ” (cross-cutting development (see Appendix E). priority). In the NOAA FY 2007 Annual Guidance Memorandum (NOAA The complexity of an ecosystem Program Planning and Integration, approach to management (EAM) 2005), language supportive of ecological demands a suite of complex, often forecasting is included in the sections on linked, models, tools, and technology to integrating global observations; provide a scientific basis for decision- advancing NOAA’s modeling capability; making (e.g., linkage of airshed, providing leadership for the oceans; watershed, water quality, and fisheries increase climate information, services, models). To achieve this full capability and products; and providing critical for ecosystem-based management, information for water resources. NOAA will need to develop integrated ecological forecasting systems over the next decade. As one approach, NOAA II. Science Capabilities Necessary to has proposed to establish or enhance Support Future Decision-Making existing regional centers for ecological forecasting that will be responsible for NOAA is well poised and has the developing and transferring to the legislative mandates to take a leadership management community a suite of role in developing ecological forecasts regionally-specific, integrated ecosystem for coastal and marine environments that modeling and ecological forecast tools to will yield significant economic and provide a scientific basis for the societal benefits to the Nation. proactive and complex decisions that Ecosystem-based management, a critical must be made at all levels of mission for NOAA, will not be possible government. Having the regional without ecological forecasts. Through centers and other NOAA ecological

56 forecasting research programs associated ecosystems has centered primarily on the or collaborating with the integrated effects from overfishing, habitat ocean observing system (IOOS) will degradation, and declining water quality allow for regionally-coordinated as well as natural physical hazards. Less planning for observations and models, is known about the linkages among and bring in regional user groups. Real- climate change, food webs, physical- time integrated observing systems can biological coupling, and ecosystem also provide critically needed infor- production dynamics. Understanding mation to assess natural scales of the fundamental knowledge base of variability, provide drivers for fore- ecosystem structure and function will casting models, and provide data to test allow NOAA to develop a suite of robust the accuracy and precision of forecasts. ecosystem forecasts addressing such issues as HABs, anoxia, fish distribution The establishment of regional ecological and abundance, beach closings, coral forecasting centers will allow NOAA, in bleaching, and water quality and conjunction with other Federal, state, quantity. This research, by its very and local partners, to: 1) bring together nature, is long-term. Specific types of research, monitoring, and modeling research needs include: efforts to understand ecosystem composition, structure, and function, and • Definition of the time and space to monitor ecosystem status and trends; scales needed to capture the 2) identify the requirements of the fundamental physical and regional management community biological drivers required for through workshops, focused studies, and ecosystem forecasts. continuous engagement; 3) track, • Measurements of the natural coordinate, and integrate, where scales of variability regarding possible, ecosystem and socioeconomic physical-biological coupling, modeling efforts within and external to food web dynamics, and NOAA; 4) identify critical gaps in ecosystem production. knowledge for each region; 5) ensure • Definition of the observational those gaps are filled through the use of needs to drive ecological internal and external funding; 6) forecasting models, assess the transition models, tools, and forecasts to accuracy of model forecasts, and operational status; and 7) provide assess the impact of management predictions for management decisions at decisions on resources and all ecosystem scales. habitat quality. • Development and testing of new To build and reinforce NOAA’s sensors for physical and capability in ecosystem forecasting, a biological observing systems. number of research, procedural, and tool • Increased understanding of needs have been identified along with a ecosystem composition, diverse set of challenges: structure, functioning, and variability, and the connection Research Needs between the abiotic and biotic Research into anthropogenic stressors to components of coastal ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems. This includes an

57 understanding of large-scale aspects of ecosystem process and ecosystem drivers and an function. understanding of ecological • Strong connections, to integrate communities, including multiple technologies (e.g., interactions among species satellites, observation platforms, (including poorly-understood ship surveys, biological sensors) “hidden players” such as viruses, associated with the development microbes, and invertebrates), the of IOOS and regional physical environment, associations. evolutionary history, and the • Fully integrated, spatially “,” if any, by explicit, coupled hydrodynamic which ecosystems are formed. and biological models with • Increased understanding of appropriate links to watershed ecosystem indicators and and higher tropic level models on establishment of thresholds and key ecological scales to support breakpoints within ecosystems place-based ecosystem beyond which there are concerns management. or needs. • Robust physical modeling • Comprehensive process studies platforms to provide the to understand the ecological foundation on which to embed mechanisms producing biological models. As most of ecosystem patterns, and NOAA’s ecological forecasts definition of ranges for key involve the movement of water physical and biological (e.g., larval transport, HABs), an parameters within ecosystem accurate physical hydrodynamic models. model (i.e., four-dimensional) is • Integrated ecosystem studies a necessity. Within this involving observations, research, framework, various biological model development, and process components could be added studies. This will allow for depending on the issue and increased understanding of forecast. connections among ecosystem • Robust biological models drivers and functions as well as capable of predicting the ability to quantify key distributions, behaviors, and biological parameters and species interactions among biota (e.g., dynamics necessary for movement, predator/prey biological models. dynamics, growth, death, reproduction processes). Procedural and Decision Support Tool • Responses to data issues such as Needs: the integration of disparate data sources, establishing and • True interdisciplinary integration enforcing data integrity, among scientists and agencies formatting output for appropriate involved with the physical, decision support software, geochemical, and biological satellite data calibration and validation, archiving forecasts, as

58 well as the data upon which they forecasts to support its stewardship role. are based. NOAA’s ecological forecasting capability will be improved by the Challenges to Fulfilling these Needs: ability to simulate ecosystem complexity with coupled physical/biological models • Ecosystem science is highly and data assimilation, and develop new complex. models to predict ecological outcomes • A series of predictions tailored from alternative scenarios and facilitate to the local or regional needs the evaluation of management plans. are necessary due to a diversity These integrated forecasting systems of issues and users, as a single, will also foster the one-size-fits-all forecast is not transition/operationalization of forecasts possible. by assessing forecast accuracy, • Physical and biological sensitivity, and error; defining components of ecosystems are acceptable levels of accuracy for grossly under sampled with proposed forecasts; enhancing risk current technologies and effort assessment tools for management levels. scenarios; linking socioeconomic cost- • Decisions regarding the types benefit analysis to ecological forecasts; of forecasts for specific developing testing and comparison regions; locations where these metrics for forecasts; and developing forecasts will be operated; and methods to share, visualize, and who will run, maintain, issue, communicate forecasts and uncertainty and fund the forecasts must be to user groups. made. • Disseminating the forecasts and informing the public must III. Partnerships Necessary to be balanced against scientific Effectively Address the Emerging uncertainties. Issues • Science-based assessments and information must be developed The success of ecological forecasting and disseminated to decision- depends on partnerships at all levels, makers in understandable and from universities and local/state utilizable formats. governments to other Federal agencies. The scale and complexity of ecological NOAA, as the primary Federal agency forecasts will require that NOAA for ocean science supporting a variety of improve its partnerships with external societal needs, is both an initiator and users and stakeholders and increase user of ecological forecasts. As an interactions among the NOAA programs enabler, NOAA provides resources and and goal teams. NOAA must take personnel to collect the data, develop the advantage of its existing partnerships forecasting products, summarize with other Federal agencies (e.g., IOOS, scientific results for decision-makers, U.S. CCSP), international organizations produce assessments, and disseminate (e.g., GEOSS, International Geosphere- the synthesized results and information. Biosphere Programme), coastal states, The agency expects to use many of the and users of coastal ecosystems and their

59 resources (e.g., commercial and are one of the principal coastal recreational fishers). Strong management decision-makers and partnerships will help decision-makers therefore the true users of the ecological within and outside the government to forecasts. Information needs identified identify the most critically needed by managers will help define the types forecasts and support efforts to build, of forecasts produced, the level of test, and issue them. Some key elements accuracy required, and the most of those partnerships are emerging but appropriate vehicles to disseminate the must be made stronger: information. Other users include boaters, coastal landowners, recreational University partnerships (extramural fishers, divers, surfers, the beach-using research community): NOAA public, and commercial enterprises. partnerships with the extramural Once forecasts are developed, these research community are necessary to users can provide feedback to help provide the research understanding and identify needed improvements in prototype ecological forecasts which will forecast capabilities and to provide become the foundation for the direction for future research. Local and development of “operational forecasts” state governments may also be involved within or outside of NOAA. There are in the actual transition, operation, and several successful examples with maintenance of developed forecasts. NOAA’s joint institutes and other major Establishing connections with the user extramural research programs (e.g., community is critical during the GLOBEC, Ecology and Oceanography development and transition of forecasts, of Harmful Algal Blooms Program and NOAA engages this community (ECOHAB), Monitoring and Event through a variety of mechanisms Response for Harmful Algal Blooms including workshops, surveys, networks, Program (MERHAB), Oceans and and participation in research (e.g., Human Health Initiative) where NOAA, 2002; Sturdevant, 2004; Hendee integration has occurred. NOAA also et al., 2006). has an ongoing program dedicated to the development of ecological forecasts Federal partnerships (e.g., NASA, EPA, which encourages collaboration among USGS, U.S. Corps of Engineers, university and NOAA scientists as well National Science Foundation, USFWS): as coastal managers. NOAA fosters partnerships with other Federal agencies to leverage expertise Local/state government partnerships and and funding and to collaborate on user community: The scale and activities related to development of an complexity of ecological forecasts will ecological forecasting capability to also require that NOAA continue and support ecosystem management at a improve partnerships with resource users scale that is often larger than the and stakeholders. NOAA partnerships purview of individual agencies. Some of with decision-makers within local and these regional issues, including climate state governments (e.g., managers of change, watershed-estuary-ocean beaches, fisheries, shellfish, and water interactions, coral reef health, habitat resources) are necessary for many restoration, hypoxia, and HABs, can reasons. State and local governments only be addressed through large-scale

60 ecosystem based programs, the research, hydrodynamics, and food web integration of multiple technologies, and information). In turn, one part of a large-scale coordination efforts such as forecast may be best operationalized IOOS and regional taskforce, alliance, within the NOAA National Weather and other collaborative endeavors (e.g., Service, whereas another part may be the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration, best operationalized within NOAA Gulf of Mexico Alliance, Mississippi National Ocean Service (e.g., Great River Watershed Nutrient Taskforce). Lakes forecasting system). This cross- NOAA is currently working with other line office and cross-goal aspect of agencies on the development of climate research applications is central to the change forecasting centers and success of NOAA’s ability to conduct integrated earth systems frameworks for ecological forecasts. ecosystem management. The recently released U.S. Ocean Action Plan (CEQ, Within the agency, there are, however, 2004) has also established a new ocean several organizational and procedural governance structure (i.e., the National challenges: Science and Technology Council’s Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Organizational challenges include: Technology) aimed at integrating the • Management of ecological activities of Executive Branch agencies forecast development through regarding ocean-related matters and NOAA’s Program Planning provides another avenue of coordination Budgeting and Execution System toward the development of ecological (PPBES) structure, which forecasts. contains at least five programs working on components of NOAA partnerships: NOAA is applying ecological forecasting. its extensive intramural and extramural • Development of an ‘end-to-end’ research capacities and modeling approach for ecological forecasts expertise to assure successful that includes user identification, development, validation, and needs prioritization, funding of demonstration of a wide variety of research and development, ecological forecasts. Ecological forecast product testing, planning forecasts result from the integration of for and funding of the transfer to data, information, and models produced application, and, when necessary, by multiple scientific disciplines, and routine operation of the forecasts. thus reflect a multidisciplinary • Capacity-building to handle the “Corporate NOAA.” For example, a accelerating increase in forecast typical forecast may require products, if NOAA is the collaboration among many NOAA ultimate operational entity, or programs, including NOAA Satellites development of a robust and Information Service (for satellite procedure to assure the most information), NOAA National Weather appropriate transfer to all parties Service (for hydrology, wind fields, and involved, if the operational entity rainfall data), and NOAA Research, is outside of NOAA. NOAA National Ocean Service, and NOAA Fisheries (for interdisciplinary

61 Procedural challenges include: • What benefits will the forecast • Prioritization of research, given have after investment? the need for high risk, but • Does investment in the forecast potentially high payoff, research. offer collaboration/leverage with • Establishment of effective other offices/agencies? connections with the user • Does investment in the forecast community during the benefit multiple user groups? development and transition of forecasts. • Definition of roles and responsibilities for ecological forecasting from a corporate level (e.g., who develops the forecasts, who receives and routinely runs the forecasts, what the users do with the forecasts, how resources are allocated, what is not done if there are no additional funds, the role of government versus the role of the private sector).

One of most challenging near-term Figure 2. Proposed NOAA Transition Process outlining the issues for the agency is how to prioritize steps involved with transitioning any research result, the development and transition to information, or tool into application. operations of the wide range and diversity of ecological forecasts • What is the time frame for currently in development. As evidenced development of the forecast? in Appendix F, the ecological • What is the overall level of forecasting capability of NOAA is investment needed? rapidly advancing on all fronts and the transition to operations of these forecasts NOAA has begun a path toward will probably not be possible or addressing some of these issues with the warranted given funding constraints and recent development of a research to other agency priorities. Prioritization application transition policy. The policy among potential ecological forecasts will describes the process by which any allow NOAA to invest resources and research result, information, or tool personnel in the most promising should be transitioned into application. products. Potential prioritization criteria The policy calls for the creation of a and questions include: Transition Board and of Transition Teams. Figure 2 outlines the proposed • Is the forecast a mandate for formalized process linking together NOAA’s coastal responsibilities? program offices with various NOAA • Is the forecast within NOAA’s planning processes, which would help to mission and goals? prioritize the development and transition of new and ongoing ecological forecasts. • Should NOAA be the lead?

62 IV. Benefits to NOAA, Constituents, forecasts will help decision-makers and Society from this Effort better manage the Nation’s coastal resources because they provide valuable Maintaining ecosystem function and information for better assessments that health will benefit U.S. society which predict future conditions of proposed demands coastal resources, such as actions and the potential impacts of their uncontaminated fish and shellfish, and decisions. Second, focusing on defining access to clean coastal waters. NOAA is ecological forecasts needs will charged by Congress and the strengthen the link between research and Administration with specific mandates management by tying management prescribed by law. Ecological needs to a scientifically challenging forecasting will aid the agency in its agenda. Finally, the desire to build and stewardship responsibilities by providing improve ecological forecasts will help information on future ecosystem-related focus NOAA’s coastal science agenda problems, including feedbacks that by assuring that NOAA’s monitoring, affect human health, for which NOAA research, and model development efforts can respond and plan. NOAA has are geared towards the needs of coastal numerous ecosystem-related mandates, managers who benefit from ecological policies, treaties, and international forecasts. agreement and at least 24 of these can be addressed or facilitated through This chapter has been an initial look at ecological forecasts (see Appendix D). NOAA’s current capability for ecological forecasts from near-real time A key mission for NOAA is to develop to periodic forecasts and the needs, scientifically sound ecological forecasts issues, and challenges that the agency relevant to NOAA’s mission, practical to will face in the next twenty years. its customers, and providing a necessary Ecological forecasting is a very young underpinning of ecosystem-based and interdisciplinary field that management. NOAA is developing capitalizes on NOAA’s existing physical ecological forecasts for coastal managers and biological expertise. NOAA must in an effort to help merge wide-ranging strive to integrate its research and research and observation programs provide the best forecasts as efficiently around this new and challenging science, and effectively as possible. The authors which ultimately enriches the science- hope this chapter will serve as a policy interface. Focusing on framework for facilitating the developing, testing, and applying development of a robust ecological ecological forecasts provides the coastal forecasting capability within NOAA and research and management communities among its external partners as this field with three benefits. First, ecological of science matures.

63 White Paper #6 restoration, and management of coastal and ocean resources following an EAM Science Requirements to Identify that, among other criteria, balances diverse societal objectives (NOAA, and Balance Societal Objectives 2005a). In the context of an EAM, the proper aim of coastal and ocean manage- Authors: ment is not any particular set of societal Marybeth Bauer, NOAA National objectives, but “balance” among them. Ocean Service, National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science Societal objectives encompass the Steve Edwards, NOAA Fisheries, plurality of conditions, experiences, and Northeast Fisheries Science Center opportunities valued by stakeholders. The natural capital and functions integral Additional comments from: to environmental systems provide Lee Anderson, NOAA Fisheries; services – referred to as ecosystem University of Delaware services – that contribute to human well- Brian Eadie, NOAA Research, Great being. Such services can be categorized Lakes Environmental Research as supporting (e.g., nutrient cycling and Laboratory soil formation), provisioning (e.g., Grant Thompson, NOAA Fisheries, timber and food), regulating (e.g., water Alaska Fisheries Science Center purification and flood control), and cultural (e.g., recreation and social relations). These services contribute to “Once we accept the concept of human well-being by directly and multispecies management, we are faced indirectly providing for values essential with the question, what (and how) do we to personal and social security, basic optimize? We cannot answer this material needs, physical and entirely in ecological terms but must psychological health, good social introduce social and economic values relations, and freedom of choice and …” (National Research Council, 1980) action to achieve personal values and foster personal identity (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005). I. Description of the Issue In the United States, at least four types The question addressed by this paper of institutions affect the spatio-temporal navigates the murky waters where pattern of and relationships among ocean science intermingles with governance and coastal resource uses. Following a and all of its sociocultural, definition provided by Ostrom (2005, p. psychological, economic, ethical, 1), institutions are “the prescriptions that institutional, and other human humans use to organize all forms of dimensions. The question is: What are repetitive and structured interactions, we managing ecosystems for? In other including those within families, words, what should be the end(s) of neighborhoods, markets, firms, sports coastal and ocean management? NOAA leagues, churches, private associations, provides an answer in the context of its and governments at all scales.” A strategic Ecosystem Mission Goal. This democratic political institution is goal prescribes the protection,

64 comprised of governmental agencies and II. Science Capabilities Necessary management bodies (such as regional to Support Decision-Making fishery management councils). A legal institution, with rules defining resource The identification, articulation, and use entitlements and responsibilities, is prioritization of values as drivers of comprised of the body of laws and coastal and ocean science, policy, and distribution of property rights among the resource management has profound government and citizenry. An economic social, cultural, and economic institution, which is closely tied to the implications for NOAA’s constituents. legal institution (e.g., enforcement and If policy makers, coastal and ocean security of title), regulates the economic resource managers, stakeholders, and value of coastal and ocean assets in situ other key decision makers are to balance or their commodity and service flows in societal objectives, as NOAA’s vision of market and, increasingly, non-market an EAM requires, then resource situations. Finally, other social management systems must critically institutions such as cultural practices engage stakeholders, and the plurality of shape patterns of resource use such as values they advocate, to identify subsistence harvesting and recreational resource use conflicts, establish activity. priorities, and evaluate alternative scenarios. Whether political, legal, economic, cultural, or (most likely) an interaction An emphasis on the role of decision of institutions balances societal processes in balancing diverse societal objectives, NOAA’s vision of an EAM objectives is enhanced by a focus on the leaves the following questions development of decision institutions unanswered: (1) Which societal with the proper incentives and objectives? (Lackey, 2001) (2) What is restrictions influencing human behavior. meant by “balance” among societal In particular, Hanna (1998) recommends objectives? (3) How will balance be that EAM institutions promote multiple achieved? In particular, how must objectives, cost-effectiveness, decision making processes and legitimacy, flexibility, and long time institutions change to accommodate the horizons. These criteria require a concept of EAM and fulfill NOAA’s suitable set of well-defined property mission “to understand and predict rights evolving from an open, changes in the Earth’s environment and deliberative process that people believe conserve and manage coastal and marine to be legitimate. The property rights resources to meet our Nation’s need to be indefinite, transferable, and economic, social, and environmental enforceable in order for the other needs”? These questions are considered elements to be voluntarily internalized. below, focusing on their implications for For example, secure, indefinite title the ecosystem science conducted and promotes stewardship, as opposed to sponsored by NOAA to achieve its aquaculturalists and fishers making a Ecosystem Mission Goal, with particular living in an open access or regulated emphasis on economic and democratic open access property rights regime in mechanisms. which the rule-of-capture prevails. Exchange promotes multiple uses and

65 flexibility as well as value. Ownership resource management decisions. Social results in cost-effective behavior because groups and, consequently, their values one is accountable for his or her own can be marginalized from political- costs. policy processes, risking the undemocratic outcome of failing to consider a subset of societal values in Incorporating Societal Objectives into coastal and ocean management Decision-Making decisions. From a practical perspective, engaging participatory decision A purpose of the political-policy process processes as a way of recognizing the in a democratic society is to adjudicate values of a diverse constituency can personal preferences to elucidate and improve the substance, perceived express collective ends – a debate that is, legitimacy, and effectiveness of ideally, informed by scientific decisions (Mascia, 2003; Sutinen and information (including local and Kuperan, 1999). In addition, statutory traditional knowledge) and reason-based authorities often leave societal objectives discussion about values and value undefined or articulate them at a high priorities. The output of this debate is a level of generality that requires set of Federal laws, executive orders, quantitative and/or qualitative and judicial decisions that, to some specification to be operational for extent, represent the vast plurality of decision-making. societal objectives that stand to be influenced (in terms of their For these reasons, a participatory achievability and sustainability) by approach to elucidating societal resource management. The objectives objectives is widely advocated as specified in such authorities (herein essential to democratic and effective referred to as “policy ends”) are directed coastal and ocean management (e.g., by Congress, the President, and the Mascia, 2003). There is “widespread courts to be implemented by the U.S. consensus that forging partnerships with Department of Commerce, NOAA, people and creating more meaningful NOAA’s component organizations, and opportunities for public participation other governmental agencies with should be part of the ecosystem resource management responsibilities. management paradigm” (Endter-Wada et Accordingly, policy ends expressed by al., 1998, p. 894). Such a consensus is NOAA’s authorities are an important demonstrated by the many source of societal objectives to serve as environmental regulations that require the ends of coastal and ocean resource some form of public participation in management. environmental decision-making, including the Administrative Procedures However, it would be democratically Act, NEPA, National Marine Sanctuaries and practically disadvantageous to Act, MSFCMA, and Coastal Zone derive resource management goals solely Management Act at the Federal level. from policy ends. From a democratic standpoint, policy ends may not In addition, social science research is represent the full ensemble of values that essential to design critical, democratic influence, and are influenced by, and effective decision approaches such

66 as collaborative learning and co- methods provide breadth and specificity management. An NRC publication, in characterizing stakeholders and Decision Making for the Environment, stakeholder objectives, enabling lays out research priorities for the social representation of a diverse constituency and behavioral sciences to improve in ecosystem science, policy, and decision processes affecting decision processes. Among many useful environmental quality (NRC, 2005). guidance documents, the Socioeconomic Endter-Wada et al. (1998) provide a Manual for Coral Reef Management valuable discussion of social research (Bunce et al., 2000) is widely used as a contributions to public involvement in tool for managers to establish planning and policy making, socioeconomic monitoring programs. In summarized as follows (p. 894): addition, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, 2002) provides “Some social scientists focus their a guide to community assessment that research and analysis on broader focuses on identifying community processes of group and societal attitudes and values. decision-making; i.e., the objects of their science are these processes. Their work generally analyzes the structure and Economics Perspectives on Decision- dynamics of various public involvement Making and Resource Use processes, the conditions under which these processes work best, their In the MIT Dictionary of Modern suitability for addressing different types Economics (Pearce, 1992, p. 121), of problems, their effectiveness in economists define economics as “the facilitating public involvement, and their study of the way in which mankind success in improving situations or organizes itself to tackle the basic attaining different outcomes. … Other problem of scarcity. … All societies social scientists have borrowed heavily have more wants than resources …, so a from conflict negotiation and mediation system must be devised to allocate these experiences outside natural resources resources between competing ends.” (e.g., labor disputes, divorce settlements) This definition reflects the importance of and applied these techniques to economics to EAM for more than understanding and managing those measuring the economic notion of value conflicts …” and impacts of regulations. The ways that “mankind organizes itself” are also In addition to social science research germane to questions about resource use, focusing on decision processes, including in an EAM. sociocultural assessment and monitoring are crucial to characterize stakeholders The political-policy process described and their objectives. Multidimensional earlier is an important mechanism for characterization of stakeholders – e.g., identifying and adjudicating societal values, priorities, perceptions (e.g., of objectives. However, in some cases, the user conflict), and attitudes and scientific uncertainty characteristic of an knowledge – is required to inform EAM could hamstring a deliberative decision making and governance in the process due to the transaction costs of context of an EAM. Social scientific information and other requirements of

67 negotiation (Libecap, 1989). This seems Concepts of Economic Value and to be most likely to occur when EAM is Measurement for EAM being used to manage increasingly more resource attributes. Attributes such as It is helpful, where possible, to measure predator-prey relationships, habitat gains and losses when speaking of requirements, sex ratios, and genetic balances, even where the natural diversity are significantly more environment is concerned, partly expensive and difficult to research, because losses almost always manage, and enforce than only biomass accompany a choice. In these cases, the and, perhaps, the age-structure of a components of the ecosystem are stock. Furthermore, this greater considered assets (e.g., fish stocks, heat attention to heterogeneous attributes will capacity of ocean waters, potential most often be complicated by spatial energy of currents) and flows (e.g., distributions, all of which are primary preproduction and oxygen characteristic of EAM. production). In addition, human use can alter the levels, or rates, of assets and NOAA should consider the option of flows while at the same time generating partnering with stakeholders to design human values. Finally, non-extractive institutions with entitlements, rules, and uses of the ocean (e.g., whale watching, attenuations necessary to create the snorkeling on reefs) and even “non- expectation that people will behave uses” are valued. consistent with an EAM as new scientific (and other) information A variety of economic methods has been becomes known, technologies change, developed since the 1960s to measure and preferences of the American public economic benefits or values as well as change (see Hanna, 1998). Rather than costs (i.e., opportunity costs or lost expand regulations or renegotiate co- economic values) of environmental and management agreements to natural resources (including quality accommodate new information, shifts in dimensions, not discussed here; see state variables, or changes in external Freeman, 1993). In addition to market factors (e.g., water movements and values such as commercial fishing, trade), the government could transfer shipping, and oil and gas production (through sale, lease, or auction) part of which are analyzed by traditional its legal “bundle of sticks” – i.e., methods, the so-called non-market property rights – to interested parties and values are classified and handled grant them responsibility for decisions. somewhat differently. Use values The objective here is to design decision involve an in situ experience with institutions run by stakeholders whose extraction (e.g., sport fishing) or without behavioral incentives match NOAA’s (e.g., sunbathing and swimming) ideals for EAM but can respond to extraction. Non-use values, which do information and uncertainty more not involve personal use, are divided effectively than a political institution or into preservation or existence values and process. bequest values for future generations. Other value categories relate to uncertainty, including option value (e.g., an insurance coverage) and quasi-option

68 value for specific circumstances when management responses, (3) designing irreversible development would most and influencing governance likely preclude learning about the arrangements effective for an EAM, and suspected high value of a resource. (4) describing and, where possible, quantifying the values of natural The NRC (1999a) recently reviewed a resource assets and flows. variety of methods used by economists to estimate the market and non-market values of environmental and natural Balancing Societal Objectives resource assets and the flows of products and services derived from their use and Conflict is fundamental to resource existence. NOAA staff have estimated, management (Hanna, 1998; Larkin, for example, random utility models 1996; Link, 2002). Juda (1999, p. 96) (RUM) of the value of recreational captures this point by explaining that fishing, the public’s valuation of protected species and marine reserves “All societies are faced with mutually using stated-preference research, and exclusive choices regarding the use of asset accounts of the value of fishery resources. In line with the opportunity resources in situ and the resource rent of opportunity costs, the use of a component of harvests. Current limited resource obviates its practices of measuring only the value of alternative uses. Accordingly, some market activity associated with values must be given a higher, and commercial (e.g., harvests) or others a lower, priority.” recreational (e.g., economic impacts and multiplier effects) fishing give a biased Importantly, “tradeoff” does not mean picture of the total economic value of the “trade-in.” That is, the de-prioritized resources and uses of the ocean under value does not necessarily get discarded. NOAA’s authority. This will be a fertile In economics, tradeoffs imply and rewarding area of EAM research and comparing differences in small, or policy for NOAA in the future. marginal, changes of two or more activities to see if they are ever equal at Recommendation #1 some point. That point identifies where the combination of values is greatest. To support the Ecosystem Mission Goal, NOAA requires greater investment and NOAA’s authorities offer little guidance intra- and interagency coordination in regarding how to prioritize conflicting human dimensions research to objectives across sectors, social groups, comprehensively identify and describe or generations. For example, National the plurality of objectives advocated by Standard 8 of the Sustainable Fisheries constituents. Such research should focus Act of 1996 redefines the goal of MSY on social scientific and humanistic as articulated in the MSFCMA, requiring approaches to: (1) improving and management plans to include measures facilitating participatory decision minimizing adverse economic impacts to processes, (2) assessing and monitoring fishing communities. The standard does sociocultural and economic causes and not state whether the conservation and consequences of ecosystem stress and restoration of stocks are to receive

69 priority over shorter-term community 1. Identifying tradeoffs among objectives or vice versa. As Cicin-Sain societal objectives that enter into and Knecht (2000, p. 149) recognize, “if policy making and a stock is in grave danger of being implementation, and depleted, fishing effort must be either management decisions; greatly reduced, which is detrimental to 2. Establishing priorities that are dependent fishing communities, or ethically defensible through allowed to continue, which is means that are democratic or detrimental to fish stocks.” In such revealed by self-governance instances, fisheries managers face a arrangements designed to create tradeoff between the cultural and short- behavior that complies with the run economic vitality of fishing EAM principle; and communities and the preservation of 3. Envisioning, implementing, and stocks for future generations. evaluating regulatory, participatory, technological, In more general terms, current and educational, institutional, and emerging management issues involve other strategies to achieve an tradeoffs among the various benefits of acceptable integration of agricultural production and water quality priorities. in the Gulf of Mexico and other areas; off-shore energy development and To support an EAM, the ecosystem resulting habitat damage, emissions, and science prioritized, conducted, and oil spill risk; ship ballasting benefits and supported by NOAA must inform and the introduction of invasive species; enable these steps. In the most general cultural, recreational, and other uses of terms, an ecosystem-based research coral reefs and their protection for future approach and institutional structure is generations; the protection of marine vital. This may seem obvious, yet most mammals and human activities such as research supported and conducted by fishing and ship traffic; and aquaculture NOAA has an environmental science and the potential spreading of disease focus (i.e., on observation and among fish populations and risks of non- forecasting of biological, physical, and native species introductions (USCOP, chemical systems in isolation of human 2004). dimensions). A truly ecosystem-based focus would integrate human dimensions In view of the centrality of such research themes such as human causes tradeoffs to coastal and ocean and consequences of ecosystem stress management, balancing societal (see Stern et al., 1992), decision objectives means reducing or eliminating approaches (see NRC, 2005), resource conflict to make objectives documentation of local and traditional mutually achievable in so far as possible knowledge, risk communication, across social groups, places, and assessment of community vulnerability generations. This requires prioritizing to hazards, and governance societal objectives when conflict is arrangements (especially for LMEs) irresolvable. More specifically, an EAM (e.g., Juda, 1999). is an enterprise in:

70 In terms of NOAA "business strategy" or locate value in the human experience organizational structure, such a (anthropocentric), ecological systems commitment requires cross-disciplinary (ecocentric), and/or living entities such integration in addition to intra- and inter- as species (biocentric). Even policies NOAA Goal Team coordination and that preserve a species or set up a social science representation at senior network of marine reserves are levels. The need for a truly ecosystem- normative (i.e., they aim to restore based focus – in terms of research nature to a desired previous state). content, institutional organization, and staffing and senior representation – is More specifically, identifying tradeoffs supported and elaborated by a Social requires a picture of the viability of Science Review Panel report to the societal objectives, individually and in NOAA Science Advisory Board, Social relation to one another, as they are likely Science Research Within NOAA: Review to be influenced by interactions within and Recommendations (NOAA, 2003b). and between human and environmental systems. The challenge of evaluating An EAM will complicate NOAA’s tradeoffs can be illustrated by applying missions in scientific research and the portfolio theory to fisheries. Assume management for several reasons. First, that the overall objective for an LME or by its nature, EAM will expand the sub-region is to balance expected number and type of resources and aggregate returns (i.e., aggregate income resource attributes being researched and from all species plus changes in asset managed, from the unit-stock biomass values) against the return risks and age-structure of target species to associated with recruitment, various interactions (e.g., ) and the interactions (e.g., predation, multi- spatial heterogeneities and topologies species harvest technology, product (i.e., relationships, such as connectivity) substitution in markets), and other of resources, other species (including uncertainties (Edwards et al., 2004). humans), and habitat. This places a Internalizing interactions into multi- heavy demand on information which species management requires deliberate connects environmental variability and tradeoffs among yields of different resource dynamics, fishing behavior, species. Since yields support a plurality regulatory actions, and the political and of economic, cultural, spiritual, and legislative responses to stakeholder recreational values, tradeoffs among demands and competitions. Second, yields give rise to tradeoffs among such EAM will force NOAA to find legal, values. For example, increasing the ethical, and cost-effective ways to yields of highly valued piscivorous inform and facilitate the identification species might require fisheries for their and evaluation of tradeoffs among prey to be substantially cut back. As resource uses and among resource users. Gulland (1982) recommended for the Third, EAM should make it self-evident North Sea, one could fish down the top that management is inherently a piscivores, such as cod, and then fish the normative endeavor (Lackey 2004). That only moderately in order to is, humans manipulate the environment encourage the growth of flounders and in order to satisfy objectives which other valuable benthivores.

71 Although this example is confined to and humanities offer diverse approaches multi-species management, the portfolio to establishing priorities in this broader framework is a considerable step in the context, including cost-benefit analysis; direction of EAM because it deals tradeoff analysis, which can be utilized directly with interactions and uncertainty in a participatory decision process (e.g., in a search for what an ecosystem can Brown et al., 2001), conflict mediation produce of economic value. (e.g., McCreary et al., 2001); discursive Furthermore, it can be applied to more ethics (e.g., O’Hara, 1995); and con- difficult resource scenarios, such as tracting (Townsend and Pooley, 1995). tradeoffs among fisheries and other human endeavors such as marine More broadly, Sutinen et al. (2000, p. 3) reserves, aquaculture parks, and oil and identify the following socioeconomic natural gas leases. However, like the research needs in a “Framework for single-species approach which is Monitoring and Assessing described primarily in terms of the Socioeconomics and Governance of natural sciences, the portfolio framework Large Marine Ecosystems”: is two-pronged and needs to be implemented with a management 1. Identify principle uses of approach that involves people and LME resources; behavior, both in government and at sea. 2. Identify LME resource users Thus, once again, the type of institution and their activities; that will properly define the objectives 3. Identify governance of a technical framework, such as the mechanisms influencing portfolio framework, must be identified: LME use; (1) one that increases the number of 4. Assess the level of LME- regulations to a large extent; (2) one that related activities; negotiates solutions to the many 5. Assess interactions between interactions democratically; or (3) one LME-related activities and that entrusts the design of EAM LME resources; institutions to have the correct incentive 6. Assess impacts of LME structures to influence socially- activities on other users; appropriate behavior. This is a question 7. Assess the interactions of governance and resource allocation between governance under uncertainty. mechanisms and resource use; The power of the EAM concept as an 8. Assess the socioeconomic instrument to envision and sustain a importance of LME-related better world derives from its broad activities and economic and applicability to decision-making across sociocultural value of key sectors, incorporating non-market uses and LME resources; values, and utilizing alternatives to 9. Identify the public’s command-and-control regulation, such priorities and as democratic and economic alternatives, willingness to make to elucidate values and adjudicate tradeoffs to protect conflict among them. The social and restore key sciences (economic and non-economic) natural resources;

72 10. Assess the cost of Pooley (1995) provide a broad taxonomy options to protect or of “distributed governance” (i.e., how restore key resources; rights and responsibilities are distributed 11. Compare the benefits across government, the fishing industry, with the costs of and fishing communities) and contrast protection and the current regulatory approach with restoration options; external institutional relationships (co- and management, harvest rights, and 12. Identify financing contracting) and internal relationships alternatives for the (self-organizing groups, cooperative preferred options for management, communal management, protecting/restoring corporate management). Notice that the key LME resources. Federal government is party to each form of external governance. Further, One research need omitted by this different combinations of external and framework is an analysis of social internal governance arrangements will factors driving human activities that result in a different balance of societal significantly contribute to ecosystem objectives and set of outcomes for the stress (e.g., demographic change; environment and interested parties. For attitudes, values, and beliefs; example, objectives from a regulatory technological innovation; political arrangement will differ from those forces; and regulatory instruments). associated with the combination of co- Knowledge of social drivers is essential management/corporate management and to focus environmental protection, from contracting/self-organizing groups. restoration, and management strategies on underlying causes of ecosystem stress. Recommendation #2

Finally, research is necessary to identify NOAA requires greater investment and and facilitate governance patterns intra- and interagency coordination in conducive to priority setting and strategy human dimensions research on topics development in the context of LME that support NOAA’s aim of striving to policy and management. Governance balance diverse societal objectives such refers to the “formal and informal as those discussed earlier. Balancing arrangements, institutions, and mores societal objectives is an enterprise in which determine how resources or an identifying tradeoffs; establishing environment are utilized; how problems priorities that are ethically defensible to and opportunities are evaluated and stakeholders and fair to the American analyzed; what behavior is deemed public through means such as acceptable or forbidden; and what rules democratic decision making and/or other and sanctions are applied to affect the combinations of distributed governance pattern of resource and environmental that match EAM principles and provide use” (Juda, 1999, pp. 90-91). Juda self-governance incentives; and (1999) lays out considerations for developing and implementing strategies developing and implementing a informed by ecosystem science governance approach. Townsend and incorporating human dimensions.

73 III. Partnerships Necessary to disciplinary research; and leadership and Effectively Address the Emerging workforce training to facilitate Issues awareness and appreciation of the value of human dimensions research for Partnerships among biophysical and NOAA’s Ecosystem Mission. human dimensions scientists - across Fundamentally, envisioning and imple- NOAA’s line offices and with external menting such scientific and organi- partners – are critical to meeting zational transformations requires scientific, organizational, and individual fostering a workforce with the knowl- challenges presented by NOAA’s edge, skills, and dispositions to engage commitment to a comprehensive in and be transformed by learning, ecosystem science enterprise supporting communication, and collaboration across an EAM. From a scientific standpoint, disciplinary cultures and approaches. ecosystem science requires innovative approaches to linking the concepts, IV. Benefits to NOAA, Constituents, methods and results of biophysical and and Society from this Effort human dimensions research to inform decision making. From an organiza- This section is intentionally left blank tional standpoint, critical needs include since this paper is devoted to the topic of greater internal capacity in human science requirements critical to achieve dimensions disciplines; leadership with NOAA’s Ecosystem Mission Goal (i.e., interdisciplinary understanding and benefits to NOAA) by identifying and team-building skills across disciplines; balancing societal objectives (i.e., management practices that encourage, benefits to society). require and reward interdisciplinary research; integrated research priori- Figure 1. Diverse disciplines are integral to tization and planning; adequate funding understanding the human dimensions of for human dimensions and inter- ecosystems.

74 Appendix A: Ecosystem Principles • Diversity is important to (Ecosystem Principles Advisory Panel, ecosystem functioning. 1999) • Multiple scales interact within and among ecosystems. • The ability to predict ecosystem • Components of ecosystems are behavior is limited. linked. • Ecosystems have real thresholds • Ecosystem boundaries are open. and limits which, when • Ecosystems change over time. exceeded, can effect major ecosystem restructuring. • Once thresholds and limits have been exceeded, changes can be irreversible.

75 Appendix B: Summary of • Develop rebuilding plans Recommendations for a for those species deemed Regional Ecosystem Approach to to be overfished. Management (NOAA Fisheries, 2004) (3) Protect Sensitive Species (1) Derive the maximum value to • Reduce mortality of society (on a sustainable basis) marine mammals, sea available from the living marine turtles, sea birds and resources under our stewardship, similar protected apex subject to sub-goals 2-9 species to a level that is described below. In sustainable. implementing this overall goal, • Develop and implement NOAA Fisheries must: conservation measures to • Account for other maintain marine ecosystem goods and mammals at optimum services as they affect, sustainable population are affected by, and are in levels. This includes addition to fisheries. ensuring that incidental • Promote participation, takes do not exceed a fairness, and equity in stock’s potential policy and management biological removal level. development. • Develop conservation and • Allocate resource use and recovery plans that non-use among sectors in contain site-specific a transparent, safe and management measures feasible manner. with objective, measurable criteria to (2) Prevent Overfishing recover ESA-listed • Develop and implement species and depleted conservation and marine mammal stocks. management measures • Monitor population that prevent overfishing status. of species or species • Create measures to complexes in each region. recover threatened or The objective is to endangered species. prevent overfishing while achieving, on a (4) Conserve Biodiversity continuing basis, the • Develop and implement optimum yield from each measures to conserve U.S. fishery. non-target species. • Monitor the status of • Ensure that no native species or species species shall go extinct complexes relative to due to anthropogenic overfishing and factors. overfished limit reference points.

76 • Monitor and evaluate • Establish measures for impacts of invasive those species or stocks at species on native species. risk of losing genetic • Establish conservation diversity to protect the and management ESU. measures to reduce fishing mortality of non- (6) Conserve Living Marine target species (e.g., Resource Habitat minimize bycatch and • Develop and implement discarding), and establish measures to conserve bycatch thresholds that essential fish habitat will sustain non-target (EFH) and critical habitat species. for all targeted and • Monitor the status of non- protected species with target species that are respect to their ability to significantly impacted by spawn, breed, feed and/or anthropogenic activities. grow to maturity. • Establish measures to • Evaluate habitat conserve designations. where an observed and • Evaluate potential sustained decline in adverse effects of fishing species diversity (e.g., on habitat and minimize mean adverse effects of fishing from fisheries on habitat. independent surveys) is • Minimize adverse below the range of perturbations (from both observed natural fishing and other user variability. sectors) to be less than the range of natural (5) Conserve Genetic Diversity and disturbances for the Structure appropriate physical and • Define evolutionary geological processes that significant units (ESUs) operate in ecosystems. for threatened, • Establish measures to endangered or overfished conserve those habitats species. that are negatively • Develop and implement impacted. harvest policies that protect genetic diversity (7) Maintain Trophic Structure of species or stocks by • Develop and implement protecting ESUs from measures to minimize excessive mortality. anthropogenic impacts on • Monitor ESU status for trophic structure and local spawning functioning. Ecological aggregations. relationships between harvested, dependent and

77 related species shall be (8) Prevent Systemic maintained within the range of observed natural • Prevent systemic over- variability. exploitation of an • Develop and implement ecosystem at relevant measures to take the spatial and temporal trophic role of species scales, cognizant of items into account when 1-7 above as appropriate. establishing harvest This may require levels, including the development and effects of the combined implementation of a limit removal of all targeted for the total combined species on the ecosystem. removal of all targeted • Monitor trophic species or some relationships among equivalent means. It targeted species, their provides a buffer for predators, and their prey. uncertainty such that the • Establish measures to total removal cap is restore the fundamental established as less than ecological relationships in the combined total of all those food webs that have targeted and non-target human-induced removals. deterioration of trophic • Allocate tradeoffs in structure. harvestable biomass • Develop and implement among all targeted harvest policies that species subject to the sustain adequate forage constraint of the total base, in situations where removal cap, up to but not fisheries potentially exceeding the total cap. compete with top trophic • Establish measures and level consumers (e.g., policies to avoid marine mammals, turtles, exceeding the systemic sea birds, or similar cap and to reduce total protected species) for system-wide exploitation shared resources (e.g., if it is exceeded. forage fish such as small pelagics), to ensure that (9) Improve knowledge of natural sufficient quantities of the and anthropogenic processes shared resource are controlling ecosystem structure available to sustain the and function to enable more top trophic level accurate forecasts of living consumers at their marine resources population thresholds. • Monitor the status of non- target species that are significantly impacted by anthropogenic activities.

78 • Monitor trophic • Improve our under- relationships among standing of the impor- targeted species, their tance of bottom-up predators, and their prey. forcing in determining • Monitor population status episodic recruitment of protected species and events in target species marine mammals at and the prey of target specific levels of species. assessment quality every X years. • Monitor the status of species or species com- plexes relative to over- fishing and overfished reference point at specific levels of assessment quality every X years.

79 Appendix C: Basic Approach biomass (i.e., stock abundance) that to Fisheries Management would result from fishing at Fmsy is in Federal Waters defined as the MSY stock size (Bmsy), (with an emphasis on groundfish recognizing that natural fluctuations management in the Bering Sea above and below the MSY stock size are and Gulf of Alaska) normal.

Several elements of the fisheries NOAA Fisheries guidelines pertaining to management system adopted by NOAA the first of the ten national standards conform to the goals of EAM. Several (herein “National Standard 1”) required regional councils and their associated of FMPs pursuant to the MSFCMA regional offices have adopted harvest instruct managers to implement harvest strategies designed to prevent strategies that maintain stock sizes at or overfishing, rebuild protected species, above their MSY stock size on average. preserve biodiversity, protect habitat, When stock sizes decline to a level and encourage public participation in where there is significantly increased decision-making. This system evolved concern regarding potential impairment over time in an effort to comply with the of stock productivity, delayed rebuilding requirements of the various laws to Bmsy, or potential ecosystem harm, governing fisheries management, the stock is considered to be depleted including NEPA, MSFCMA, and ESA. (Figure 1). When a stock reaches this The groundfish management system level, rebuilding plans must be recommended by the North Pacific developed and implemented to improve Fisheries Management Council stock condition. (NPFMC) and implemented by NOAA Fisheries is a good example of a fishery Figure 1. Summary of thresholds used management plan (FMP) that has in managing commercial fisheries in successfully integrated the goals of Federal waters. EAM into its management strategy.

DEFAULT LIMIT & TARGET

CONTROL RULES Overview of National Guidelines for Fisheries Management 1.5 overfishing

Y 1

NOAA Fisheries established guidelines S Limit M F / Target

for FMPs to ensure that the catch of F Federally managed species is consistent 0.5 overfished M with the goals of building sustainable 0 fisheries. Overfishing is defined as any 00.511.52 amount of fishing in excess of the limit B/BMSY fishing mortality level (Flim). The Restrepo et al 1998 fishing mortality rate (Fmsy) that would produce the maximum long-term average catch (maximum sustainable Each council and associated regional yield, or MSY) is the upper bound for office of NOAA Fisheries is responsible Flim. The long-term expected level of for defining MSY control rules. These

80 rules generally guide managers to set illustration of how the MSFCMA, ESA, target fishing mortality levels below the and NEPA guide managers toward an limits to avoid exceeding the Flim and, EAM. In an effort to prevent to the extent possible, to account for overfishing and to comply with the social, economic, and ecological factors. provisions of the MSFCMA, the NPFMC working in association with NOAA Fisheries is also responsible for NOAA Fisheries’ Alaska Regional enforcing its harvest policies. Ideally, Office (ARO), has developed a system catch and bycatch should be directly of in-season constraints on target monitored with an in-season catch groundfish species, non-target reporting system that provides accurate groundfish species (primarily groundfish estimates of catch of both target and incidentally captured), forage species, non-target species. In many regions, and prohibited species (important non- NOAA Fisheries supports fishery groundfish species incidentally monitoring programs that consist of at- captured). The catch constraints are sea and/or shoreside observers. These built around a tier system for estimating monitoring programs allow managers to acceptable biological catch (ABC) and assess the amount of catch of target OFL for stocks or stock complexes. The species and incidental species in real tier system provides guidance on the time. Fisheries can be closed to protect maximum permissible levels of catch a species from reaching the overfishing given the quality of information level (OFL). In regions where time-area available (see Goodman et al., 2002 for a or gear restrictions are utilized to control review of harvest strategy employed in catch, scientists conduct research to the North Pacific groundfish fishery). In verify that these management tools addition to the constraints on catch at the provide sufficient control to keep fishing species or species group level, the mortality at or below Flim. NPFMC also imposes an overall cap on the total amount of groundfish that can NOAA Fisheries is also responsible for be removed (Witherell, 2005). In the conducting stock assessment surveys, Bering Sea Aleutian Islands region, this which provide relative biomass estimates overall constraint results in considerable of many target species, non-target reductions in catch for several target species, and indicator species. LMRs species. are typically monitored through periodic surveys. These surveys represent a The establishment of total allowable major contribution to the goal of catches (TACs) is fundamental to the conserving biodiversity because they management of Alaskan groundfish provide a historical record of distribution fisheries in Federal waters. It involves and abundance. annual evaluation of the best available scientific information at public meetings and through the review of applicable Overview of Alaskan Groundfish documents. The first step begins with Management the preparation of Stock Assessment and Fishery Evaluation (SAFE) reports. The management system used in the These reports contain analyses Alaska groundfish fisheries serves as an summarizing the information about the

81 individual stocks and groups, and reports that document the status and include ABC and OFL recommendations trends of target and non-target species for future years. The authors of these (e.g., other rockfish, other flatfish and reports (generally NOAA Fisheries other species) and provide ABC scientists) present their findings to recommendations for both target and NPFMC and its Groundfish Plan Teams non-target species. and Scientific and Statistical Committee for further review. After scientific The NPFMC’s groundfish FMPs also review and public discussion, the include constraints stemming from the NPFMC recommends TAC levels for the ESA. Managers imposed time, area, and upcoming year, which have to be gear restrictions on the groundfish approved and subsequently implemented fishery to reduce direct and indirect by NOAA Fisheries. Alaska groundfish mortality of Pacific salmon, short-tailed managers always set TAC at less than or albatross, and Steller sea lions. These equal to ABC, and ABC at less than constraints, coupled with deterrents to OFL. Catch is usually less than TAC, the development of directed fisheries for almost always less than ABC, and is forage species, act to mitigate adverse always less than OFL. Agency scientists impacts of fishing on endangered are currently working on the species. A biomass control rule was development of objective rules for established for pollock, Pacific cod, and incorporating uncertainty in estimated Atka mackerel to preserve the forage stock biomass, catch rates, stock base for Steller sea lions. structure, and productivity. These rules, as noted earlier in this paper, must The NPFMC groundfish FMPs have balance the risk of populations becoming recently been reviewed with respect to depleted against the benefit to society of protection of EFH. In Alaska, large resource utilization. areas are protected from the effects of fishing through seasonal or year-round The NPFMC’s groundfish management closures (Witherell, 2005). The review strategy is designed to preserve of EFH found that current levels of biodiversity by protecting target species harvest are not producing a measurable along with non-target species that are impact on the reproduction, growth, or impacted by the fisheries. The FMPs distribution of managed species in identify four groups of species: Alaska. Despite this finding, the prohibited species, target species, other NPFMC recommended preemptive species, and forage fish. The NPFMC is measures to protect habitats of particular currently reviewing these categories in concern and deep water corals. an effort to comply with proposed revisions to the guidelines for National The practices of the NPFMC and ARO Standard 1. Anticipated changes also comply with the goals of seeking include a split of the “other species” public input on management decisions. complex into species assemblages that The NPFMC and ARO recently share common life history completed a programmatic characteristics. Scientists from NOAA environmental impact statement on Fisheries’ Alaska Fisheries Science groundfish fisheries management in Center produce annual or biennial SAFE Alaska. Alternatives reviewed in this

82 document were identified at public In conclusion, this brief review of meetings. The document provided a Alaskan groundfish management clear assessment of the tradeoffs illustrates that managers are taking between management alternatives and incremental steps towards implementing the expected environmental impacts EAM. The review also illustrates that, associated with each alternative. This when these steps are taken, fisheries can process illustrates that compliance with be managed in a sustainable manner the NEPA provisions contributes while providing economic benefits to the towards the goal of seeking and Nation. incorporating public input into decision- making.

83 Appendix D: Legal Mandates • National Climate Program Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 2901-2908) • Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. § 1268) • National Coastal Monitoring Act (33 • Coastal Zone Management Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 2801-2805) U.S.C. §§ 1451 et seq.) • National Contaminated Sediment • Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. Assessment and Management Act §§ 1531-1543) (33 U.S.C. § 1271) • Establishment of Great Lakes • National Environmental Policy Act Research Office (33 U.S.C. § 1268(d)) (42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347) • Establishment of the National • National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 Estuarine Research Reserve System (16 U.S.C. §§ 1431 et seq.) U.S.C. § 1461) • Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance • Estuary (Estuarine) Protection Act Prevention and Control Act, and (16 U.S.C. §§ 1221-1226) National Invasive Species Act (16 • Estuary Restoration Act (33 U.S.C. U.S.C. §§ 1431-1445) §§ 2901-2909) • Oceans and Human Health Act (33 • Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act U.S.C. §§ 3101-3104) (18 U.S.C. §§ 2901-2911) • Regional Marine Research Programs • Global Change Research Act (15 (16 U.S.C. § 1447(b)) U.S.C. §§ 2921-2961) • Water Resources Development Act: • Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Great Lakes habitat remediation (33 Research and Control Act (16 U.S.C. § U.S.C. § 2326(b)) 1451) • Water Resources Development Act • Marine Migratory Gamefish Act (16 (33 U.S.C. § 2572) U.S.C. § 760(e)) • National Aquaculture Act (16 U.S.C. §§ 2801-2810)

84 Appendix E: Examples of NOAA Ecological Forecasts (Operational and in Development)

Ecological Forecast Driver - Need Frequency Spatial Products - User Community Status Categories/ of Forecast Extent of Outputs Type Forecast Predicting movement of -Disaster -Near-real -Event -Trajectory of -State managers -In Development hazardous spills Planning time Specific movement -Federal managers -In Transition -Living Resource -Local -Risk to living -Emergency -In Operation Impact -Regional resources and response -Human Health humans personnel Impact Forecasting the distributions, -Stock -Seasonal -Regional -Species -Fishery managers -In Development abundance, and health of Assessments -Scenario - maps -Fishery -In Transition living resources -Living Resource Distribution -Species abundance management -In Operation Impact Range -Probability of councils rebuilding -State managers overfished species -Resource -Projects managers distribution and abundance Forecasting the effectiveness -Stock -Scenario -Regional -Species -MPA managers -In Development and optimal placement of Assessments -Local abundance, -Resource MPA’s -Living Resource distribution, size managers Impact structure and habitat maps -Optimal location of MPA’s Predicting coral reef health -Living Resource -Scenario -Regional -Species survival -Marine Sanctuary -In Development and recovery after Impact probability managers disturbance -Habitat maps -Resource manager

Ecological Forecast Driver - Need Frequency Spatial Products - User Community Status Categories/ of Forecast Extent of Outputs Type Forecast Predicting larval transport -Stock -Daily to -Regional -Trajectory of -Marine Sanctuary -In Development and survival Assessments weekly movement managers -In Transition -Living Resource -Probability of -MPA managers -In Operation Impact survival at a given -Fishery managers location Predicting organism -Stock -Scenario -Local -Species -Local and state -In Development distributions based on habitat Assessments -Regional distribution maps managers -In Transition mapping -Essential Fish -Habitat maps -Resource -In Operation Habitat managers -Living Resource Impact -Human health impacts

Development, persistence, -Living Resource -Near real -Local -Trajectory of -Local and state -In Development movement and landfall of Impact time -Regional movement managers -In Transition harmful algal blooms -Human health -Daily -Bloom -Resource -In Operation impacts -Scenario identification managers -Probability of bloom initiation Coral bleaching forecasts -Living Resource -Seasonal -Regional -Species survival -Marine Sanctuary -In Development Impact -Scenario -Global probability managers -Resource manager Effectiveness of habitat -Living Resource -Seasonal -Local -Metric measuring -Resource -In Development restoration Impact -Yearly -Regional restoration managers -In Transition - Essential Fish -Scenario effectiveness -State managers Habitat -Federal managers Effectiveness of hydropower -Living Resource -Scenario -Local - Probability of -Local managers -In Operation system modifications for Impact -Yearly individual fish -State managers In Development survival of migrating fish -Endangered survival Species Act -Probability of species recovery

86 Ecological Forecast Driver - Need Frequency Spatial Products - User Community Status Categories/ of Forecast Extent of Outputs Type Forecast Projections of extinction risk -Living Resource -Scenario -Local -Probability of -Resource -In Operation for protected species Impact -Yearly -Regional species recovery managers -In Development -Endangered Species Act Forecasts of the coastal -Living Resource -Daily -Regional -Metrics for -City planners -In Development ecosystem effects associated Impact -Seasonal impacts to the -Local managers with upstream water -Yearly ecosystem under -State managers management alternatives -Scenario study -Federal managers Beach closure forecasting -Human health -Near real -Local -Probability of -Local managers -In Development impacts time -Regional exceeding health -State managers -Daily standards Impact of climate change on -Human health -Months -Local -Habitat inundation -City and state -In Development coastal ecosystems impacts -Decades -Regional maps planners -Living resource -Scenario -Metrics for -Local, state, impact impacts to the Federal managers ecosystem under study Forecasts of physical -Living Resource -Near real -Regional -Forecast maps and -Resource -In Development dynamics and their impacts Impact time time-series of key managers -In Transition on the ecosystem -Human health -Daily physical -Federal managers -In Operation impact -Seasonal parameters -State managers -Scenario -Metrics of impacts to ecosystem under study New non-native species -Living Resource -Scenario -Local -probability of -State managers -In Development introductions Impact -Regional species invasion -Federal managers Drinking water quality and -Human health -Scenario -Local -Probability of -Local managers -In Development quantity impact -Regional exceeding health -State managers standards Onset, extent and impact to -Living Resource -Near real -Local -spatial / temporal -State managers -In Development living resources of hypoxia Impact time -Regional maps of hypoxia -Federal managers in coastal areas -Seasonal -metrics for living -Scenario resources

87 Ecological Forecast Driver - Need Frequency Spatial Products - User Community Status Categories/ of Forecast Extent of Outputs Type Forecast Water quality forecasts -Living Resource -Near real -Local -spatial and -State managers -In Development Impact time -Regional temporal maps of -Federal managers -In Transition -Human health -Daily key water quality -In Operation impact -Seasonal variables -Scenario Ice thickness/extent and -Living Resource -Scenario -Local -Metrics for -Resource -In Development ecological impacts Impact -Regional impacts to the managers ecosystem under study Water quantity impact on -Living Resource -Daily -Local -Metrics for -State managers -In Development living resources Impact -Seasonal -Regional impacts to the -Federal managers -Scenario ecosystem under -Resource study managers Forecast of shellfish toxicity -Living Resource -Near real -Local -toxin -State managers -In Development Impact time accumulation in -Resource -Human health -Daily shellfish managers impact

88 References Schwab. 2004. NOAA’s Center of Excellence for Great Lakes and Human Health. Great Lakes Environmental Anderson, P. J. and J. F. Piatt. 1999. Research Laboratory, Ann Arbor, MI. Community reorganization in the Gulf of Alaska following ocean climate regime Browman, H. I. and K. I. Stergiou. 2004. shift. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 189: 117- Perspectives on ecosystem-based 123. approaches to the management of marine resources. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 274: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment 269-303. [ACIA]. 2004. Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Browman, H. I. and K. I. Stergiou. 2005. Assessment. Cambridge University Politics and socio-economics of Press. ecosystem-based approaches to the management of marine resources. Mar. Atkinson, A., V. Siegel, E. Pakhomov, Ecol. Prog. Ser. 275: 241-296. and P. Rothery. 2004. Long-term decline in krill stock and increase in salps within Brown, K., W. N. Adger, E. Tompkins, the Southern Ocean, Nature 432: 100- P. Bacon, D. Shim, and K. Young. 2001. 103. Trade-off Analysis for Marine Protected Area Management. Ecological Beechie, T. J., M. H. Ruckelshaus, E. Economics 37: 417-434. Buhle, A. H. Fullerton, and L. Holsinger. 2006. Hydrologic regime and the Bunce, L., P. Townsley, R. Pomeroy, conservation of salmon life history and R. Pollnac. 2000. Socioeconomic diversity. Biological Conservation 130 Manual for Coral Reef Management. (4): 360-372. Australian Institute of Marine Science.

Boesch, D. F., J. C. Field, and D. Scavia Cicin-Sain, B. and R. W. Knecht. 2000. (eds.). 2000. The potential consequences The Future of U.S. Ocean Policy: of climate variability and change on Choices for the New Century. Island coastal areas and marine resources: Press. report of the coastal areas and marine resources sector team, NOAA Coastal Clark, J. S., S. R. Carpenter, M. Barber, Ocean Program Decision Analysis Series S. Collins, A. Dobson, J. A. Foley, D. No. 21, Silver Spring, MD., 163 pp. M. Lodge, M. Pascual, R. Pielke Jr., W. Pizer, C. Pringle, W. R. Reid, K. A. Brandt, S. B., D. M. Mason, M. J. Rose, O. Sala, W. H. Schlesinger, D. H. McCormick, B. M. Lofgren, T. S. Wall, and D. Wear. 2001. Ecological Hunter, and J. A. Tyler. 2002. Climate Forecasts: An Emerging Imperative. change: implications for fish growth Science 293: 657- 660. performance in the Great Lakes, Am. Fish. Soc. Symp. 32: 61-76. Coastal States Organization [CSO]. 2004. Improving Links between Science Brandt, S. B., T. E. Croley, B. Eadie, G. and Coastal Management: Results of a Fahnenstiel, P. L. Landrum, G. Survey to Assess State Coastal Leshkevich, M. McCormick, and D. Management Science and Technology the Ecosystem Principles Advisory Needs. Panel. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Committee on Environmental and Administration, National Marine Natural Resources [CENR]. 2001. Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD., Ecological Forecasting. Washington, 54 pp. D.C., 12 pp. Edwards, S. F., J. S. Link, and B. P. Costanza, R., A. Voinov, R. Boumans, Rountree. 2004. Portfolio management T. Maxwell, F. Villa, L. Wainger, and H. of wild fish stocks. Ecological Voinov. 2002. Integrating 49: 317-329. economic modeling of the Patuxent River watershed, Maryland. Ecological Endter-Wada J., D. Blahna, R. Krannich, Monographs 72: 203-231. and M. Brunson. 1998. A Framework for Understanding Social Science The Council of State Governments Contributions to Ecosystem [CSG]. 2003. Water Wars. The Council Management, Ecological Applications 8 of State Governments, Lexington, KY., (3): 891-904. 22 pp. Executive Office of the President, Courtney, F. and J. Wiggen. 2003. Council on Environmental Quality Ocean Zoning for the Gulf of Maine: A [CEQ]. 2004. U.S. Ocean Action Plan: Background Paper (prepared for the Gulf The Bush Administration’s Response to of Maine Council for the Marine the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy. Environment). 39 pp. http://ocean.ceq.gov/actionplan.pdf Daily, G. C., S. Alexander, P. R. Ehrlich, L. Goulder, J. Lubchenco, P. A. Matson, Feely, R. A., C. L. Sabine, K. Lee, W. H. A. Mooney, S. Postel, S. H. Berrelson, J. Kleypas, V. J. Fabry, and F. Schneider, D. Tilman, and G. M. J. Millero. 2004. Impact of Woodwell. 1997. Ecosystem services: anthropogenic CO2 on the CaCO3 Benefits Supplied to Human Societies by system in the oceans. Science 305 Natural Ecosystems. Issues in Ecology (5682): 362-366. No. 2. Ecological Society of America, Washington, D.C., pp 275-293. Field, J. G., G. Hempel, and C. P. Summerhayes. 2002. Oceans 2020: DeMaster, D. P. and P. Sandifer. 2004. Science, Trends, and the Challenge of Final Summary Report: NOAA Sustainability. Island Press, Washington, Workshop on Delineation of Regional D.C., 365 pp. Ecosystems. Charleston, South Carolina, 31 August – 1 September 2004. Food and Agriculture Organization of http://ecosystems.noaa.gov/noaa_worksh the United Nations, Fisheries op_delineation_final.htm Department [FAO]. 2003. The ecosystem approach to fisheries. FAO Ecosystem Principles Advisory Panel. Technical Guidelines for Responsible 1999. Ecosystem-Based Fishery Management: A Report to Congress by

90 Fisheries. No. 4, Suppl. 2. Rome, FAO. Hare, S. R. and N. J. Mantua. 2000. 112 pp. Empirical evidence for North Pacific regimes shifts in 1977 and 1989, Prog. Freeman, A. M. III. 1993. The Oceanogr. 47: 103-145. Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods. Health Canada. 1995. Great Lakes Water Resources for the Future, Washington, and your Health: A Summary of a Great D.C. Lakes Basin Cancer Risk Assessment: A Case-control Study of Cancers of the Goodman, D., M. Mangel, G. Parkes, T. Bladder, Colon and Rectum. Great Quinn, V. Restrepo, T. Smith, and K. Lakes Health Effects Program, Ottawa, Stokes. 2002. Scientific review of the Canada. harvest strategy currently used in the BSAI and GOA groundfish fishery Health Canada. 1998. Health Canada Management Plans. Prepared for the Drinking Water Guidelines. It’s your North Pacific Fishery Management Health. Fact Sheet Series, May 27, 1998. Council. 140 pp. Hendee, J. C., E. Stabenau, L. Florit, D. Grebmeier, J. M., J. E. Overland, S. E. Manzello, and C. Jeffris. 2006. Moore, E. V. Farley, E. C. Carmack, L. Infrastructure and capabilities of a near W. Cooper, K. E. Frey, J. H. Helle, F. A. real-time meteorological and McLaughlin, and S. L. McNutt. 2006. A oceanographic in situ instrumented major ecosystem shift in the northern array, and its role in marine Bering Sea. Science 311: 1461-1464. environmental decision support. In: Remote Sensing of Aquatic Coastal Greene, C. M., D. Jensen, G. R. Pess, E. Ecosystem Processes, Laurie L. M. Beamer, and E. A. Steel. 2005. Richardson & Ellsworth Frank leDrew, Effects of environmental conditions Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 135- during stream, estuary, and ocean 156. residency on Chinook salmon return rates in the Skagit River, WA. Trans. Hoegh-Guldberg, O. 1999. Climate Amer. Fish. Soc. 134:1562-1581. change, coral bleaching and the future of the world’s coral reefs, Marine and Gulland, J. A. 1982. Long-term potential Freshwater Research 50: 839-866. effects from management of the fish resources of the North Atlantic. J. Cons. Hollowed, A. B., and W. S. Wooster. Int. Expl. Mer. 40:6-16. 1992. Variability of winter ocean conditions and strong year classes of Hall, S. J. and B. Mainprize. 2004. Northeast Pacific groundfish, ICES Mar. Towards ecosystem-based fisheries Sci. Symp. 195: 433-444. management. Fish and Fisheries 5:1-20. Hutson, S. S., N. L. Barber, J. F. Kenny, Hanna, S. S. 1998. Institutions for K. S. Linsey, D. S. Lumia, and M. A. marine ecosystems: economic incentives Maupin. 2004. Estimated Use of Water and fishery management. Ecological in the United States in 2000. USGS Applications 8 (Supplement): S170- Circular 1268, United States Geological S174. Survey, Reston, VA., 46 pp.

91 Intergovernmental Oceanographic Research, report of a workshop held 18- Commission [IOC]. 1984. Ocean 20 April 2005, St. Petersburg, FL, Science for the Year 2000. Paris: sponsored by NSF, NOAA, and U.S. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Geological Survey, 88 pp. Commission, UNESCO. Lackey, R. T. 2001. Values, Policy, and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Ecosystem Health. Bioscience 51 (6): Change [IPCC]. 2001. Climate Change 437-443. 2001: Synthesis Report. A Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Lackey, R. T. 2004. Normative science. Third Assessment Report of the Fisheries 29: 38-39. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Larkin, P. A. 1996. Concepts and issues Change [Watson, R.T. and the Core in marine ecosystem management. Writing Team (eds.)]. Cambridge Reviews Fish Biology and Fisheries University Press, Cambridge, United 6:139-164. Kingdom, and New York, N.Y., 398 pp. Leeworthy, V.R. and P. Wiley. 2001. Juda, L. 1999. Considerations in Current Participation Patterns in Marine Developing a Functional Approach to Recreation: National Survey on the Governance of Large Marine Recreation and the Environment 2000. Ecosystems. Ocean Development and U.S. Department of Commerce, National International Law 30: 89-125. Oceanic and Atmospheric Administr- ation, National Ocean Service, Special Justic, D., R. E. Turner, and N. N. Projects, Silver Spring, MD. 47 p. Rabalais. 2003. Climate influences on riverine nitrate flux: Implications for Libecap, G. D. 1989. Contracting for coastal marine eutrophication and property rights. Cambridge University hypoxia, Estuaries 26(1): 1-11. Press, New York, NY.

Kiffney, P. M., J. P. Bull, and M. C. Link, J. S. 2002. Ecological Feller. 2002. Climatic and hydrologic considerations in fisheries management: variability in a coastal watershed of When does it matter? Fisheries 27 (4): southwestern British Columbia. Journal 10-17. of the American Water Resources Association 38:1437-1451. Mantua, N. J., S. R. Hare, Y. Zhang, J. M. Wallace, and R. C. Francis. 1997. A Kimmerer, W. J. 2002. Physical, Pacific interdecadal climate oscillation biological, and management responses to with impacts on salmon production, variable freshwater flow into the San Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 78: 1069-1079. Francisco Estuary. Estuaries 25:1275- 1290. Mascia, M. B. 2003. The Human Dimension of Coral Reef Marine Kleypas, J. A., R. A. Feely, V. J. Fabry, Protected Ares: Recent Social Science C. Langdon, C. L. Sabine, and L. L. Research and its Policy Implications. Robbins. 2006. Impacts of Ocean Conservation Biology 17 (2): 630-632. Acidification on Coral Reefs and Other Marine Calcifiers: A Guide for Future

92 McCreary, S., J. Gamman, B. Brokks, L. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Whitman, R. Bryson, B. Fuller, A. Administration [NOAA]. 2001. A New McInerny, and R. Glazer. 2001. Outlook from NOAA. Ecological Applying a Mediated Negotiation Forecasting: Expanding NOAA’s framework to Integrated Coastal Zone Assessment and Prediction Capabilities Management. Coastal Management 29: to Support Proactive Ecosystem 183-216. Management. 8 pp.

McGinn, N. A. (ed.). 2002. Fisheries in a National Oceanic and Atmospheric changing climate, American Fisheries Administration [NOAA]. 2002. Society, Bethesda, MD., 319 pp. Proceedings of the ECOHAB/GLOBEC Gulf of Maine Modeling Workshop. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Management and scientific 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well- informational needs for harmful algal being: Synthesis. Island Press, bloom and fisheries forecasting in the Washington, D.C. Gulf of Maine: A framework for moving toward an operational capability, 52 pp. Mote, P. W., E. A. Parson, A. F. Hamlet, http://www.cop.noaa.gov/ecoforecasting W. S. Keeton, D. Lettenmaier, N. /workshops/GulfofMaine_wksp_report.p Mantua, E. L. Miles, D. W. Peterson, D. df. L. Peterson, R. Slaughter, and A. K. Snover. 2003. Preparing for climatic National Oceanic and Atmospheric change: the water, salmon, and forests of Administration [NOAA]. 2003a. the Pacific Northwest. Climatic Change Ecological Forecasting: New Tools for 61, 45-88. Coastal and Marine Ecosystem Management, NOAA Technical Murawski, S. A. 1993. Climate change Memorandum NOS NCCOS 1, 118 pp. and marine fish distributions: Forecasting from historical analogy. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 122: 647-658. Administration [NOAA]. 2003b. Social Science Research Within NOAA: Murawski, S. A. 2000. Definitions of Review and Recommendations. Final overfishing from an ecosystem Report to the NOAA Science Advisory perspective. ICES Journal of Marine Board by the Social Science Review Science 57: 649-658. Panel. 96 pp.

Murawski, S. A. 2006. Top 10 Myths National Oceanic and Atmospheric Concerning Ecosystem Approaches to Administration [NOAA]. 2004. New th Ocean Resource Management. 7 Priorities for the 21st Century- NOAA’s Meeting, United Nations Open-Ended Strategic Plan: Updated for FY 2005- Informal Consultative Process on FY 2010, 28 pp. Oceans and the Law of the Sea, Panel Discussion: “Demystifying Ecosystem National Oceanic and Atmospheric Approaches and Oceans” June 12-16, Administration [NOAA]. 2005a. New 2006, NY. 5 pp. Priorities for the 21st Century- NOAA’s Strategic Plan: Updated for FY 2006-

93 FY 2011, 24 pp. http://www.csc.noaa.gov/mpa/Stakehold http://www.spo.noaa.gov/pdfs/STRATE er_Synthesis.pdf GIC%20PLANS/Strategic_Plan_2006_F INAL_04282005.pdf National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] Program National Oceanic and Atmospheric Planning and Integration. 2005. FY 2008 Administration [NOAA]. 2005b. - 2012 Annual Guidance Memorandum. Research in NOAA: Toward Understanding and Predicting Earth’s National Research Council [NRC]. 1994. Environment – A Five-Year Plan: Fiscal Priorities for Coastal Ecosystem Years 2005-2009, 60 pp. Science. National Academy Press, http://nrc.noaa.gov/Docs/NOAA_5- Washington, D.C. Year_Research_Plan_010605.pdf National Research Council [NRC]. National Oceanic and Atmospheric 1999a. Nature’s Numbers: Expanding Administration [NOAA]. 2005c. the National Economic Accounts to Understanding Global Ecosystems to Include the Environment. National Support Informed Decision-Making: A Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 20-Year Research Vision. Washington, D.C., 16 pp. National Research Council [NRC]. http://nrc.noaa.gov/Docs/Final_20- 1999b. Sharing the fish: toward a Year_Research_Vision.pdf national policy on individual fishing quotas. National Academy Press, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Washington, D.C. Administration [NOAA] Fisheries. 2004. Developing Guidelines for Regional National Research Council [NRC]. Marine Ecosystem Approaches to 1999c. Sustaining marine fisheries. Management. (NOAA Fisheries Service National Academy Press, Washington, Discussion Draft). U.S. Department of D.C. Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National National Research Council [NRC]. 2001. Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, Marine protected areas: tools for MD., 41 pp. sustaining ocean ecosystems. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] National National Research Council [NRC]. 2002. Marine Protected Areas Center. 2003. Effects of trawling and dredging on Social Science Research Strategy for seafloor habitat. National Academy Marine Protected Areas, 36 pp. Press, Washington, D.C.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric National Research Council, Committee Administration [NOAA] National on Assessment of Water Resources Marine Protected Areas Center. 2004. Research [NRC]. 2004. Confronting the Stakeholder Participation: A Synthesis Nation’s Water Problems. National of Current Literature, 26 pp. Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 310 pp.

94 National Research Council [NRC]. 2005. Paerl, H. and D. F. Millie. 1996. Decision Making for the Environment: Physiological Ecology of Toxic Aquatic Social and Behavioral Science Research Cyanobacteria. Phycologia Special Priorities. National Academies Press, Issue: Toxicology of Cyanobacteria 35 Washington, D.C., 291 pp. (6 Supplement): 160-167.

National Science and Technology Palmer, M., E. Bernhardt, E. Chornesky, Council [NSTC]. 2004. Science and S. Collins, A. Dobson, C. Duke, B. Technology to Support Fresh Water Gold, R. Jacobson, S. Kingsland, R. Availability in the United States. Kranz, M. Mappin, M. L. Martinez, F. National Science and Technology Micheli, J. Morse, M. Pace, M. Pascual, Council, Committee on Environment S. Palumbi, O. J. Reichman, A. Simons, and Natural Resoruces, Subcommittee A. Townsend, and M. Turner. 2004. on Water Availability and Quality, Ecology for a crowded planet. Science Washington, D.C., 19 pp. 304: 1251-1252.

Orr, J. C., V. J. Fabry, O. Aumont, L. Parker, R. O., Jr. and R. L. Dixon. 1998. Bopp, S. C. Doney, R. A. Feely, A. Changes in a North Carolina reef fish Gnanadesikan, N. Fruber, A. Ishida, F. community after 15 years of intense Joos, R. M. Key, K. Lindsay, E. Maier- fishing – global warming implications. Reimer, R. Matear, P. Monfray, A. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 127: 908-920. Mouchet. R. G. Najjar, G.-K. Plattner, K. B. Rodgers, C. L. Sabine, J. L. Pearce, D. W. (ed.). 1992. MIT Sarmiento, R. Schlitzer, R. D. Slater, I. Dictionary of Modern Economics. MIT J. Totterdel, M.-F. Weirig, Y. Press, Cambridge, MA. 486 pp. Yamanaka, and A. Yool. 2005. Anthropogenic ocean acidification over Pearcy, W. G. and A. Schoener. 1987. the twenty-first century and its impact on Changes in the marine biota coincident calcifying organisms. Nature 437: 681- with the El Niño in the northeastern 686. subarctic Pacific. J. Geophys. Res. 92: 14, 417-14, 428. O’Hara, S. 1995. Discursive Ethics in Ecosystems Valuation and Perry, A. L., P. J. Low, J. R. Ellis, and J. Environmental Policy. Ecological D. Reynolds. 2005. Climate change and Economics 16: 95-107. distribution shifts in marine fishes. Science 308: 1912-1915. Ostrom, E. 2005. Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton Peterson, C. H., S. D. Rice, J. W. Short, University Press, Princeton, N.J., 376 D. Esler, J. L. Bodkin, B. E. Ballachey, pp. and D. B. Irons. 2003. Long-term ecosystem response to the Exxon Overland, J. E. and P. J. Stabeno. 2004. Valdez oil spill. Science 302: 2082- Is the climate of the Bering Sea warming 2086. and affecting the ecosystem? Eos Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 85(33): 309-316. Peterson, W. T. and F. B. Schwing. 2003. A new climate regime in northeast

95 pacific ecosystems. Geophys. Res. Lett. and Management Act. NOAA Technical 30(17): 1896. Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-31, 54 pp.

Pew Oceans Commission. 2003. Rice, J. C. 2005. Implementation of the America’s Living Oceans: Charting a Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Course for Sea Change. 166 pp. Management – Asynchronous co- http://www.pewtrusts.org/pdf/env_pew_ evolution at the Interface Between oceans_final_report.pdf Science and Policy. In: Browman, H. I. and K. I. Stergiou (eds.). Politics and Pikitch, E. K., C. Santora, E. A. socio-economics of ecosystem-based Babcock, A. Bakun, R. Bonfil, D. O. approaches to the management of marine Conover, resources. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 275: P. Dayton, P. Doukakis, D. Fluharty, B. 265-270. Heneman, E. D. Houde, J. Link, P. A. Livingston, M. Mangel, M. K. Sainsbury, K. J., A. E. Punt, and A. D. McAllister, J. Pope, and K. J. Sainsbury. M. Smith. 2000. Design of operational 2004. Ecosystem-Based Fishery management strategies for achieving Management. Science 305: 346-347. fishery ecosystem objectives. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57 (3): 731-741. Polovina, J. J., E. Howell, D. R. Kobayashi, and M. P. Seki. 2001. The Schiffries, C. M. and A. Brewster (eds.). transition zone chlorophyll front, a 2004. Water for a Sustainable and dynamic global feature defining Secure Future: A Report of the Fourth migration and forage habitat for marine National Conference on Science, Policy resources. Prog. Oceanogr. 49 (1-4): and the Environment. National Council 469-483. for Science and the Environment, Washington, D.C., 83 pp. Powell, G. L., J. Matsumoto, and D. A. Brock. 2002. Methods for determining Sissenwine, M. P. and P. M. Mace. minimum freshwater inflow needs of 2003. Governance for responsible Texas bays and estuaries. Estuaries 25: fisheries: an ecosystem approach. In: 1262-1274. Sinclair, M., and G. Valdimarsson (eds.), Responsible fisheries in the marine Rappoport, D. 1998. Chapter 2. Defining ecosystem. FAO, Rome, & CABI Ecosystem Health. pp. 18-34. In: Publishing, Wallingford, UK. Ecosystem Health. Balckwell Science, Inc., Malden, Massachusetts, 372 pp. Stern, P. C., O. R. Young, and D. Druckman (eds.). 1992. Global Restrepo, V. R., G. G. Thompson, P. M. Environmental Change: Understanding Mace, W. L. Gabriel, L. L. Low, A. D. the Human Dimensions. National MacCall, R. D. Methot, J. E. Powers, B. Academy Press, Washington, D.C. L. Taylor, P. R. Wade, and J. F. Witzig.1998. Technical guidance on the Sturdevant, R. 2004. Great Lakes use of precautionary approaches to Ecological Forecasting Needs implementing National Standard 1 of the Assessment. NOAA Technical Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Memorandum GLERL 131, 60 pp.

96 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Sutinen, J. G. and K. Kuperan. 1999. A [EPA]. 2005. National Coastal Condition Socioeconomic Theory of Regulatory Report II. EPA-620/R-03/002. Compliance. International Journal of Social Economics 26(11): 174-193. U.S. General Accounting Office [GAO]. 2004. Watershed Management: Better Sutinen, J. G., P. Clay, C. Dyer, S. Coordination of Data Collection Efforts Edwards, J. Gates, T. Grigalunas, T. Needed to Support Key Decisions. Hennessey, L. Juda, A. Kitts, P. Logan, GAO-04-382, Washington, D.C., 145 J. Poggie, B. Rountree, S. Steinback, E. pp. Thunberg, H. Upton, and J. Walden. 2005. A Framework for Monitoring and Western Governors’ Association [WGA]. 2004. Creating a Drought Early Assessing Socioeconomics and st Governance of Large Marine Warning System for the 21 Century. Ecosystems. In T. A. Hennessey and J. Western Governors’ Association, G. Sutinen, Sustaining Large Marine Denver, CO., 13 pp. Ecosystems: The Human Dimension. 380 pp. Whitman, R. L. and M. B. Nevers. 2003. Foreshore sand as a source of Townsend, R.E. and S.G. Pooley. 1995. Escherichia coli in nearshore water of a Distributed governance in fisheries., pp. Lake Michigan beach. Applied and 47-58, In S. Hanna and M. Munasinghe Environmental Microbiology 69 (9): (eds.). Property rights and the 5555-5562. environment: social and ecological issues. Beijer International Institute of Witherell, D. (ed.). 2005. Managing our Ecological Economics and the World Nation’s Fisheries II: Focus on the Bank, Washington, D.C. future. Proceedings of a conference on fisheries management in the United U.S. Climate Change Science Program. States held in Washington, D.C., March 2003. Strategic Plan for the Climate 24-26, 2005, pp. 34-39. Change Science Program Final Report. World Health Organization [WHO]. http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/s 1998. Expert meeting on beach public tratplan2003/final/default.htm health issues, Annapolis, MD., Nov.

1998 (Reported in: Bartram, J. and G. U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy Reese. 2000. Monitoring Bathing [USCOP]. 2004. An Ocean Blueprint for Waters: A Practical Guide to the Design the 21st Century, 676 pp. and Implementation of Assessments and http://oceancommission.gov/documents/ Monitoring Programmes. E & FN Spon, full_color_rpt/welcome.html#full London).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

[EPA]. 2002. Community Culture and the Environment: Guide to Understanding Sense of Place. EPA 842- B-01-003, Office of Water.

97