NONPROFIT ORG. 41ºN U.S. POSTAGE PAID A PUBLICATION OF THE RHODE ISLAND WAKEFIELD, RI SEA GRANT AND LAND GRANT PROGRAMS PERMIT NO. 19 A PUBLICATION OF RHODE ISLAND SEA GRANT & THE UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND COASTAL INSTITUTE 4141 NN VOL 3 NO 1 2006 Solomon’s Work:

The Bay Window Program has provided a model for showing how an integrated effort of monitoring and assessment, among a number of partner agencies, is the best way to proceed. MonitoringMonitoring NarragansettNarragansett BayBay SpecialSpecial Section:Section: TheThe BayBay WindowWindow ProgramProgram Publications

41ºN STAFF MANAGING EDITOR SEA GRANT Malia Schwartz Dear Readers: Rhode Island Sea Grant College Program CONTRIBUTING EDITORS Please send requests to: Rhode Island Sea Grant and the University of Rhode Island (URI) Coastal Insti- Publications Strategic and Organizational Development Monica Allard Cox ° Chip Young tute have joined forces in a new partnership to bring you 41 N: A Publication of Rhode Rhode Island Sea Grant Plan 2006–2010 and Implementation Plan Island Sea Grant and the URI Coastal Institute. This is a natural alliance. The two pro- University of Rhode Island Bay Campus 2006–2008 DESIGN/ART DIRECTION grams work together on many initiatives, and 41°N is a perfect venue to bring these Narragansett, RI 02882-1197 (401) 874-6842 Puffin Enterprises projects to you. These plans describe Rhode Island Sea Grant’s strategic Make check or money order payable to Rhode Island Sea Grant/URI. investments and goals in its themes of Sustainable Fisheries The magazine will highlight Sea Grant and Coastal Institute research, outreach, WEB DESIGN Sorry, no credit cards accepted. and Sustainable Coastal Communities and Ecosystems, as Monica Allard Cox and education activities on a particular theme, as well as deliver the latest information well as the program’s plan for reaching those goals. RIU-Q-05- on the new, innovative, and exciting connections we are making in the state and 001 and RIU-Q-06-001. Free. EDITORIAL BOARD Public Access to the Rhode Island Coast Peter August beyond. Monica Allard Cox (ed.) Barry Costa-Pierce The current issue of 41°N focuses on efforts to monitor Narragansett Bay and Be sure to visit the on-line Rhode Island Sea Grant Bookstore, which offers many of our publications as free pdf downloads: Arthur Gold its living resources, with special attention given to the Bay Window Program—an This guide to over 340 public access sites in Rhode Island will Judith Swift bring you to well-known destinations and hidden treasures in seagrant.gso.uri.edu/bookstore exciting and ambitious enterprise to monitor the ecological condition of the Bay and Rhode Island’s 21 coastal towns. Descriptions of each site include COVERS: Buoy monitoring provides mea- to rapidly convey these results to our resource management community. Sen. Lincoln uses and amenities, and maps indicate each site’s location along the surements for dissolved oxygen and other Chafee has been instrumental in continuing to secure Bay Window funding for many shore. Color photographs highlight features, and articles in the factors, a system that plays a vital role in years now. The program is the poster child of successful partnerships: The Bay Win- guide provide information about Rhode Island coastal habitats, Aquaculture Aquaculture is an international journal devoted to research on the Bay Window program. dow team includes the R.I. Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM); fishing, surfing, boating, and birding opportunities, safety tips, urban shorelines, and more. 84 pages. RIU-H-04-001. $10 each plus $3 the exploration, improvement, and management of all aquatic scientists from many departments at URI, Roger Williams University, and Brown Uni- 41ºN is published twice per year by Rhode each for shipping and handling. food resources. Barry Costa-Pierce, Rhode Island Sea Grant Island Sea Grant and the Coastal Institute at the versity; NOAA Fisheries; the RIDEM Narragansett Bay Estuary Program; and the NOAA director, is the editor of the Husbandry and Management University of Rhode Island (URI). The Rhode Narragansett Bay Estuarine Research Reserve. section, which has produced two special editions, one in Island Sea Grant College Program was estab- October 2003 on “Management of Aquaculture Effluents,” lished in 1966 to promote the conservation and The Bay Window Program has made a difference—a big difference—in the way Proceedings of Fisheries Educational Workshops guest-edited by Cheng-Sheng Lee and Patricia J. O’Bryen, and sustainable development of marine resources for Rhode Island manages its coastal resources. The R/V John H. Chafee, purchased with Bay These workshops were held by Sea Grant Fisheries Extension the public benefit through research, outreach, and programs in Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Connecticut, and one in March 2006 on “Seaweed-based Integrated Maricul- education. Funding comes primarily from federal Window funding, is the platform for RIDEM’s fisheries monitoring program. The net- Maine on topics of concern in fisheries management. ture,” guest-edited by Rui Santos. The Husbandry and sources, with matching funds provided by states work of monitoring buoys in Narragansett Bay, many of which were purchased with Management section of the journal reviewed more than 400 and private-sector groups. The URI Coastal Institute works in part- Bay Window funding, are the cornerstone of Rhode Island’s estuarine monitoring frame- • Proceedings of the New England Bycatch research manuscript submissions in 2005. In early 2006 the nership with local, state, federal, and international Workshops journal moved to a new on-line, web-based manuscript agencies to provide a neutral setting where work. The NarrBay.org web portal, built with Bay Window funds, now distributes 7.5 Margaret Petruny-Parker et al. (eds.) submittal and review system, which will improve, as well as knowledge is advanced, issues discussed, infor- gigabytes of Bay-related data a year via the Internet. And the Mariner Shuttle data are shorten, the scientific peer review process for authors. For mation synthesized, and solutions developed for now available on-line for use by the resource management community. the sustainable use and management of coastal Bycatch is a serious issue in fisheries, and this series of work- more information about Aquaculture or ordering information ecosystems. The Coastal Institute works across We truly hope you enjoy this publication and that it both informs and challenges shops focused on what the term bycatch means, what is on the special editions, contact the publisher at: and beyond traditional structures to encourage www.elsevier.com. new approaches to problem solving. your views on the many fascinating environmental and resource utilization issues we currently known about bycatch in New England, and what This publication is sponsored in part by face together as a state. information is available on options to reduce the problem. Rhode Island Sea Grant, under NOAA Grant No. 48 pages. RIU-W-03-003. $3. NA86RG0076. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOAA or any of its sub- • Who Gets the Fish? Proceedings of the New agencies. The U.S. Government is authorized to Sincerely yours, England Workshops on Rights-Based Fisheries produce and distribute reprints for governmen- Management Approaches tal purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation that may appear hereon. Margaret Petruny-Parker et al. (eds.) Change of address, subscription informa- tion, or editorial correspondence: 41ºN, Rhode This series of workshops on rights-based fisheries manage- Island Sea Grant Communications Office, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett Bay ment approaches was aimed at providing an overview of the Campus, Narragansett, RI 02882-1197. Telephone: different types of rights-based fishery management options (401) 874-6842. Fax: (401) 874-6817. E-mail: beyond the individual transferable quota (ITQ) systems most [email protected]. 41ºN is free to Rhode Island widely talked about. 24 pages. RIU-W-03-002. $3. residents. The cost is $10 per year for out-of- state and foreign addresses. Postmaster: Send • Proceedings of the New England Workshops on address changes to 41ºN, Rhode Island Sea Grant Marine Protected Areas Communications Office, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett Bay Campus, Narragansett, Margaret Petruny-Parker et al. (eds.) RI 02882-1197. Peter August, Director Barry Costa-Pierce, Director This series of workshops on marine protected areas, or URI Coastal Institute Rhode Island Sea Grant MPAs, tackled this controversial topic by exploring what MPAs are, how they work, and whether they can be successful in helping to rebuild stocks and provide for sustainable fisheries. 76 pages. RIU-W-03-004. Available on-line at seagrant. Rhode Island gso.uri.edu/bookstore or from National Sea Grant Library only.

Printed on recycled paper. THE CONBAY WINDOWTENTS PROGRAM

Special Section: The Bay Window Program

2 The Bay Window Program: Monitoring and 18 Up To The Minute Assessing Changing Fisheries Yields, Ecol- ogy, and Water Quality in Narragansett Bay 19 What’s Happening to Our Lobsters? By J. Stanley Cobb By Kenneth Sherman In an editorial reflecting insights gained over a 35- The cooperative approach of the Bay Window Pro- year career, J. Stanley Cobb, URI biological sciences gram, a collaboration of the R.I. Department of professor emeritus and past Rhode Island Sea Grant Environmental Management (RIDEM), University of researcher, looks at why lobsters have flourished in Rhode Island (URI), Roger Williams University, Brown University, the Narragansett Bay National Estuarine some areas but crashed in Rhode Island. Research Reserve (NBNERR), and NOAA Fisheries, has meant that the best of Rhode Island marine science 21 Monitoring Lobsters for Shell Disease is applied to support management actions for the By Malia Schwartz health and sustainability of marine resources and critical environments of the Bay. Results are docu- Because of her efforts to ‘get to know [her] animal,’ ° mented in this special section of 41 N: A Publication of Kathleen Castro, Sea Grant Sustainable Fisheries Rhode Island Sea Grant and the URI Coastal Institute. Extension Program director, identified changes in the Rhode Island lobster population that signaled 4 How Are the Fish Doing? the first signs of trouble. Collaborators: Mark Gibson, Najih Lazar, Timothy Lynch, J. Christopher Powell, and Lawrence Buckley 25 RWU Law Students Address Cutting- 1 Edge Water Pollution Issues in 7 Sensors Monitor Water Quality in National Competition Narragansett Bay By Lance Young Collaborators: Christopher Deacutis and Susan Kiernan Rhode Island Sea Grant sponsored the team from 10 Eutrophication in Narragansett Bay Roger Williams University (RWU) School of Law to Collaborators: Christopher Deacutis and Candace Oviatt compete at the National Environmental Moot Court competition held at Pace University School 12 Mariner Shuttle: Cutting Edge of Law in White Plains, N.Y. Teams competing in the Technology Circling the Bay Pace competition must try a hypothetical court case based on salient environmental issues. Collaborators: Mark Berman, Elaine Calderone, Jack Jossi, Christopher Melrose, Candace Oviatt DEPARTMENTS 14 Integrating the Effort: The Rhode Island Bays, Rivers, and Watersheds 26 IN BRIEF Coordination Team 32 Coming Up . . . 15 NarrBay.org: A Digital Gateway to 33 Publications Data and Information on Narragansett Bay Visit 41°N on-line at: seagrant.gso.uri.edu/41N 16 The R/V John H. Chafee

17 Write Us On Monitoring Narragansett Bay We are interested in what you have to say. By U.S. Senator Lincoln Chafee Please write to Letters, 41°N Editorial Office, Rhode Island Sea Grant, URI Bay Campus, Narragansett, RI 02882, or e-mail [email protected]. “The success of the initial pro- gram led to additional funding

in 2000. The continuation of A PUBLICATION OF RHODE ISLAND SEA GRANT & THE UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND the Bay Window Program COASTAL INSTITUTE VOL 3 NO 1 2006 involved researchers from the 4141 NN R.I. Department of Environ- mental Management, NOAA Solomon’s Work: Fisheries, the Narragansett Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, the University of 2 Rhode Island, Roger Williams University, and Brown University.” –Kenneth Sherman, Monitoring Narragansett NOAA Fisheries Bay

Bay Window Executive Steering Committee

Kenneth Sherman, Bay Window Program Chairman, NOAA Fisheries Marie-Christine Aquarone, NOAA Fisheries Peter August, University of Rhode Island Coastal Institute Mark Berman, NOAA Fisheries Christopher Deacutis, R.I. Department of Environmental Management Mark Gibson, R.I. Department of Environmental Management Susan Kiernan, R.I. Department of Environmental Management Photos and graphs in Bay Window Paul Nitschke, NOAA Fisheries-Woods Hole Special Section courtesy of the Bay Window Program. Candace Oviatt, University of Rhode Island Graduate School of Oceanography THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM

The Bay Window Program: Monitoring and Assessing Changing Fisheries Yields, Ecology, and Water Quality in Narragansett Bay By Kenneth Sherman

In 1997, Sen. John H. Chafee, responding to significant gaps in scientific data that were needed for assessing resource damage to Narragansett Bay from the North Cape oil spill, sponsored a cooperative project to be jointly managed by the R.I. Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) and NOAA The cooperative Fisheries. The goal of the project was to advance understanding of the fish stocks, fisheries, ecology, and approach of the Bay health of Narragansett Bay in support of RIDEM’s fisheries management responsibilities. The approach Window Program, was designed to enhance RIDEM’s fish and fisheries monitoring and to support and coordinate among RIDEM, URI, Narragansett Bay monitoring and assessment activities involving federal, state, and academic institutions. RWU, Brown Univer- Early projects included the design and construction of a new RIDEM research vessel, an analysis of sity, NBNERR, and fish trawl survey results, an assessment of heavy metal and organic contaminants in the sediments of NOAA, has proven Narragansett Bay and Rhode Island coastal ponds, the establishment of a network of three continuously successful... The Bay sampling fixed-site stations, and an assessment of Narragansett Bay productivity using advanced technol- Window Program ogy deployed monthly from an undulating towed-body sampler (Mariner Shuttle) to assess spatial and represents for Rhode temporal patterns of primary productivity and plankton distribution. The early findings of the project Island marine scientists components were documented in the Rhode Island Sea Grant publication Narragansett Bay Window—The and managers a Cooperative Bay Program Phase 1. The success of the initial program led to additional funding in 2000. The unique and effective continuation of the Bay Window Program involved researchers from RIDEM, NOAA Fisheries, the means for working to- Narragansett Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve (NBNERR), the University of Rhode Island (URI), gether to improve the Roger Williams University (RWU), and Brown University. The program focused on enhancing assessments environmental assets of the fish and fisheries of the Bay, as well as extending the baseline of data on the environmental and eco- and socioeconomic logical conditions that support the Bay’s finfish and shellfish stocks. During this phase, a website, benefits provided by www.NarrBay.org, was set up to serve as a clearinghouse for scientific and general information on the Bay for the people Narragansett Bay. The research vessel R/V John H. Chafee was equipped, fixed sites were kept operational, 3 of Rhode Island. monthly transects were continued, and RIDEM maintained work on the characterization of the fish and fisheries of the Bay. New projects initiated were an outreach component to facilitate the dissemination of Bay Window results to the public and scientific community, an intense series of sampling cruises in the up- per Bay to assess the extent of hypoxic events, an examination of Bay productivity through remote sens- ing, and a characterization of the benthic fauna in relation to changing winter temperature and the absence of the winter-spring bloom. The continued monitoring and assessments of the Bay Window Program are the principal source of science-based information on Narragansett Bay productivity, fish and fisheries, and pollution and ecosys- tem health. Results from the various elements of the Bay Window Program are systematically synthesized and reported to the local, state, and federal agencies responsible for governing and protecting the Bay. Results are documented in this special section of 41°N: A Publication of Rhode Island Sea Grant and the URI Coastal Institute. The cooperative approach of the Bay Window Program, among RIDEM, URI, RWU, Brown University, NBNERR, and NOAA, has proven successful. Working together under the framework of the Bay Window Program, the best of Rhode Island marine science is applied to provide data and timely information in sup- port of management actions for the recovery of the health and sustainability of the great wealth of marine resources and critical environments of the Bay. Based on the assessment of the ecological condition of the Bay, a major nitrogen removal effort is under way that aims to reduce nitrogen inputs from wastewater treatment plant effluent. This will have a positive impact in improving the ecology and health of the Bay. When a major hypoxic event and fish kill occurred in Narragansett Bay, the timing of which was predicted Researchers launch a by Bay Window researchers, RIDEM increased its water quality measurements, and the Bay Window Pro- stationary buoy. gram expanded its fixed-site network to additional areas of the Bay. The Bay Window Pro- gram represents for Rhode Island marine scientists and managers a unique and effective means for working together to improve the environmental assets and socioeconomic benefits provided by the Bay for the people of Rhode Island.

—Kenneth Sherman is Bay Window Steering Committee Chairman and Director of the NOAA Fisheries Narragansett Laboratory and NOAA Fisheries Office of Marine Ecosystems Studies. HOW ARE THE FISH DOING? Collaborators: Mark Gibson, Najih Lazar, Timothy Lynch, and J. Christopher Powell, RIDEM, and From an economic standpoint, fish, lobster, and shellfish are Narragansett Lawrence Buckley, NOAA Fisheries Bay’s most valuable resources. Yet those fisheries face many challenges. The re- cession of the winter flounder population, the troubles faced by the lobster in- dustry ranging from oil spills to shell disease, and the ongoing closing of conditional shellfishing areas in the upper Bay after rain or snowfalls or other unexpected pollution events can make Bay management and planning a night- mare. And the impact is deeply felt in the wallets of the fishermen and associ- Death Out of Sight ated industries that rely on a healthy Bay fishery. From a scientific perspective, these animals are the living reflection of A researcher from Brown University overall conditions in the Bay. From their position in the food web, their health found billions of blue mussels dead after a as a group integrates all the other factors that affect the Bay. Any type of change, whether it be water quality, climate, planktonic plants and animals, or 2001 low oxygen event in upper Narragansett human fishing pressure, are ultimately reflected in the fish and shellfish popula- Bay that was reported in the journal Ecology in tions. The Bay Window Program can provide coastal managers with the infor- 2006. In 2003, the public saw millions of dead mation they need to assess not only the effect these conditions have on those populations, but also what they can do to eliminate the harmful impacts. fish—mainly menhaden—along the shores and beaches of Greenwich Bay during a summer low-oxygen period. But unseen beneath the WAKE-UP CALL surface of the bay were astronomical numbers There are few people in Rhode Island who will forget August 20, 2003. of organisms that were unable to move out of That was the date of a massive fish kill, described as the worst in over a cen- tury, which left one million fish dead in the Bay. The cause was fairly simple: they harm’s way and failed to float and be counted, had suffocated, deprived of the oxygen in the water that allowed them to says Bay Window benthic ecologist Candace 4 breathe. Oviatt, URI oceanography professor. This Bay Window researchers were perhaps the least surprised by the occur- rence. Having tracked dissolved oxygen levels through the project’s buoy moni- dead marine life included blue mussels, worms, toring and the “Insomniacs” oxygen-mapping program, there was evidence that softshell clams, shrimp, crabs, sea stars, snails, this “perfect storm” of harmful factors was brewing. One researcher, the late amphipods, and lobsters. Dana Kester, URI chemical oceanography professor, had predicted that period of August 2003 as being particularly vulnerable to severe low oxygen events. Why is this so important to recognize? The fish kill was a wake-up call not just to the public, but to the scientific With the loss of these populations, community as well. There was recognition that the lack of oxygen (hypoxia) was Narragansett Bay loses the prey of bottom part of a larger issue occurring throughout Narragansett Bay and not just con- fish and sportfish, shellfish for human harvest, fined to Greenwich Bay, where the fish kill occurred. To the scientific commu- nity, the wake-up call was that the fish kill was caused by a fatal mix of factors. and the cleansing capacity of filter feeders. The Some factors, such as the weather, wind, and water temperature, are uncontrol- Brown University findings noted that the lable. Others, such as effluent from wastewater treatment plants and septic sys- filtering capacity by blue mussels had been tems or storm-water runoff that brought nutrients or toxic pollutants, could be, and needed to be, better controlled. reduced by 75 percent after the loss of Decisions needed to be made by coastal managers supported by the best mussel reefs to low oxygen in 2001. Bay science available, with backing from the public and policymakers. The public Window fishery researcher Timothy Lynch, awareness of the number of factors needing to be addressed to prevent, or at least be prepared for, another such calamity as the fish kill, has grown since RIDEM fisheries scientist, while survey 2003. The Bay Window program has provided a model for showing how an in- trawling from the R/V Chafee, noted he had tegrated effort of monitoring and assessment, among a number of partner never seen the Bay so clear as prior to the agencies, is the best way to proceed. loss of the mussels in 2001. The Bay Window Program seeks to document, understand, and help plan the solutions for the low oxygen conditions that cause these massive mortali- ties out of the public view. THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM SIDEBAR WHAT IS THE NET RESULT? A Place to Call Home In keeping with Bay Window’s top priority of monitoring the health of Narragansett Bay, the R. I. Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) One of the areas in which the Bay Win- conducts monthly and seasonal bottom trawl surveys aboard the R/V John H. dow Program is augmenting and fine-tuning Chafee. The excitement of a net spilling its bulging catch all over the deck beach seine and fish trawl surveys is by analyz- might detract from the fact that this exercise is critical to determining which ing the production of winter flounder and its species are in trouble, which are thriving, and whether management efforts, origin. such as catch restrictions, are working. The questions being asked are whether Bay Window fish trawls have continued RIDEM’s fisheries work going back there are different stocks or groups of winter over 25 years. The continuous surveying is critical to making informed man- flounder that spawn in various places, or do all agement decisions. Already, research is showing that protecting larger fish Rhode Island juvenile flounder come from a through fisheries management measures has given stocks the chance to re- single, genetically homogenous group of fish? cover. A recent 2005 spring trawl has also shown a spike in the Age 1 class of Do certain groups return every year to the winter flounder that opened researchers’ eyes. “The task now is to monitor same spawning grounds such as Wickford Har- the key area between the new age class moving out of shallow waters and be- bor, the Providence River, or Mt. Hope Bay? coming adult. This is where we may see the impact of nutrients or other fac- Bay Window researchers are investigating tors,” said Mark Gibson, RIDEM deputy chief for marine fisheries. these questions to better understand the con- These are questions that the fish trawl survey prompts for Bay Window tribution of different portions of the Bay to researchers. Is the habitat better? Is it improved water quality? Does chronic juvenile winter flounder production and to lack of oxygen in some spots make fish move around? Is the food supply shift- help manage the species more effectively. If ing? As one scientist observed, “The fish aren’t where they used to be.” there is a rich, delineated stock structure It’s finding the answers to these questions over time that make each and composed of many different groups, the fish every trawl net full of fish a valuable piece of the puzzle. will return to the same location to spawn, which may eventually result in overfishing, due to concentrated effort in an area. FLIP-FLOPPING FISHERIES There are serious management implica- tions in determining whether a single homog- 5 Bay Window data have been tracking a shift in Bay fisheries that has been enous stock exists versus several more or less a trend from the 1990s through the early 2000s. This trend shows that bot- isolated stocks. Loss of essential habitat and tom-dwelling (demersal) fish have declined sharply, while off-bottom (pelagic) overexploitation of local stocks may have species have increased. contributed to the poor recruitment of This has had economic implications as well as raised questions about what Narragansett Bay winter flounder. Improved conditions in the Bay caused this flip-flop. Bottom-dwelling fish, such as winter knowledge of stock structure and habitat use flounder and tautog, command four to five times more money on the market by juvenile winter flounder should result in than fish in the upper part of the water column, such as scup, squid, or butter- new insight into the poor recruitment of win- fish. Although the economic loss has not been computed, it has a ripple ef- ter flounder in Narragansett Bay and lead to fect—from the fishermen on the water to the wholesalers, restaurants, and better management of the species. For ex- retail markets. In addition, recreational fishing in the Bay has dropped off. ample, if a particular section of the Bay con- RIDEM fisheries scientist Timothy Lynch estimates it may be down to one- tributes a disproportionately large portion of tenth of what it was 20 years ago as the populations of prized fish such as win- winter flounder production, then special ter flounder have dropped off. emphasis could be placed on maintaining and “The mix of recreational opportunities and commercial value is not what improving habitat in that area. it was,” notes Gibson. However, by 2005, the numbers of pelagic fish began to drop off, while demersals showed some increases, such as the spike in Age 1 winter flounder. Five years ago, Gibson said, “We might be seeing the beginning of another re- versal, with pelagics trending down and demersals recovering—but we’ll need “Winter flounder were the first fish another five to 10 years to know for sure whether this is a long-term, stable shift or just a temporary fluctuation.” you caught in the year, and the last As researchers and coastal managers struggle with how to adjust to changing fishery populations, are they facing challenges that they can actually fish you caught.” do something about, or are there elements that are beyond their control, such as climate? Inevitably, the bigger picture is made of human-caused problems, —Timothy Lynch, RIDEM fisheries scientist, ranging from increased fishing pressure, low dissolved oxygen, excess nutrient describing the abundance and constant concentrations, increased water temperatures from power plants, habitat loss, such as eelgrass beds, and sediment contamination. Bay Window research is presence of winter flounder in the past. helping to ensure that everything within the control of manageable factors is being done, informed by the best science available.

SIDEBAR Winter Winter? Flounder: :Flounder Turning Turning the the Tide? Tide

One of the more notorious charted collapses of a Narragansett Bay fishery is that of winter flounder. But as the Bay Window Program’s monthly and seasonal trawl surveys by RIDEM have recently noted, there may be hope for a turnaround that would have not only ecological im- Frequency plications, but serious economic impacts for what was once a major source of revenue for commercial fishermen. The winter flounder fishery in the Bay and coastal waters peaked in the late 1970s but crashed by 1993. RIDEM’s Division of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) tagging stud- Length (cm) ies from 1986 to 1990 showed high rates of exploitation of the popular recreational and commercial fish, indicating overfishing. Although some improvement has occurred, abundance remains low relative to historic levels as evi- denced by DFW bottom trawl surveys. Persistent low abundance is perplexing to scientists because extensive lo- cal and regional management efforts have been directed at Frequency winter flounder. The abundance of “young-of-the-year” winter flounder (Age 0) has increased in Narragansett Bay shallows based on DFW beach seine surveys. These new fish, however, do not seem to survive to the older indi- Length (cm) viduals sampled in deeper Bay waters by the bottom trawls. A spike in the charting of the once-thriving winter flounder in spring 2005 is giving The apparent survival bottleneck is unlikely related to fisheries scientists hope for recovery. The winter flounder fishery is valuable both 6 fishing pressure since it occurs at young ages not yet part commercially and recreationally. of the fishery. Recent Bay Window studies are pointing to other human-induced factors, including hypoxia, excess nu- trient concentrations, and habitat loss, as plausible expla- nations. The fact that other demersal resident fish, including those not subject to fishing pressure, have de- clined sharply lends support to the results of these studies. But what researchers have been seeing of late may be cause for hope. Catches of winter flounder in bottom trawl surveys can be separated into age groups using length-frequency analysis—models developed with Bay Window funding. Fish caught in the spring trawl survey less than 15 centi- meters (cm) in length are likely Age 1 fish. By convention, they would have been Age 0 fish in the summer seine sur- vey a year before. Applying the Age 1 length cutoff to the time series of trawl data, one can examine the abundance The 2005 catch of the Age 1 of this year class over time. In doing so, Bay Window re- group was the highest in over a searchers found that the abundance of Age 1 fish was very low from 1998 to 2003, but has begun to increase. In fact, decade. It may be that Bay con- the 2005 catch of this age group was the highest in over a decade. It may be that Bay conditions have recently ditions have recently changed, changed such that the survival of young-of-the-year winter flounder has improved. This could be evidence of the be- so that the survival of young-of- ginning of a recovery. While Mark Gibson, RIDEM deputy chief for marine fisheries, cautions that it may take another the-year winter flounder has im- five to 10 years to confirm a recovery, Bay Window moni- toring will be able to document the underlying changes proved. This could be evidence occurring in the Bay and to aid fisheries scientists and of the beginning of a recovery. managers in determining the relationship between water quality and fishery production. THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM

Sensors Monitor Water

Quality in Narragansett Collaborators: Christopher Deacutis and Bay Susan Kiernan, RIDEM

As the Bay Window Program keeps (RIDEM)/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) funding, was instrumental in adding its fingers on the pulse of Narragansett five new stations at strategic points selected by scientists to better characterize hypoxic Bay to continuously determine its health, conditions in the Bay. There are now six stations on docks and seven deployed on buoys. a key element of that monitoring and At a few locations, data are retrieved manually every two weeks as part of the regular net- assessment is the fixed-site water quality work operations. But at eight stations, telemetry equipment is used to electronically feed the monitoring system, also referred to as the data to agency computers several times a day. From the data, Bay Window scientists and buoy monitoring program. RIDEM managers get an indication of what is happening in Narragansett Bay and water qual- This system is analogous to an elec- ity conditions that may cause disruptions, such as fish kills, are identified as they emerge. The trocardiogram that is part of a regular information also allows scientists to look at longer-term trends to guide management deci- physical exam. A number of sensors sions. Once the analysis is complete, it is posted on the Narrbay.org (see page 15) and placed at strategic points on the body RIDEM Bay Assessment and Response Team websites for easy public access. feed information directly to the ECG ma- The fixed-site network represents a collaborative effort among RIDEM, Narragansett chine, which prints out what the sensors Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, Narragansett Bay Commission, the University of pick up for a doctor to analyze. This is in Rhode Island’s Graduate School of Oceanography, and Roger Williams University to monitor essence how the fixed-site system water quality in Narragansett Bay. Under the Bay Window Program, significant progress has works—water quality sensors are de- been made toward ensuring interchangeability of the data among the partners that enhances ployed on docks and buoys throughout the value of the entire dataset compiled from the network. This has been accomplished via much of the Bay. use of common field procedures and data editing protocols and reinforced by joint training The sensors for this watery ECG are programs. called sondes. Little over a foot The data acquired by the fixed-site monitoring program is being used to assess water long and resembling miniature quality conditions relative to Rhode Island’s stan- 7 rockets, they contain electronic dards as required by the federal Clean Water Act. In sensors that measure tempera- judging whether the Bay waters are able to support ture, salinity, dissolved oxygen, healthy aquatic life, RIDEM focuses on the level of pH, turbidity, chlorophyll, and dissolved oxygen (DO). If DO levels decline too depth. With measurements much, marine life literally suffocates. The new salt- made every 15 minutes, day and water DO criteria enforced by RIDEM reflects a night, the amount of data they time component; for example, not less than 2.9 mil- record and transmit to scien- ligrams per liter (mg/l) for more than 24 hours dur- tists belies their size. As of ing larval recruitment season. A recent review of 2005, the fixed-site monitoring fixed-site data by RIDEM and Bay Window scientists program has expanded to 13 indicated that conditions were better during 2004– sites around the Bay, up from 2005 due to relative coolness and dryness, than eight locations in 2003. Bay 2003, which had significant hypoxia problems. The Window funding, in combina- data continue to show that during portions of the tion with the R.I. Department summer, hypoxic conditions in the estuarine Provi- of Environmental Management dence and Seekonk rivers, as well as Greenwich Bay, are more prevalent than at stations further south in the Bay. Restoring healthy DO levels requires control of the pollutant loadings that contribute directly, or indirectly, to the depletion of oxygen. For the Providence and Seekonk rivers and affected portions of the upper Bay, a nutrient reduction strategy involving wastewater treatment–facility upgrades is being implemented to control the algal blooms that contribute to hypoxia events. The success of this significant investment in pollution abatement will be evaluated using data made available by the continuing op- eration of the fixed-site network as well as targeted DO ...the Insomniac surveys provided the first regular DO monitoring in Narragansett Bay.

surveys. Fortunately, state managers have access to this important data largely due to the Bay Window Program’s prior timely investments in enhancing these monitoring programs. Bay Window monitoring was the first consistent monitoring to clearly indi- cate that low DO extended beyond Conimicut Point and could reach hypoxia levels similar to those found in the Gulf of Mexico (less than 2 mg/l) in the upper Bay and even in the upper East and West pas- sages on an intermittent basis. Prior to this finding, there were hints but no clear signal as to the extent or frequency of low DO. The extent is now clear from the Insomniac surveys and Mariner Shuttle data, while the frequency (and linkage to neap tides) is seen through the continuous fixed-site monitor- ing. This evidence has been used to assess the con- dition of the upper Bay as well as Greenwich Bay and the Providence and Seekonk tidal rivers as “not Monitoring and assessment remain labor-intensive efforts, meeting water quality standards for dissolved oxy- whether it is doing hands-on work at docks, or sorting through 8 huge amounts of electronic computer data to analyze the gen.” The state and EPA are now required to rectify measurements and detect trends. The constant collection and the problem—in this case through nutrient treat- evaluation is critical to help guide coastal managers to make ment at the most cost-effective point, the wastewa- effective planning and management decisions. ter treatment facilities. In addition, within the fixed-site network, several critical stations are located in the areas expected to see changes in water quality over the next several years as improvements at 11 Rhode Island treatment plants come on-line, eventually re- ducing the seasonal nutrient pollutant loadings by approximately 50 percent over 1995–1996 levels. The sondes inside the floating stations Bay Window scientists are also interested in are the marine equivalent of an electrocardiogram for humans, studying the hypoxia problem down-Bay. Questions continually providing data on the Bay’s remain such as: How far down the Bay do hypoxic health. conditions extend? How often and how persistent are these hypoxic conditions? What is the effect on our fisheries? Continued data collection and assimi- The Insomniacs’ work has lation via the Bay Window Program will be vital to finding answers to these questions. dovetailed with and comple- mented other monitoring efforts, including the Bay Window buoy network, by providing an area-wide picture of oxygen levels that can be compared to data from the buoys. THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM SIDEBAR The Insomniacs

In 1999, puzzled by sporadic low oxygen levels in upper Narragansett Bay, events continue in daylight in the bottom wa- the Providence River, and Greenwich Bay, and how they might be linked to fish ters, so now we go out in the early morning,” kills, Narragansett Bay Estuary Program (NBEP) scientist Christopher Deacutis, says Deacutis. now a member of the Bay Window steering committee, had a novel idea: He or- As he further explains, “You now can have ganized a survey team to measure DO throughout the upper Bay and Providence adaptive monitoring as well as adaptive manage- River at night. This volunteer team of nocturnal researchers was later dubbed the ment.” More information about the Insomniacs “Insomniacs.” Late evening to dawn is the time of lowest DO, because photosyn- can be found at: www.geo.brown.edu/georesearch/ thesis occurs during the day, thereby adding oxygen to the surface waters. In ad- insomniacs/. dition, winds are usually calmer during summer nights. In addition to a core group from RIDEM, Save The Bay, URI, and Brown Uni- versity, the Insomniacs included about 25 people and small boats from various universities and organizations in the Rhode Island and Massachusetts area with an interest in the water quality of Narragansett Bay. Starting on a cool summer evening in June 1999 with eight boats, they covered more than 80 stations in up- per Narragansett Bay, the Providence River, Greenwich Bay, and Mount Hope Bay. The sites were located both in navigational channels that provided maximum depth ranges and in shoal areas adjacent to the channels. At each station, the group measured depth profiles of temperature, salinity, and DO. The tempera- ture and salinity measurements were used to calculate density values to detect if the water was stratified (a critical requirement for low oxygen to set in because the more oxygenated surface waters are kept from mixing with the bottom waters, blocking replenishment with oxygen from the atmosphere above). When the weather becomes windy and/or strong tides return, such as during spring (moon) tides, the water column is mixed and bottom water oxygen levels remain adequate to support marine life. The Insomniacs’ surveys focused on the warm summer months during neap tides when the risk of hypoxia was greatest because 9 mixing from tidal currents is weakest. The Insomniacs’ data have become an important part of the Bay Window Program. Along with the Mariner Shuttle and fixed-site monitoring, the Insomniac surveys provided the first regular DO monitoring in Narragansett Bay. Prior to these surveys, most scientists believed that hypoxia was confined to the Provi- dence River. What Bay Window scientists found was the first evidence of hypoxia in the upper Bay and upper East and West passages. “Many scientists believed that the upper Bay and upper East and West passages were immune to low DO be- cause it was assumed that adequate mixing would always occur due to strong The Bay Window’s Christopher Deacutis, NBEP scientist, tidal currents and wind,” relates Deacutis. “And it was thought that Greenwich examines his equipment prior to a nighttime monitoring Bay was too shallow to allow stratification and low DO. Our results were a ma- trip on Narragansett Bay. Deacutis was one of the jor overthrow of this traditional view of a well-mixed Bay below Conimicut founders of the Insomniacs, who did their critical work in Point.” The Insomniacs’ work has dovetailed with and complemented other the dark, providing an even broader profile of the Bay’s oxygen condition. monitoring efforts, including the Bay Window buoy network, by providing an area-wide picture of oxygen levels that can be compared to data from the buoys. “Where there are close correlations between buoy data and certain areas (e.g., the ship channel in the upper Bay and a buoy at Bullocks Reach in the Providence “We have learned through River), there is the potential to gain some level of prediction of oxygen levels in those areas by looking at the buoy data once we are familiar with these relation- the fixed-site buoy data that ships, arrived at by taking measurements over the course of several years,” adds Deacutis. As the years have gone by, Deacutis has added new equipment, which low DO events continue in speeds up the process, allowing a boat to reach more stations for surveying. It has also demonstrated the variability between wet and dry years. daylight in the bottom The surveys can also look at the Bay Window buoys and stations, and how they relate to each other. This vital information can minimize the number of sta- waters...” tions if the data are repetitive, making the entire program more efficient and, in times of limited funds, more cost effective. In addition, nighttime forays are no —Christopher Deacutis, NBEP longer required. “We have learned through the fixed-site buoy data that low DO scientist “We’re becoming a southern estuary.” Collaborators: Christopher Deacutis, Eutrophication RIDEM, and Candace Oviatt, URI

That succinct observation by Bay In 2004, Bay Window researchers The reason for this sampling is that Window scientist Christopher saw the impact of temperature on how when the winter-spring algae die and Deacutis, who serves as the R.I. De- the Bay reacts to other factors. It was a descend to the bottom, they become partment of Environmental Manage- cooler summer, and the water tem- food for benthic organisms, including ment (RIDEM) Narragansett Bay perature wasn’t as high as the year be- worms (polychaetes), which in turn be- Estuary Program’s (NBEP) scientific di- fore, but issues with low DO remained. come food for fish in the natural cycle rector, neatly summed up what moni- The temperature, precipitation, and of life in Narragansett Bay. Changes in toring is telling us about Narragansett winds were different from 2003, and the distribution of the organic material Bay as the water temperature rises. the cooler temperatures helped sustain reaching the bottom may account for And as the estuary evolves, that change somewhat higher DO levels. A few de- shifts in fish habitat. may bring with it different challenges grees may have made a major differ- During summer periods of strati- for coastal managers and possible new ence. fication, high nutrient concentrations threats to the health of the Bay. That The Bay Window studies have also may result in intense phytoplankton Narragansett Bay is becoming warmer picked up on another significant factor blooms. In the summer of 2003, these is not just guesswork. The Bay’s mean in the health of the Bay: The winter- blooms played a major role in the winter water temperature has risen 4 F spring bloom of phytoplankton has complex brew of factors that came to- over the past 20 years, a significant in- taken place only sporadically in recent gether to cause the Greenwich Bay crease. The annual mean temperature years. The Bay Window fixed-site fish kill. High nutrient concentrations has increased by about 2 F. (See “The monitoring stations at the south end of stimulate blooms of algae, a process Warming of Narragansett Bay” in 41°N Prudence Island and at the URI Gradu- called eutrophication. These algal 2(1):18–20.) ate School of Oceanography dock pro- blooms can hurt the Bay’s system in It could well be that a hot sum- vide continuous records of bloom or two ways. First, they cloud the water mer, strong stratification, and a neap non-bloom activity. The Mariner and block sunlight, causing underwater 10 tide (the weakest, which has the least Shuttle (see story, page 12) provides a plants, which provide food and shelter change in tide range between high and Bay-wide snapshot of bloom intensity. for aquatic creatures, to die. This also low), which reduced water mixing, This trend comes at the same time as disrupts spawning and eliminates nurs- helped light the fuse of the nutrients al- the shift in the dynamic between dem- ery habitat. The lack of water clarity ready in the water during the Green- ersal (bottom-dwelling) and pelagic fish may make it difficult for seagrasses to wich Bay fish kill of 2003. “High surface tilts towards the pelagic species. The grow and restore this valuable aspect primary production, combined with winter-spring bloom provides up to a of marine habitat. Second, when the al- sinking of the resultant organic matter, third of the year’s food for benthic ma- gae die and decompose, oxygen is used caused the levels of dissolved oxygen rine life in the Bay. Its absence during up. This is why Bay Window scientists (DO) in the bottom water to approach warm winters changes the type, keep a close eye on algal blooms, zero. In essence, the fish had no oxygen amount, and timing of the food avail- water temperature, nutrient levels, and to breathe and suffocated,” recalls able. Further research in conjunction fish populations and seek out other Candace Oviatt, University of Rhode with the fish-trawl surveys may reveal possible factors, such as pollution Island (URI) oceanography professor more in the future, but Bay Window sources, to help guide management and a Bay Window scientist. “An addi- researchers have already identified the decisions. tional factor may have been the move- trend. In addition, the factors that affect ment of low oxygen water from upper The Bay Window Program is fisheries have serious economic impli- Narragansett Bay into Greenwich Bay. studying the effects of the winter dia- cations as well as impacts on the con- Bottom water moving southward be- tom bloom on bottom-dwelling marine dition of Narragansett Bay. The Bay tween Warwick Neck and Patience life. Every two years in June, divers col- Window’s integrated monitoring, sur- Island upwells and spreads on the sur- lect samples from four sites around the veys, research, and data assessment face southward and into Greenwich Bay—Mt. Hope Bay, Conimicut Point, provide scientists, decision makers, and Bay. Fish rising to the surface in search Greenwich Bay, and Fox Island—with the public with an ongoing view of the of more oxygen may have found less.” another sample from north of health of Narragansett Bay. Jamestown serving as a control sample. THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM SIDEBAR August 2003 fish kill The fixed-site monitoring stations “If oxygen is going lower than we thought, that’s important,” says Deacutis. and the Mariner Shuttle are telling an “Low oxygen creates problems for bottom-dwelling animals. Our next questions interesting story about stratification in are: How often does this happen, how low does oxygen go and over what areas, and Narragansett Bay. Stratification refers how long does it stay?” to the separation of the water into dis- tinct layers, with a less dense upper layer overlying a denser bottom layer. Temperature and salinity control den- sity, with colder, saltier water being denser. In Narragansett Bay, as in any estuary, the cold saline water coming in from the ocean tends to form a dense under-layer while the warmer fresh water from the rivers tends to stay on top. But counteracting this tendency are the effects of tides, wind, and storms, which mix the layers and break up the stratification. “The complex factors causing low oxygen become understandable with the integrated monitoring provided by the Bay Window Program,” says Candace Oviatt, URI oceanography professor. The floating monitoring buoys, with their pairs of sondes mak- ing simultaneous measurements near DO 11 the surface and near the bottom, are especially useful for detecting stratifica- tion. The graphs (at right) show read- ings taken from a buoy off Prudence Island in August 2003 at the time of the massive fish kill in Greenwich Bay. With surprising rapidity, the Bay went from being mixed to being stratified to being mixed again. Several factors—storms, temperature, and tides—influenced the changes. As seen in the top graph, DO fell when the water became stratified. “As soon as mixing stops, dissolved oxygen begins to drop in the bottom waters, because oxygen comes from the sur- face,” explains Christopher Deacutis, NBEP scientific director. Bottom organ- isms use up the oxygen, which is not replenished from the surface. Algal growth is also affected by stratification, and this in turn plays a Temp Low oxygen creates problems for bottom-dwelling animals. role in DO levels. When strong mixing As seen in the top graph, occurs, the algal cells get pushed down, away from the sunlight, and don’t grow bottom oxygen fell when the as well, but when the Bay is stratified, algae bloom. Blooms can quickly lead to waters became stratified. low levels of bottom oxygen as algal cells fall below the lighted surface waters and consume oxygen. Mariner Shuttle: Collaborators: Mark Berman, Elaine Calderone, Jack Jossi, and Christopher Cutting-Edge Technology Circling Melrose, NOAA, and Candace Oviatt, URI the Bay

If you can imagine a bright-yellow roller coaster going up Data That Make a Difference and down underneath the waters of Narragansett Bay, you have a vision of Bay Window’s Mariner Shuttle, the only one of The data collected by the Mariner Shuttle have a pro- its kind in the United States. found effect on our understanding of what is occurring in The Mariner Shuttle is a finely tuned device employing Narragansett Bay and the impacts on ecologically and eco- cutting-edge technology that provides a wealth of data from nomically important Bay life such as fish and shellfish. the entire water column—as well as the entire Bay. The yellow underwater sled is towed each month by the R/V Chafee from Regime Shift: One significant element of Bay conditions that Jamestown up the West Passage as far as Field’s Point in Provi- Mariner Shuttle surveys and complementary Bay Window data dence through Mount Hope Bay and back again via the East have shown is a change in the annual productivity cycle. Using Passage, all the while collecting data. It rises and falls as it six years plus of chlorophyll data, researchers have discovered samples the water from surface to bottom, circling a “regime shift” in the long-term pattern of phytoplankton Narragansett Bay on its 11-hour circuit. By maintaining its blooms. Historically, large blooms occurred in Narragansett same pattern over the past six Bay in the late winter and early spring. years, the Mariner Shuttle has These winter-spring blooms pro- been able to create a series of duced most of the food upon data sets that can be compared which Bay animals—particularly over time and can identify fish, shellfish, and other marine life anomalies for the R.I. Depart- that live on the Bay’s bottom—ul- 12 ment of Environmental Man- timately depend. But the scientists agement (RIDEM). This allows found that, since the start of the RIDEM to focus on potential Bay Window sampling in 1998, the problem areas at an early date normal winter-spring bloom has and to more closely monitor been absent or greatly reduced. an area. This identification pro- This change is concurrent with a cess proved especially valuable shift from bottom-dwelling (dem- after the massive fish kill of ersal) fish like winter flounder to 2003. Mariner Shuttle data water column dwellers (pelagic) showed the severity and extent such as scup. This information is of the low oxygen conditions supported by the regular Bay Win- that caused the event. This allowed RIDEM not only to re- dow fish-trawl surveys. The research data have significant eco- spond, but to take steps to get back to normal conditions. nomic implications for the commercial fishing industry, since The Mariner Shuttle also features several examples of the demersal fish command much higher market prices than their most advanced scientific equipment, such as the fast repetition pelagic counterparts. rate fluorometer that measures the growth rate of phy- toplankton (microscopic algae). Knowing the phytoplankton Enough Food to Eat: Another aspect of evolving Bay life on growth rate helps researchers assess the amount of food avail- which the Mariner Shuttle has opened the door is the changing able for larval fish and shellfish, and to predict algal blooms and distribution of food for larval and juvenile fish. If the winter die-offs that can result in low oxygen conditions that threaten flounder larvae are making a comeback, as some preliminary marine life and the physical health of the Bay. Bay Window fish-trawl data have noted, will there be the right The roller-coaster motion of the Mariner Shuttle is im- food in the right places at the right time? Mariner Shuttle data portant because it allows Bay Window researchers to assess are helping to assess if enough food is available and how fast it ecological conditions and distribution of planktonic organisms is produced—issues that are critical to determining whether throughout the water column from surface to bottom. or not a status quo in the standing stock exists or an increase The Mariner Shuttle optimizes the Bay Window invest- in available food has occurred. Obviously, where, when, and ment by allowing researchers to collect more data more how much food is available is critical to fisheries management. quickly and at lower expense than traditional methods. Cost This will be a Mariner Shuttle and Bay Window focus for the savings come from reduced ship time, as well as lower costs future. for personnel and data handling. ...ONLY ONE OF ITS KIND IN THE UNITED STATES. THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM SIDEBAR Mariner Shuttle: State of the Art

The Mariner Shuttle’s ability to Other instruments housed within the Mariner Shuttle’s payload area include so- travel up and down through the water phisticated electronic equipment such as the fast repetition rate fluorometer, optical column represents the very latest in plankton counter, and photosynthetic active radiation meter, along with several more monitoring technology. In early 2006, traditional monitoring devices. Mariner Shuttle instrumentation was • Fast Repetition Rate Fluorometer (FRRF): Measures the growth rate of augmented by a state-of-the-art nutri- phytoplankton electronically, in real time, without the time-consuming lab ent analyzer. This device was designed procedures required by traditional methods. and built by SubChem, a Rhode Island • Optical Plankton Counter (OPC): Measures the number and size of zoo- company located at the University of plankton by putting a curtain of light across a tunnel through which water Rhode Island (URI) Bay Campus. The flows. When a zooplankter interrupts that curtain, it is recorded. The animal’s nutrient analyzer had to be specially size is estimated from the size of the interruption. miniaturized to fit in the limited space • Photosynthetic Active Radiation (PAR) Meter: Measures how much light available in the Mariner Shuttle and de- is available for photosynthesis at different depths. signed to interface with its other elec- • Conductivity, Temperature, and Depth (CTD)/Fluorometer: Measures tronic sensors. With this addition, the salinity, temperature, depth, and chlorophyll—an indicator of the amount of Mariner Shuttle will be able to assess phytoplankton present. the concentrations and distribution of • Dissolved Oxygen Electrode: Measures concentration of dissolved oxygen. phosphate, silicate, ammonia, nitrate, • Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR): Captures zooplankton between and nitrite, the major inorganic nutri- two layers of silk mesh, making a “sandwich” that secures creatures—such as ents that support the growth of phy- immature crabs and lobsters—for later counting and identification under a toplankton in the Bay. Rhode Island microscope. recently enacted laws calling for a 50 percent reduction in nutrients to Bay waters. Combined with other existing 13 factors, nutrient loadings have been identified as a key factor in low oxygen levels in the Bay, which contributed to the Greenwich Bay fish kill of 2003. Having the Mariner Shuttle identify where nutrients are having an effect on The Mariner Shuttle is towed behind the R/V Chafee on an 11-hour trip the Bay’s condition will help determine around Narragansett Bay, feeding the success of the state’s investment back data while it makes its monthly in nutrient reduction, as well as guide rounds. Its new, state-of-the-art management decisions by targeting nutrient analyzer will be extremely nutrient hot spots. important in assessing how Rhode Island’s recent effort to reduce nutrients coming into the Bay by 50 percent is progressing, as well as its effectiveness in improving water quality. INTEGRATING THE EFFORT: The Rhode Island Bays, Rivers, and Watersheds Coordination team

The massive fish kill of 2003 had a the health of Narragansett Bay,” August cataclysmic impact on the state’s ap- added. “The coordination team will be proach to management of Narragansett effective in transforming this support Bay. The Rhode Island General Assem- into real action.” bly had taken initial steps to better in- The legislation also creates four tegrate its work in the Bay, and now groups that bring together experts in a Gov. Donald Carcieri also stepped in, variety of fields to provide input and forming a commission to look at what advice to the team. Rhode Island Sea could be done. The Governor’s Grant and URI Coastal Institute per- Narragansett Bay Planning Commission sonnel are active in several of these and subsequent key pieces of legisla- groups. In addition to the RIEMC, there tion in the General Assembly led to the is the Economic Monitoring Collabora- formation of the Rhode Island Bays, tive, chaired by Kip Bergstrom, execu- Rivers, and Watersheds Coordination tive director of the state Economic Team. The team brings together the Policy Council; the Science Advisory seven key agencies that deal with the Committee, chaired by Donald Pryor, Narragansett Bay watershed. It also has Brown University visiting lecturer in as one of its subgroups the R.I. Envi- environmental studies; and the Public ronmental Monitoring Collaborative Advisory Committee, chaired by Chip (RIEMC), which includes many mem- Young of the URI Coastal Institute, 14 bers of the Bay Window program. who is also involved in the Bay Win- The 2004 legislative session cre- dow initiative. ated the coordination team to develop The RIEMC has worked in con- a systems-level plan that ensures the cert with Bay Window researchers to environmental protection of upgrade and expand the state’s overall Narragansett Bay yet promotes the monitoring and assessment programs. economic vitality of its marine re- The Bay Window fixed-station moni- sources. In addition to the chair, the toring project, Mariner Shuttle, and fish team consists of a representative from trawl and seine surveys have all had a Legislative initiatives by the governor and General Assembly in 2004 led to the creation of the Rhode Island the R.I. Department of Environmental major influence on the accountability Bays, Rivers, and Watersheds Coordination team. This Management, R.I. Department of Ad- and adaptive management that comes brings together the seven state agencies that have the ministration, Rhode Island Water Re- from a truly comprehensive effort. bulk of jurisdiction over Narragansett Bay and Bay-related sources Board, Rhode Island Rivers More information about the issues. These issues range from analyzing and regulating Council, Economic Development Cor- Rhode Island Bays, Rivers, and Water- fisheries to improvements in controlling runoff pollution poration, R.I. Coastal Resources Man- sheds Coordination Team, its member- coming into the Bay and wastewater treatment plant agement Council, and the Narragansett ship, activities, and additional resources discharges. Bay Commission. The team will work for information can be found on the with federal, state, and local agencies as team’s website at: www.ci.uri.edu/ well as other groups in preparing an ribayteam. overall plan for Narragansett Bay. It will also serve as the lead coordinator in implementing the plan. “This is a real window of oppor- tunity for the state,” said Peter August, a Bay Window steering committee member who chairs the RIEMC in his role as director of the University of Rhode Island (URI) Coastal Institute. “We have the support of Gov. Carcieri and the General Assembly to improve

www.ci.uri.edu/ribayteam THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM

NarrBay.org: A Digital Gateway to Data and Information on Narragansett Bay

In many respects, we are awash in data on Narragansett Bay and our coastal ecosystems. This is not surprising. Major initiatives such as the Bay Window Pro- gram, as well as projects sponsored by Rhode Island Sea Grant and R.I. Depart- ment of Environmental Management’s Narragansett Bay Estuary Program, have gathered data on the status and trends of the Bay and its resources for decades. Moreover, the nation’s premier coastal scientists at local academic institu- tions—University of Rhode Island, Brown University, University of Massachusetts- Dartmouth, Roger Williams University—and federal research labs at NOAA Fisheries, NOAA National Estuarine Research Reserve, Naval Undersea Warfare Center, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, are engaged in scores of projects that produce critical information on the condition of the Bay and the life forms it contains. But these data are of little value to the research and manage- ment community if they cannot be readily accessed or understood. Enter the NarrBay.org website. Available at www.narrbay.org, the NarrBay.org information portal was initiated by the Bay Window Program in 2000. NarrBay.org is designed to achieve two important goals: 1) serve as a navigation tool to link us- ers to data that reside on websites throughout the region; and (2) provide Web ac- cess to datasets created by individuals or institutions who do not have Web-hosting capacity. 15 The website has three major threads of information—maps of the Bay’s envi- ronment, current conditions, and archived datasets. Unseen and unknown to most casual visitors, Narragansett Bay is laced with environmental sensors, called sondes (see article page 7), that measure wind, temperature, tides, wave height, salinity, dis- solved oxygen, and river flow into the Bay. The current conditions, which are posted on the NarrBay.org site, provide simple access to the data collected by the sensors. In most cases, real-time reports of environmental conditions can be ob- tained, as well as archives of past data. The data archive on the NarrBay.org site provides ready availability to scores of datasets that have been collected about the Bay. These include data collected by Bay Window projects such as the Mariner Shuttle cruise data (see page 12), the fixed-buoy monitoring network, and the dis- solved oxygen surveys conducted by the “Insomniacs” monitoring group. NarrBay.org has an extensive gallery of maps of almost every aspect of Narragansett Bay, from eelgrass beds to watersheds. An important part of the NarrBay.org website is the “metadata” for the actual datasets. Metadata are data about data—they describe what was measured, how the measurements were recorded, and how accurate the resulting information is. This is needed to assure that Bay Window figures and statistics can be compared and interwoven with data from other sites. The website has NarrBay.org uses an internationally recognized format for writing metadata— three major threads the Federal Geographic Data Committee metadata standard. By following the committee’s format, the NarrBay.org site becomes part of the National Spatial of information— Data Infrastructure, the nation’s ultimate repository of geospatial data. This makes

maps of the Bay’s the NarrBay.org information part of the global information network and available NarrBay.org 24/7 to anyone with an interest in Narragansett Bay. environment, current The expansion of data and the elements that are measured, and their accessi- conditions, and bility and conformity, were early goals of the Bay Window Program that have now archived datasets. been achieved. The next challenge, already being addressed, will be to present a concise layman’s analysis of sometimes complex graphs and charts, so that NarrBay.org becomes of even greater value to decision makers and the general public. The R/V John H. Chafee

The acquisition of the R/V After two years of intense work and planning, the original idea of a fiber- John H. Chafee in 2004 was a glass-and-aluminum vessel was major achievement and enor- scrapped, as the design was mous boost to the Bay Window unaffordable. However, during the spring of 2002, a second request for Program. It is bigger and more proposals was sent out for a custom seaworthy than the previous re- vessel, to be built on a stock fiberglass hull. search vessel, a 42-foot ship Only one proposal was entered— built in 1975. It is twice as fast from Marine Subcontractors, Inc. in Maine—to build a 50-foot vessel, with Sen. Lincoln Chafee (standing at right) observes and features an expanded a single 600–800 horsepower diesel the crew with the results of the R/V Chafee’s workspace and state-of-the-art engine, complete with the hydraulics, initial fish trawl. The new boat will greatly expand the capabilities of Bay Window fish rigging, and electronics originally trawling and sampling equip- surveys. planned. The bid included a WesMac ment, including the Mariner Kevlar hull, for the price of a basic Shuttle and the gear necessary fiberglass hull. The Kevlar material is Arthur Ganz made the smooth trip. lighter and stronger than basic fiber- The ship arrived in Jamestown to a to tow the device. glass. small crowd. But this was an “ugly duck- The entire boat was molded in The official commissioning of the composite panels. As the builder de- R/V John H. Chafee was held on June 7, ling” story: Initial plans, designs, clared, “Nothing in this boat will rot or 2004, at the new Fort Wetherill Marine contracts, bid notices, unac- rust.” The engine is a 3406E Caterpillar Lab in Jamestown, followed by a VIP re- 16 cepted bids, and false hopes that diesel. All deck reinforcements were of ception for the many people who pressure-treated wood, guaranteed for helped with the project. Gov. Donald began the attempt to get a new 40 years—the only structural wood on Carcieri honored boat builder Anthony boat for Bay Window eventually the boat. Fernandez with a plaque of apprecia- On January 10, 2004, the R/V John tion. Virginia Chafee, wife of the late led to a spectacular conclusion. H. Chafee was launched in Maine, with Sen. John H. Chafee for whom the boat all of the shop employees plus a dozen was named, christened the vessel with friends pitching in to help. Technicians numerous family members in atten- ran final checks on everything mechani- dance, including current Sen. Lincoln cal and hydraulic. The vessel was Chafee, who succeeded his father in launched in minus 4 F temperatures. office. The ceremonial champagne froze im- The R/V John H. Chafee is being mediately to the bow. used for the Mariner Shuttle surveys Many last-minute adjustments and that cover the entirety of Narragansett shakedown cruises were made over Bay. The boat has been rigged with a the springtime. By mid-May, the long- new trawl net and trawl doors and is anticipated trip south to Rhode Island conducting the monthly and seasonal began. Capt. Richard Mello, First Mate fish surveys of the Bay and coastal wa- Kenneth Benson, and R.I. Department ters, first begun in 1979, that are key to of Environmental Management staff assessing fish stocks and determining members Christopher Powell and fish conservation measures in the state. Monthly surveys will be conducted to monitor the abundance and migratory Top left: Virginia Chafee, wife of the late Sen. patterns of larval and juvenile fish. John Chafee and mother of current Sen. Lincoln The contribution the R/V John H. Chafee gives the R/V John H. Chafee an Chafee is making to increase the effi- explosive christening at a celebratory launch ciency and range of Bay Window moni- ceremony. toring and assessment is invaluable to Bottom left: Gov. Donald Carcirei commends the program. R/V Chafee boatbuilder Anthony Fernandez at the christening and launch event at Fort Wetherill in Jamestown. THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM

ON MONITORING NARRAGANSETT BAY

By U.S. Senator Lincoln Chafee

On the gradual descent into T.F. Green Airport, the blue waters and sculpted islands of Narragansett Bay are always a welcome sight. From 5,000 feet, one can see at a glance why the Bay is so important to Rhode Island’s economy and its quality of life. Public recreation, commercial fishing and shellfishing, tourism, wildlife habitat, interstate commerce, property values, and perhaps even our identity as Rhode Islanders are all dependent on a single, vital resource. For nearly a decade, federal, state, and university partners have invested in an ongoing, detailed examination of the condition of Narragansett Bay. Using a variety of scientific in- struments and an array of surveys, the Bay Window Program is quite literally taking Narragansett Bay’s temperature. It also lets us know if important fish populations are rebounding or failing, tracks the onset of harmful algal blooms, and tells us whether there is enough oxygen along the bottom to sup- port flounders, lobster, and quahog. With an emphasis on gathering the hard facts and putting that data in the hands of some of the best researchers in the country, the Bay Window greatly improves our ability to tackle current and future threats to the Bay’s health. As chairman of the Senate subcommittee that oversees the nation’s clean water programs, the recovery and protection of Narragansett Bay and its watershed are among my top priorities. Since 2004, I have been happy to secure more than $2 million for the Bay Window Program. Last summer, I enjoyed a morning on the water with many of the Bay Window partners and observed firsthand their efforts to keep a constant finger on the pulse of Narragansett Bay. They are a hardworking crew, dedicated to making intelligent, fact-based decisions that will yield a healthier, cleaner, and more productive natural resource for all Rhode Islanders. 17 My father liked to say that “Narragansett Bay is good for the soul.” Just the sight of its glistening waters— whether from the air, the highway, or the deck of a boat—is enough to lift our spirits and let us know that we are home. As we embrace our responsibility for the stewardship of Narragansett Bay, I am confident that the Bay Window Program will continue to guide us in the right direction.

“As we embrace our responsibility for the stewardship of Narragansett Bay, I am confident that the Bay Window Program will continue to guide us in the right direction.” up to the MINUTE

What’s Going on With Our Lobsters? The U.S. fishery has J. Stanley Cobb been bringing in three times the lobsters in the early 2000s as it did in the late 1960s. Why the crash in Rhode Island?

18 Monitoring Lobsters& for Shell Disease Malia Schwartz Approximately 30 per- cent of Rhode Island’s legal and just sublegal lobsters are showing signs of shell disease.

Photos for this section courtesy of the Rhode Island Sea Grant Sustainable Fisheries Extension Program.

Background lobster illustration from Herrick, F.H. 1895. The American Lobster, a study of its hab- its and development. Bull. U.S. Fish. Comm. 15: 1–252. THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM What’s Going on with Our Lobsters? By J. Stanley Cobb

The lobster industry is the most valuable in the North- the “predation release” hypothesis, but the evidence suggests east and one of the most important in the country. In 2004, that cod is not the culprit. the most recent year for which data are available, 88 million What about the other end of the trophic system? pounds of lobster were landed, worth $366 million. Records Lobstermen use bait to tempt lobsters into traps, and video of landings have been kept for over 120 years, and 2004 was recordings by University of New Hampshire biologist Win the second highest in the history of the U.S. fishery. Not bad Watson show that lobsters enter and leave traps with more for a fishery resource that has been so heavily exploited for so ease that anyone ever thought. Perhaps they come in, munch many years that managers and scientists predicted its demise some bait, and leave. Bait could be an enormous subsidy to the 40 years ago, and still don’t understand why, instead of a crash, lobster population. Saul Saila, University of Rhode Island (URI) they saw a boom of epic proportions. The graph (below) oceanography professor emeritus, calculated that the Gulf of shows over 50 years of lobster Maine lobstermen used catches as reported by NOAA 116,000 metric tons of bait in Fisheries (available on their the year 1996 alone. That website at: www.st.nmfs. gov/st1/ could feed a lot of lobsters. commercial/index.html). Let’s ex- Are we farming the lobsters? plore some of the hypotheses ad- The evidence is equivocal. If vanced to explain the increase in bait is feeding more lobsters landings. than the natural environment During a time when most could, there should be evi- 19 fishery stocks were in moderate dence of increased use of bait to sharp decline, the lobster fish- before the landings increase. ery tripled its take. How could We see this in the data from that be? Are there data that help the Gulf of Maine but not us to understand what factors in- from Massachusetts. And in fluenced the great run-up in lob- many parts of Canada, where ster catch between 1970 and the bait use is much less because present? fishing effort is capped by short seasons and fewer traps per There are many hypotheses about the reasons for the fisherman, the landings increase was the same as in the United great increase. One suggests that lobsters have, for some rea- States. So the evidence is equivocal, but amenable to some son, taken up residence in a new habitat, adding softer bot- good experimentation. toms (mud, sand) to their usual rocky habitat. Annual trawl In a similar way, we can raise questions about the hypoth- surveys by NOAA Fisheries made from the mid-Atlantic bight esis that increasing water temperatures are responsible for in- to downeast Maine show a much increased population of lob- creased catches. Some evidence says yes, some says no. What sters in the new habitat since the 1960s. This may very well we can be sure of is that there always are surprises, as in the have played an important role in permitting the expansion in southern New England fishery. Let’s take Rhode Island as an population size. But if more habitat space accommodated example. more lobsters, what fueled the increase in numbers? The landings for the state of Rhode Island reported by Perhaps the fishing mortality imposed on predators of NOAA Fisheries show that Rhode Island shared in the lobster lobsters has removed an important check on lobster popula- prosperity for many years. During this time, some lobstermen tion size from the system. Codfish often are fingered as the bought new boats, expanded operations, and landed lots of prime suspect. If cod is a major predator of lobster as some lobsters. Landings that began to increase in the mid-1960s say it is, then the loss of millions of predators would allow that peaked in 1991 and have been, but for one very productive many more lobsters to survive. However the current data year in 1999, on a rapid downhill slide ever since (note the argue against this hypothesis. First, in many places the lobster shaded area on the graph, page 20). The U.S. fishery as a whole population increase started before the cod crash. Second, has been bringing in 75 million pounds a year (give or take a when Canadian investigators opened an extraordinary 34,000 few million) in the early 2000s—about three times the catch cod tummies, only seven showed signs of lobster consumption. levels in the late 1960s. But for the last few years, the catches There are many other predators on lobster, including striped in the Rhode Island fishery have been about equal to the bass, sculpins, skates, and other finfish, so we cannot dismiss catches in the late 1960s. Why the crash in Rhode Island? Surely overfishing has played a role. The lobster stock assessment report of 2005, by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, expresses real concern about the state of the lobster resource in southern New England and calls for re- duced fishing mortality. However, another factor is at work in the Rhode Island area: shell disease. For years, fishermen, wholesalers, and managers recognized that, of the lob- sters held in high density in impoundments, some would get “shell rot” caused by bacteria that would erode the shell. This form of shell disease has long been found in a small percentage of the natural population. Recently, a similar disease, one with slightly different symptoms, appeared and spread rapidly in the natural population. Kathleen Castro, Sea Grant Sustainable Fisheries Extension Program director and a URI fisheries researcher, has been following shell disease since 1996. She and Tho- mas Angell, R.I. Department of Environmental Management fisheries biologist, de- scribed the progression of this nasty disease in individuals (a particularly bad case is seen in the lobster pictured at right) and in the population. In 1996, less than 1 per- cent of lobsters sampled in Narragansett Bay were infected. By 2004, between 20 and 40 percent of individuals were diseased. To make matters worse, larger individu- als are much more likely to have the disease. Large lobsters spend more time be- tween molts, so the disease has more time to work before the shell is renewed by molting (ecdysis). Most disturbing, in Narragansett Bay and Long Island Sound, fe- males bearing eggs are the most likely to have shell disease—on the order of 50 percent of the lobsters legal-sized or larger are diseased. Lobsters caught offshore have very low levels of prevalence of shell disease. We do not know the cause of the disease, other than it is bacterial. We sus- pect that a range of environmental stressors, such as warmer water temperatures 20 and pollutants like insecticides and plasticizers, may contribute to increased suscep- tibility to the disease. Of particular concern to me is the possibility that this may be a disease that infects other crustaceans such as crabs and shrimps found in Narragansett Bay. If the disease becomes as prevalent in other species as it is in lob- sters, it could truly alter the ecosystem dynamics of the Bay. We know that shell disease can be fatal but do not know the mortality rate. We know that egg-bearing females may die or molt before their eggs hatch. The in- creased rate of mortality must affect the population dynamics and will decrease the number of lobsters available for fishermen to catch. We cannot be sure how serious this is, but in some areas of Narragansett Bay and in Buzzards Bay, there are many fewer lobster trap buoys than there were a few years ago. Shell disease was likely to have factored into the precipitous decline in lobster catch since 1999. What to do? We simply do not know enough about the disease to answer that question. A scientific meeting sponsored by the New England Aquarium a year ago reviewed the situation and recommended priority areas for research. Fortunately, Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., and Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, recognized the seriousness Editor’s note: The 2005 Annual Sea Grant of this threat and were successful in obtaining targeted funding to address it. The Science Symposium, “Lobsters as Model Or- URI Fisheries Center, Rhode Island Sea Grant, and NOAA Fisheries are coordinat- ganisms for Interfacing Behavior, Ecology, and ing the $3 million effort to determine the causes, consequences, and management Fisheries,” honored J. Stanley Cobb, who re- implications of shell disease. Scientists around the region will collaborate in tired in 2005. Cobb started as a professor at attempting to confirm the identity of the bacterial culprits, describe their modes of URI in 1970, doing extensive research on action, and follow the spread of the disease in the natural population. lobsters and other crustaceans. This sympo- The work will begin soon. With diligence, good science, and a bit of luck we sium recognized his many contributions to hope to learn enough about the disease to know what to expect of it and what the the field of lobster biology. The proceedings implications will be to the important, but now struggling, fishery for lobsters in from the symposium are being published in a southern New England. special issue of the Journal of Crustacean Biol- ogy. Presentations from the symposium can be found on-line at: seagrant.gso.uri.edu/ —J. Stanley Cobb is Professor Emeritus of Biological Sciences at URI. reg_fish/lobster_symposium.html THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM

Monitoring Lobsters for Shell Disease By Malia Schwartz

This is the exoskeleton (shell) “Get to know your animal.” That was the from a shell-diseased female charge put forward by the late Ann Durbin, Uni- lobster that recently molted. versity of Rhode Island (URI) oceanography pro- Lobsters with shell disease often fessor. Kathleen Castro took that advice to molt to get rid of the disease. heart as she embarked on her Ph.D. study of For egg-bearing females, molting prematurely means losing her lobster ecology and behavior. entire clutch of eggs. In 1994, Castro started a program to moni- tor Rhode Island’s lobster population by going out on a weekly research trawl survey that sampled fish populations in Narragansett Bay. Castro would collect basic information on each lobster that came up in the trawl net, including the lobster’s sex, size, molt stage, and egg-bearing status, and affix a tag to the lobster to monitor in- dividual animals over time. She would also make note of the black spots she saw on the lobster’s shell (carapace)—the telltale sign of shell disease. Shell disease is caused by bacteria that invade from the outside of the lobster via pores in its cuticle—the outermost layer of the shell—pores that are usually not visible. Roxanna Smolowitz, a veterinary pathologist at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Mass., has been studying shell disease in lobsters since its outbreak in eastern Long Island Sound in 1998. In her work, she sees a range in the severity of the disease from shallow pits that erode the cuticle and cause those unsightly black spots to ulcerations—holes that fully penetrate the shell, fusing the shell to the un- derlying membranes and preventing the lobster from releasing its shell, which likely makes it impos- 21 sible for the lobster to molt and thereby kills it. At the time, Castro didn’t realize that she was onto something: Those little spots noted on her data sheets pinpointed the outbreak of shell disease in southern New England. In addition to the weekly trawl surveys, Castro, now Rhode Island Sea Grant Sustainable Fisher- ies Extension Program director and URI fisheries researcher explored, with funding from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), creating artificial reefs in Narragansett Bay’s Dutch Harbor for lobster habitat as mitigation for the loss of lobsters during the World Prodigy oil spill. From 1997 to 2003, Castro and her colleagues tagged lobsters on the artificial reefs and re- leased them back into the Bay. Lobsters were then recaptured during weekly surveys from April to November. The tag-recapture program enabled the team to monitor individual lobsters over time and record the increasing prevalence and aggressiveness of shell disease, as well as its effects on the lobsters. These data, combined with the URI trawl survey data and R.I. Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) inshore and offshore sea sampling data, allowed Castro and her colleagues to piece together a complete picture of shell disease in Rhode Island from its beginnings to its dramatic increase today. “In 1997–98, we saw the incidence of shell disease jump from 5 percent to 20 percent,” says Thomas Angell, RIDEM fisheries biologist. “Then, in 2001–2002, the incidence jumped from 21 per- cent to 30 percent in inshore lobsters; incidence in offshore lobsters has remained low.” Approxi- mately 30 percent of Rhode Island’s legal and just sublegal lobsters are showing signs of shell disease. Legal-sized female lobsters By affixing a tag to individual lob- are the most severely affected, according to sters, researchers can monitor the lobsters over time and record the Angell, because they retain their shell for a increasing prevalence and aggres- longer period of time while carrying eggs. siveness of shell disease, as well Rhode Island’s lobsters were not the as its effects on the lobsters. only ones in trouble: In 1999, Long Island Sound’s lobster fishery experienced a mas- sive die-off of an estimated one million lobsters. While not caused by shell disease, this event signaled something amiss in the coastal environment. It was decided that, while a research initiative was formed to look into the Long Island Sound die-off, issues such as shell disease, which had made its way to Long Island Sound lobsters as well, should also be ad- dressed by the initiative. “We asked the scientists to look into how some recent extremes in certain environmental parameters might have impacted the lobsters and made them susceptible to disease,” said Edward Monahan, then Connecticut Sea Grant director, in an interview for Connecticut Sea Grant’s magazine Wrack Lines. Many were quick to blame the die-off on pesticides sprayed to control mos- quitoes that might spread the deadly West Nile virus, but researchers could find no evidence to suggest that the pesticides ever made their way to the bottom wa- ters where lobsters live. Lobster researchers now believe that a series of events came together to cause the mass mortality event in that region. “It was the ‘per- From 1997 to 1998, the incidence of shell disease jumped from fect storm,’” says Barbara Somers, Rhode Island Sea Grant Sustainable Fisheries 5 percent to 20 percent. By 2002, the incidence had reached 30 Extension specialist. “That year, we had a hurricane hit the Long Island Sound area, percent in inshore lobsters; incidence in offshore lobsters has dissolved oxygen levels had plummeted, and water temperature was unusually high remained low. Source: Castro et al., 2000. that summer.” Further up the coast in Massachusetts, lobster shell disease outbreaks had previously been reported around the Elizabeth Islands between 1983 and 1989 but were of minimal severity. Then, from 1997 to 2003, the incidence of shell dis- ease migrated northward through the Cape Cod Canal, into Cape Cod Bay, Bos- ton Harbor, and north to Cape Ann. Robert Glenn, Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries aquatic biologist, also points to increasing temperatures as the cause: “We’re seeing severity ‘hot spots’ in areas like the Elizabeth Islands and not in more polluted areas like Boston Harbor.” In addition to temperature, Glenn 22 points to a possible relationship with other environmental factors or the relation- ship with density-dependent factors as causes for disease proliferation. In 2000, Castro began giving presentations on her cooperative work with RIDEM on shell disease. The International Lobster Conference in Key West, Fla., that year was the first time that a session on the topic was held at an international This graph shows the incidence of shell disease (% infected) conference. “Rhode Island has been fortunate to have data going back four to six over time from Rhode Island inshore (Rhode Island Sound, upper East Passage, lower East Passage, West Passage) and off- years, so we can monitor shell disease and its impact on stocks,” said Castro at ° shore (Hudson Canyon) sampling sites. Source: Castro et al., the time (see story in 41 N 1(1):11). Since then, shell disease has become a regu- 2000. lar feature of the conference, likely due to widespread alarm by scientists, manag- ers, and the lobster industry, worldwide, about the rapid proliferation of the disease. When asked why no one reacted sooner, Castro replied, “People haven’t been concerned. There was no champion for the issue. It’s very curious.” But people are concerned now: In March 2005, scientists, fisheries managers, fishermen, and the concerned public met to discuss what is currently known and unknown about shell disease. “We’re looking at shell disease as a puzzle and trying to see how the pieces fit together,” said Castro, who organized this third annual Rhode Island Lobster Health Symposium, sponsored by Rhode Island Sea Grant. As one outcome of the symposium, Castro and Angell worked with Donald Landers, a senior biologist with Dominion Nuclear Connecticut’s Millstone Envi- ronmental Laboratory, to write a paper titled, “Conceptual Approach to Shell Dis- ease Revisited.” Landers had been conducting a tagging study to follow individual shell diseased lobsters over time and documenting the change in incidence of the disease in eastern Long Island Sound. They combined their data to get a more complete picture of how the shell disease outbreak in southern New England is affecting wild populations of lobsters. In their paper, which will be published soon, the investigators put forward several new hypotheses suggesting that “the inci- In laboratory studies, shell diseased lobsters spend the major- ity of time in their shelters, whereas healthy lobsters spend dence of shell disease in the natural population is increasing; there are population most of their time exploring their surroundings. Researchers impacts from shell disease; and there is increased evidence that anthropogenic, as wonder what impact these differences have on lobsters in the well as environmental stressors, are involved.” wild. Source: Castro et al., 2005. –continued on page 24 THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM

Shell Disease Scale

When Kathleen Castro, Rhode Island Sea Grant Sustain- able Fisheries Extension Program director, began seeing shell disease in lobsters, she would draw little circular shapes on her data sheets, depicting the size and shape of the lesions she found. Back in 1995, she would see maybe one lobster out of as many as 67 with a single black spot—the telltale sign of shell disease. By 1998, Castro was seeing an increase in the prevalence of shell disease—not only in the number of lobsters affected, but also in the percent of disease coverage on the shell. Because of the rapid spread of the disease and increase in severity, it was no longer feasible simply to draw a picture of the spots on the lobster’s shell. Lobster research- ers devised a scale for describing the severity of shell disease to standardize coast-wide data collection. Categories of zero (no shell disease) to severe were assigned based on the per- cent shell coverage of the disease (Table 1). During her tag-recapture program, Castro fine-tuned the scale to note in more detail the amount of shell disease (expressed as a percent) on each body section of the lobster (carapace, claws, and tail). The percentages were added to- gether and assigned a rank from 0 to 5 (Table 2). “The scale was changed to accommodate our tag-recapture data be- cause we could get estimates of the change in shell disease 23 coverage in individuals over time,” said Castro. “Using this scale, we showed that shell disease spread rapidly over a short period of time and peaked during the fall season.”

Table 1. Regional shell disease scale based on percent shell coverage

Score Characteristics 0 No shell disease symptoms Low Shell disease symptoms on 1–10% of the shell surface Moderate Shell disease symptoms on 11–50% of the shell surface Severe Shell disease symptoms on >50% of the shell surface

Table 2. Shell disease scale used for URI tag-recapture program. The amount (%) of shell disease on each body section of the lobster (dor- sal carapace, claws, and tail) was added together for a possible total of 300 points.

Score Characteristics 0 No shell disease 1 1–30 2 31–150 3 151–220 4 221–300 5 Scars Fisheries leader –continued from page 22 But despite what we now know about shell disease, scientists, fisheries managers, and the lobster recognized for industry are grappling with tough questions:

outreach efforts • Where and when is shell disease occurring? • What triggers an outbreak of the disease? One of the chal- • What are its consequences? How does shell disease affect natural lenges of fisheries mortality, molting, egg production, and behavior? management is bal- • How can new information about the disease be better communicated to ancing the health of other researchers, industry, and the general public? the resource with the livelihoods of the The answers to these questions will not come easily and will take dedicated research funding to fishermen. That chal- investigate. Lobster researchers, fisheries managers, and Rhode Island lobstermen pooled their knowl- lenge has been keep- edge and data on shell disease and approached Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., to pursue a new research initia- ing Kathleen Castro tive to study lobster diseases. “Our data had direct input into the ‘Reed Initiative,’” says Castro. “The busy conducting re- fishermen were a big part of that.” The senator listened, and last November, Congress approved search on lobster shell disease, organiz- spending $3 million to establish a cooperative research program to study the causes of lobster shell ing a symposium to share results of disease and the decline in the lobsters in New England waters. regional lobster research, and coordinat- “While not a solution, I hope this funding can provide some answers,” said Sen. Reed. “Rhode ing regional workshops on bycatch, Island state officials, fisheries managers, and lobster fishermen are prepared to work closely with rights-based management, and marine NOAA Fisheries to investigate the causes of shell disease and mortality in New England lobsters. This protected areas. disease goes to the heart of an industry that is important to Rhode Island and New England and is a Castro, director of the Rhode Is- crucial link to our regional history and culture.” land Sea Grant Sustainable Fisheries Ex- The funding for the “New England Lobster Research Initiative” will be jointly managed by NOAA tension Program, which is housed in the Fisheries, URI, and Rhode Island Sea Grant. A call for research proposals came out this May. URI fisheries, animal, and veterinary sci- As co-principal investigator on the initiative, Castro is excited by what we will be able to learn about the disease and its effects on wild lobsters, and she maintains that “If not for regular monitoring, 24 ence department, was honored with the 2005 URI College of the Environment we wouldn’t have had the epidemiology of the disease, including knowing the answers to questions, and Life Sciences Outreach Award for like: How did it spread? Where did it originate? Having the monitoring data allowed us to understand these efforts. Castro, who serves as the the context in which the disease evolved.” regional coordinator for the Northeast “We are hopeful that this research funding will answer the tough questions,” says Lanny Delinger, Sea Grant Fisheries Extension programs, vice president of the Rhode Island Lobstermen’s Association. “Our main concern is finding out what says that bringing fishermen, managers, causes shell disease and identifying whether it’s really a disease or something man-made in the envi- and researchers from across the North- ronment that’s causing it, so it can be prevented.” east together to discuss regional fisher- For several years, lobstermen saw greatly elevated levels of shell disease in their catches. But the ies issues has helped publicize these last year or so has given them reason to be optimistic: According to Delinger, “some lobsters seem to issues in the area and even nationally— be molting out of their diseased shells and surviving, and some [hard-hit] areas seem to be improving with a national CBS News feature on in terms of the number of animals affected.” lobster disease broadcast last June fea- A synthesis of existing research on shell disease is available at: seagrant.gso.uri.edu/fisheries/ turing Castro and a Rhode Island lobster_initiative/index.html. The site is updated as new information becomes available. lobsterman. “This has led, in part, to more funding for research, which is des- For further reading: perately needed,” Castro says. Castro, K.M. and T.E. Angell. 2000. Prevalence and progression of shell disease in American lobster, Barry A. Costa-Pierce, Rhode Island Homarus americanus, from Rhode Island waters and the offshore canyons. J. Shellfish Res. 19(2):691–700. Sea Grant director, who nominated Castro, K.M., T.E. Angell, and B. Somers. Lobster shell disease in southern New England: Monitoring and Castro for the award, commended her research. In: Lobster Shell Disease Workshop Forum Series 05-1. Available at: www.neaq.org/scilearn/re- for building the Sustainable Fisheries Ex- search/subpage.php?id=24. tension Program from $300,000 of core funding to nearly $1 million through ex- New England Lobster Research Initiative: Lobster Shell Disease Website: seagrant.gso.uri.edu/fisheries/ terior grants and contracts. “Kathy is ap- lobster_initiative/index.html. preciated throughout New England as an Connecticut Sea Grant. 2005. Wrack Lines Magazine. 4(2). outstanding organizer, facilitator, and Long Island Sound Lobster Initiative Website: www.seagrant.sunysb.edu/LILobsters/. leader in the fisheries community. Fisher- men speak so highly of her work,” —Malia Schwartz is Communications Director for Rhode Island Sea Grant. Costa-Pierce says.

—Monica Allard Cox THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM

RWU Law Students Address Cutting-Edge Water Pollution Issues in National Competition

By Lance Young gable body of water into another. The Supreme Court failed to resolve this issue; instead, it encouraged the parties Kristen Fletcher, Rhode Island Sea Grant Legal Pro- Nongovernmental organizations gram director (far left), with the 2005 Moot Court team to argue this theory before the district play an essential role in shaping the of Shawn Ralston, Lance Young, and Tara Jänosh. court on remand. implementation of complex federal Photo courtesy of RWU. statutes like the Clean Water Act These two cases have raised ques- (CWA). For example, New York City tions for city and state water authori- Pace University in late February, in never imagined that it might be in vio- ties. Water allocation authority has which we competed against 71 other lation of the CWA by diverting water traditionally been a local and state law schools from across the country in from the Schoharie Reservoir, through power. To what extent can federal au- three preliminary rounds. The oral ar- the Shandaken Tunnel, into Esopus thority impede water allocation deci- guments resemble actual appellate Creek. The diversion has been occur- sions? How far can federal jurisdiction court proceedings—each interested ring for more than a half century, long extend over waters that are seemingly party is given 30 minutes to persuade a before the CWA was enacted, to meet intrastate? To what extent are state and panel of judges orally that their posi- the drinking water needs of nine mil- local governments required to control tion should prevail. Oralists are judged lion New York residents. The city’s ra- naturally occurring pollution, as op- by the quality of their argument and tionale was that adding water to water posed to pollutants discharged through presentation style. is not the same as adding a pollutant to human effort, in water distribution Scores from the three preliminary water, the traditional type of discharge projects? Finally, where should a court rounds and the appellate brief are tal- the CWA regulates. draw the line when considering lied and the top teams progress to the However, New York ran into a whether an addition of water into next round. The total score of our problem because Esopus Creek is water is a discharge of pollution under RWU team placed us sixth out of 72 naturally cooler and clearer than the the CWA? teams, which advanced us to the next water from the Schoharie Reservoir, These issues were presented in round. We competed well, but the 25 and this change disrupts the creek’s the 2005 National Environmental Moot excitement came to an end in the trout population. Fishermen com- Court competition held at Pace Uni- quarterfinal round, where we were plained that trout could not see cast versity School of Law in White Plains, eliminated by the University of lines and flies and that the increased N.Y. Rhode Island Sea Grant sponsored Montana. turbidity made wading unsafe. Five rec- the team from Roger Williams Univer- In the real world, we still await a reation organizations notified New sity (RWU) School of Law consisting of final decision in the case of Catskill York City, under the citizen suit provi- Tara Jänosh, Shawn Ralston, and me. Mountains v. City of New York. On re- sion of the CWA, that it was polluting Teams competing in the Pace mand from the Second Circuit, New the Esopus Creek and needed a federal Competition receive a hypothetical York City was penalized nearly $6 mil- permit to continue diverting the water. court case and determine which of lion by a federal court for its CWA In 2001, the U.S. Court of Appeals for three parties—an environmental orga- violations. The city maintains that its the Second Circuit agreed that the city nization, a city, and a state—they will transfer of water between reservoirs is was polluting the creek in violation of represent by writing a brief. In the hy- not a discharge of a pollutant and it has the CWA. pothetical case, the environmental or- appealed, once again, to the Second The Esopus Creek case, cited as ganization alleged that the city was in Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeal Catskill Mountains v. City of New York, sur- violation of the CWA when it diverted was postponed pending the Supreme prised and broadened many people’s silty water from one creek into an- Court’s decision in South Florida Water perception of pollution discharges un- other more pristine creek that was Management District v. Miccosukee Indian der the CWA. The U.S. Supreme used by the city in its entirety. The Tribe. The parties have now filed briefs Court more recently held, in South creek once flowed into a navigable in light of that decision and are waiting Florida Water Management District v. river, which would make it subject to for a date to make their arguments be- Miccosukee Indian Tribe, that a water federal jurisdiction, but the city fore the Second Circuit once again. In management district in Florida is in vio- stopped that flow 70 years prior to the meantime, New York City is going lation of the CWA when it pumps provide drinking water. The silty water through the permit process as or- phosphorous-rich water from a canal was depleting the habitat of a struggling dered. into the Everglades to prevent flooding trout species. The RWU team wrote a of developed areas. The government brief representing the claims of the en- —Lance Young is a 2006 graduate of the filed a brief before the Supreme Court vironmental group and submitted it for RWU School of Law and served as a Sea urging the Court to find that a permit the competition. Grant Law Fellow since 2004. He was also would not be necessary if unaltered The second phase of the competi- a member of the 2006 team that com- water was transferred from one navi- tion was the oral argument held at peted at Pace in February. Mapping our underwater marine Sea Grant Director recognized for contribu- resources: BayMap and MapCoast tions to the national Sea Grant Association partnerships expand Rhode Island Sea Grant Director Barry Costa-Pierce was recently honored With seed funding from Rhode Island Sea Grant, the BayMap project—a major for his “outstanding contributions to the initiative to produce a comprehensive series of high-resolution seafloor maps of Sea Grant Association (SGA).” The SGA is Narragansett Bay—has grown and expanded its scope and scale to map Rhode composed of representatives—typically the Island’s shallow coastal habitats. The MapCoast Partnership is a consortium—an alli- state Sea Grant program director—from ance of local, state, and federal agencies—dedicated to mapping the state’s coastal each of the 31 Sea Grant member universi- underwater resources, including bathymetry, habitat, geology, soils/sediment, and ar- ties and institutions nationwide. cheological resources in shallow waters to 5 meters (16.5 feet) depth. In collabora- Costa-Pierce received this award for tion with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resources his many efforts at the national level of Sea Conservation Service and a fleet of other partners, and with funding from the Na- Grant, including serving on the SGA Board tional Science Foundation, NOAA, and USDA, MapCoast researchers are using state- of Directors, as chair of the SGA’s Program of-the-art science to examine the productivity of the submerged (or “subaqueous”) Mission Committee, which develops all of 26 soils that lie beneath Narragansett Bay and the salt ponds along the southern shore the SGA’s workplans, and for leading the of the state. The ultimate goal of the MapCoast Partnership is to develop a readily Ecosystems and Habitats Theme Team for accessible database of subaqueous soils and sediment in coastal Rhode Island. Soils the National Sea Grant Network. Costa- and sediment map data and attributes are essential in the management of coastal ac- Pierce also led the formation of two new tivities such as dredging, fishing, habitat conservation, and eelgrass restoration. For national committees—the Committee on more information on MapCoast and BayMap activities, visit www.mapcoast.org. Sea Grant Priorities, composed of repre- sentatives from the National Sea Grant Re- —Chip Young view Panel, National Sea Grant Office, and SGA, and the Sea Grant International Net- work, developed as a partnership with URI’s Coastal Resources Center that has made new investments at universities and non- governmental organizations in Latin America and Asia. “It’s always an honor to be recognized by people you respect,” Costa-Piece said. “I am proud that we have established two new organizational frameworks and pro- cesses to work more actively as a national and international program. It’s been a chal- lenge, but I have great hope that through these programs we have created new op- portunities for cultivating the next genera- tion of coastal leaders. It’s also been great fun working with and learning from the other Sea Grant programs as they face suc- cesses and challenges.”

—Malia Schwartz Photos courtesy of the URI Coastal Institute. THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM

National Science Foundation makes significant investment in Ph.D. training in coastal environmental management at URI

The IGERT—Integrative Graduate Education Research Training—pro- gram at the National Science Foundation (NSF) awarded URI $3 million over the next five years to develop a new paradigm to train students in coastal en- vironmental problem-solving. Engaging URI faculty from the natural and social sciences, as well as faculty from the humanities, the Coastal Institute IGERT Project provides advanced graduate students with training in the science of coastal stewardship, as well as ethics, aesthetics, leadership, and social equity dimensions of ecosystem management. “IGERT is one of NSF’s most presti- gious awards and recognizes the incredible strength URI and its partner insti- tutions (e.g. the Bay Window Program) have in coastal science and policy,” says Peter August, URI Coastal Institute director. For more information about the IGERT Program, visit www.ci.uri.edu/ciip.

—Chip Young www.ci.uri.edu/ciip Photo courtesy of the URI Coastal Institute.

27

Sea Grant Foundation donates $3,000 and book bags to assist Mississippi-Alabama fishing communities devastated by Hurricane Katrina

The Rhode Island Sea Grant Foundation donated $3,000 to the fishing communities of Biloxi, Miss., and Bayou La Batre, Ala., that were devastated by Hurricane Katrina. Along with the National Sea Grant Library, Rhode Island Sea Grant staff contributed book bags with school supplies to children along the devastated coast. “The funds were used to provide pallets of salt to shrimp fishermen as salt is needed to ice the shrimp immediately after harvest. Salt can cost as much as $200 per fishing trip,” wrote LaDon Swann, Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Consortium director, who managed the effort. “We also used the dona- tion to purchase Thanksgiving meals with all of the fixings and for gifts cards for construction materials, so that families could begin to rebuild their damaged homes.” In his thank-you note Swann wrote, “Your donation did make a differ- ence to Katrina victims. While life improves daily, some areas still look like the storm hit yesterday.” Photo courtesy of Malia Schwartz. Background photo courtesy of NOAA. IN BRIEF... Got plan, the thorough deliberation that Another issue with public planning preceded its adoption, and the limited processes is ensuring that they truly scope of our review, it is appropriate are public. Edward Tanner, Bristol’s Taken? for us … to resolve the challenges … principal planner who also participated in light of the entire plan. Because that in the seminar, said that better notice Law seminar explores plan unquestionably serves a public of public meetings is needed, noting purpose, the takings challenged here that “people see a small ad in the paper “Takings by the satisfy the public use requirement of for a public meeting, but don’t realize the Fifth Amendment.” its significance.” Waterfront” Many editorialists declared this a Finally, O’Connell pointed out that loss for property owners everywhere. the long standoff between the property If the government takes your pri- New London’s lawyer in the case, Ed- owners and the municipality halted vate property for a highway, it’s for the ward B. O’Connell, though victorious progress on the plan, even though the public good. If it takes your property in the suit, said the result “tends to fa- city prevailed in the suit. He suggested for economic development, is that also vor property owners rather than give that a finite amount of time be allowed for the public good? Is there anything carte blanche to municipalities.” for property owners to challenge use you can do about it? O’Connell said that as a result of the of eminent domain. Well, you can sue. case, anything short of a similarly Rhode Island Special Assistant That’s what seven property own- lengthy planning process—to which the Attorney General Michael Rubin also ers in Connecticut did when the city of state of Connecticut allocated $70 mil- spoke at the seminar on another prop- New London sought to take their lion—“might be found wanting in a erty rights case—Palazzolo v. Rhode properties by eminent domain for what constitutional sense.” Island. the lawyer representing the city de- Recognizing that this might be In the 1980s, Anthony Palazzolo scribed as “municipal development” in cold comfort to some property own- made two applications to the R.I. a seminar at Roger Williams Univer- ers, Stevens further wrote, “We do not Coastal Resources Management Coun- minimize the hardship that condemna- cil to fill in approximately 18 acres of 28 sity’s (RWU) School of Law. Though the property owners argued that economic tions may entail … We emphasize that coastal intertidal marshland—the more development was not a public purpose, nothing in our opinion precludes any recent in 1985 to build a beach club. the city won the case all the way State from placing further restrictions When his applications were denied, he through the U.S. Supreme Court. All on its exercise of the takings power. In- sued the state, saying it had effectively courts found that the city had pre- deed, many States already impose ‘pub- taken his property without compensa- pared a carefully crafted plan over the lic use’ requirements that are stricter tion. course of two years, which was not, as than the federal baseline.” The state’s argument that Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in his Since the ruling, about 40 states Palazzolo’s proposed filling constituted majority opinion, designed “to benefit a have passed laws to protect private a “public nuisance” prevailed through particular class of identifiable individu- property from being seized by local the R.I. Superior Court and was un- als.” governments for other private devel- challenged by the state Supreme Court, Stevens further wrote that, “Given opment, according to The Providence Rubin said, and the case was taken up the comprehensive character of the Journal. by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2001.

The R.I. Supreme Court determined that Winnapaug Pond is subject to the public trust doctrine, and therefore owned by the state.

Photos by Monica Allard Cox. THE BAY WINDOW PROGRAM

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision focused on whether Palazzolo had unjustifi- ably been denied the value of his land. Though Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, described the details of Palazzolo’s proposal as not tending “to in- spire the reader with an idyllic coastal image, for the proposal was to fill 11 acres of the property with gravel to accommodate ‘50 cars with boat trailers, a dumpster, port-a-johns, picnic tables, barbecue pits of concrete, and other trash receptacles,’” the Court found that the state Supreme Court erred in part of its judgment against Palazzolo. However, the Court also found that Palazzolo “failed to establish a depri- vation of all economic value,” according to Kennedy, and remanded the case back to the R.I. Superior Court, which heard the case in 2005. Rubin compared his argument in the latest case to the old saw about the Holy Roman Empire being neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire: “It’s not a taking, it’s not his, and it’s not land.” Rubin said that the initial issue to determine is “What is the property?” and then to determine whether there has been a taking. Rubin said Pfizer has created an urban park behind its research that if the state could prove that it—rather than Palazzolo—actually owned the and development facility in New London. land, through the public trust doctrine in Rhode Island’s Constitution, it would have a stronger case than if the state merely had the right to regulate the land. The state attempted to show that coastal ponds are subject to the public trust doctrine, which holds in part that land below mean high tide (i.e., submerged tidal land) is owned by the government in trust for the citizens of the state. In making the argu- Since the ruling, about ment, the state referred to an 1895 R.I. Supreme Court case that determined 40 states have passed “wheresoever the thatch grows it shall be public,” Rubin said, and found what he called a “thatch expert” who could testify that the vegetation growing on the land laws to protect private in question was indeed thatch. property from being The R.I. Superior Court concurred with the state in a decision saying, “regard- less of this Court’s public nuisance finding, only one-half of the site is available for seized by local govern- 29 development by reason of the Public Trust Doctrine.” The court further found that “under the facts and circumstances unique to this case, Palazzolo could have little ments for other private or no reasonable expectation to develop the parcel as he has now proposed. Con- development, according stitutional law does not guarantee a bad investment.” This seminar was part of the RWU Marine Affairs Institute’s Lecture Series. For to The Providence more information or to access the court decisions, visit the institute’s website at Journal. law.rwu.edu/.

—Monica Allard Cox

Don't Tread on Me: Though the U.S. Supreme Court deter- mined that New London could take private property for de- velopment, owners who lost the case remain in their homes. Vacant lots in New London await development. Find a SEA TURTLE in trouble? Marine Resources Development Call the hotline at (401) 633-4116 Plan designedMRDP to improve Did you know sea turtles make their way interagency cooperation, into Rhode Island waters in the summer? “The leatherback and loggerhead sea turtles are most resources management common, since they follow their food sources north along the western Atlantic, says Malia Schwartz, Rhode Island Sea Grant marine turtle Rhode Island’s economic empha- The MRDP’s vision includes: extension specialist. sis has shifted in the last three decades Unfortunately, this is also where and why from producing goods to providing ser- • Properly functioning bay and lagoon they get tangled in fishing gear. “They’re attracted vices. Wastewater treatment plants ecosystems to the critters growing on or swimming around have been built and upgraded, and wa- • Abundant and sustained fishing and buoy lines, for example,” says Schwartz. “Then, ter quality has improved. The ship fisheries resources they’ll get a line wrapped around their flipper Navy has departed, while marine and • Successful coastal places and they panic, further entangling themselves.” military research has flourished. Popu- • Marine-based economic development David Beutel, Sea Grant fisheries extension lation migration has continued into specialist, feels that most commercial fishermen suburban and rural towns. When the The plan delineates strategies to enjoy knowing that the sea turtles are in Rhode R.I. Coastal Resources Management improve the state’s marine ecosystem Island waters. “No one wants to see a turtle Council (CRMC) was created in 1971 and to provide appropriate marine- hurt, let alone tangled in their fishing gear.” to administer the state’s coastal pro- based economic development. It also If you do spot an entangled sea turtle, help gram, the specter of oil refineries and outlines implementation activities for is just a phone call away. The R.I. Sea Turtle Dis- nuclear power plants was real, and the the next five years. The plan is on-line entanglement Hotline, at (401) 633-4116, is pressure to develop open space was at www.crmc.state. ri.us/projects/ manned 24/7. The program has enlisted boats intense. mrdp.html. and equipped numerous responders with the Thirty-five years later, there are The plan was created with input knowledge and tools to disentangle trapped no proposals for oil refineries or from the R.I. Department of Environ- 30 turtles. nuclear power plants on Narragansett mental Management, the R.I. Depart- Callers are requested to give the turtle’s Bay; instead, issues of preserving open ment of Administration, and the R.I. location and condition, a contact phone number, space and achieving smart growth Economic Development Corporation. and if possible, to remain with the turtle until dominate CRMC’s agenda and The URI Coastal Resources Center the response boat arrives. workload. and Rhode Island Sea Grant also as- Launched in 2005 and coordinated by Under direction from the sisted in the development of the plan, Beutel and Schwartz, the disentanglement pro- governor’s office and state legislation, along with the R.I. Senate Policy office gram is run by the Rhode Island Sea Grant CRMC has developed a Marine Re- and the R.I. Economic Policy Council. Sustainable Fisheries Extension Program in sources Development Plan (MRDP) to Rhode Island Sea Grant’s efforts partnership with NOAA Fisheries, the federal foster state agency collaboration in the on the MRDP earned the program agency charged with protecting and recovering better management of marine and outreach awards from the Northeast sea turtles. coastal resources. “The Marine Re- Sea Grant Region and from URI for sources Development Plan will serve Virginia Lee, Sustainable Coastal Com- —Monica Allard Cox as a major vehicle for the CRMC to munities and Ecosystems Extension change from a permitting-heavy to Program director, and Pamela Rubinoff, policy-driven agency,” said Michael Donald Robadue, and Amber Neville, Tikoian, CRMC chairman. “This plan is Sustainable Coastal Communities and designed to aid the CRMC in coastal Ecosystems Extension Program staff. resources management far into the fu- ture, using CRMC Special Area Man- —Laura Ricketson, R.I. Coastal Resources agement Plans as implementation tools. Management Council, and Susan Kennedy, Ongoing program and other changes, URI Coastal Resources Center/Rhode Is- including harbor management plans for land Sea Grant. all of the coastal municipalities and proposed revisions to regulations deal- ing with marinas, will reflect the goals of the MRDP.” David Beutel, R.I. Sea Turtle Disentanglement Program co-coordinator, demonstrates the use of the disentangling equipment to a group of sea turtle responders at a training workshop. Photo by Malia Schwartz THE BAYIN WINDOWBRIEF... PROGRAM

VisualArtsSeaGrantaward winnercapturesbeachbodies,Barbies

People act differently at the beach than they do anywhere else. They willingly build elaborate structures in the sand knowing they will shortly be obliterated by water. They walk purposefully to and fro with no desti- nation. They expose their bodies but cover their faces. These observations were a few of the many ex- plored by photographer Kathie Florsheim in her Visual Arts Sea Grant–funded work, presented in a slideshow at The Towers in Narragansett. The presentation showcased Florsheim’s work from images examining women’s hands, clotheslines in Maine, and beaches in Italy, to her Sea Grant–funded photos of Narragansett Beach. “I’m really interested in gestures,” Florsheim said, “as well as shadows.” The interplay of these interests made the beach a perfect subject. Florsheim, who graduated from the Rhode Island School of Design, said, “I wasn’t trained as a photojournalist, but that’s what I’ve become,” and described looking out of the corner of her eye for quirky details that will uncover “something about the people who go to this place and hopefully the place.” 31 A photo of a hand holding a ratty plastic doll prompted a murmur of recognition from the audience as Florsheim wryly observed, “There are a lot of Barbies on the beach”—in pretty rough shape. While her images were of people, they weren’t traditional portraits. A child in a three-wheeled stroller was com- pletely wrapped in a towel, with only his feet sticking out; a young man’s torso was featured, with underwear peeking above the top of his trunks. A tattooed arm clutched the side of the seawall—“There have been lots more tattoos and piercings in the last couple years”—and a series of legs clad uniformly in jeans and black leather boots—with the exception of one pair belonging to a sunbather—lined the seawall next to a shiny motorcycle. A photo of people standing in shal- low water captured their reflections heading in one di- rection, while their shadows fell in another, and drew appreciative comments from the audience. One thing that seemed remarkable about all the pictures was that, though they were taken at a close range, the subjects in them seem wholly unconcerned that their picture is being taken. Florsheim explained that “I get close, but not in their space. Sometimes I would talk to them, but that changes the picture. Mostly people just don’t care.” The Visual Arts Sea Grant, run by URI’s fine arts department, awards $2,500 annually to a professional artist whose work explores a marine or aquatic theme.

—Monica Allard Cox The photographs reproduced here are originally in color. URI Cooperative Extension (CE) is offering a series of Rhode Island Sea Grant’s Metro Bay Special Area Man- three Global Positioning System (GPS) workshops this agement Plan team will participate in the Rhode Island summer. More information about “GPS, Digital Cameras, and Dragonboat Race and Taiwan Day Festival on Sep- Mapping: Finding the Link—A Summer 2006 Workshop Series at tember 9. This festival, sponsored by the Blackstone Valley URI” can be found at: www.uri.edu/ce/wq/ or contact Lisa Philo at Tourism Council and city of Pawtucket, is modeled after (401) 874-4587 or via e-mail at [email protected]. the famous Dragon Boat festivals held around the world. June 15: Workshop #1—“Introduction to GPS for the Teams paddle 52-foot authentic Taiwan-constructed boats Storm-water Manager” focuses on the use of low-cost, hand- that resemble dragons, complete with heads, scales, and held GPS units, in combination with digital cameras, to locate tails, on a 1,000-foot-long course. Race begins from the storm-drain features and verify their condition. Held 1 to 4 p.m. School Street Pier in Pawtucket, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. at the Coastal Institute, URI Kingston Campus. Course costs $15 for nonprofit/government/student ($25 after June 8); $45 Join in the annual Coastweeks celebration of the for professionals ($60 after June 8). coast from September 16 to October 9. Events include July 25: Workshop #2—“Pictures, Points, and Projections” beach cleanups, guided walks, lectures, a commercial fishing will cover basic GIS concepts, including obtaining RIGIS data and trawl, and more. Sponsored by Rhode Island Sea Grant and creating GIS-based maps. Experienced GIS users will gain profi- the R.I. Coastal Resources Management Council. Visit ciency collecting geo-referenced digital pictures and hyperlinking seagrant.gso.uri.edu/Coastweeks or call (401) 874-6937 for 32 pictures with GPS points to view pictures interactively in GIS more information or to receive a free calendar of events. programs. Held 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. at the Coastal Institute, URI Narragansett Campus. Course costs $100 for nonprofit/ Mark your calendars for the Sixth Biannual Marine government/student ($125 after July 7); $150 for professionals Law Symposium, October 19 to 20, 2006, at the ($175 after July 7). Roger Williams University (RWU) Law School. The focus of September 8: Workshop #3— “URI GPS Field Day.” De- the symposium will be “Evolution of Ecosystem-Based tails to be announced soon! Management: From Theory to Practice.” It will explore a This series is sponsored by the Geospatial Extension new way to manage coastal and marine resources by mov- Program and R.I. Nonpoint Education for Municipal Officials in ing from fragmented management to management based partnership with the R.I. Department of Environmental Manage- on the coastal and marine ecosystems. But the challenge ment, R.I. Department of Transportation, and the URI Coastal remains: How do we get from the theory of ecosystem- Institute. based management to putting it into practice? This confer- ence is sponsored by the Rhode Island Sea Grant Legal The Seventh Annual Summer Community Lecture Program and the Marine Affairs Institute at the RWU Ralph Series, sponsored by Rhode Island Sea Grant and CE/Nutrition R. Papitto School of Law. For more information, contact and Food Sciences Department. The lectures are free, but seat- [email protected]. ing is limited, so please reserve your place or request additional information by calling Rhode Island Sea Grant Communications at (401) 874-6842. August 3: Come learn to “Be Happy, Eat Seafood: Balanc- ing the Benefits and Risks” with Doris Hicks, University of Dela- ware Sea Grant seafood technology specialist. Held 7 p.m. at the URI Graduate School of Oceanography Coastal Institute Audi- torium, South Ferry Road, Narragansett. August 23: Normand LeClaire, popular local chef, cooks up “Healthy Seafood from Your Coast to Your Table” at Westerly Public Library, 44 Broad St., Westerly, 6 p.m. October 5: Join David Beutel, Rhode Island Sea Grant Fisheries Extension specialist, for a discussion about “Fish for the Future: Where Will Our Fish Come from?” at the Audubon Society of Rhode Island Environmental Education Center, 1401 Hope St., Bristol, at 7 p.m. Photo by Rick Dugas, The Pawtucket Times.