2008 OLYMPIC COAST NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY CONDITION REPORT REVIEWERS AND AFFILIATIONS James Delgado, Institute of Nautical Archaeology Sarah Dzinbal, Washington Department of Natural Resources Dave Fluharty University of Washington, School of Marine Affairs Rikk Kvitek California State University, Monterey Bay The document that follows is a copy of the DRAFT Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Condition Report that was disseminated to four individuals who served as peer reviewers. In December 2004, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review (OMB Bulletin) establishing peer review standards that would enhance the quality and credibility of the federal government’s scientific information. Among other information, these standards apply to Influential Scientific Information (ISI), which is information that can reasonably be determined to have a “clear and substantial impact on important public policies or private sector decisions.” The Condition Reports are considered Influential Scientific Information. For this reason, these reports are subject to the review requirements of both the Information Quality Act and the OMB Bulletin guidelines. Therefore, following the completion of every report they are reviewed by a minimum of three individuals who are considered to be experts in the field, were not involved in the development of the report, and are not Office of National Marine Sanctuaries employees. Following the External Peer Review the comments and recommendations of the reviewers were considered by sanctuary staff and incorporated, as appropriate, into a final draft document. In some cases sanctuary staff reevaluated the status and trend ratings and when appropriate, the accompanying text in the document was edited to reflect the new ratings. The comments and suggested edits that were received from the reviewers are embedded in the below draft. The final Olympic Coast NMS Condition Report may be downloaded from: http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/. Peer Review Draft i Olympic Coast NMS Condition Report 2008 Comment [kb1]: Thank you for the opportunity to review the Olympic Coast NMS Condition Report. My comments will address a few general areas and then some specifics. Olympic Coast I found the report overall to be well researched and presented, and in particular, the environment, setting National Marine Sanctuary and natural resources of Olympic Coast NMS were very capably addressed from my perspective. Comment [kb2]: Summarizing the status and trend of a complex, multispecies system such as the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary is a difficult task, and the authors should be commended for their efforts. The report is reasonably well Condition Report 2008 organized and thorough, and we generally agree with the OCNMS condition status findings. We do have a few comments/concerns on factual issues, inconsistencies and omissions, which are itemized below. Comment [kb3]: Overall, I think that the OCNMS has done a good job following the format and providing well-justified statements about conditions in OCNMS given the often limited data available. The collective judgments that are presented in the ratings reflect internal and external expertise, although they are by design quite broad in lumping many activities or conditions into one rating. My primary concerns are with some details and with a few issues of consistency across the report. These matters, I believe, are easily addressed in the final Conditions Report. I raise some of these comments as questions where I am seeking review of existing information to ensure accuracy. I am assuming that there will be further editing by a professional editor to deal with some awkward and run-on sentences. This document must communicate to the broad spectrum of interested parties in tribes, government agencies, and the general public. Comment [kb4]: I have gone through the OCNMS Condition Report. Very impressive document. The treatment appears to be comprehensive, thorough and accurate as far as available resources will allow. I found no glaring oversights, misstatements or interpretations that I would substantially disagree with. The document does appear to offer an accurate overview of sanctuary resources, conditions, threats and actions taken or proposed. I commend you and your colleagues on a job well done. My only regret is that I do not have more time to spend reading the document in greater detail, but my work schedule with the California mapping project simply does not allow it at this time. Comment [kb5]: a specific goal for submerged cultural resources assessment and then management is strongly recommended. This could include the preparation of a specific submerged cultural resources assessment, a detailed document similar to that prepared by the NPS and NOAA for Gulf of the Farallones NMS and its bordering NPS units, Golden Gate NRA and Point Reyes NS, in 1990. This report would detail the particulars and contexts for maritime activity in the region, vessel losses, and known encounters, impacts and archaeological activity related to submerged cultural resources at Olympic Coast NMS. An important part of this ... Peer Review Draft ii Olympic Coast NMS Condition Report 2008 U.S. Department of Commerce Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration VADM Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr. (USN-ret.) Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere National Ocean Service John H. Dunnigan, Assistant Administrator Office of National Marine Sanctuaries Daniel J. Basta, Director National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Sanctuary Program SSMC4, N/ORM62 1305 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 301-713-3125 http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/ Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary 115 Railroad Ave. East, Suite 301 Port Angeles, WA 98362 (360) 457-6622 http://olympiccoast.noaa.gov/ Report Preparation: National Marine Sanctuary Program: Kathy Broughton, Stephen R. Gittings Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary: Liam Antrim, Barbara Blackie, Ed Bowlby, George Galasso, John Barimo, Mary Sue Brancato, Robert Steelquist Copy Editor: Graphic Designer: Cover photo credits left to right: Suggested Citation: National Marine Sanctuary Program. 2008. Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Condition Report 2008. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Sanctuary Program, Silver Spring, MD. ** pp. Peer Review Draft iii Olympic Coast NMS Condition Report 2008 Table of Contents About this Report ................................................................................................................................................... iv Summary and Findings .......................................................................................................................................... iv National Marine Sanctuary System and System-Wide Monitoring ..................................................................... iv Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Condition Summary Table .............................................................. vi Site History and Resources ................................................................................................................................... 1 Overview ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Geology ........................................................................................................................................................... 1 Original Peoples and European Exploration ................................................................................................ 3 Commerce ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 Water ............................................................................................................................................................... 6 Habitat ............................................................................................................................................................. 7 Living Resources ............................................................................................................................................ 9 Maritime Archaeological Resources ............................................................................................................ 11 Pressures on the Sanctuary ................................................................................................................................ 14 Commercial Development ............................................................................................................................ 14 Fishing ........................................................................................................................................................... 15 Ballast Water and Invasive Species ........................................................................................................... 15 Oil Spills ........................................................................................................................................................ 16 Increased Human Use .................................................................................................................................. 17 Military Activities ..........................................................................................................................................