OUR OCEAN FUTURE

THEMES AND ISSUES CONCERNING THE NATION’S STAKE IN THE OCEANS

DEVELOPED FOR DISCUSSION DURING 1998, THE YEAR OF THE OCEAN

A MULTI-SECTOR, COLLABORATIVE PROJECT OF

THE H. JOHN HEINZ III CENTER FOR SCIENCE, ECONOMICS AND THE ENVIRONMENT

WASHINGTON, DC

MAY 1998
ii

The H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the

Environment, a nonprofit institution, furthers the work of Senator John

Heinz by improving the scientific and economic foundation for

environmental policy. The Heinz Center’s distinctive contribution is to

create new mechanisms for collaboration among the four major sectors

essential to solving environmental problems. Environmental organizations,

industry, government, and academia all play important roles in defining the

agenda that shapes our common future, including our ocean future. The

Heinz Center provides a venue for these sectors to work together to

address challenging issues.

The Heinz Center Year of the Ocean project was conducted under the

terms of a joint project agreement between The Heinz Center and the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Funds were provided

by the Minerals Management Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, U.S. Geological Survey, and The Heinz Center. This

report does not necessarily reflect the policies or views of The Heinz

Center, any individual member of The Steering Group for the Year of the

Ocean, or the organizations or agencies that employ these individuals.

Additional copies of this report may be obtained from

The H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment

1001 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 735 S

Washington, D.C. 20004

Telephone: 202-737-6307

Facsimile: 202-737-6410

The report may be viewed on The Heinz Center’s web site,

http://www.heinzctr.org
iii

FOREWORD

The purpose of the International Year of the Ocean, 1998, is to raise public

awareness about the value of oceans and coasts, celebrate considerable accomplishments

in understanding the oceans, and promote learning from past experiences in managing the

oceans and their resources. In the United States, the Year of the Ocean also provides a

much-needed opportunity to examine national ocean policies and programs as we prepare

for the twenty-first century.

The Heinz Center and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

(NOAA) agreed that an examination of the nation’s stake in the ocean could best be

initiated by convening all major sectors concerned with the oceans—industry, the

environmental community, academia, and government. To that end, The Heinz Center and

NOAA entered into a joint project. The joint project was implemented by a Steering

Group composed of leaders from federal and state governments, ocean industry and

business, the environmental community, and academia.

In this, its final report, the Steering Group describes issues affecting the nation’s

ocean future and, consequently, its economic and environmental future. The report does

not offer detailed guidance—that will be the province of those who continue the dialog.

However, the work of the Steering Group has convinced us of the need to achieve a better

balance between the use and conservation of oceans and coasts.

The Steering Group members gave freely of their time to set the course for, and

oversee, the joint project. They invited nearly 200 ocean leaders to meet with them, and to

help identify and describe the issues and how they might be addressed. We are deeply

indebted to all who participated (these individuals are listed in Appendix A). We also wish

to thank our staffs, especially Stanley Wilson and Muriel Cole of NOAA’s Office of the

Chief Scientist, and Charles Bookman, Marina Guedes and Mary Eng of The Heinz

Center, who organized and administered the joint project.

Sincerely,

D. James Baker

Undersecretary of Commerce for

Oceans and Atmosphere and

Administrator, National Oceanic

and Atmospheric Administration

Sincerely,

William J. Merrell

President,

H. John Heinz III Center for

Science, Economics and the

Environment
iv

STEERING GROUP FOR THE YEAR OF THE OCEAN

D. James Baker, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Robert Ballard, Institute for Exploration and Jason Foundation

Lillian Borrone, Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

Kenneth Brink, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and NRC Ocean Studies Board

James M. Coleman, Louisiana State University and NRC Marine Board

Richard DuMoulin, Marine Transport Lines

Richard D. Fain, Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines

Robert J. Huggett, Michigan State University

Wesley Jordan, Bolt Beranek and Newman Technologies

Paul Kelly, Rowan Drilling Company

James Loy, U.S. Coast Guard

Roger McManus, Center for Marine Conservation

Dana Minerva, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

James Murley, Florida Department of Community Affairs

William Oakerson, Boat Owners Association of the United States

Cynthia Quarterman, Minerals Management Service

Joshua Reichert, The Pew Charitable Trusts

Paul E. Tobin, U.S. Navy

James D. Watkins, Council on Ocean Research and Education

Lee Weddig, fisheries consultant

Douglas Wheeler, California Resources Agency

Robert M. White, The Heinz Center

The Heinz Center Project Staff

Charles A. Bookman, Project Manager

Marina Miranda Guedes, Research Assistant
v

THE HEINZ CENTER BOARD OF TRUSTEES

John Sawhill (Chairman), President and Chief Executive Officer, The Nature Conservancy

Jared Cohon, President, Carnegie Mellon University

John Flicker, President, National Audubon Society

George Hatsopolous, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Thermo Electron

Corporation

Teresa Heinz, Chairman, Heinz Family Philanthropies

Samuel C. Johnson, Chairman, S. C. Johnson & Son, Incorporated

Donald Kennedy, Co-director, Global Environment Forum, Stanford University

Fred Krupp, Executive Director, Environmental Defense Fund

Kenneth L. Lay, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Enron Corporation

Simon A. Levin, Director, Princeton Environmental Institute, Princeton University

William Merrell, President, The Heinz Center

Paul H. O'Neill, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Aluminum Company of America

Frank H. T. Rhodes, President Emeritus, Cornell University

David H. Smith, President, David H. Smith Foundation, Incorporated

Phyllis Wyeth, environmentalist
vi

CONTENTS

Executive Summary 1

Overview 5

The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts 11

Protecting and Restoring Fisheries 31

Science and Technology: Key to Ocean Understanding 42

Appendix A: Participants in the Year of the Ocean Project 51

Appendix B: Commentary on The Marine Resources and Engineering

Development Act of 1966, the Stratton Commission, and the report

Our Nation and the Sea: A Plan for National Action 56
Executive Summary 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The United States is surrounded by

one of the largest, richest, and most

diverse marine territories of any nation.

From the Arctic Ocean bordering Alaska

to the Atlantic, Caribbean, and Pacific

oceans framing the mainland, Americans

enjoy and prosper from an abundance of

marine resources and activities, including

productive fisheries, global trade, coastal

recreation, mineral and energy production,

and diverse marine ecosystems. But today

these resources and activities face an array

of threats, which at best may result in lost

opportunities and at worst can cause

irreparable damage. Regrettably, the

environmental quality of marine areas and

resources, and the economic value of vital

ocean and coastal industries such as trade,

tourism, and fishing (and the communities

that depend on these activities), will be in

jeopardy unless effective measures are

taken immediately to safeguard, protect,

and restore America’s oceans and coasts.

After consulting with 200 ocean

and coastal leaders from industry,

government, academia, and environmental

organizations, The Heinz Center Steering

Group for the Year of the Ocean has

concluded that there is an urgent need for

a systematic and comprehensive review of

ocean and coastal policies and programs.

Unless action is taken now, significant

benefits to the economy and quality of life

will be lost, and the United States will fall

behind other nations in using and

conserving the oceans and their resources.

An integrated vision, and a plan for

achieving it, must be developed for U.S.

marine areas, resources, and activities. A

restructuring of national, regional, and

local mechanisms for managing oceans and

coasts may be necessary, along with new

investments in science, education, and

management.

On the positive side, a great

diversity of stakeholders, including all

levels of government, are interested in

helping to develop and implement

solutions. Members of the Steering Group

believe that an independent commission

mandated by the U.S. Congress and

supported by the Executive Branch of the

U.S. Government offers a means to rethink

the nation’s stake in the ocean and decide

how to address the related challenges and

opportunities. The commission would be

charged with making recommendations to

rejuvenate the nation’s ocean and coastal

policies and programs and realign them for

the future.

OCEAN ISSUES FACING THE

NATION

The preeminent challenge for the

United States is to achieve integrated

management that balances the use of ocean

resources with the conservation of those

resources. Enormous economic and

environmental benefits would result. This

challenge can be met if the nation can

overcome the obstacles that have blocked

progress in the past. The three principal

obstacles are the following:
Executive Summary 2

• The nation has underinvested in the

physical and technological infrastructure necessary for the efficient use

of the oceans and coasts. Elements of

this infrastructure include ports and

waterways, research laboratories and

facilities, and marine services.

• The national and international

institutions and mechanisms for

governing and managing ocean and

coastal areas and resources are often

fragmented and have conflicting

mandates.

• Insufficient effort has been devoted to

developing and applying the

knowledge necessary for wise

management.

The Steering Group defined the

dimensions of these obstacles and explored

potential solutions in three national

meetings convened to focus on the

following broad issues: managing the U.S.

coasts for economic and environ-mental

prosperity, protecting and restoring

fisheries and other living marine resources,

and advancing and applying ocean science

and technology for the use and

conservation of the marine environment.

Managing the Coasts for Economic and

Environmental Prosperity

Every American is affected by the

oceans. As vast as they are, the oceans can

also be harmed by humans. Changes in

oceanic conditions in the far Pacific can

determine whether the next growing

season for Midwestern farmers will be wet

or dry. Conversely, agricultural practices,

sewage processing, automobile emissions,

and other human activities generate byproducts that contain nitrogen or other

nutrient elements, which eventually find

their way into the ocean. Excess nutrients

in coastal waters can trigger harmful

blooms of marine organisms that adversely

affect coastal water quality and fishery

resources. Every year, some Americans

have to change vacation plans because of

beach closures, or endure “fish scares” in

the seafood marketplace because of broadbased concerns about environmental

quality and public health.

The United States is by far the

world’s largest marketplace. American

factories and stores depend on imported

goods. Approximately 40 percent of the

total value of U.S. foreign trade (and a

much larger share by weight, including half

of the petroleum that fuels the economy) is

carried by ship. These goods and products

are funneled through ports, which provide

an essential link between land and sea. Yet

the economic importance of ports is

increasingly transparent to the consumer,

who does not always appreciate the need

to ensure the efficiency and safety of

marine transportation. Many other

activities, ranging from beachfront

development to ocean-dependent

industries, also have economic

ramifications. All of these vital activities

depend on the nation’s capability to

manage marine activities, conserve and

protect coastal and ocean resources, and,

ultimately, understand the sea.

To meet the challenge of

protecting and conserving the coastal

environment, the United States will need

to manage the oceans and coasts in new

ways. The economic and other

consequences of coastal storms and

erosion need to be reduced, and

sustainable economic growth needs to be

achieved in marine recreation, marine

resource development, global trade, and

other activities. Progress in these areas
Executive Summary 3

increasingly lies beyond direct federal

control. A rich experience base is

emerging on partnership approaches that

build on the roles and capabilities of the

private sector; the knowledge base

provided by scientific researchers; and the

conservation and economic development

tools of local, state, and federal

governments. Solutions and innovations

today often require the participation of all

stakeholders, including every level of

government. The process of learning to

achieve progress through cooperation

more routinely and more effectively will be

a major undertaking, with important

implications for governing institutions at

every level.

Protecting and Restoring Fisheries and

Other Living Marine Resources

The nation also faces a difficult

challenge in developing a management

regime that ensures sustainable fisheries

and fishing communities while also

protecting and nurturing marine

biodiversity. Many U.S. fish stocks are still

overutilized despite some successful

restoration efforts. Although the

commitment to conservation has been

strengthened in recent legislation, a great

deal of work remains to be done to ensure

that this resolve is honored in practice.

Fishery managers today need to muster the

resources and political will to identify and

protect essential fish habitat, address the

problems of overfishing and excess fishing

capacity, minimize bycatch, address the

future of aquaculture and its potential

impacts on the marine environment, and

apply management techniques that work

across jurisdictions and conserve

ecosystem values such as the protection of

biodiversity.

Advancing and Applying Ocean Science

and Technology

Advances in ocean science and

technology can be applied to gain

important new knowledge that will help

build a sustainable future. With new

technologies and observing systems, new

levels of accuracy are becoming possible in

the prediction of natural disasters and

climate change. With new knowledge of

plate tectonics, scientists have begun to

understand the evolution of the Earth and

the implications for predicting earthquakes

and the distribution of mineral resources.

The recent identification of exotic life

forms around deep-sea hydrothermal vents

suggests that the oceans still harbor many

undiscovered treasures, perhaps including

clues to the origins of life. The growing

understanding of the complexities,

fragility, and resilience of ocean

ecosystems positions humanity to use the

living resources of the sea without

adversely affecting their sustainability. But

to realize the full potential of ocean

science, new investments in research,

education, facilities, and international

collaboration will be required.

MOVING FORWARD

Americans care deeply about the

oceans and coasts. The Year of the Ocean,

1998, provides a unique opportunity to

reflect on, and chart, a new and more

effective course for managing them.

Essential roles in this endeavor are already

being performed by industry, government

agencies at all levels, research and

educational institutions, and nongovernmental organizations. Buoyed by strong
Executive Summary

4

public interest, all are poised to continue

to work together toward America’s new

ocean future. The best chance for

achieving their shared vision lies in the

establishment of an independent commission comprised of the nation’s ocean

leaders, who can recommend the most

economically and environmentally beneficial directions for U.S. ocean policy and

programs in the next century.
Overview 5

1

OVERVIEW

The bounty and hazards of the

oceans that surround the United States

make their presence known daily. The fish

in the local supermarket, the day at the

seashore, the cruise to the Caribbean or

Alaska are but part of the ocean’s bounty.

The national economy and the well-being

of citizens depend on ocean-borne trade in

fuels, consumer products, and other goods

that enhance daily life. On the other hand,

the oceans are frequently a cause of

devastating hazards. Through their effects

on the weather and climate, the oceans

influence droughts and floods and are the

source of hurricanes, storm surges, and

tsunamis. They are also receptacles for the

wastes of humanity, sometimes with

adverse effects on complex marine

ecosystems. Less frequently, and primarily

in times of international tension,

Americans are reminded of the critical role

that the oceans play in protecting national

security.

The importance of the oceans has

been widely documented. They are an

integral part of the hydrological cycle that

drives weather and climate. They contain

the majority of the Earth’s biomass and are

a wellspring of ecological diversity.

Scientific discoveries in and around the

oceans have shed light on the origins of

the Earth and even life itself. Human

exploration of the ocean, and growing

understanding of life and other treasures in

the sea, awes and inspires millions.

Ecological studies have confirmed that

coastal waters are among the most

productive and valuable of all habitats.

Ocean activities are comparable in

economic importance to other sectors of

the economy, such as agriculture.

Thirty years have passed since the

last comprehensive review of the nation’s

relationship to the sea (President’s

Commission on the Oceans, 1969).1 Since

that time, the world has changed so

profoundly that a new examination of this

relationship is warranted. The Year of the

Ocean, 1998, and the prospect of a

national commission on the oceans,2 offer

the opportunity to reevaluate the nation’s

stake in the conservation and use of the

oceans.

THE HEINZ CENTER PROJECT ON THE

YEAR OF THE OCEAN

As a result of discussions with the

Ocean Principals’ Group,3 The Heinz

 

1

 A brief description of this assessment and its

subsequent impact is provided in Appendix B.

2

 S. 1213, 105th Congress, 1st Session. Passed by

the Senate in November, 1997. H.R. 3445 was

marked up on April 23, 1998, by the House

Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife

and Oceans. The bills would require the

development of comprehensive ocean policy for

the United States. A temporary commission would

be established for the purpose of conducting a

study and making recommendations concerning

national policy for the oceans. S. 1213 would also

establish a national marine council to strengthen

federal agency coordination and policy

implementation.

3

The Ocean Principals’ Group is an ad hoc

interagency coordinating committee of federal

agencies with ocean missions. Members are

agency directors or their principal deputies. The

member agencies are the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration of the Department of

Commerce, the Army Corps of Engineers and

Navy of the Department of Defense, Department

of Energy, the U.S. Geological Survey and

Minerals Management Service of the Department

of Interior, Department of State, the Maritime
6 Overview

Center established a 22-member Steering

Group to develop themes and issues for

the Year of the Ocean. The Steering

Group—benefiting from a diverse

membership representing industry, government, academia, and environmental

organizations—sought to identify what is

working well and what is not working with

regard to the nation’s ocean activities and

interests, and also to identify the needs and

opportunities. The Steering Group

proposed three strategic steps for

assessing the nation’s stake in the ocean:

• The first strategic step was to identify

and develop major ocean themes by

drafting issue papers and discussing

and refining them at national

workshops. This step was

accomplished by the Steering Group.

Approximately 200 ocean, coastal,

fisheries, and maritime leaders from

industry, government, academia, and

environmental organizations participated in three major national meetings in early 1998. Participants in The

Heinz Center Year of the Ocean

meetings are listed in Appendix A.

Background documents contributed by

federal agencies (National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration, 1998)

were provided to all participants. This

report synthesizes the results of these

meetings.

• The second strategic step is a national

conference to highlight the nation’s

 

Administration and Coast Guard of the

Department of Transportation, the Council on

Environmental Quality and Office of Science and

Technology Policy of the Executive Office of the

President, Environmental Protection Agency,

Federal Emergency Management Agency, Federal

Maritime Commission, National Aeronautics and

Space Administration, National Science

Foundation, and Agency for International

Development.

stake in the oceans and build public

interest in, and support for, addressing

U.S. ocean policies and programs. The

U.S. Government plans to convene the

National Conference on the Oceans in

Monterey, California, on June 11−12,

1998.

• The third strategic step, not yet

realized, is the enactment of legislation

establishing a high-level commission to

review thoroughly current U.S. ocean

policies and programs and the national

stake in the oceans (see footnote 2).

The Need to Reassess the Nation’s

Stake in the Ocean

A remarkable thing happened when

200 leaders from industry, government,

academia, and environmental organizations

came together under the auspices of The

Heinz Center to discuss the nation’s ocean

future. The four sectors are seldom

convened in this way. And yet, despite

their diverse backgrounds and interests,

these leaders joined together to note the

profound changes in virtually every aspect

of American life, including the nation’s

governance structure and environment, in

the brief time—just 30 years—since the

last comprehensive examination of the

nation’s stake in the sea. These

stakeholders agreed on many points,

including the nature of the problems that

have arisen over the past several decades

and what must be done to address them.

The convergence of opinion underscores

the urgency of the need to address the

nation’s ocean future.

This need is driven primarily by

changes that have taken place in both the

natural environment and approaches to

marine governance. Ocean issues also have
Overview 7

important implications for inter-national

security and commerce.

Changes in the Natural Environment and

Perceptions of It

The quality and well-being of many

marine areas and resources have declined

over the past several decades, and, partly

in recognition of this degradation, there

has been a shift in how these areas are

perceived. Marine resources are now

understood to be finite, even fragile. The

interconnectedness of all resources on or

near the coast, and even far upstream, is

becoming increasingly apparent.

Among the most profound changes

has been the encroachment of humanity on

the seas. Millions of people take advantage

of the amenities found in coastal areas and

the economic activities that thrive there.

The increase in coastal populations has

been accommodated by additional

pavement and infrastructure—roads,

recreation facilities, residential homes, and

businesses—all of which place stresses on

the coastal and marine environments.

Sensitive habitats, which nurture marine

life and buffer the shoreline, are

encroached upon, degraded, and

sometimes lost. A balance between

resource use and conservation is often

sought, but rarely achieved.

One of the hopeful trends amid

these changes is the growing

understanding of ocean and coastal

environments and processes. This new

knowledge is due in large part to an array

of increasingly sophisticated technologies,

ranging from remote-sensing instruments

on satellites and aircraft to highly equipped

underwater platforms and vehicles. The

improved observational capabilities,

combined with exponential increases in

computational power, have reduced the

costs of acquiring information and

increased the accuracy of weather

predictions. Additional investments are

needed, however, to exploit fully the

potential of these rapidly evolving

technologies for ocean science.

Changes in Ocean Governance

Opinion surveys have documented

that most Americans care deeply about the

environment. The depth of concern and

care for the environment has grown and

matured over the past 30 years. This

concern is now shared by all sectors of

society. Environmental organizations on

the local, regional, national, and

international levels have become a potent

political force, perhaps the strongest single

political force influencing ocean policy.

The rise in influence of the environmental

advocacy community is one of the

fascinating institutional developments of

the past decades. Moreover, these

predominantly private-sector interests are

willing to work with both landowners and

government agencies to conserve and

manage the environment, and they have

considerable technical and managerial

capabilities and resources to offer.

This phenomenon is only one

aspect of the growing number and

diversity of organizations with roles in

managing or using the marine

environment. Indeed, the whole approach

to marine governance is changing. The

traditional playersfederal and state

governments, industry, and academia

have been joined at the table by regional

and local governments as well as the
8 Overview

environmental community. Federal budgets and roles are no longer viewed as the

sole answer. Solutions and innovations

today may be devised and used by all

stakeholders, including multiple levels of

government. States are assuming larger

roles in planning and managing ocean

areas and uses. Still relatively untapped is

the private sector’s capability to address

problems and concerns through market

forces. In the future, management programs will increasingly need to recognize

the limits of the federal budget, the

constraints on states, and the power for

change that could be unleashed through

market forces.

Building on these new realities, a

realigned management framework is

emerging that strives to balance ocean

uses and conservation. Glimmers of that

framework can be seen, for example, in the

zoning of the Florida Keys to protect

fragile natural resources while

guaranteeing the rights of ocean users to

continue their activities. It is also evident

in habitat protection and species recovery

plans developed in many regions and

political venues that recognize the linkage

between land and water systems and

address real problems at the appropriate

scales. At the same time, a new vision of

innovative partnerships among stakeholders is emerging. But realizing its full

potential will involve difficult choices as

well as different priorities for fiscal and

human resources and realignments of

responsibilities among government

agencies, between levels of government,

and between government and the private

sector.

Long-term trends in federal

domestic discretionary spending add

urgency to the need to develop partnership

approaches to governing and managing

marine areas and resources. Despite

expanding missions and increasing costs,

most federal, state, and local agencies

involved in ocean management and

protection have had flat or declining

budgets for years. In virtually every

mission area, federal agencies have had to

do more with less. For example, in

constant dollars, the federal budget for

basic research in ocean science grew less

than 1 percent between 1982 and 1997,

even as the federal budget for basic

scientific research overall nearly doubled

(in constant dollars). Additional evidence

of the budget squeeze can be seen in the

backlog of nautical charts that require

updating, unmet needs for fishery stock

assessments, and many other deficiencies.

While ocean governance structures

continue to evolve, an entirely new

framework must be devised for vast areas

of coastal ocean that at one time were

essentially unmanaged. The most significant event in marine governance in the

last generation has been the extension of

U.S. jurisdiction out to 200 miles off the

coast for the purposes of resource

management. This Exclusive Economic

Zone must be managed wisely and

sustainably to preserve resources and

values for future generations.

International Security and Commerce

In marked contrast to the 1960s,

the United States no longer faces the

prospect of war with a military peer. Yet

the U.S. military is increasingly called on

for peacetime engagement, deterrence,

conflict prevention, and the control of

regional crises. The capability to sail

anywhere and project power remains
Overview 9

important, and knowledge of the ocean,

especially the marginal seas and coastal

areas, has become increasingly critical to

national defense. The military’s need for

accurate, detailed information is an

important driver of the use of advanced

technologies in ocean science.

Meanwhile, the globalization of the

world economy has intensified the use of

the oceans for the transport of goods and

services and transformed the shipping

industry, heightening the need for modern,

efficient ports and waterways. Ships have

become critical links in a time-sensitive

global distribution chain. Congestion in

U.S. ports, the result of continued trade

growth with insufficient modernization of

the infrastructure, triggers delays in

shipping and imposes economic penalties.

U.S. ports need to be modernized to the

level of the nation’s most sophisticated

trading partners (and economic

competitors), with deeper and wider

channels, modern traffic management

systems, and improved intermodal

connections through the port to highway

and rail transportation.

ACHIEVING A BALANCE OF OCEAN USES

AND CONSERVATION

The remaining chapters in this

report address three broad ocean-related

challenges that the nation will face over

the coming years. Each chapter is

organized somewhat differently, reflecting

the dimensions of the particular topic and

the nature of the discussions at the

national meetings convened by The Heinz

Center.

Chapter 2, “The Challenge of

Sustainable Coasts,” discusses the difficult

problem of managing the coast so that

both the economy and environment

prosper. Topics include enhancing and

sustaining coastal environmental quality,

shoreline management, producing energy

from the ocean, and maintaining and

modernizing the nation’s ports. The

chapter concludes with a discussion of

approaches to developing workable,

integrated management frameworks for

addressing and balancing these diverse

coastal issues.

Chapter 3, “Protecting and

Restoring Marine Fisheries,” identifies the

key issues that must be addressed if the

management of particular fisheries is to be

successful over the long term. These issues

include overfishing, over-capitalization,

bycatch, habitat protection, aquaculture

and its impacts on the environment,

managing fisheries across jurisdictions, and

the trend toward ecosystem management.

Chapter 4, “Science and Technology—Key to Ocean Understanding,”

describes some of the many ways in which

knowledge of the oceans benefits society,

especially the contributions to a productive

economy and thriving environment. Other
10 Overview

topics include the national capacity to gain

and apply knowledge of the sea,

international dimensions of ocean science

and technology, research and educational

facilities and institutions, and human and

fiscal resources.

The following chapters represent

the Steering Group’s synthesis of the

results of the three national meetings

convened by The Heinz Center. In addition

to outlining what is working and not

working today, the chapters identify the

major issues and questions that remain to

be addressed, important cross-cutting

themes, and the organizational structure

and fiscal means necessary to achieve

national goals. It is hoped that a national

commission on the oceans will find this

information helpful. REFERENCES

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA). 1998. Year of

the Ocean Discussion Papers. Washington, D.C.: NOAA Office of the Chief

Scientist.

President’s Commission on the Oceans.

1969. Our Nation and the Sea: A Plan for

National Action. Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Government Printing Office.
The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts 11

2

THE CHALLENGE OF SUSTAINABLE

COASTS

SUMMARY

The United States benefits from a

rich diversity of ocean and coastal

resources and activities, which contribute

in important ways to the economy and

quality of life. But the challenge of

preserving the environmental integrity of

the coastal region is growing along with

the human population and related impacts.

To meet the challenge of sustainable

coasts, integrated management approaches

that serve both economic and

environmental purposes will need to be

devised and implemented.

A rich experience base on

partnership approaches is emerging that

builds on the roles and capabilities of the

private sector; the knowledge base

provided by scientific researchers; and the

conservation and economic development

tools of local, state, and federal

governments. Solutions and innovations

today often require the participation of all

stakeholders, including all levels of

government. Ocean and coastal managers

and researchers must share best practices

and learn how to encourage and capitalize

on the new partnership approaches if they

are to protect and conserve the coastal

environment; reduce the economic and

other consequences of coastal storms and

erosions; and meet the challenges of

growth in world trade, tourism, and in

resource extraction industries.

INTRODUCTION

The majority of the U.S.

population lives near the coast,4 and

coastal populations are growing faster than

other populations (Culliton et al., 1990;

Cohen et al., 1997). Coastal population

growth increases demands for food, trade,

public health, waste disposal, and

protection from natural disasters. Apart

from permanent residents, the coasts also

attract vacationers, who require additional

services and infrastructure. Moreover,

increasing affluence leads to different

consumption patterns; in the United

States, this generally means increased

consumption of resources per individual.

Natural coastal resources include

biologically and economically important

marine life, energy resources, and useful

minerals. Perhaps the most important

attribute of the coast is the overall

ecological system. Thriving coastal areas

perform a number of ecosystem functions

and have great aesthetic as well as

economic importance. Coastal ecosystems

support juvenile fish stocks, for example,

 

4

 The coast is the region in which the land and sea

interact as a system. This is a broad definition; the

specifics can change, depending on the context.

For some purposes, the coast extends from the

shoreline seaward 200 miles to the limit of the

U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, and landward

from the shoreline to the limit of tidal influence

(National Research Council, 1995a). The coast

includes the Great Lakes, estuaries, bays, inlets,

and other coastal waters. In some contexts, the

coast may even include the surrounding lands,

watersheds, and even the “airsheds” that influence

them.
12 The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts

and provide unparalleled recreational

opportunities.

Natural processes sometimes

conflict with the activities of humans.

Coastal hazards, such as hurricanes, cause

record damages to residential and other

developed areas. Rising sea levels and

beach erosion threaten coastal

communities as well as critical natural

environments.

The coast is valuable economically

for many reasons. Perhaps most obviously,

great urban centers are typically found on

the coasts, and their ports and harbors

provide links to the heartland and

gateways to an increasingly global

economy. Although comprehensive

analyses of ocean-dependent economic

activity are not available, the extent and

relative economic importance of certain

activities have been assessed. For example,

one study estimated that selected ocean

activities are worth more than $17 billion

to California (see Table 2-1).

TABLE 2-1: Contribution of Selected

Ocean Industries to the California

Economy

Sector Contribution (in billions)

Tourism $ 9.90

Ports 6.00

Offshore oil .86

Fisheries and mariculture .55

Total $17.31

Source: Wilson and Wheeler, 1997

These ocean industries account for

approximately 2 percent of California’s

gross domestic product, which is roughly

$800 billion. In total, the ocean sector is

similar in size to other important sectors of

the economy, such as agriculture

(Pontecorvo, 1989; Wilson and Wheeler,

1997). Wilson and Wheeler (1997)

observed, “These findings are testimony to

the concept that ongoing efforts to manage

California’s ocean resources in a

sustainable manner will provide long-term

economic, as well as environmental,

benefits to the State. In other words,

ecosystem management and economic

sustainability are not mutually exclusive

goals. The State must continue to pursue

efficient and effective processes for

addressing the protection of ocean

resources, while also addressing the

legitimate needs of ocean-dependent

industries.”

Despite their widely recognized

intrinsic and economic value, U.S. coasts

are threatened. The warnings can be seen

in both newspaper headlines5

 and careful

studies. Unfortunately, current management approaches may not be adequate to

neutralize these threats. A recent report by

the National Research Council (1997a)

concluded that, “The governance and

management of our coastal waters are

inefficient and wasteful of both natural and

economic resources. The primary problem

with the existing system is the confusing

 

5

 Major coastal news stories of the past year

included a toxic bloom of pfiesteria in the

Chesapeake Bay that caused a public health scare;

a “dead zone” of oxygen-depleted water off the

mouth of the Mississippi River that raised

concerns about regional fisheries and control of

nonpoint-source pollution; congestion in West

Coast ports that triggered delays in shipping,

raised costs, and threatened to disrupt the holiday

shopping season; a cyclical change in Pacific

Ocean conditions that threatened coastal flooding,

storm damage, and large-scale erosion; and

production of oil from the deep ocean made

possible by advances in marine technology.
The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts 13

array of laws, regulations, and practices at

the federal, state and local levels. The

various agencies that implement and

enforce existing systems operate with

mandates that often conflict with each

other. In many cases, federal policies and

actions are controlled from Washington

with little understanding of local

conditions and needs.”

This chapter summarizes the most

significant trends, problems, and

opportunities in coastal ocean

management, as identified by all four

sectors—government, industry, academia,

and environmental organizations. The

discussion is organized into five sections.

The first four sections deal with coastal

environmental quality, shoreline management, production of energy from the

ocean, and the future of U.S. ports. At the

practical level, these subjects may seem to

have little in common. From a policy

perspective, however, they share a

fundamental problemfragmented governance mechanisms and conflicting

mandates. Therefore, the last section

discusses governance issues and the need

for integrated management.

COASTAL ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

“...[M]an’s fingerprint is found everywhere

in the oceans. Chemical contamination and

litter can be observed from the poles to the

tropics and from beaches to abyssal

depths...But conditions in the marine

environment vary widely. The open sea is

relatively clean...In contrast to the open

ocean, the margins of the sea are affected by

man almost everywhere, and encroachment

on coastal areas continues worldwide...If

unchecked, this trend will lead to global

deterioration in the quality and productivity

of the marine environment.” (Group of

Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine

Pollution, 1990)

Coastal oceans and estuaries are

among the most productive and valuable

natural systems on Earth. They are also

among the most threatened. Coastal areas

become more crowded every day; indeed,

the rate of population growth is fastest in

coastal counties, where population

densities are five times the national

average (Culliton,1997). Growth brings

jobs, creates economic prosperity, adds

new industries, improves regional

infrastructure, enhances educational

opportunities, and increases tax revenues.

However, the cost of progress is often the

loss or diminishment of the natural

features that originally attracted people to

the coast. Waste and pollutant loads

increase, green space and valuable habitat

is paved over or degraded, and water

quality deteriorates. The major stresses

include pollutants (nutrients, chemicals,

and debris); transportation-related

activities; and coastal development. Some

success has been achieved in mitigating

these stresses through mechanisms such as

marine protected areas. The stresses and

possible solutions are outlined below.

Stresses on the Coastal Environment

Nutrients, Chemicals, and Debris

Oxygen depletion is a severe and

growing concern in coastal waters. The

growth in human populations, changes in

land cover, the loss and degradation of

wetlands, and increases in the use of

fertilizer and in animal husbandry have

resulted in a dramatic increase in nutrient

inputs to the coastal ocean from the land.

The overenrichment of nutrients, called

eutrophication, stimulates the growth of

algae and other aquatic organisms and
14 The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts

results in oxygen depletion. This problem

particularly plagues large estuaries that are

poorly flushed and mix slowly with the

coastal ocean.

In the last 50 years, two- to tenfold

increases in nutrient enrichment have taken

place in coastal waters, with significant

seasonal variability in some regions

(Culliton, 1997). Many regions are now

plagued by both eutrophication and the

related problem of “blooms” of algae or

tiny toxic animals. In the summer of 1997,

newspaper headlines focused on an area of

over-nitrification and oxygen depletion

that seasonally covers approximately 7,000

square miles of the Gulf of Mexico off the

mouth of the Mississippi River. The likely

cause is agricultural runoff, which may

travel more than 1,000 miles from the

Midwest down the Mississippi River

before affecting the Gulf of Mexico. In the

Chesapeake Bay region, the Governor of

Maryland closed fisheries and warned

citizens about seafood safety because of a

bloom of a tiny toxic organism. The likely

cause is the handling of agricultural

wastes. These experiences point to a need

for more integrated management of land

and water in agricultural areas.

The scientific community and

coastal managers are just now

understanding the role of atmospheric

deposition in the contamination of coastal

waters. For example, it has been estimated

that approximately one-third of the

nitrogen that enters the Chesapeake Bay is

deposited from the atmosphere. Moreover,

in the United States, atmospheric

deposition is the predominant source of

the mercury that accumulates in fish. Some

40 to 70 percent of atmospheric mercury is

believed to originate from anthropogenic

sources, with domestic sources releasing

approximately 200 tons of mercury into

the air each year (U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 1997).

Chemicals and debris from all

sources are also recognized as serious

problems in the marine environment.

Chemical contamination poses risks of

acute and chronic toxicity, threatening

predators, and ultimately humans, through

uptake (i.e., bioaccumulation) in the food

chain. Although many substances that pose

health hazards have entered coastal

waters, monitoring indicates that chemical

pollution is at least not worsening, and

that concentrations of some banned

chemicals are decreasing. Marine debris,

which has been traced to many sources,

often harms or kills marine organisms that

become entangled in it or ingest it

(National Research Council, 1995b).

Debris also has economic impacts when it

damages fishing gear or reduces the

aesthetic appeal of recreational beaches.

Communities in New Jersey, for example,

spend approximately $1.5 million each

summer to keep beaches clean.

Coastal pollution can have a

measurable effect on travel and tourism,

which is the largest and fastest-growing

segment of the U.S. service industry. At

ocean, bay, and Great Lakes beaches,

there were at least 2,596 individual publichealth closings and advisories in 1996; 4

out of 5 were attributed to high bacteria

counts, usually the result of storm water

overflows from sewage systems or

polluted runoff from the land. In any given

year, up to half of the estuarine and coastal

waters tested do not meet ambient water

quality standards (U.S. Environ-mental

Protection Agency, 1996). Bac-terial

contamination is also a major concern for

shellfish harvests. Harvest limitations of
The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts 15

some type have been im-posed on roughly

one-third of all shellfish waters because of

seasonal health concerns.

Transportation-Related Stresses

Waterborne transportation poses

three general risks to the coastal

ecosystem. One risk stems from the need

to maintain clear, safe navigation channels,

a task that requires the management of

dredged material. Dredging is

commonplace in the United States and is

essential to many of the routine activities

and services that Americans have come to

expect and demand (Interagency Working

Group on the Dredging Process, 1994).

Approxi-mately 300 million cubic yards of

material, on average, are dredged each

year from U.S. coastal waters. Although

much of this material is clean and can be

disposed of safely in dump sites or islands

outside of shipping lanes, perhaps 5 to 10

percent of the material does not meet

water or sediment quality standards. These

materials have to be managed in a manner

that protects the environment by

containing the potential pollution source,

eliminating the pollutants (often an

expensive alternative), or reusing the

material for some beneficial purpose

(National Research Council 1997b).

Ships also pose two other risks to

coastal waters. Shipping accidents,

although rare events, still occur.

Accidental spills represents a small fraction

of total pollution of the seas, but shipping

accidents can devastate the areas in which

they occur, usually in the vicinity of

shipping lanes and most frequently near

ports (National Research Council, 1995c).

Worldwide efforts to improve the safety of

shipping and cargo movements, using

mechanisms such as treaties negotiated

through the International Maritime

Organization, help protect the environment but need to be implemented and

enforced more comprehensively.

Another well-established risk is the

introduction of exotic organisms by ships

moving from one region of the globe to

another. Unintentional introductions of

organisms by ships have altered the

ecological balance in the Great Lakes, San

Francisco Bay, and other regions and have

resulted in large expenditures to control

nuisance species (National Research

Council, 1996). Air pollution from ships

can also be an important local concern.

Development-Related Stresses

Coastal ecosystems are stressed by

a variety of human activities, and many

areas have experienced widespread

degradation. These problems have been

extensively documented and are well

known. Some of the causes, such as

deliberate discharges of wastes, have been

effectively controlled. Other causes are

equally pernicious but more difficult to

control.

Among the most common and

serious threats to marine habitat quality

are the incremental changes in estuarine

watershed function resulting from

piecemeal changes in the land use of

coastal watersheds. The modification of

vegetative patterns (with resulting changes

in water balance), installation of

impervious surfaces, compaction of soils,

elimination of wetlands that retain or

detain water, and other changes can

greatly modify the way water and

associated pollutants move into tidal

creeks. Typically, intensified development
16 The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts

results in enhanced average flows and

greatly enhanced peak flows, with

associated increases in the delivery of

sediments and water as well as

contaminants (e.g., pathogens, nutrients,

toxicants). Small coastal watersheds are

particularly vulnerable to the development-related delivery of pollutants

associated with storm water. Areas of

particular concern include brackish nursery

areas, anadromous spawning and nursery

areas, and tidal creeks that support

shellfish.

The physical alteration or

degradation of habitats such as wetlands,

sea grass meadows, and coral reefs

directly affects the quality of the marine

environment and the health of marine

living resources. Eight out of 10

commercial fish species use coastal

habitats as nurseries, and eight out of ten

endangered marine species depend on

shallow water habitat. Fully half of all

coastal wetlands have been lost or

degraded in the United States. At present,

coastal wetlands are being lost at an

average of 31 square miles annually

because of habitat modification, rises in

sea level, and other natural and humaninduced processes.

Coastal waters are cleaner today as

a result of government and industry efforts

to reduce the volume of pollutants from

point sources, including factories and

sewage treatment plants. However, the

United States is, at best, holding steady in

protecting the coastal environment. The

nation clearly needs to reassess its

commitment to clean coastal water. The

Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.),

a fundamental tool for protecting coastal

waters, was 25 years old in 1997. Point

sources continue to contribute sizable

amounts of nutrients and contaminants to

coastal waters, partially because of the

steady growth in the numbers of people

who live in coastal regions and

watersheds. Addressing these problems

will continue to be a priority for many

years.

Nonpoint-source pollution6

 poses

an even greater challenge. Runoff from

urban and rural areas causes widespread,

serious effects, including threats to public

health. This problem will be difficult to

address because it stems from many

sources and cumulative activities across

entire watersheds. Moreover, it is

aggravated by the widespread alteration of

watersheds and water flow and involves

significant scientific and technical

uncertainty. Marshaling new controls or

expenditures to address an identified but

diffuse problem has proven to be

politically difficult. Adding to the problem

is a lack of general public awareness of the

sources of the pollution and the

contributions that individuals can make to

both the problems and the solutions.

Enhancing and Sustaining Coastal

Environmental Quality

Solutions to coastal environmental

quality problems are difficult to implement,

in part because the responsibilities for the

watersheds involved typically are shared

among multiple governmental jurisdictions

and authorities. The management of

nonpoint sources, for example, requires

 

6 Nonpoint-source pollution is defined as

originating from non-distinct sources such as

agricultural lands (which are sources of pesticides

and fertilizers), roadways and other paved

surfaces, soil erosion (which produces silt), septic

tanks, and the air.
The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts 17

changes in many behaviors and activities

that involve land use and a wide range of

social and economic choices. Nonpointsource pollution remains severe despite

expenditures on controls at the state and

federal levels through national efforts such

as soil conservation programs, the Clean

Water Act, and the Coastal Zone

Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1451 et

seq.). Because of the diffuse nature of

nonpoint sources, the most effective

approach may be to set national standards

and best management practices at the

federal level, supported with resources and

interagency cooperation, rather than

relying on inflexible mandates.

Locally designed solutions are

being implemented through the National

Estuary Program. Unlike traditional

regulatory approaches to environmental

protection, this program focuses on

protecting not just water quality or

individual species, but rather whole

ecosystems. It also engages local

communities in environmental planning

and in protecting estuaries and the species

that inhabit them. The national program

requires stakeholders to create a

comprehensive conservation and

management plan for the long-term

protection of those resources. Twentyeight regional programs under the

umbrella of the National Estuary Program

are endeavoring to safeguard some of the

nation’s most important coastal waters.

The public’s fundamental interest

in clean water stems from personal health

concerns, which can be expressed in

questions such as, “Can I eat the fish?”

“Can I swim in the water?” “Is the

environment itself healthy?” Monitoring

can help assess the well-being of the

marine environment and the effectiveness

of management policies and actions in

maintaining or improving conditions.

Although monitoring capabilities have

advanced, much more can be done to

strengthen the role of monitoring in marine

environmental management (National

Research Council, 1990). It is important to

do so because knowledge is fundamental

to any attempt to manage coastal

environments in a way that both sustains

resources and accommodates multiple

uses.

The federal government recently

developed a Clean Water Action Plan to

chart a course toward fulfilling the original

goal of the Clean Water Act—“Fishable

and swimmable” waters for all Americans

(U.S. Environmental Pro-tection Agency,

1998). The cornerstone of the plan is the

watershed approach, which means that

increased emphasis will be placed on

controlling and preventing polluted runoff

within the watershed. This approach is

based on the recognition that clean water

is a product of a healthy watershed, and

that strategies to provide clean water must

be built on the foundation created over the

past 25 years and tailored to specific

watershed conditions. Focusing on the

whole watershed helps strike a balance

among efforts to control point-source

pollution and polluted runoff in the effort

to protect drinking water and sensitive

natural resources such as wetlands. The

watershed approach helps identify the

most cost-effective pollution-control

strategies to meet clean-water goals. The

plan emphasizes new partnerships working

at the watershed level to involve the

general public and bring together tribal,

local, state, and federal programs with the

private sector to clean up and protect

waters effectively and efficiently.
18 The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts

Marine Protected Areas

A potentially powerful environmental protection measure is to set a

region aside for conservation purposes.

This approach, used for generations on

land, has become widely accepted in

marine conservation. Marine protected

areas have proliferated around the globe,

and a network of marine protected areas is

emerging in the United States. Protected

areas include national marine sanctuaries,

national estuarine research reserves,

national estuaries, national wildlife

refuges, national parks and related

designations, national forests, fishery

closure areas, marine reserves, and

essential fish habitats. A variety of area

set-asides and protections also exist at the

state and local levels.

Marine protected areas have

proven to be valuable management tools

for balancing protection of the

environment with traditional uses and

navigation freedoms (Roberts and Polunin,

1993). Depending on the management

measures taken, marine protected areas

can control direct pressures, such as

physical alteration of habitats and

harvesting of marine species, and also

indirect pressures such as pollution and

eutrophication, and invasions of exotic

species (National Research Council,

1995d). The management measures taken

in a particular area may address one or

several of these threats; a protected area

may be managed for multiple uses or

solely for a protection objective. The two

approaches are complementary rather than

mutually exclusive. The Florida Keys

National Marine Sanctuary is an example

of combining these approaches.

Protected areas can help conserve

ecosystem integrity by providing

benchmarks of natural patterns and

opportunities to study natural ecosystem

function. By contrasting natural and userinduced changes, researchers can improve

understanding of the effects of different

uses and management approaches. In

addition, when used for fisheries

management, protected areas can help

reduce uncertainty and possibly enhance

the yield of fisheries outside the area.

Despite the numbers and diversity

of marine protected areas, few provide

strong or comprehensive protection for

marine resources or effectively address the

major threats. In California, for example,

the extraction of living resources is

prohibited in just nine out of 104 marine

protected areas, in areas covering less than

10 square miles (or 0.2 percent of state

waters). Resource managers may make

greater use of “no take” zones in the

future as statutory provisions to designate

and protect essential fish habitat are

implemented, and, more generally, as

additional experience is gained with

protected areas.

SHORELINE MANAGEMENT

Thirty of the 50 states have coasts.

These states contain approximately 85

percent of the U.S. population. Moreover,

about half of the U.S. population lives

within 50 miles of the coast. The

concentration of the populace on the

coasts is expected to continue, resulting in

increasing demand for shoreline

development.
The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts 19

Much of the U.S. shoreline is

sandy. A protective ribbon of islands

stretches 2,700 miles from Maine to

Texas, one of the longest and best defined

coastal barriers in the world (Coastal

Barriers Study Group, 1988). Sandy

shorelines absorb the constant barrage of

the sea. They buffer adjacent wetlands and

the mainland from the daily, erosive brunt

of waves, currents, and tides. Sandy

shorelines, barrier islands, and their

associated wetlands are ecologically rich

and biologically diverse. People, too, seem

drawn to this land-water interface. The

sandy shorelines are, in fact, subject to

many competing demands from

recreational enthusiasts, water-dependent

industries, real estate developers, the

military, conservationists, and others.

Sandy shores are dynamic. Sand is

carried by water and wind between

offshore bars and the barrier beach, across

the dunes, through coastal inlets, and

throughout the entire littoral.

Complicating the picture is the projected

rise in sea level over the long term

(Bijlsma, 1996). The impacts of a rise in

sea level include inundation, flooding,

erosion, and saline intrusion into coastal

aquifers. Clearly, an environment featuring

such dynamism and threats so dramatic

poses unique problems for those who live

or build there. Structures built too close to

the shoreline are often threatened by

erosion. Hard stabilization (i.e. groins,

jetties) to prevent erosion, and soft

stabilization techniques (i.e. beach

nourishment), must be considered in

concert, keeping in mind that shorelines

differ and that one or another approach

may or may not be successful (National

Research Council, 1995e). In addition,

whenever the supply of sand to the

shoreline is interrupted, it is important to

restore the supply to the greatest extent

possible.

The degree of protection,

management, or human intervention that

may be needed depends on the nature of

the shoreline and the prevailing uses of the

adjacent area. For developed communities

with water-dependent economic activities

such as harbors and resorts, the strategy of

choice is, in all likelihood, to protect the

existing infrastructure and maintain

beaches. For eroding shorelines that are

less developed the decision becomes more

difficult (National Research Council,

1985). The choice is either to stabilize the

shoreline at some environmental and

economic cost or to retreat from the

shoreline and let nature take its course,

also at some environmental and economic

cost. Interestingly, many coastal property

owners do not obtain insurance coverage

for coastal hazards, especially flooding

caused by hurricanes and chronic erosion

(Miletti, 1997). In the alternative, property

owners in high-risk areas turn to federal

disaster relief programs when hit with high

flood, wind, and erosion damages, shifting

the burden to the nation’s taxpayers.

Separate, uncoordinated government programs and practices make

choosing stabilization measures more

difficult. Sometimes the interests of

different agencies come into conflict. For

example, the tradition of local and state

control of development can sometimes

impede federal environmental management efforts. Federal insurance against

losses from natural disasters, such as

floods, may encourage shoreline

development, perhaps promoting the

erosion that other agencies seek to

combat. Despite the economic and

ecological importance of shorelines, the
20 The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts

United States still lacks adequate

coordination among the federal agencies

that manage shorelines.

To provide a basis for the

development of a coordinated national

approach to shoreline management, a

comprehensive analysis of existing federal

and state policies is needed. The analysis

should address population and

development trends in the context of

overall risk, as well as mitigation

measures, including the respective roles of

hard and soft stabilization techniques

versus letting nature take its course. A

national approach to shoreline

management would need to be

implemented through local, state, and

federal mechanisms.

OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS DEVELOPMENT

Oil and gas extraction from

beneath the seabed is a major marine

activity in the Gulf of Mexico, off

Southern California, and in some regions

of Alaska. Petroleum production from

federally controlled offshore lands

currently accounts for approximately 19

percent of all domestically produced oil

and 27 percent of natural gas, and the

percentages are growing. These domestic

energy resources are especially important

because the United States still depends

heavily on imported oil, which supplies

about half of the nation’s petroleum

consumption. The offshore program is also

an important source of revenue for the

government, generating over $1.4 billion

in bonuses, $68 million in rents, and $3.5

billion in royalties in 1997. This industry is

also an important employer in the Gulf of

Mexico region and elsewhere, with 38,000

workers offshore and another 46,000

onshore support personnel (Gächter,

1997).

Offshore oil production is a major

technological triumph. Traditionally a

cyclical industry, the offshore oil and gas

industry is currently booming. The most

challenging and exciting discoveries are far

from shore, in water depths ranging from

1,000 to 10,000 feet. Exploratory wells

have been drilled in water as deep as 7,600

feet. The MARS project illustrates the

scale of offshore activity. Located 130

miles offshore in 3,000 feet of water, the

MARS project will produce 100,000

barrels of oil and 100 million cubic feet of

natural gas per day. The production

platform floats on the sea surface, is

tethered by long steel tendons to the sea

floor, and stands 3,250 feet tall (nearly

three times the height of the Empire State

Building). Oil and gas are pumped ashore,

or to a gathering platform, through a

pipeline that traverses extremely steep and

corrugated undersea slopes. Tethered and

robotic undersea vehicles play critical roles

in the operation of the MARS structure

and pipeline. In 1997, the Ram-Powell and

Mensa projects in the Gulf of Mexico

passed the MARS project in terms
The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts 21

of depth, producing in water 3,214 feet

and 5,300 feet deep, respectively.

With the advent of new

exploration, drilling, and productionrelated technologies, interest in the deeper

waters has intensified. The MARS project

and other deep-water operations are some

of the largest, most complex industrial

projects ever undertaken and were

unimaginable a generation ago. As a result,

offshore oil production is projected to

increase as much as 70 to 100 percent in

the Gulf of Mexico between 1995 and

2000, with exploration pushing beyond the

Exclusive Economic Zone and product

pipeline networks extending well off the

continental shelf and down the continental

slope.

The exploration, development, and

production of oil and natural gas may

affect the marine, coastal and human

environments in several ways. Prior to

approving any proposal, the Minerals

Management Service performs the

requisite National Environmental Policy

Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) analysis to

obtain information to support decisions

about mitigation of potential impacts,

including

• physical disruption of the seafloor

habitat and benthic communities;

• discharge of chemicals, drilling muds

and cuttings, and produced waters;

• accidental hydrocarbon spills;

• hydrocarbon emissions from facilities,

supply vessels, and helicopters;

• exploration and production noise

impacts on marine mammals and

fisheries stocks;

• impacts of explosive platform removals

on fish species; and

• socioeconomic impacts on coastal

communities and ports. Of special

concern in Alaska are potential impacts

on native Alaskan subsistence culture.

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, as

amended in 1978 (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.),

requires the use of the best available

pollution-prevention technologies. The Act

further requires that research be conducted

to assess, manage, and monitor the

impacts of oil and natural gas development

on the human, coastal, and marine

environments. The Minerals Management

Service conducts research to evaluate

equipment and procedures that could

further reduce the risk of environmental

impacts. This information is used in

making decisions about oil and natural gas

activities and in developing appropriate

regulations and lease conditions.

The number of significant spills

from oil production in state and federal

waters has been low, and the volume of oil

spilled has declined fairly steadily over the

years (Minerals Management Service,

1997). There has not been a spill larger

than 1,000 barrels from oil and gas

platforms on the outer continental shelf

since 1980; in fact, natural seeps introduce

approximately 100 times more oil into

U.S. marine waters than do spills from

offshore development and production

activities. Increased precautions by

industry, enhanced safety technologies

(e.g., blowout prevention systems, shut-in

valves), and strict adherence to

government regulations most likely have

minimized the risk of oil spills from

offshore activities.

Although the risk of pollution from

oil and gas development appears to be

low, land-use decisions remain an ongoing

issue. Favorable market conditions and

improved exploration techniques have
22 The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts

already revitalized oil and gas exploration

and development in the Gulf of Mexico.

However, offshore development is not

readily accepted by coastal populations in

other areas. Local communities and others

have blocked such development in many

offshore areas because of environmental

and land-use concerns. Some stakeholders,

for example, are concerned about the

adequacy of the local infrastructure to

accommodate the growth that might be

stimulated by offshore oil and gas

development and production. The history

of the federal offshore program shows that

the successful development of ocean

energy and mineral resources requires a

shift from conflict to consensus among all

stakeholders within the framework of a

comprehensive management strategy

(Minerals Management Service, 1993).

The need for consensus extends to

the different levels of government, because

the coastal states play a role in offshore oil

and gas development. These states manage

and regulate oil and natural gas activities

in their waters and the associated onshore

facilities. In addition, the Coastal Zone

Management Act gives states explicit

authority to assure that lease sales and

permitting of activities on the outer

continental shelf are consistent with state

coastal zone management programs

(which are federally approved). Federal

and state laws related to energy and

mineral resources often contain differing

policy objectives that must be balanced.

In recent years, the federal

government has resolved conflicts to a

greater extent and more successfully by

working with stakeholders. Efforts have

been made to avoid and settle lawsuits

concerning the offshore leasing program

and to extend leasing more slowly into

new areas to provide time for stakeholders

to become engaged in the process. There

have also been renewed discussions about

providing coastal communities with impact

assistance funded by revenues from

offshore leases, to help offset the

associated infrastructure costs and meet

additional coastal investment needs. These

and other steps have set a new, more

conciliatory tone for the offshore leasing

program and provide the necessary

preconditions for more holistic management of ocean resources. An impact

assistance program might strengthen

relationships and participation among

levels of government concerning offshore

development and lead to better planning

and impact mitigation.

FUTURE OF U.S. PORTS

The United States is the largest

consumer nation, and most of its imports

and exports—41 percent of foreign trade

by value (and a much larger percentage by

weight)—are shipped by sea (National

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,

1998). In 1995, waterborne commerce

totaled 2.24 billion short tons, including

1.09 billion tons in domestic cargo and

1.15 billion tons in foreign trade. The

foreign trade alone was valued at more

than $600 billion. This trade is expected to

triple by 2020, and the U.S. transportation

infrastructure must be capable of handling

the growth. Domestic marine transportation complements the international

trade and serves 47,000 miles of U.S.

waterways and 185 major ports.

Oil is by far the most common

cargo shipped by water, with 9 million

barrels imported every day. Along with oil

tankers and barges, many other ships
The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts 23

operate on the waterways. Large

containerships striving for tight and

reliable transoceanic schedules are

essential cogs in just-in-time manufacturing and retail inventory management. Approximately 100 large cruise

ships embark frequently from U.S. ports

with large numbers of passengers. In all,

commercial vessels make roughly 70,000

port calls each year. Approximately

110,000 fishing vessels operate from U.S.

ports, and there are more than 20 million

recreational craft (National Research

Council, 1995b).

The locus of all this activity is the

port. Ports are commercial hubs,

generating economic vitality and

enhancing overall quality of life.

Stakeholders in the future of ports are

diverse. Commercial stakeholders include

waterfront industries, shipping companies,

manufacturers of all types, and commodities brokers. State and local governments depend on ports to stimulate

regional development. Members of the

public enjoy boating and various waterfront activities and want to protect the

coastal environment. A number of federal

agencies are concerned with the future of

ports because of their duties to promote

trade, ensure maritime safety, maintain

waterways, and enforce environmental

regulations.

Ports also provide essential

services in national emergencies. Thus,

their capabilities and efficiency contribute

to national security. The reductions in U.S.

forces based overseas, a result of the postCold War peace dividend, have increased

the nation’s reliance on an efficient marine

transportation system. For example, during

the Persian Gulf War, 95 percent of the

supplies for American forces were

transported by ship. During the peaks of

the Desert Shield logistics buildup, the

number of supply ships engaged averaged

one every 50 miles between the East Coast

and the Persian Gulf. Efficient ports are

critical to the nation’s stability as well as

its capability to respond to world crises

with appropriate aid, ranging from food to

disaster assistance to military forces.

Despite their importance, many

U.S. ports are showing signs of stress, a

disturbing prospect as the nation competes

in an increasingly dynamic global

economy. A study by international tanker

operators found that port infrastructure in

the United States is being pushed to the

limits of its capability, with major

decisions about investing in infrastructure

renewal on the horizon. The report

concludes that, “It is an anomaly that

tankers which approach U.S. terminals do

so without the support of a modern vessel

traffic system, many times base their

approach on fifty year old charts, are

instructed to approach the berth on less

than adequate water draft, and finally

moor at a berth which was designed to

accommodate ships much smaller than a

modern tanker” (INTERTANKO, 1996).

Ports are being affected by

important changes in two areas (Bookman,

1996). The first is the rapidly changing

intermodal freight transportation market,

which moves increasing amounts of cargo

on ever-more-demanding schedules. This

market has fueled a trend toward larger

and faster ships that make precisely timed

and efficient port connections to achieve

maximum cost effectiveness and

competitiveness. The survival of a general

cargo port therefore depends on its

capability to receive and transfer goods as

quickly as possible. A 1991 survey found
24 The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts

that half of public ports and two-thirds of

container ports faced growing problems

providing seamless links among ports,

highways, and railroads (National

Research Council, 1993a). There is also a

growing need to deepen and widen

channels to accommodate the new

generation of larger cargo ships.

The second factor is the increasing

number and complexity of environmental

regulations that pertain to ports (National

Research Council, 1997b). In some

regions, port maintenance and

modernization have been delayed, and

costs have been increased, as a result of

difficulties in finding acceptable solutions

for the disposal or use of dredged material,

obtaining land-use approvals for new port

facilities and access routes, and resolving

other issues. Increasing environmental

awareness and mounting environmental

problems affecting coastal areas and ocean

waters have made dredged material

management, in particular, a contentious

problem in a number of ports. Many ports

are also finding it increasingly expensive

and difficult to manage wastes, respond to

spills of oil and hazardous substances,

control air emissions, and comply with

wetlands protection and endangered

species legislation. Significant progress is

being made to address these problems

through cooperative efforts by federal and

state governments, local communities, and

nongovernmental organizations. Particularly noteworthy are dredged material

management planning efforts in the Port of

New York/New Jersey, San Francisco

Bay, and Galveston Bay.

U.S. ports and waterways are at a

critical juncture. Failure to address the

need for modernization will adversely

affect the economy, environmental

security, and national security. On the

positive side, a coordinated modernization

effort is being launched. The U.S.

Department of Transportation recently

brought together the many federal

agencies responsible for waterways

management to discuss issues, coordinate

programs and services, and promote

efficiency and safety. A national dialog

with local stakeholders has also been

initiated. Policy coordination at the

national level, combined with action at the

local port level, can help ensure an

adequate infrastructure, including

appropriate channel and berth depths, realtime navigation information, modern port

facilities, and efficient intermodal

connections.

The emerging trend toward vertical

and horizontal collaboration among

governments and port interests could

provide a vehicle for modernization. The

Congress could establish a demonstration

program to make planning funds available

to port regions. These planning funds

could be used to forge port modernization

partnerships and undertake strategic

planning that supports the national

interest. For regions and partnerships that

successfully undertake such efforts, it

might be possible to offer an additional

incentive, perhaps expedited federal action

on related projects and permits. Such a

demonstration program might be

established in the normal course of

reauthorizing any of several relevant

statutes. Coordinated planning may hasten

the modernization of safer and more

efficient ports, thereby promoting economic growth in an environmentally sound

manner.

GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT
The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts 25

Two themes are common to each

topic addressed previously in this chapter:

inappropriate or inadequate public investment in infrastructure, and fragmented

governance and management regimes.

Effective governance of the coastal

ocean is difficult at best. Large areas of

marine resources are in the public domain.

The resources are diverse, as are the

resource users. Monitoring and

enforcement are especially difficult

offshore. These inherent difficulties are

compounded by the great number of

activities that occur in, on, and under the

coastal ocean, and the fractured

framework of laws, regulations, and

practices that exists at the federal, state,

and local levels.

Failures in governance are having

increasingly deleterious effects as the

marine environment is used more

intensely. The biological integrity of the

sea has been impaired, as evidenced by

depleted fisheries, reductions in marine

biodiversity, and the loss of critical coastal

habitats. Growing conflicts over the use of

marine resources often result in wasted

opportunities and unnecessary costs.

Delays in dredging harbors, for example,

can result in cargo and revenues being

shifted to other ports, regions, and

transport modes. Problems of this type are

bound to become more acute as growing

populations exert increasing stresses on

the water’s edge.

Coastal zones are archetypical

complex systems.7 The interacting forces

 

7

 This discussion of integrated coastal

management is condensed from the work of

Robert M. White, a senior fellow at The Heinz

Center, in his paper “Managing Coastal

on coastal areas produce effects that

frequently are not intuitively obvious.

These multifaceted forces are both natural

and anthropogenic and arise both within

and outside the coastal areas. The result is

management efforts that struggle with

diverse goals that sometimes are

incompatible. Single-purpose legislation

that serves specific goals well has also

established multiple modes of management that require great coordination.

Despite the difficulties, examples

abound of successful, innovative ocean

and coastal management efforts.8 The 25-

year-old Coastal Zone Management

Program establishes national policy for

coastal areas and empowers states

independently to plan and implement

programs that meet national policy

objectives. In the National Estuary

Program, comprehensive planning has

been undertaken in 28 estuaries to improve

water, sediment, and habitat quality (i.e.

overall ecosystems) in a sustainable

manner. Although parti-cipating estuaries

have been congress-ionally designated, the

program is successful because of its strong

regional focus. Coastal states are

exercising increased control over issues

such as ocean pollution, fisheries

management, public access, and coastal

zone impacts of ocean uses. Although

most states manage ocean uses and

resources with single-purpose statutes,

seven are actively developing or

implementing more comprehensive ocean

management policies.

The complexity of the management challenge is widely recognized. The

 

Complexity,” which was presented at the Coastal

Zone 97 Conference, held in Boston in July 1997.

8

 Detailed examples are provided in a recent

report by the National Research Council (1997a).
26 The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts

concept of integrated coastal management

is frequently invoked to address the

complexity issue (National Research

Council, 1993b). Integrated coastal

management is a sound concept, but it

means different things to different people.

There are also formidable obstacles to its

practical implementation. There are

bureaucratic obstacles in the form of

agencies seeking to protect their “turf,”

economic issues posed by stakeholders

who want to advance their own financial

interests, and legal concerns created by

constituencies who want to achieve their

goals through legislative action. There are

also political obstacles because the

boundaries of cities, counties, and other

jurisdictions do not coincide with those of

natural coastal zone systems. The core of

the conundrum is whether it is possible to

manage any coastal activity without

managing all coastal activities in an

integrated manner.

A fully developed marine

governance and management system must

necessarily evolve over time and in

response to experience gained in managing

the coast. However, there seem to be

many opportunities to move forward now.

Moreover, improvements in governance

and management seem to be prerequisites

to both productive economic investments

and sound environmental stewardship.

General attributes of a successful

coastal and ocean governance system,

identified during The Heinz Center Year of

the Ocean project, are presented in Box 2-

1. As the framework for marine area

governance and management continues to

be developed, it will be important to avoid

the tendency to perpetuate the longstanding dichotomy and separation

between ocean uses and conservation. The

complexity of the existing system of

governance often contributes to this

polarization. Absent new and innovative

ways to bring more cohesiveness to ocean

resource management, progress will

continue to be hampered by “fragmented

and compartmentalized management

processes made more complicated by

cross-jurisdictional issues and authorities”

(Burroughs and Baird, 1995).

Simply put, the policy and legal

infrastructure often does not correspond to

practical needs. The governance system

must place greater emphasis on the use of

integrated management approaches to

bring together all the stakeholders to

address the economic, environmental, and

social demands placed on finite ocean and

coastal resources. At the same time,

focused efforts are needed to harness the

expertise and resources of

nongovernmental entities, such as private

industry, user groups, and nonprofit organizations. Such efforts can help infuse

new ideas and resources into a system that

has been largely dominated by insiders

accustomed to traditional management

approaches.
The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts 27

BOX 2-1: ATTRIBUTES OF SUCCESSFUL COASTAL AND OCEAN GOVERNANCE

• overall vision and mechanism for measuring progress

• integrated across all sectors, constituencies, and stakeholders

• decentralized as much as possible but with common goal and objectives

• participatory decision making that promotes good faith, confidence building, and ability to reach closure

• role clarity for participants; there must be a leader, contact, or focal point; someone must have final say

• stakeholders committed to process instead of using political clout to get their own way

• mechanism for conflict resolution

• clear process with a beginning, middle, and end

• adaptive, flexible process that fosters innovation and risk taking

• incentives for collaboration

• cost efficient; considers cost to environment (i.e., external costs) as well as direct internal costs

• realistic, pragmatic programs that use existing capabilities when appropriate

• adequate financial and physical resources to support process and infrastructure as appropriate

• maximizes use of good natural science and social science in decision making

• data on which decisions are based are openly available

• public information and education by government and/or private groups
28 The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts

KEY QUESTIONS

If the United States is to protect

and conserve the coastal environment and

meet the many other, related challenges of

coming decades, then the following key

questions must be addressed:

· What are the priorities among the many

environmental threats to the coastal

ocean, including estuaries? What steps

are necessary to restore, protect and

enhance the coastal ocean? What

technological, land use, partnership, and

public education initiatives can be

pursued to reduce nonpoint-source

pollution and restore and protect coastal

environmental quality? How can the

benefits of marine protected areas be

assessed and optimized?

· Does the United States need a

coordinated federal policy concerning

management of its shorelines? What steps

would lead to the development and

implementation of a coordinated national

approach to shoreline management?

· Has the offshore leasing and

development program achieved an

acceptable balance between national

and local interests, and between

resource use and conservation? Would

an impact assistance program help

achieve a balance between economic

and environmental protection?

· What steps can be taken to promote

U.S. port modernization (and the

nation’s economic prosperity) while

also meeting the many demands on

ports to protect the marine

environment? How can coordination

among port stakeholders, and between

regional and port planners, be

encouraged?

· How do we give operational life to the

concept of integrated coastal

management? Would a greater degree

of coordination or integration of

federal ocean programs make it easier

to set priorities, or resolve potential

use conflicts? How can we achieve a

greater degree of effectiveness of

federal, state, and local governance

approaches? How can the expertise

and resources of nongovernmental

entities be harnessed in partnership to

help set priorities and resolve use

conflicts?

REFERENCES

Bijlsma, L. 1996. Coastal Zones and Small

Islands. Chapter 9 in Climate Change

1995: Impacts, Adaptations, and

Mitigation of Climate Change.

Contribution of Working Group II to the

Second Assessment Report of the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change. Cambridge (U.K.): Cambridge

University Press.

Bookman, C.A. 1996. U.S. Seaports: At

the Crossroads of the Global Economy.

Issues in Science and Technology.

13(1):71−77.

Burroughs, J.T., and B.E. Baird. 1995.

California’s Ocean Resources Management Program, Natural Resources and

Environment. American Bar Association,

Section of Natural Resources, Energy and

Environmental Law 9(4):44−47.
The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts 29

Coastal Barriers Study Group. 1988.

Executive Summary in Report to

Congress: Coastal Barrier Resources

System. Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Department of the Interior.

Cohen, J.E., C. Small, A. Mellinger, J.

Gallup, and J. Sachs. 1997. Estimates of

Coastal Populations. Letter to the Editor.

Science 278: 1211−1212.

Culliton, T.J., M.A. Warren, T.R.

Goodspeed, D.G. Remer, C.M. Blackwell,

and J. MacDonough. 1990. Fifty Years of

Population Change Along the Nation’s

Coast. Second Report of the Coastal

Trends Series. Washington, D.C.: National

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,

Office of Oceanography and Marine

Assessment.

Culliton, T.J. 1997. Population:

Distribution, Density, and Growth. Report

of NOAA’s State of the Coast Project.

Silver Spring, Md.: National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration.

Gächter, R.A. 1997. Federal Offshore

Statistics: 1995. OCS Report, MMS 97-

007. Herndon, Va.: U.S. Department of

Interior, Minerals Management Service,

Operations and Safety Management.

Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects

of Marine Pollution (GESAMP). 1990.

The State of the Marine Environment.

Oxford (U.K.): Blackwell Scientific

Publications.

Interagency Working Group on the

Dredging Process. 1994. The Dredging

Process in the United States: An Action

Plan for Improvement. Report to the

Secretary of Transportation. Washington,

D.C.: Maritime Administration.

INTERTANKO. 1996. U.S. Ports and

Terminals Safety Study: A Discussion

Paper. Oslo, Norway: International

Organization of Tanker Owners and

Operators.

Miletti, D.S. 1997. Designing Future

Disasters: An Assessment and Bolder

Course for the Nation. First review draft,

November 1997. Boulder, Colo: Natural

Hazards Research and Applications

Information Center, University of

Colorado.

Minerals Management Service (MMS).

1993. The Outer Continental Shelf Oil and

Gas ProgramMoving beyond Conflict to

Consensus. Reston, Va.: MMS OCS

Policy Committee, Subcommittee on OCS

Legislation.

Minerals Management Service. 1997. OCS

Oil Spill Facts. http:// www.mms.gov.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA). 1998. Year of

the Ocean Discussion Papers. Washington,

D.C.: NOAA.

National Research Council. 1985.

Engineering Implications of Sea Level

Rise. Washington, D.C.: National

Academy Press.

National Research Council. 1990.

Managing Troubled Waters: The Role of

Marine Environmental Monitoring.

Washington, D.C.: National Academy

Press.

National Research Council. 1993a.

Landside Access to U.S. Ports.

Transportation Research Board Special
30 The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts

Report No. 238. Washington, D.C.:

National Academy Press.

National Research Council. 1993b.

Managing Wastewater in Coastal Urban

Areas. Washington, D.C.: National

Academy Press.

National Research Council. 1995a.

Science, Policy, and the Coast: Improving

Decisionmaking. Washington, D.C.:

National Academy Press.

National Research Council. 1995b. Clean

Ships, Clean Ports, Clean Oceans:

Controlling Garbage and Plastic Wastes at

Sea. Washington, D.C.: National Academy

Press.

National Research Council. 1995c.

Minding the Helm: Improving Marine

Navigation and Piloting. Washington,

D.C.: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. 1995d.

Understanding Marine Biological

Diversity. Washington, DC: National

Academy Press.

National Research Council. 1995e. Beach

Nourishment and Protection. Washington,

D.C.: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. 1996.

Stemming the Tide: Controlling

Introductions of Nonindigenous Species

by Ships’ Ballast Water. Washington,

D.C.: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. 1997a.

Striking a Balance: Improving Stewardship

of Marine Areas. Washington, D.C.:

National Academy Press.

National Research Council. 1997b.

Contaminated Sediments in Ports and

Waterways: Cleanup Strategies and

Technologies. Washington, D.C.: National

Academy Press.

Pontecorvo, G. 1989. Contribution of the

Ocean Sector to the United States

Economy. Marine Technology Society

Journal 23(2):7−14.

Roberts, C.M., and N.V.C. Polunin. 1993.

Marine Reserves: Simple Solutions to

Managing Complex Fisheries? Ambio:

Journal of the Human Environment.

22(6):363−368.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

1996. Liquid Assets: A Summertime

Perspective on the Importance of Clean

Water to the Nation’s Economy. EPA

Report No. 800-R-96-002. Washington,

D.C: U.S. Government Printing Office.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA). 1997. Mercury Report to

Congress, December 1997. Washington,

DC: EPA Office of Air and Radiation.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA). 1998. Clean Water Action Plan:

Restoring and Protecting America’s

Waters. Report No. USEPA-840-R-98-

001. Washington, DC: EPA.

Wilson, P., and D.P. Wheeler. 1997.

California Ocean Resources: An Agenda

for the Future. Sacramento, Calif.: The

Resources Agency of California, Ocean

Resources Management Program.
Protecting and Restoring Marine Fisheries 31

3

PROTECTING AND RESTORING

MARINE FISHERIES

SUMMARY

The 1976 Magnuson Fishery

Conservation and Management Act (P.L.

94-265) was highly successful in

Americanizing U.S. fisheries, which

previously had been dominated by foreign

fleets, and in attracting investment in the

fishing industry. However, the regional

fishery management structure established

by the Act has not always succeeded in

maintaining uniformly healthy, fully

productive fishery resources. Off every

shore and in every estuary, the nation faces

the difficult challenge of managing its

fisheries sustainably. Although the

commitment to conservation has recently

been strengthened in reauthorized

legislation (P.L. 104-297), a great deal of

work must be done to ensure that this

resolve is honored in practice. Fishery

managers today need to muster the

resources and political will to identify and

protect essential fish habitat, address the

problem of excess fishing capacity, reduce

bycatch, address the future of aquaculture

and its potential impacts on the marine

environment, and use manage-ment

techniques that conserve ecosystem values

such as the protection of biodiversity.

BACKGROUND

Fisheries contribute a significant

source of protein to a growing world

population9 and provide a commercial

livelihood and recreational opportunities

for millions of people across the globe.10

However, the majority of economically

valuable marine fisheries11 are now at or

beyond their limits of sustainability. The

United Nations’ Food and Agriculture

Organization (FAO) (1997) has classified

62 percent of commercial stocks as “in

urgent need of management action.”

Fisheries are in crisis worldwide and

fisheries management is at a crossroads.

Since 1977, the marine fisheries of

the United States have been managed

under the Magnuson Fishery Conservation

and Management Act (MFCMA) (16

U.S.C. 1801 et seq.). The MFCMA was

designed to eliminate foreign fishing within

the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone and to

conserve and manage U.S. marine

fisheries. The Act was implemented at a

time when the oceans were generally

considered to be a limitless source of food

and natural resources. The impacts of

fishing were not viewed as threatening;

indeed, increases in fishing capacity were

generally not constrained and were even

encouraged.12

Commercial landings have tripled

since the United States extended its

 

9

Sixteen percent of all animal protein consumed

worldwide comes from the oceans (Food and

Agriculture Organization, 1997).

10 Worldwide, there are 15 to 20 million fishers

(90 percent are small scale), and fisheries provide

up to 180 million more jobs in associated sectors

(Food and Agriculture Organization, 1997).

11 The total value of global marine catch is

estimated at $80 billion annually (Food and

Agriculture Organization, 1997).

12 For example, fishing was encouraged by the

Processors Preference Amendment, Fisheries

Promotion Act, and Fishing Vessel Obligation

Guarantee Program.
32 Protecting and Restoring Marine Fisheries

jurisdiction with the enactment of the

MFCMA. The annual U.S. catch has

fluctuated between 4.2 and 5.0 million

metric tons since 1990; it was 4.3 million

metric tons in 199613. Fish provide 8

percent of the U.S. animal protein food

supply. Consumer expenditures, including

retail sales for home consumption,

restaurant sales, and industrial fish

products, were $41.2 billion in 1996 (U.S.

Department of Commerce, 1997). Fishing

contributed $21 billion in value added to

the 1996 gross national product (U.S.

Department of Commerce, 1997).

Estimates of the value of

recreational fisheries are incomplete, as are

the data related to catch levels and fishing

mortality associated with this sector.

However, in some fisheries, the value of

the recreational sector is equivalent to, or

greater, than that of the commercial sector

(National Marine Fisheries Service,

1996a). U.S. salt-water anglers number

more than 10 million and contribute some

$9 billion annually to the economy (U.S.

Government, 1997).

The MFCMA established eight

regional fishery management councils and

assigned them the responsibility for

developing fisheries management plans in

accordance with national standards. The

council system is designed to allow

management approaches that incorporate

the special characteristics of each fishing

region. The councils have developed very

different approaches to decision making,14

 

13 The U.S. catch represents 5 percent of the

worldwide total (U.S. Department of Commerce,

1997).

14 There are regional variations in decision

procedures, mix of fishery management tools, use

of advisory committees, stock assessment

which, in turn, have led to different

performance outcomes. The variations in

management approach and performance

reflect, in part, wide disparities in the size

and value of the stocks classified as

overfished. Fisheries management plans

adopted by the regional councils differ

with respect to regulatory compliance,

adoption of multispecies regulations,

approaches to bycatch, stake-holder

participation, and social and economic

impacts.

Neither the councils, nor the Act

itself, have been successful in conserving

the nation's fisheries. Over one-third of

U.S. fish stocks are overutilized15

(National Marine Fisheries Service,

1996b).

In 1996, the MFCMA was

reauthorized as the Magnuson-Stevens

Fishery Conservation and Management

Act (MSFCMA) (P.L. 104-297). The

MSFCMA provides stronger provisions

for fishery management and conservation

within the Exclusive Economic Zone by

requiring the National Marine Fisheries

Service and regional councils to protect

essential fish habitat, reduce overfishing

and overcapitalization,16 and minimize

bycatch (National Marine Fisheries

Service, 1996c).

 

procedures, use of economic and social data, and

interactions with stakeholders.

15 “Overutilized” is defined as fished at levels

greater than that necessary to achieve the

maximum long-term potential yield.

8 A fishery is overcapitalized when the amount of

harvesting capacity exceeds the amount needed to

harvest the desired amount of fish at least cost

(Organization for Economic Cooperation and

Development, 1997).
Protecting and Restoring Marine Fisheries 33

These changes to the Act create

new responsibilities for the regional fishery

management councils. These added

responsibilities, which in many cases are

not yet well-defined, present significant

challenges for the already heavily burdened

council system. Adequate financial and

personnel resources are needed to help the

councils meeting the new requirements.

Both the U.S. Congress and the

Administration will have to maintain a

strong commitment if the new provisions

in the MSFCMA are to be implemented

fully.

The Year of the Ocean provides a

timely opportunity to examine national

ocean policies and programs as the nation

prepares for the twenty-first century.

Protection of the nation’s marine fisheries

and assurance of their long-term

sustainability are vital to the economic

well-being of the many Americans who

depend on fishing for their livelihood.

These efforts are also critical to the health

of marine ecosystems, which represent an

important part of the natural heritage and

provide social, economic, and

environmental services to all Americans.

KEY ISSUES

A number of key issues must be

addressed if U.S. marine fisheries are to be

protected and restored. These issues

include overfishing, overcapitalization,

bycatch, habitat degradation, aquaculture

and its impacts on the marine environment,

and management of interjurisdictional

fisheries. The overarching theme of

ecosystem management also demands

attention. Marine fisheries are components

of ecosystems, and their continued

existence at biologically and economically

optimal levels depends on the protection

of these ecosystems. Unless adequate

attention is devoted to the overall

environment in which fish populations live,

efforts to protect particular fisheries and

restore them to sustainable levels are

unlikely to be successful.

Each of these issues is discussed

briefly in the following sections.

Resolution of these issues clearly will

require the development of alternative

management strategies and the

encouragement of effective, streamlined

approaches to collaboration among the

wide variety of federal, regional, and state

authorities that make decisions affecting

the marine environment (National

Research Council, 1997).

Overfishing

Overfishing is the principal factor

contributing to the depletion of U.S.

marine fisheries. The National Marine

Fisheries Service (1996b) has classified 36

percent of U.S. fisheries as overutilized

and 44 percent as fully utilized. Because of

current or past overuse, the fisheries are

producing only about 60 percent of their

estimated long-term potential yield

(National Marine Fisheries Service,1996b).

The MSFCMA directs the National

Marine Fisheries Service and regional

fishery management councils to eliminate

overfishing17 in domestic waters. In the

past, uncertainty about the status of fish

stocks allowed managers, often

succumbing to political pressures, to set

 

17 Overfishing is defined as a rate or level of

fishing mortality that jeopardizes the capacity of a

fishery to produce the maximum sustainable yield

on a continuing basis.
34 Protecting and Restoring Marine Fisheries

quotas at the high end of the estimated

range. The revised Act now provides

explicit time frames for rebuilding

overfished populations. An ongoing

problem is the taking of many migratory,

straddling,18 and high seas stocks by

individuals from other countries, a practice

that limits the capability of U.S. fishery

managers to achieve adequate recovery

without the active participation of other

nations in conservation efforts.

A great deal of work needs to be

done to determine how best to eliminate

overfishing. For example, should access to

fisheries be more strictly regulated, and, if

so, how can this be achieved in a manner

that is both effective and fair? Given the

limitations of fishery science, should

regulatory bodies be directed to act

conservatively, with a bias toward

conservation, when faced with uncertainty

regarding the health of fisheries under their

jurisdiction? And how might this

“precautionary principle”19 be

implemented? The variations in

characteristics and conditions of individual

fisheries suggest that different strategies,

involving both regulatory and marketbased approaches, are appropriate for

different situations. Greater effort needs to

be devoted to identifying alternative

approaches to fisheries management and

ascertaining their strengths and

weaknesses over time.

Overcapitalization

 

18 Straddling stocks are those whose habitats cross

the boundaries of managerial or political

jurisdictions.

19 The precautionary principle calls for

conservative action in the face of uncertainty.

A major driver of overfishing is the

overcapitalization of fishing fleets. Overcapitalization creates economic waste and

political pressures for increased catch. The

Food and Agriculture Organization

estimates that global fishing capacity in

traditional fisheries is 30 percent greater

than that required to take the present

world catch. Although no comprehensive

estimates are available on the degree of

over-capitalization in U.S. fleets, anecdotal

evidence indicates that it has reached

critical proportions in some fisheries, both

com-mercial and recreational. There is

broad consensus among experts and

fishermen alike that, in many fisheries and

regions, the pressure to capture short-term

benefits of fisheries at the expense of longterm sustainability cannot be relieved until

fishing capacity is reduced.

A key issue is the extent to which

fishing capacity must be reduced to

manage the resources more effectively. If

it is essential to reduce fishing capacity,

then considerably more analysis and

discussion are needed regarding certain

issues, including the role that federal and

state governments can and should play in

addressing this problem. Specifically, there

is a need to examine whether the

elimination or reduction of existing subsidy

programs, such as the Capital

Construction Fund and the Fishing Vessel

Obligation Guarantee Program, would

prevent future increases in capacity. Also

needed is a thorough analysis of the types

of market-based incentives and

mechanisms that might help reduce

overcapitalization and prevent it from

recurring, and do so in ways that are

acceptable to stakeholders.

Bycatch
Protecting and Restoring Marine Fisheries 35

Bycatchthe unintended catch of

immature fish, unmarketable or protected

species, and other nontargeted speciesis

among the most difficult challenges in

fishery management. Furthermore, it is a

problem that grows with escalating fishing

pressures and declining stocks.

Worldwide, an estimated 27 million metric

tons of bycatch are discarded each year, an

amount equivalent to roughly 25 percent

of the global catch (Food and Agriculture

Organization, 1997). If those percentages

hold for the United States, then bycatch in

U.S. fisheries is about 1.8 million metric

tons per year, based on 1992−1994

average catch statistics (National Marine

Fisheries Service, 1996b). A critical

bycatch problem is exemplified in the Gulf

of Mexico shrimp fishery, where 4 to 5

pounds of nontargeted species are

captured, and mostly discarded, for every

pound of shrimp taken. The bycatch

problem is not confined to nontargeted

species of fish. Each year, large numbers

of seabirds and other marine creatures

(including whales, dolphins, sea turtles,

and marine invertebrates such as crabs,

starfish, and sponges) perish in the trawls,

nets, and lines of fishers.

Incentives need to be developed to

encourage all fisheries to address this

problem aggressively. Resources need to

be directed toward developing new types

of fishing gear that minimize bycatch,

promote the survival of nontarget fish and

other creatures until they can be released,

and enable fishers to return unwanted

species alive back to the sea. Finally,

although the MSFCMA requires action to

minimize bycatch, successful reduction

efforts will depend on monitoring and

enforcement as well as on the compliance

of fishers (Reichert, 1997).

Habitat Protection

Marine fisheries and other living

marine resources are dependent on the

integrity of the habitats in which they live.

Habitatssuch as wetlands, coral reefs,

oyster beds, kelp forests, and coastal

waters that provide essential spawning and

nursery grounds for fish and serve as the

primary home for a large number of marine

speciesare being degraded rapidly

through a multitude of human activities

related to fishing. These practices include

bottom trawling, dredging for scallops and

clams, coastal development, and the

introduction of alien species.

The protection of essential fish

habitat is an important new responsibility

of the regional fishery management

councils. Yet a very small percentage of

the National Marine Fisheries Service

budget is allocated to the critical role of

habitat protection as an essential tool for

maintaining and restoring marine fisheries.

Furthermore, although the regional

councils can take certain actions to

minimize the effects of fishing on habitats,

they cannot control other important

variables, such as nonpoint-source

pollution, eutrophication, and physical

habitat loss resulting from coastal

development or other activities.

To protect essential fish habitat,

new mechanisms must be found to

streamline and consolidate authority

among federal, regional, and state agencies

that have jurisdiction over activities that

contribute to habitat destruction. Efforts

need to be made to identify ways to

strengthen both state and federal laws,

such as the Coastal Zone Management Act
36 Protecting and Restoring Marine Fisheries

(16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.) and the Clean

Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), to

reduce habitat destruction caused by landbased pollution. In addition, resources

need to be provided to rehabilitate

damaged ecosystems and restore estuarine

and other habitats that are critical to the

reproduction and maintenance of marine

fisheries.

Aquaculture

Worldwide, the aquaculture

industry is growing rapidly. Total

aquaculture production reached a record

25 million metric tons in 1994, with sales

of approximately $40 billion in U.S.

dollars (Food and Agriculture

Organization, 1997). Considering the

growing demand, production could reach

39 million metric tons by 2010 (Muir and

Nugent, 1995).20

In the United States, the

aquaculture industry (primarily catfish,

cupped oysters, rainbow trout, golden

shiner for bait, salmon, and crawfish) is

growing more rapidly than any other

sector of U.S. agriculture (Electric Power

Research Institute, 1995). In 1996, the

United States cultured more than 300,000

metric tons of seafood.21 The industry now

exists in virtually every state and territory

(Office of Technology Assessment, 1995).

Increases in aquaculture are driven by a

combination of growing consumer

demand, a favorable price differential

 

20 This estimate does not include the production

of aquatic plants, of which 6.4 million tons were

produced by China, Japan, the Republic of Korea,

and the Philippines in 1994.

21 The United States is the world's fifth-largest

producer of seafood (U.S. Department of

Commerce, 1997).

between aquaculture products and wild

catch, advances in aquaculture technology

(National Research Council, 1992), and

the continuing depletion of popular fish

species in the wild.

Aquaculture is often viewed as a

source of jobs and revenue for local

communities, a promising new food

source, and a way to supplement wild fish

populations. Yet aquaculture operations

can also have significant negative impacts

on the marine environment and on

fisheries. With the rapid growth and

expansion of this industry, special

attention must be devoted to

environmental concerns. In particular,

there is an urgent need to develop

standards for aquaculture that minimize

pollution, prevent the introduction of alien

species and diseases that can seriously

threaten wild fish populations, minimize

habitat destruction, and protect other

wildlife such as seals and fish-eating birds

that tend to prey on confined fish stocks.

Interjurisdictional Fisheries

The U.S. government shares

jurisdiction over many fisheries with states

within its own borders as well as with

other nations. Government officials need

to be certain that negotiations over

management practices and conservation

measures do not lead to fishery

management outcomes that are weaker

than those sought through the MSFCMA.

Domestically, it is important to

coordinate conservation standards and

guidelines among state, regional, and

federal authorities; take steps to eliminate

conflicting mandates among different

government agencies; consolidate and
Protecting and Restoring Marine Fisheries 37

streamline decision making; and encourage

improved collaboration. Internationally,

certain fisheries are managed directly

under treaties and international

agreements. These instruments provide

general principles for fisheries

management worldwide,22 but many have

yet to enter into force because they have

not been ratified by a sufficient number of

countries. In particular, high-seas stocks,

which live outside the formal jurisdiction

of any nation's exclusive economic zone,

are vulnerable to overfishing and to the

use of destructive fishing practices. Until

the United Nations Agreement on

Conservation and Manage-ment of

Straddling Stocks and Highly Migratory

 

22 The Rome Consensus on World Fisheries,

adopted by the Food and Agriculture Organization

ministerial meeting in March 1995, includes

agreement on the need to eliminate overfishing,

reduce fishing capacity, reduce bycatch and

discards, and strengthen governance. The Code of

Conduct On Responsible Fisheries, adopted by the

Rome Conference of the Food and Agriculture

Organization in October 1995, contains guidelines

on fishery management and operations,

aquaculture, coastal zone management, trade, and

research. The Kyoto Declaration, adopted at the

1995 Conference on the Sustainable Contribution

of Fisheries to Food Security, includes agreements

on the need to reduce fishing capacity, strengthen

the scientific basis for multispecies and ecosystem

management, reduce incidental catch, and

strengthen institutional coordination. The United

Nations Agreement on the Conservation and

Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and

Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, adopted in 1995

and ratified by the United States in 1996 but not

yet entered into force, represents a consensus

among coastal states and distant-water fishing

nations concerning the 10 percent of ocean stocks

caught on the high seas. The agreement includes

provisions for the protection of biodiversity and

the use of the precautionary principle. In several

cases, these international agreements are leading

to national efforts to define and implement the

principles embedded in the various actions (Food

and Agriculture Organization, 1997).

Fish Stocks enters into force, many high

seas fisheries are protected only through

voluntary agreements, which have proven

to be largely ineffective.

Because many fish migrate over

long distances and move in and out of U.S.

waters, the federal government, to protect

domestic fisheries, needs to exert its

leadership to encourage other countries to

ratify important international agreements

aimed at conserving fisheries. The United

States also needs to insist that such

agreements comply with scientific

standards and prevent fishing beyond

maximum sustainable yields. In cases

where international bodies have failed to

establish policies and practices that

adequately protect fish that move between

national boundaries, the United States

must retain the flexibility to establish more

rigorous quotas and other management

tools aimed at protecting these fish while

they are in U.S. waters.

At present, it is clear that many

international bodies and individual governments are not equipped to manage across

jurisdictions. Techniques must be

developed to strengthen capabilities in this

area. In addition, new approaches are

needed that require compliance of

participating nations and systems need to

be designed and funded that allow for

adequate monitoring and enforcement.

Ecosystem Management

Scientists and fisheries managers

worldwide increasingly have recognized

that fish are part of a broad ecosystem that

contains numerous marine species, all of

which are important to the healthy

functioning of the system as a whole. With
38 Protecting and Restoring Marine Fisheries

this recognition has come the need to

integrate the management of all marine

species, not just individual fish stocks, to

protect the overall well-being of the

marine ecosystem in which fish live.

Successful fisheries management cannot be

aimed simply at preserving a single fishery.

Rather, it must take into account the

maintenance of natural patterns of species

composition, or biodiversity, within the

broader marine environment.

The MSFCMA contains provisions

designed to move U.S. fisheries away from

single-stock management and toward

ecosystem management. However, numerous challenges need to be addressed

before this goal can be accomplished

effectively. Greater scientific

understanding is needed regarding the

complex web of interactions that

contribute to ecosystem function. Methods

are needed to involve stakeholders

representing a broad diversity of commercial, recreational, and conservation

interests in research and management. And

greater effort is needed to design

controlled-access management systems

that are fair. The use of maximum

sustainable yield as an operational concept

needs to be viewed within a larger

ecosystem context, so that this approach,

which focuses on surplus production, is

balanced with requirements for ecosystem

function in which “surplus” fish often

maintain other species. Finally, improved

techniques are needed to ensure that

margins of safety corresponding to the

degree of uncertainty about the effects of

resource use are built into management

regimes in such a way as to protect the

overall ecosystem.

Marine protected areas are a

promising technique for preserving marine

ecosystems and protecting fisheries. The

protection of specific areas from any direct

use offers a number of potential benefits,

including the preservation of breeding

grounds for threatened or endangered

species, assurance that examples of natural

ecosystems will exist in the future, and the

protection of species with potential

biomedical benefits. Protected areas can

also serve as controls in research on

natural ecosystem function to gain

valuable insights into how to improve

fisheries management.

As the nation moves forward to

take full advantage of the potential benefits

of marine protected areas, greater effort

needs to be made to understand how best

to design these areas to accomplish

different tasks, such as the replenishment

of fisheries, the protection of endangered

species, and the preservation of scenic and

other values. It will also be necessary to

determine how protected areas can best be

incorporated into broader fishery

management systems and what criteria

should be established for determining their

location and size. Finally, considerably

more attention needs to be placed on the

design and implementation of adequate

monitoring and enforcement systems

aimed at ensuring that these areas actually

accomplish what they are intended to do.

KEY QUESTIONS

If the United States is to build and

maintain sustainable fisheries, protect

other marine resources, and conserve and

restore living marine resource habitat

(U.S. Department of Commerce, 1996),

then it will be necessary to answer these

important questions:
Protecting and Restoring Marine Fisheries 39

· What steps can be taken by the

National Marine Fisheries Service and

the regional fisheries management

councils to facilitate the swift and

effective implementation of laws that

are designed to eliminate overfishing,

reduce bycatch, and protect essential

fish habitat?

· What steps need to be taken to reduce

fishing capacity and prevent the

recurrence of overcapacity to restore

fish populations to—and maintain

them at—levels that are commercially

and ecologically sustainable? How

can this be accomplished in an

equitable manner, taking into account

the interests of all sectors and parties?

· What management strategies might

better protect habitat that is critical to

fisheries and other living marine

resources? How can these strategies

be implemented?

· How can marine aquaculture evolve in

the United States in a manner that

does not adversely affect the

environment?

· How can coordination be improved

among state, regional, and federal

authorities whose mandates and jurisdictions affect areas that are

important to the conservation of

marine fisheries?

· What role should the United States

play in encouraging the design and

imple-mentation of international

agreements and treaties that protect

fisheries and other living marine

resources?

Marine resources are vital to the

American economy and environment. All

stakeholders at The Heinz Center’s

national conference on fisheries recognized

the need to restore depleted fisheries,

protect marine ecosystems, and manage

the future use of marine resources in ways

that are sustainable and do not threaten

marine biological diversity. The Year of

the Ocean provides a timely opportunity to

strengthen the commitment to protect the

nation’s marine fisheries and other living

marine resources and ensure that future

generations of Americans will be able to

enjoy the numerous social, economic,

environmental, and aesthetic benefits

provided by the oceans. A sustained

political commitment will be needed

among policy makers at both the federal

and state levels to address these issues.

Fishers and other stakeholders will need to

work alongside government in a vigorous

effort to develop more effective ways to

manage marine resources in ways that

accommodate uncertainty, value

sustainability, and preserve viable

commercial and recreational fisheries for

the benefit of all Americans.

REFERENCES

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).

1995. Aquaculture Scoping Study (CR105302). Palo Alto, Calif.: EPRI.

Food and Agriculture Organization

(FAO). 1997. The State of World

Fisheries and Aquaculture 1996. Rome:

FAO, United Nations.

Muir, J.F., and C.G. Nugent. 1995.

Aquaculture production trends:

perspectives for food security. Paper

presented at the International Conference
40 Protecting and Restoring Marine Fisheries

on the Sustainable Contribution of

Fisheries to Food Security, Kyoto, Japan,

December 4−9, 1995.

National Marine Fisheries Service

(NMFS). 1996a. Our Living Oceans: The

Economic Status of U.S. Fisheries. U.S.

Department of Commerce, NOAA

Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO22. Silver Spring, Md.: NMFS.

National Marine Fisheries Service. 1996b.

Our Living Oceans: Report on the Status

of U.S. Living Marine Resources, 1995.

U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA

Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO22. Silver Spring, Md.: NMFS.

National Marine Fisheries Service

(NMFS). 1996c. Magnuson-Stevens

Fishery Conservation and Management

Act (Public Law 94-265) as amended

through October 11, 1996. NOAA

Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO23. Silver Spring, Md.: NMFS.

National Research Council. 1992.

Opportunities in Marine Aquaculture.

Washington, D.C: National Academy

Press.

National Research Council. 1997. Striking

a Balance: Strengthening Marine Area

Governance and Management.

Washington, D.C.: National Academy

Press.

Office of Technology Assessment (OTA).

1995. Current Status of Federal

Involvement in U.S. Aquaculture.

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Congress, OTA.

Organization for Economic Cooperation

and Development (OECD). 1997.

Towards Sustainable Fisheries: Economic

Aspects of the Management of Living

Marine Resources. Paris: OECD

Publications.

Reichert, J. 1997. Stop Wasteful Fishing

and Save Marine Life. International Herald

Tribune, August 15, 1997, page 9.

U.S. Department of Commerce. 1996.

NOAA Strategic Plan: A Vision for 2005.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce. Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Government Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Commerce. 1997.

Fisheries of the United States, 1996.

Current Fishery Statistics No.9600.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, U.S. Department of

Commerce, National Marine Fisheries

Service. Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Government Printing Office.

U.S. Government. 1997. National Survey

of Fishing, Hunting, and WildlifeAssociated Recreation (1996). Report No.

FHW/96NAT. Washington, D.C: U.S.

Government Printing Office.
Science and Technology: Key to Ocean Understanding 41

4

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY—KEY

TO OCEAN UNDERSTANDING

SUMMARY

By enhancing capabilities to observe

and understand the physics, chemistry, and

biology of the oceans and their dynamics, the

United States can help improve both the

economy and the environment. During the last

half of the twentieth century, investments in

ocean science and technology have been

driven largely by national defense needs. The

focus is now shifting to sustainability. Just as

the Cold War provided a strategic vision for

the postwar era, it is necessary today to

develop a compelling vision that encompasses

both a productive economy and thriving

environment.

Additional investments in ocean

research and the development of new

technologies and observing systems may lead

to new levels of prediction of natural disasters

and climate change. With the maturation of

knowledge of plate tectonics, scientists will

better understand the evolution of the Earth

and its implications for predicting earthquakes

and the distribution of mineral resources. An

enhanced understanding of the complexities,

fragility, and resilience of ocean ecosystems

may help humanity manage these ecosystems

wisely in ways that maximize the use of living

marine resources without adversely affecting

their sustainability. The discoveries of exotic

life forms in extremely hot deep-sea vents

suggests that the oceans may harbor new clues

about the origins of life. To make this vision a

reality, investments must be made in

education, technical assistance, and facilities

for ocean research. In addition, the knowledge

gained through investments in ocean research

needs to be made available to coastal and

ocean managers and to industry.

INTRODUCTION: THE OCEANS AND SOCIETY

The oceans are ubiquitous in their

effects on society.23 They are the source of the

rainfall that sustains humanity’s agricultural

food supply. They are a treasure trove of

living and nonliving resources. They are global

avenues of commerce and arenas for

worldwide military presence. They shape the

pathways of the planet’s most destructive

storms, such as hurricanes, even as they

regulate the climate. They bathe the Earth’s

coasts, home to an expanding population. The

oceans are also the receptacle for much of the

world’s wastes.

If the oceans are to be managed and

conserved amid growing use of their

resources, then a greater understanding is

needed of their dynamics and changing

chemical composition, interaction with the

atmosphere, living and nonliving resources,

tolerance for and response to pollution, and

effects on society. The acquisition of such

knowledge requires systematic, long-term

investments by both the government and the

 

23 This chapter focuses on the open ocean, but many of

the topics addressed are also pertinent to coastal areas,

bays, estuaries, and the Great Lakes. Coastal zone and

fisheries science and technology issues are discussed

in Chapter 2, “The Challenge of Sustainable Coasts,”

and Chapter 3, “Protecting and Restoring Marine

Fisheries.”
42 Science and Technology: Key to Ocean Understanding

private sector in ocean research and the

development and application of technologies

that can probe a vast and mysterious domain

that is difficult to study.

The present national ocean sciences

enterprise comprises a diverse set of disciplines and myriad technologies for exploring,

monitoring, observing, and predicting the state

of the oceans. Many of these systems rival

space technologies in terms of complexity.

Some eight federal agencies spend a combined

total of approximately $500 million annually

on ocean science and technology. Although

serious efforts are under way to coordinate the

diverse ocean science and technology efforts,

no comprehensive national strategy guides

them. The overall result is essentially the sum

of the individual parts rather than a cohesive

program in which projects are designed to

leverage others.

Any ocean science and technology

strategy must follow from the important

national interests in the seas. The national

investment strategy must address the major

knowledge gaps and develop the means

necessary to close them. This chapter

discusses these gaps in three sections: the

relationship between the oceans and the

concept of sustainability, ocean facilities and

technologies and access to them, and human

and fiscal resources. 24

 

24 The discussions at The Heinz Center’s

national meeting on ocean science and

technology were based in part on a report by

the National Research Council (1992).

Although somewhat dated, this report

provides a comprehensive assessment of the

state of ocean science and technology and

identifies important research directions for the

THE OCEANS AND SUSTAINABILITY

During the Cold War, U.S. national

defense requirements provided the impetus for

dramatic advances in every field of ocean

science and technology. With the end of the

Cold War less than a decade ago, the nation’s

stake in the oceans needs to be redefined.

In shaping a national ocean strategy,

perhaps the most critical challenge is to

respond to the widely recognized need for

both a productive economy and a thriving

environment. Sustainable development has

been characterized as meeting the needs of the

present without compromising the ability to

meet the needs of the future. To achieve this

goal, humanity needs adequate knowledge for

making the appropriate choices. The following

sections describe the types of information

needed and how it might be obtained.

The Oceans and the Global Environment

The oceans and the atmosphere form

the thin fluid envelope of the Earth. The two

fluids, one liquid and one gaseous, interact on

all time and space scales, resulting in a range

of natural phenomena whose formation,

development, and life cycles have widespread

social and economic consequences. Improved

detection, monitoring, and prediction of

hurricanes, storm surges, ocean temperature

anomalies, and global climate perturbations

will help protect lives and property and

minimize the economic consequences of these

phenomena.

 

future.
Science and Technology: Key to Ocean Understanding 43

The United States and other nations

have, over the years, developed a useful, but

limited, global system for monitoring the

physical state of the seas. The present system

is based largely on observations from ships at

sea, satellite measurements of sea state and sea

surface temperature, and supplementary

observations from island locations. Special

campaigns to study specific ocean and

atmospheric processes use a wide range of

other tools, such as buoys, submersibles, and

various expendable measurement systems.

In recent years the nations of the world

have devoted increased intellectual and

financial resources to the study of oceanic and

atmospheric circulation. Observations of

ocean conditions are intrinsically valuable.

However, they yield their greatest benefits as

the basis for the prediction of future

oceanographic and atmospheric conditions on

all time scales, from fast-developing hurricanes

to seasonal phenomena such as El Niño to

climate changes over long periods of time.

Capabilities for numerical modeling of the

coupled ocean-atmosphere system have

advanced substantially in recent years. These

models have enabled improved predictions of

oceanic phenomena such as El Niño and

atmospheric phenomena such as hurricanes.

The resulting warnings have yielded enormous

economic benefits in many parts of the world

and have been responsible for the improved

protection of life and property.

Ongoing international programs such

as the Global Change Research Program,

Global Ocean Observing System, and World

Ocean Circulation Experiment are coordinated efforts to improve scientific capabilities

to understand and predict ocean and

atmospheric conditions. Special regional

observing efforts such as the Tropical

Atmosphere Ocean buoy array have already

proved their worth by enabling improved

understanding of El Niño conditions in the

Pacific Ocean. The United States participates

actively in all of these efforts. Continued

participation will likely provide benefits that

far exceed the costs.

The Oceans and Marine Life

The encroachment of humans on the

marine environment has had significant effects

on coastal and oceanic ecosystems. These

effects have ranged from the destruction of the

great whales to the depletion of global

fisheries. Pollutants from land, air, and marine

sources have adversely affected habitats.

Widespread degradation of coastal waters

endangers many marine living resources,

threatens the viability of coral reef systems in

subtropical regions and triggers periodic

outbreaks of microfauna that affect both fish

and humans.

Scientists have yet to catalog all the

life forms in the ocean or explore in detail the

natural cycles and habitats that sustain them.

An improved understanding of marine

ecosystems is indispensable to the prevention

of irreversible damage and the loss of valuable

organisms and resources before they are even

identified. Recent explorations of

hydrothermal vents in the sea floor have

yielded an almost continuous string of

discoveries of previously unknown biota. The

wonders still to be discovered may help

answer some of the fundamental questions

about the origins of life.
44 Science and Technology: Key to Ocean Understanding

The Oceans and the Earth’s Life-Support

Systems

The Earth’s life-support systems

depend on the circulation of chemicals through

the oceans, atmosphere, solid earth, and

terrestrial and marine biosphere. The role of

the oceans in these transfers is believed to be

critical but remains poorly understood. The

global cycles of important elements such as

carbon, nitrogen, and oxygenand the ways

in which the oceans participate in these cycles

through the physical transport of water or the

biological processes in marine ecosystems

are of great importance in climate change and

the population dynamics of marine organisms.

The oceans, for example, are a significant sink

in the global carbon cycle. As a result, they

exercise important controls on the buildup of

carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the

resulting projected climate warming. Carbon

dioxide is removed from the atmosphere by

organisms in the upper part of the ocean, and

these organisms subsequently settle to the

abyss in the form of dead organic matter. The

marine food web plays a critical role in this

process.

Additional, highly sophisticated research on biochemical cycles is needed to

enhance understanding of these complex

processes and the role of the oceans in

sustaining the Earth’s life-support systems.

This understanding will help provide a basis

for wise decision making.

The Oceans and Continental Origins

Among the most profound discoveries

of ocean science of the past several decades

has been the verification of the processes of

plate tectonics. Plate tectonic theory and

related observations have broad practical

implications. For example, scientists now

understand the causes of the distribution of the

global earthquake zones. The theory also has

shed light on the location and formation of the

Earth’s mineral resources.

The present knowledge base was

developed through the international Ocean

Drilling Program sponsored by the National

Science Foundation and agencies of other

nations. This program provides an excellent

example of the dividends of investments in

basic science. Among the many other benefits

of the ocean drilling effort, recovered deep-sea

cores have contributed much of the

information that has revealed the extent and

nature of climate change. Based on these

discoveries, a framework has been developed

for understanding climate change, including

the possible range of natural variations.

The Oceans and National Security

Knowledge of the oceans is an element

of national security because the oceans are an

important military operating environment. The

ocean environment affects all aspects of naval

operations, and timely ocean data are

increasingly critical to the operation of hightechnology military systems. The capability of

naval forces to train and operate on and in the

oceans around the world supports global

peace and security. Exercising and preserving

the traditional navigational rights and

freedoms codified in the 1982 Law of the Sea

Convention is one of the United States’

highest ocean policy priorities. Recognizing

that national defense and environmental

protection are compatible goals, the U.S.
Science and Technology: Key to Ocean Understanding 45

Navy has developed sophisticated new

approaches to mitigate the effects of naval

operations on the environment. Many of the

Navy’s science and technology advances

developed for tactical use and environmental

protection of the ocean are also offered for

public use.

OCEAN FACILITIES AND TECHNOLOGIES

Technology provides the means for

monitoring and exploring the oceans. It

provides the modes of access and the

analytical capabilities for assessing present

conditions and predicting future changes. In

recent decades, there has been an explosion of

new ocean technologies as well as advanced

systems that were designed for other research

fields but can also be applied to ocean science.

In addition to the traditional systems

consisting of fixed platforms, ships, buoys, and

undersea vehicles, ocean scientists now

command a diverse arsenal of new

technologies that promises new and expanded

modes of access to the oceans.

Space technology makes it possible to

observe surface oceanic and atmospheric

phenomena on a global basis. New remote

acoustic or electromagnetic sensing

technologies and unmanned, remotely piloted

undersea and aerospace vehicles provide new

observational capabilities. Advances in

computing technology now make it feasible to

model the ocean-atmosphere system

mathematically, in considerable detail. The

ability to acquire, transmit, process, and

interpret data from the oceans has taken a

quantum leap forward with modern

communications and computers.

Because of the increasing costs of

developing and operating technological

facilities—ships, submersibles, satellites, and

computersa coherent national strategy is

needed for developing and operating ocean

technology. Such a plan might include

facilities that are shared by the scientific

community and joint funding provided by

multiple agencies. As in the case of the Ocean

Drilling Program, international funding and

management of some facilities is desirable.

Expanding the international character of ocean

science and technology efforts is a fiscal

necessity in some instances, and it makes good

programmatic sense in others. This is

especially so because the Law of the Sea

Convention, ratified by 124 nations and now

in force, provides favorable treatment for

research programs conceived and undertaken

with international cooperation.

International Dimensions of Ocean Science

and Technology

The study of the seas is an

international enterprise. Over the last several

decades, progress in ocean science and

technology has benefited from the

collaborative research that takes place

between individual investigators and within

large global programs such as the Ocean

Drilling Program and the World Ocean

Circulation Experiment. The broader access,

greater resources, and intellectual stimulation

afforded by international cooperation has

enabled scientists to achieve objectives that

otherwise would have remained out of reach.

Moreover, although the United States is one

of the dominant intellectual powers in this

field, other nations play important roles. For

example, each nation tends to dominate the
46 Science and Technology: Key to Ocean Understanding

work that takes place within its own exclusive

economic zone.

Over the coming decades, the further

internationalization of the ocean sciences

needs to be encouraged, where appropriate.

There are many opportunities for international

collaboration in global observations of the

oceans; monitoring and management of

fisheries and marine ecosystems; renewal and

expansion of research infrastructure; and

broad public education, a major objective of

the International Year of the Ocean.

Until recently, ocean science

programs, even those of international scope,

have been driven primarily by the research

interests of individual investigators. This

model will continue to be important, but

future global programs increasingly will be

addressed through worldwide oceanographic

operations directed to meet well-defined

management goals and needs. Management

goals include observing and predicting

changes in ocean conditions that can influence

worldwide weather, and monitoring the wellbeing of coastal oceans and marine living

resources. These operational oceanographic

programs will rely to a great extent on the

collection of long-term, real-time, routine

(often synoptic) observations, in a manner

analogous to the ongoing worldwide

collection of atmospheric observations now

used as the basis for operational atmospheric

weather forecasting. Because the scope of

these programs will greatly exceed the

capabilities of any one nation, they will by

necessity be organized, managed, and

operated through international collaborations.

The development of future

international agreements and arrangements

must be closely associated with the process of

defining and organizing these global programs.

The capabilities of the U.S. Government and

scientific community to effect the necessary

international agreements and make the

associated institutional arrangements will be

important factors shaping the future of these

collaborations. The present level of

sophistication and effort directed to these

matters is not sufficient. Building a capacity to

address these issues is a matter of some

urgency because the needs for global

operational oceanographic programs are

emerging rapidly, and the programs are

already being developed.

Needs for New Facilities and Institutions

The United States has been well served

by its oceanographic facilities and institutions.

However, as a new national vision and

strategy emerge for ocean science and

technology, the needs for, and roles of, the

various facilities and institutions need to be

reevaluated. For example:

• Global Ocean Observing System. An

international global ocean observing

system has been planned to tackle complex

and interesting questions concerning the

vitality of the oceans and climate change.

A prototype system would combine

existing sensors and data. To move this

concept forward, an integrated strategy is

needed to complete the development and

testing of observing systems and then

establish operational networks.

• Seafloor Observatories. Ocean

observatories would improve data

sampling over space and time; provide
Science and Technology: Key to Ocean Understanding 47

time-series data sets to address problems

in the study of climate, biogeochemical

cycles, and ecology; and provide

information about infrequent events, such

as volcanic eruptions. The observatory

system would be composed of various

elements, such as buoys, undersea

vehicles, and seafloor instrument

packages.

• Oceanographic Ships. The research ship is

evolving from an isolated data-acquisition

platform to a multipurpose platform for

launching and operating various dataacquisition systems and analyzing the data.

This shift implies dramatically different

requirements for future oceanographic

ships. Although U.S. oceanographic

research fleets are modern and well

maintained, planning needs to begin now

for the building of new ships, a process

that requires long lead times. There is a

need to continually reassess requirements

for research vessels and platforms and the

changing demand for undersea vehicles.

• Facilities for Data Assimilation and

Integration.. As oceanographic platforms

and sensors proliferate, new methods are

needed to assimilate and integrate data

from different sensors working on different

time and space scales. The success of a

global ocean observing system will depend

in part on advances in capabilities to

assimilate and integrate diverse data sets.

• Institutions. The last major change in

federal institutions dealing with ocean

affairs was the establishment of the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, as recommended by the

1969 Stratton Commission. The name and

duties of this agency recognize the

interaction between the oceans and

atmosphere. Since that time, this coupling

has proven to be a valid concept, as the

nation has grappled with the effects of

phenomena such as El Niño. It is now time

to review the institutional structure once

again to determine whether, in light of

present knowledge and national needs for

a sustainable future, a new institutional

approach is warranted to address the

Earth’s physical and biological systems as

a whole.

HUMAN AND FISCAL RESOURCES

The most comprehensive analysis of

the human and fiscal resources required for the

U.S. ocean science and technology efforts

covers the time period 1982 to 1992 (National

Research Council, 1992). The study provides

a status report and projections for human

resources, including the demand through the

year 2000 for oceanographers with advanced

degrees. It also describes the existing

oceanographic facilities, including ships,

submersibles, satellites and computational

facilities, and details agency funding for ocean

science (see Box 4-1).

In constant dollars, federal funding for

ocean science and technology changed less

than 1 percent between 1982 and 1997

(Watkins, 1997), while the total federal

science and technology budget nearly doubled.

If the United States had followed the fiscal

recommendations of the President’s

Commission on the Oceans (1969), then the

current federal investment in ocean science

and technology investment would be

approximately $925 million85 percent more
48 Science and Technology: Key to Ocean Understanding

than it actually is. This extra funding would

augment the considerable private-sector

investment in tools and technology for

performing research and the collection of the

environmental data needed for engineering and

operations.

BOX 4-1: STATUS OF HUMAN AND FISCAL RESOURCES FOR OCEAN SCIENCE AND

TECHNOLOGY

• Approximately 55 percent of the more than 3,000 oceanographers with Ph.D.s are employed

in educational and research institutions, 15 percent in the federal government, 10 percent in

industry, 10 percent in nonprofit organizations, and the rest in other organizations.

• The oceanographic fleet managed by the University National Ocean Laboratory System

(UNOLS) consists of some 28 vessels. Other vessels are owned and operated independently

by the Navy and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Many smaller vessels and

facilities are owned and operated by regional institutions, some with state support. Fifty-seven

academic institutions help manage the UNOLS academic fleet.

• The submersibles in the federal fleet consist of Alvin (which can operate in waters 4,000

meters deep), operated by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution; and Sea Cliff and

Turtle (6,000 and 3,000 meters, respectively), which were operated by the Navy but are now

being mothballed; and two Johnson Sealink submersibles (1,000 meters), operated by the

Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution. There is growing use of remotely operated

vehicles.

• The drilling vessel Joides Resolution is operated by the United States for the Ocean Drilling

Program.

• A variety of ocean-sensing satellites are operated by three federal agencies.

• Funding for ocean research, in current dollars, increased from $364 to $518 million between

1982 and 1992. In constant 1982 dollars, funding decreased from $364 million to $348 million

during the same time period. About 72 percent of the funding is provided by the National

Science Foundation, Office of Naval Research, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration. As a percentage of total U.S. government science and technology funding,

ocean science funding shrank from 7 percent of the total in 1982 to 4 percent of the total in

1995.

Sources: National Research Council, 1992, 1996; Consortium for Ocean Research and Education,

1996; CORE home page, http//core.cast.msstate.edu/corehmpg1.html
Science and Technology: Key to Ocean Understanding 49

The federal government is

currently implementing a new effort

designed to strengthen ocean science and

technology and its usefulness to society.

The U.S. Congress established the multiagency National Oceanographic

Partnership Program in 1997 to promote

the national goals of assuring national

security, advancing economic

development, protecting quality of life, and

strengthening science education and

communication through improved

knowledge of the ocean. The program also

is intended to coordinate and strengthen

oceanographic efforts in support of those

goals by identifying and carrying out

partnerships among federal agencies,

academia, industry, and other members of

the scientific community.

The International Year of the

Ocean provides an opportunity to focus

attention on the past and future

contributions of ocean science and

technology to society’s welfare, as well as

on the needs and mechanisms for

strengthening national and international

programs and integration of disparate

elements into a coherent whole.

KEY QUESTIONS

If the United States is to maintain

an ocean science and technology enterprise

that can meet the challenges of the coming

decades, then the following key questions

must be addressed:

· The vision of a sustainable future

holds implications for the present

portfolio of ocean science and

technology initiatives. Can a national

strategy be developed for ocean

science and technology that supports

the transition to a sustainable future?

Should this strategy become the

central driver for investment in ocean

science and technology for the next

generation?

· Ocean science is becoming

increasingly dependent on facilities,

both shore and sea based, that enable

new types of data acquisition and

analysis. Is the present governmental

and institutional framework for

funding and managing the nation’s

ocean science and technology

program adequate, efficient, and

sufficiently cost-effective to meet the

needs of the next decade?

· Advancing technology offers new

capabilities for monitoring and

probing the oceans. Are sufficient

funds being invested in new

technology development? Where

should efforts be focused?

· The vigor of the national ocean

science and technology program

depends directly on the availability of

a well-educated and trained pool of

talent, ranging from technicians to

Ph..D. Is the present institutional

framework adequate to educate and

retain the necessary talent? Are the

resources available to those

institutions to meet the broader

educational needs of the country?

· The roles of the various stakeholders

in ocean science and technology are

evolving. What should the relative

roles be of the government and the

private sector in the development of

ocean technologies? In what areas of

the ocean enterprise will it be valuable

to strengthen ties among the private,

governmental, and academic sectors?
50 Science and Technology: Key to Ocean Understanding

REFERENCES

Consortium for Ocean Research and

Education (CORE). 1996. Oceans 2000:

Bridging the Millennia. Washington, D.C:

CORE.

National Research Council. 1992.

Oceanography in the Next Decade. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. 1996.

Undersea Vehicles and National Needs.

Washington, D.C.: National Academy

Press.

President’s Commission on the Oceans.

1969. Our Nation and the Sea: A Plan for

National Action. Washington, D.C.: U.S.

Government Printing Office.

Watkins, J. 1997. Letter from James

Watkins, the Consortium for

Oceanographic Research and Education

(CORE), to Charles Bookman, The Heinz

Center, conveying the results of a fiscal

analysis conducted by CORE, December

22, 1997.
Appendix A 51

APPENDIX A

PARTICIPANTS IN THE HEINZ CENTER

YEAR OF THE OCEAN

WORKSHOPS

1998 YEAR OF THE OCEAN WORKSHOP

OCEAN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY:

MEETING THE NEEDS OF

SOCIETY

OVER THE NEXT 25 YEARS

IRVINE, CALIFORNIA

FEBRUARY 6-7, 1998

Anders Andren, University of Wisconsin

Ronald Baird, NOAA Office of Sea Grant

Richard Barber, Duke University Marine

Laboratory

Robert Bourke, U.S. Naval Postgraduate

School/U.S. Navy

Kenneth Brink, Woods Hole Oceanographic

Institution

Warner Chabot, Center for Marine

Conservation

Charles Cook, The Nature Conservancy

John Dickson, California Coastal

Commission

Sylvia Earle, Deep Ocean Exploration and

Research

Edward Frieman, Science Applications, Inc.

John Halkyard, Deep Ocean Technology

Ed Horton, Deep Ocean Technology

Kenneth Johnson, Moss Landing Marine

Laboratory

Kristina Katsaros, Atlantic Oceanographic

and Meteorological Laboratory/NOAA

John Knauss, University of Rhode Island

Marsha McNutt, Monterey Bay Aquarium

Research Institute

Walter Munk, Scripps Institution of

Oceanography

Fred Piltz, Minerals Management Service/

DOI

Shirley Pomponi, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution

Michael Purdy, National Science Foundation

Steven Ramberg, Office of Naval Research/

U.S. Navy

Terry Schaaf, Consortium for Oceanographic Research and Education

Richard Spinrad, Consortium for Oceanographic Research and Education

John Steele, Woods Hole Oceanographic

Institution

Kenneth Tenore, Chesapeake Biological

Laboratory and National Association of

Marine Laboratories

Paul Tobin, Oceanographer of the Navy/

U.S. Navy

James Watkins, Consortium for Oceanographic Research and Education

Stephen B. Weisberg, Southern California

Coastal Water Research Project

Robert White, Washington Advisory Group

Dennis Whitford, U.S. Naval Academy

Stanley Wilson, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration

L. Donelson Wright, Virginia Institute of

Marine Science

Staff

Charles Bookman

Mary Eng

Marina Miranda Guedes

Laura Ost
52 Appendix A

1998 YEAR OF THE OCEAN WORKSHOP

THE CHALLENGE OF SUSTAINABLE COASTS

CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA

FEBRUARY 11-12, 1998
Appendix A 53

Anne Aylward, Volpe Trans-portation

Systems Center

Donald Boesch, University of

Maryland Center for Environmental

Studies (by telephone)

Lillian Borrone, Port Authority of

New York/New Jersey

Thomas Campbell, Coastal Plan-ning

and Engineering Inc.

Thomas Chase, American Association of Port Authorities

Jessica Cogan, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency

Penelope Dalton, Professional Staff,

Senate Subcommittee on Fisheries and

Oceans

Margaret Davidson, NOAA Coastal

Services Center

Rick DeVoe, South Carolina Sea

Grant Program

William Eichbaum, World Wildlife

Fund

John Fisher, North Carolina State

University

Anna Maria Frankic, Office of

Senator Akaka, U.S. Congress

James Good, Oregon State Univer-sity

and NOAA Coastal Services Center

Fred Holland, South Carolina Marine

Resources Department

James Houston, U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers

Robert Huggett, Michigan State

University

Wesley Jordan, BBN Technologies

Paul Kelly, Rowan Drilling Co.

Robert Kifer, National Ocean

Service/NOAA

Thomas Kitsos, Minerals Management Service/DOI

William Klesch, Coastal America

John Knott, Dewees Island Project,

S.C.

Stephen Leatherman, Florida International University

Richard Lee, Skidaway Institute of

Oceanography

Tom Leschine, University of

Washington

Douglas Logan, Charleston Branch

Pilots

James Loy, U.S. Coast Guard

Anthony MacDonald, Coastal States

Organization

Orville Magoon, Coastal Zone

Foundation

Howard Marlowe, American Coastal

Coalition

Roger McManus, Center for Marine

Conservation

Richard Mosteller, Fort Sumter Tours,

Inc.

James Murley, Florida Department of

Community Affairs

Robert North, U.S. Coast Guard

William Oakerson, Boat U.S.

Michael Orbach, Duke University

Jeff Payne, NOAA Coastal Services

Center

Nina Petrovich, NOAA Coastal

Services Center

Margaret Podlich, Clean Water Trust

Alan Pulsipher, Louisiana State

University

Douglas Rader, Environmental

Defense Fund

James D. Reilly, Duke University

Marine Laboratory

Joseph P. Riley, Mayor of Charleston,

S.C.

William “Quin” Robertson, Woods

Hole Oceanographic Institution

William Robertson, Andrew Mellon

Foundation

Edwin Roland, Bona Shipping (U.S.),

Inc.

Paul Sandifer, South Carolina

Department of Fisheries and Wildlife

Roger Schecter, North Carolina

Division of Coastal Management

Kenneth Smith, Coastal Advocates,

Inc.

Whit Smith, Charleston Branch Pilots

James Spitzer, U.S. Coast Guard

Robert Stewart, National Ocean

Industries Association

William Stronge, Regional Re-search

Associates
54 Appendix A

Dennis Suszkowski, Hudson River

Foundation

Gerald Talbert, Southeast

Conservation Buffer Campaign

James Tripp, Environmental Defense

Fund

Rod Vulovic, Sealand Service Co.

Douglas Wheeler, California

Resources Agency

Richard Worthington, Office of the

Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army Corps

of Engineers

Stanley Wilson, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration

Staff

Charles Bookman

Mary Eng

Marina Miranda Guedes

Mary Hope Katsouros

Wiliam Merrell

Laura Ost

1998 YEAR OF THE OCEAN

WORKSHOP

FISHERIES AND OTHER LIVING MARINE

RESOURCES

WASHINGTON, D.C.

MARCH 3-4, 1998

Richard Allen, lobster fisher, Snug

Harbor, Rhode Island

Dayton Lee Alverson, Natural

Resources Consultants

Edward P. “Ted” Ames, fisherman,

Stonington, Maine

Lee Anderson, University of.

Delaware

John Aquilino, Global Aquaculture

Alliance

Jesse Ausubel, Alfred P. Sloan

Foundation

Stephanie Bailenson, Subcommittee on

Fisheries and Oceans, U.S. Senate

Robert A. Bachman, Maryland

Fisheries Administration

James Baker, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration

Nelson Beideman, Bluewater

Fisherman’s Association, Barnegat

Light, N.J.

Barbara Best, U.S. Agency for

International Development

Donald Boesch, Center for

Environmental Studies, University of

Maryland

Paul Brouha, American Fisheries

Society

Ralph Brown, Oregon groundfisher;

member, Pacific Fisheries

Management Council

Scott Burns, World Wildlife Fund
Appendix A 55

Julius Collins, J. Collins Trawlers,

Brownsville, Texas

Penelope Dalton, professional staff,

Subcommittee on Fisheries and

Oceans, U.S. Senate

Paul Dayton, Scripps Institution of

Oceanography

Craig Dorman, Office of Naval

Research/U.S. Navy

David Evans, National Marine

Fisheries Service/NOAA

Hon. Sam Farr, U.S. House of

Representatives

John Field, Subcommittee on

Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans, U.S.

House of Representatives

Nancy Foster, National Ocean

Service/NOAA

Terry Garcia, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration

James Gilmore, American Factory

Trawler Association, Seattle, Washington

Kelly Green, professional staff,

Subcommittee on Fisheries and

Oceans, U.S. Senate

Rebecca Guldberg, Environmental

Defense Fund

Richard Gutting, National Fisheries

Institute

Michael Hastings, Maine Aquaculture

Innovation Center

Douglas Hopkins, Environmental

Defense Fund, New England Fisheries

Management Council

Kathy Hurld, Office of Water/EPA

Suzanne Iudicello, Center for Marine

Conservation

James Kendall, New Bedford Sea-food

Coalition; New England Fisheries

Management Council

Hon. John F. Kerry, U.S. Senate

Robert Kifer, National Ocean

Service/NOAA

Patricia Kurkul, National Marine

Fisheries Service/NOAA

Mary Langlais, National Marine

Fisheries Service/NOAA

George D. La Pointe, Atlantic States

Marine Fisheries Commission

Thor Lassen, Ocean Trust

Peter Leipzig, Oregon Fishermen's

Marketing Association

Rebecca Lent, NMFS Highly

Migratory Species Division/NOAA

Bonnie McCay, Rutgers University

Morgan McCosh, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service/DOI

Roger McManus, Center for Marine

Conservation

John Migliarese, Marine Resources

Div., South Carolina Dept. of Natural

Resources

Christopher L. Nelson, Bon Secour

Fisheries, Inc.

Jennifer Newton, Office of Congressman Sam Farr, U.S. House of

Representatives

Elliot Norse, Marine Conservation

Biology Institute

Michael Nussman, American

Sportfishing Association

Clarence Pautzke, North Pacific

Fishery Management Council

Jennifer Pereira, BOAT U.S./Clean

Water Trust

John Poggie, University of Rhode

Island

Kennard Potts, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency

John Rayfield, professional staff,

Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife

and Oceans, U.S. House of

Representatives

Joshua S. Reichert, Pew Charitable

Trusts

Edwin Rhodes, National Marine

Fisheries Service/NOAA

David Roland, Roland Productions

Carl Safina, Director, Living Oceans

Program, National Audubon Society

Angela SanFilippo, Gloucester

Fishermen's Wives Association

Charles Savitt, Island Press

John Sawhill, The Nature Conservancy, and H. John Heinz III
56 Appendix A

Center for Science, Economics and the

Environment

Hon. James Saxton, Subcommittee on

Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans, U.S.

House of Representatives

Daniel Sayre, Island Press

Jeanne Sedgwick, Packard Foundation

Michael Sissenwine, Northeast

Fisheries Science Center/NMFS

Joshua Stearns, Office of Sustainable

Development, NOAA

Elizabeth Stewart, Aleutians East

Borough, Juneau, Alaska

Jon Sutinen, University of Rhode

Island

Jean Toal, professional staff,

Subcommittee on Fisheries and

Oceans, U.S. Senate

Stephanie Thornton, Marine

Sanctuary Program, National Ocean

Service/NOAA

Virginia Tippie, Coastal America

Lamarr B. Trott, NMFS Office of

Chief Scientist

Elizabeth Turner, NOAA Coastal

Ocean Program

John Twiss, Marine Mammal

Commission

Lee Weddig, fisheries consultant

Stanley Wilson, National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration

Phyllis Wyeth, H. John Heinz III

Center for Science, Economics and the

Environment

Staff

Charles Bookman

Mary Eng

Marina Miranda Guedes

Susan Hannah

Mary Hope Katsouros

William Merrell

Laura Ost
Appendix B 57

APPENDIX B

COMMENTARY ON THE

MARINE RESOURCES AND

ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT ACT

OF 1966 (P.L. 89-454),

 THE STRATTON COMMISSION, AND

THE REPORT,

OUR NATION AND THE SEA25

The Marine Resources and

Engineering Development Act of 1966 led

directly to the establishment of the

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA), laid the

groundwork for enactment of many pieces

of legislation, and set priorities for federal

ocean activities that have guided this

nation for almost 30 years. Much of this

was possible because the 1966 Act

established a Presidential commission on

marine science, engineering, and

resources. The commission was chaired by

Julius A. Stratton, a former president of

the Massachusetts Institute of Technology

and then chairman of the Ford Foundation.

The commission became known as the

Stratton Commission.

The number of accomplishments

achieved in marine legislation and activities

in the late 1960s and 1970s is truly

remarkable. In 1966, the Sea Grant

Program was established and the Marine

Resources and Engineering Development

Act was passed; in 1970, NOAA was

formed and the International Decade of

 

25 Condensed from a presentation by Mary Hope

Katsouros of The Heinz Center, delivered at the

February 1998 annual meeting of the American

Association for the Advancement of Science, held

in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Ocean Exploration and World Weather

program began. In 1972, when the Coastal

Zone Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1451 et

seq.); Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et

seq.); Marine Protection, Research, and

Sanctuaries Act (33 U.SA.C. 1401 et

seq.); and Marine Mammal Protection Act

(16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) were all passed.

Then, in 1973, the Endangered Species

Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) was passed,

giving NOAA and the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service the authority to manage

marine and other species faced with

extinction. Finally, in 1976, the Magnuson

Fisheries Conservation and Management

Act ((16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) was

enacted.

The commission members were

from federal and state governments,

industry, universities, and laboratories, and

also included bipartisan congressional

advisors. While commission members all

were accomplished individuals, the

diversity of appointed, advisory bodies

was not yet a concern. This illustrates an

important point: that the Stratton

Commission, for all its acknowledged

brilliance and foresight, was very much a

product of the thinking of the 1960s. The

environmental movement was a nascent

political force in marine policy at that time,

and it was not specifically represented in

the membership of the commission. Nor

were the coastal states accorded a seat at

the table.

Policy is now informed by a wider

range of viewpoints. Americans also look

at marine issues differently. In the late

1960s, marine resources were viewed as

essentially infinite, and efforts were made

to expand their use and accelerate

development to grow the economy. This

attitude is expressed within the Marine
58 Appendix B

Resources and Engineering Development

Act itself, as evidenced by this quotation

from the Act regarding its purpose:

“Develop, encourage, and maintain a

coordinated, comprehensive, and longrange national program—to protect health

and property and enhance commerce,

transportation, and national security—and

to increase utilization of these resources.”

This paradigm is also reflected by the

charges to the Stratton Commission,

which was called upon to maintain the

expanding national economy and obtain

the needed resources from the marine

environment.

The Stratton Commission published Our Nation and the Sea in January

1969. The report included 126

recommendations in 17 categories.

Without discussing all of the

recommendations and activities of the

commission, it should be sufficient to note

that the Stratton Commission has had far

more impact on marine sciences and policy

than any other commission, board, or

committee—before or since. As noted

earlier, those recommendations led directly

to the establishment of NOAA in 1970,

laid the groundwork for enactment of the

Coastal Zone Management Act in 1972,

and set priorities for federal ocean

activities that have guided this nation for

almost 30 years.

The commission of the 1990s may

not look much like Stratton’s, but it can be

as wise and forward looking. If it fulfills

this role, then the early years of the new

millennium will be a marine watershed—

like the 1970s. But the new paradigm will

not reflect a movement toward increased

development. Instead, it will reflect a

movement toward balancing use and

conservation; movement towards the

sustainability of marine resources.
i