The Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem

New, Free Online Training Course for Reef Managers (TNC)

jseda — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:43:27 +0000

As posted in Coral-List:

The Nature Conservancy, in partnership with NOAA and with support from MacArthur Foundation, is offering a new virtual training program on Reef Resilience to provide coral reef managers, trainers, and policymakers guidance on building resilience to climate change into the design of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and daily management activities.

The course incorporates the new science, lessons learned, case studies, and practices that have been included in the on-line Reef Resilience toolkit and is designed to accelerate the knowledge and facilitate access to essential information and tools needed to incorporate resilience principles into management strategies.

While the focus of this course is on the problem of coral bleaching and actions that managers can take to address this problem, specifically in the context of Marine Protected Areas, the recommendations and tools can be applied to most threats that coral reefs face today. The program includes key aspects such as:

An introduction to mass coral bleaching and the ecological and social impacts

Description of the four main principles of resilience and how to identify factors of resilience

Recommendations on the design and management of resilient MPAs

This course is free and open to anyone interested in learning about Reef Resilience.

How to enroll in the course:

This free online course is available for you to work through at your own pace. Here are the steps to begin the training:

Navigate to www.conservationtraining.org <http://home.tnc/workingattnc/learningattnc/development/www.conservationtraining.org>
If you have not already done so, create an account on ConservationTraining <http://www.conservationtraining.org/> by clicking the ‘Create new account’ link
Once your account is created and confirmed, log into ConservationTraining <http://www.conservationtraining.org/> and click ‘Reef Resilience – Self-paced’ course
Enter the course and begin by reading the course description and syllabus

If you’d like more information about Reef Resilience and/or the online course, please email resilience@tnc.org.

As part of the CRA project, we encourage reef managers in the Caribbean to use this free resource to improve their knowledge and skills in the management of coral reef ecosystems.

Funds and Baselines – Major Concerns for Caribbean FMC

jseda — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:46:34 +0000

The Caribbean Fisheries Management Council (CFMC; http://www.caribbeanfmc.com), a regional agency involved in establishing important regulations on commercial and recreational fisheries in Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands, held its last regular general meeting on December 15-16, 2009 at El Conquistador Hotel in Fajardo, PR. Approximately 30 attendees from public and private sectors participated. Among these were included the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources, US Virgin Islands Department of Planning and Natural Resources – Fish and Wildlife Divisions, various consultants and local fishermen from the US Virgin Islands. Establishing annual catch limits (ACLs) by groups of fish or by specific species was largely debated because of the lack of data on the exact number of species caught (according to one source, >50% are unreported catch) and catches are not accurately identified. Identification of fish species is one of the problems encountered by most fishermen and is a major concern when establishing fishing regulations. With this in mind, Sea Grant PR has considered making efforts to help local fishermen with identifying fish species using posters and information sheets. However, a major limitation when determining ACLs is the scarce amount of data presently available, especially those from recreational activities.

Using this meeting as an opportunity for networking and given that several fishery experts were present, we conducted a brief survey consisting of three questions about research and information needs for fisheries management (click here to view our questionnaire). Of these questions, we asked participants about the type of research that is presently required on short (<5 years) and long (5-10 years) terms in order to deal with fisheries management effectively. We also inquired about the obstacles that are presently hindering research/assessments that can help improve fisheries management. More than 50% of the attendees (n=20) participated in our survey. Results showed that 80% of those that answered our questions have more than 16 years of experience in fisheries and 58% presently work for a government agency/institution. Establishing baselines and development of fisheries management policy tools were most frequently chosen as the short-term research presently needed. Critical information that is needed for long-term research varied, but the most frequently mentioned was better data collection of species-specific catches and ages. Lack of funding was the obstacle most frequently selected among our participants along with insufficiently trained and skilled personnel.

Sea Grant Puerto Rico would like to thank the CFMC members and attendees for participating in our survey and we will be disseminating this information to National Sea Grant and NOAA. We expect that some of our sponsored research projects will help address these issues of main concern among the fisheries community.

Contributed by J. Seda

Suggested reading:

Barnes, C. and K. W. McFadden. “Marine ecosystem approaches to management: challenges and lessons in the United States.” Marine Policy 32.3 (2008): 387-92. (Free full text in our database)

Dhoray, Shanta and Sonja Sabita Teelucksingh. “The implications of ecosystem dynamics for fisheries management: A case study of selected fisheries in the Gulf of Paria, Trinidad.” Journal of Environmental Management 85.2 (2007): 415-28. (Free full text in our database)

Videos:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Sea Grant Puerto Rico – Efforts for orientating local fishermen about the EEZ (Elusive Economic Zone) in the US Caribbean . (Audio in Spanish only).

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Endless Voyage: Introduction to Oceanography – Focus on fisheries management, mostly on overfishing and maintaining a sustainable use of our marine resources.

Enhancing Products and Services – CaRA

jseda — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:04:27 +0000

On December 1, 2009, we participated in the General Assembly “Coastal data and information, a vital need in our islands” sponsored by the Caribbean Regional Association (CaRA, http://cara.uprm.edu) at the Nautical Club in San Juan, PR. Several speakers were invited to present updates on products and services to CaRA members and participants, which approximated 50 attendees from Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands. The status and future development of the CariCOOS (Caribbean Coastal Ocean Observing System), including facilities and services for direct observations of coastal conditions and forecasting abilities, were presented along with the establishment of a Products & Services Committee that represents different sectors of coastal data users. This committee consists of several groups that will evaluate the system’s ability to attend to the data needs of that particular sector and will educate other sectors on the products and services available through CaRA. In addition, identifying frequent users and their information needs in order to address these issues is also contemplated.

Observational and forecast needs most frequently solicited by users include data on coastal winds, waves, currents, inundation, water quality, bathymetry, temperature, salinity, and benthic habitats. Several implementation strategies were presented by Prof. Julio Morell, principal investigator, including the minimization of infrastructure deployment and maintenance (i.e., sparse network of real-time sensors complemented by higher spatial resolution), installing observing assets (e.g., buoys, radars, remote sensing) located in critical representative areas, and developing numerical model assets.

During the assembly, most of the members/participants expressed their concern about installing cameras in specific areas (e.g., beaches) for improving vigilance and safety, installing buoys and developing models for USVI and increasing the resolution of the data provided by the system. A major interest by users is the development of tutorials on how to use and interpret the data provided by the system, which may be directed towards helping specific users (e.g., divers, shipping companies, surfers, coastal managers). UPRSG is currently integrated in the Outreach & Education subcommittee headed by Dr. Yasmín Detrés and will be participating in efforts to educate CaRA users on how to efficiently utilize the online products and services.

The first CariCOOS coastal data buoy, weighing approximately 6,000 pounds, for the US Caribbean region was deployed on June 9, 2009 on the south coast of the Puerto Rico insular shelf break off Caja Muertos Island. The buoy was anchored at a depth of 55 feet. Measurements of wind, air temperature, atmospheric pressure, waves, near-surface water temperature, salinity and ocean currents throughout the water column are obtained in real-time. Buoys similar to this one will be deployed in the northern coast of Puerto Rico during March 2010 and in a region between St. Croix and St. Thomas sometime during this year.

Photo: CariCOOS coastal data buoy, http://cara.uprm.edu

Contributed by J. Seda

Ecological Restoration: History, services and rebuilding

jseda — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:03:31 +0000

A number of government agencies and conservation institutions around the world are underscoring the importance of restoration as a tool to protect habitats and ecosystems, and perhaps bring them to an acceptable functioning condition that resembles a previous historical condition. Restoration requires science, experimentation, political will, funding and societal participation in the design and implementation of restoration programs and projects. In the United States, agencies (e.g., NOAA) support local stewardship efforts in restoring habitats. In July 2009, Science published a special issue (vol. 325, no. 5940) on restoration ecology that deserves our attention. As quoted from the authors, “restoration ecology is a relatively new science…. But in its short life it assumed a major role in sustainable development efforts across the globe.” In relation to our endeavors in identifying the best science for the conservation of marine and coastal resources in the Caribbean, we recommend two articles for further reading from this special issue: Ecological Restoration in the Light of Ecological History by S.T. Jackson and R.J. Hobbs; Restoration of Ecosystems Services for Environmental Markets by M.A. Palmer and S. Filoso. On a similar note, we also suggest reading Rebuilding Global Fisheries (Science, vol. 325, p. 578), which was written by a number of scientists led by Boris Worm and Ray Hilborn.

Jackson and Hobbs argue on the importance of the historical perspective on ecosystems and the need for paleoecological and paleoenvironmental studies in understanding “existing and historical ecosystems, determining the circumstances under which they arose, gauging the range of environmental variability they have experienced, and identifying different levels of intervention” (2009:568). These authors are cautious, but firm in their view of the need for a historical analysis of ecosystems, prior to a deliberation on how to restore them. Their model and recommendations are straightforward; however, they fail to mention the human component. In many cases, historical ecosystems and paleoenvironments show evidence of the human footprint in varying degrees. Namely, restoration must also consider archaeological and paleoecological factors (which are often worked in tandem) in order to create a more precise view of past ecosystems.

Palmer and Filoso provide a short and precise discussion on ecosystem services and environmental markets, and their role in restoration. The authors warn the reader on the many interpretations of restoration that are not ecologically sound. If restoration is defined, in its purest form, as “returning an ecosystem to an undisturbed or historic state”, then one must be cautious with projects that propose the “creation” of a stream or a wetland in an area where there was none in the past. Furthermore, many projects are based on the structural characteristics of the ecosystem (e.g., developing a salt flat or a wooded area), but ecological processes are disregarded. In addition, the difference between a service and a process are underscored: the former should be based on the scientific analysis of how is the ecosystem performing, while the latter delivers a service, such as “clean water to humans” (2009:575).

Rebuilding Global Fisheries (Worm et al. 2009) provides a worldwide panorama of the status of the stocks and starts, based on many scientific papers and data, with overfishing as the main culprit for its decline. The article also reviews the status of fisheries science and the assessment of stocks on a global scale. Information on single species predominates, mostly in temperate regions and continental areas, where industrial fishing fleets operate with the most advanced technologies. The authors acknowledge that, the “information … for small-scale artisanal and recreational fisheries is scarcer, less accessible, and more difficult to interpret. This is because small-scale fisheries are harder to track… ” (2009:581). The lack of enforcement and poor reporting make management difficult for small-scale fisheries, and thus, rebuilding (restoration) continues to be a major challenge. While this study offers important recommendations for the science of restoration and the rebuilding of stocks (“still a poorly understood process”), a poor understanding and treatment of the human factor remains, except for a handful of broad remarks on the socioeconomic factors shaping small-scale and industrial fisheries. Nevertheless, the overall analysis is top-notch and those interested in ecosystem restoration and stock rebuilding should further explore by reading this article.

Contribued by M. Valdés Pizzini

Sea Grant and CIEL

NOAA Restoration Center – http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/restoration/

Society for Ecological Restoration International – http://www.ser.org

Global Restoration Network – http://www.globalrestorationnetwork.org/ecosystems/coastal/

NOAA’s Efforts for Ecosystem Management

jseda — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:54:30 +0000

McFadden, K. W. and Barnes, C. (2009). The implementation of an ecosystem approach to management within a federal government agency. Marine Policy 33: 156-163.

Summary

The implementation of ecosystem management of marine natural resources is considered a challenge despite the overall consensus that it is essential to understand the complexity of these ecosystems at both ecologic and socioeconomic scales. Katherine McFadden and Cassandra Barnes (2009) report on the endeavors made by the United States’ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to execute and modify its strategies to incorporate an active ecosystem approach to management (EAM). Survey responses from nine programs associated with ecosystem science and management within NOAA from eight eco-regions (Northeast US Continental Shelf, Southeast Continental Shelf, Gulf of Mexico, California current, Alaska ecosystem complex, Pacific Islands, Great Lakes, and the Caribbean ecosystem) were analyzed. Initially, NOAA’s efforts began with its participation in the Interagency Ecosystem Management Task Force (IEMTF) in 1993. However, the implementation of EAM presented a significant change in the agency’s method of managing marine resources and its collaboration with other organizations. The United States Ocean Action Plan (USOAP) helped renew NOAA’s efforts for EAM with its integration in the 2004 Strategic Plan.

According to McFadden and Barnes (2009), 66 regional activities were identified, with the Gulf of Mexico contributing the largest number of EAM initiatives followed by the Northeast (although this may be due to specific mandates in these particular areas). Most EAM projects began approximately 7 years ago and vary widely in spatial scales. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) was considered the major organization that had the largest number of EAM-related projects and the greatest portion of NOAA’s 2005 total budget for ecosystem-related research (58%). A statistical analysis showed no particular geographic region as the sole focus of NOAA’s efforts for EAM. Collaborative efforts with other non-governmental organizations (NGOs), international organizations, and partnerships reached up to 70%, of which most were within other NOAA divisions and programs.

Survey responses were categorized into successful intents of EAM projects that concentrated on “collaborations, multidisciplinary approaches and identifying common priorities”. Partnerships with different organizations and agencies are considered essential to achieve an ample amount of information needed for better management strategies. Incorporating multiple disciplines from several areas of scientific knowledge (e.g., environmental sciences, psychology, and social sciences) are needed to assess needs and concerns that require alternatives/solutions based on an ecosystem approach. Being able to identify common priorities can help minimize the timeliness in recognizing problems and focus efforts on improving commitments between NOAA and local stakeholders.

The authors acknowledge that not all programs associated with EAM projects responded to this study and is not considered an “entirely comprehensive analysis”. However, the results obtained from this survey provided insight on how ecosystem management is perceived by most of the individuals involved in EAM activities and the extent of NOAA’s progress in executing this type of management as a large multidisciplinary agency.

To read more on this week’s Featured Article, check out our CRA Publication Database.

Dr. Ken Sherman (Director, U.S. Large Marine Ecosystem (LME) Program) – What criteria is used to name a LME?

Click here to view the embedded video.

CRA’s Comment

NOAA’s attitude towards marine resource management has been gradually changing in order to implement an ecosystem approach. However, integrating different forms of science, encouraging collaborations, lack of financial funds, and the need for a “big picture” view have been identified as being major challenges in improving the cooperation and understanding of EAM within NOAA (Barnes and McFadden, 2008)[1]. Interestingly, one of the strategies considered for a successful EAM is establishing collaborations with other organizations, agencies and the local community. CRA’s preliminary assessments of marine resource managers, experts and users in the Caribbean are in agreement for increasing collaborations and partnerships of governmental agencies and local stakeholders (see a detailed report of the scoping session at the 2008 Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute Annual Meeting). We concur entirely with the authors in the sharing of information among partners outside and inside of NOAA, which foments the development of a comprehensive database that can be consistently updated with the latest data (McFadden and Barnes, 2009).

Contributed by J. Seda

NOAA Ecosystems Goal Team – http://ecosystems.noaa.gov/

National Coastal Development Center (Ecosystem Observation Program) – http://www.ncddc.noaa.gov/activities/noaa-ecosystem-approach-to-management

Large Marine Ecosystems of the World (Dr. Ken Sherman) – http://www.lme.noaa.gov/

[1] Barnes, C. and McFadden, K.W. (2008). Marine ecosystem approaches to management: challenges and lessons in the United States. Marine Policy 32: 387-392. (Free full text available here)

Landing Data – a Priority for SEDAR

jseda — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:40:46 +0000

Our team attended the SouthEast Data, Assessment, and Review (SEDAR) meeting held in San Juan on January 26-29, 2009. Reports from the meeting are currently available online (http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/sedar/). One of SEDAR’s main goals is to improve the scientific quality and reliability of fishery stock assessments and encourage the participation of important stakeholders in the assessment development. Briefly, SEDAR presently recommends research in the area of data collection of landing data. Based on the information from the report titled “Consolidated Caribbean SEDAR Research Recommendations”, research is needed to design an appropriate trip-ticket data collection to make the data suitable for proper analyses of fisheries biology and economics, which include the need to allocate catches and quotas. The report also underscores specific recommendations for landed species. In general terms, better data collection techniques (and analyses) are necessary to assess stocks through fishery independent sampling efforts, surveys with hook and line and/or traps, visual surveys, and mark and recapture techniques. On potential social and economic research needs, the SEDAR report suggests that a better knowledge of the recreational fisheries is required, specifically in terms of effort and target species. Particularly referring to the U.S. Virgin Islands, SEDAR recommends studying management and environmental events and factors affecting catches. A key concern mentioned was the data gathering process in the local fisheries. Other areas or research themes that fishers and managers identified as needed:

The role and effectiveness of bans, closures and MPAs for species protection
Different factors involved in the variability of catches and in recruitment
The role of local markets in shaping the structure of catches and selectivity of species and sizes.

Although not directly related to research, there was a concern on the flow of information from the scientists and managers to the fishers. The future construction of a research agenda will depend on the effectiveness of the shared information and the ability to successfully explain these findings to laypersons using complex graphics based on computer models.

Contributed by M. Valdes-Pizzini

CaRA’s Efforts for Coastal Management in PR and USVI

jseda — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:11:50 +0000

We attended the Workshop on Ocean Observing in Support of Coastal Management sponsored by the Coastal States Organization (CSO) and the Caribbean Regional Association (CaRA) on Sept 3 and Oct 1, 2008 at the Embassy Suites Hotel & Casino in San Juan, Puerto Rico. The main goal of CaRA is to “establish and administer a sustained observing system for the northeastern Caribbean region, the Caribbean Regional Integrated Coastal Ocean Observing System – CaRICOOS to provide observations and products” (http://cara.uprm.edu) that are related to issues concerning coastal management and use. Members from the University of the West Indies, University of the Virgin Islands, and USVI-Sea Grant were active participants in this conference. The purpose of this workshop was to encourage the interchange of ideas and concerns of coastal managers and scientists from several government agencies and local institutions with the interest of improving and providing services for those particular needs from the US Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico.

Various issues of main concern included:

1. Lack of tools (e.g., topography maps and models) that would benefit the managers in performing their duties

2. Accessibility to the most recently updated information in a user-friendly format

3. Political will as a constant pressure in coastal development

4. Long-term planning for climate change adaptation (e.g., beach erosion, flash flooding)

5. How to best guide coastal development based on models and maps that are based on USVI environmental conditions rather than conditions in the US or PR

6. Lack of human capacity needed to obtain up-to-date information on land use, water quality, etc.

7. Lack of technical training and expertise to maintain databases and websites

8. Lack of interconnectivity and sharing of information among divisions in federal departments

9. Lack of interagency and institutional dissemination of recent information on projects focused on coastal management

10. Lack of sufficient funds for personnel and projects

Among these concerns, high-priority data needs were mentioned that addressed specific matters:

1. Up-to-date data on wind, waves and currents throughout the USVI

2. Watershed and wetland sampling for water quality evaluation

3. Shoreline mapping

4. Layered data sets for land-use plans

5. Tsunami warning system

6. Identifying inundation zones

7. Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) habitat imagery including seasonal variations

8. Accessibility and evaluation of information

9. Real-time monitoring of water quality and coral reefs

Being able to find, interpret, and apply the data available through the CaRA data website (http://www.caricoos.org) is one of the major difficulties reported by users. In a personal interview with CaRA’s Executive Director, Julio Morell, one of the main tasks that they will be working on this year is the training of coastal managers and mariners on how to access and understand the data that is generated daily by the sensors located at several stations in the waters of USVI and PR.

A stakeholder council meeting was later scheduled on December 9, 2008 at the Embassy Suites Hotel & Casino in San Juan, PR. Dr. Manual Valdes-Pizzini was invited to participate in this conference. The purpose of this assembly mostly focused on stakeholder needs and maintaining collaborative efforts and relations with national and local organizations/programs such as PR/USVI state government, NOAA, National Federation of Regional Associations of Coastal and Ocean Observing (NFRA), IOCARIBE, Interdisciplinary Center for Littoral Studies (CIEL), US Coast Guard Search and Rescue, National Weather Service, and the PR Sea Grant Program.

Contributed by J. Seda

Shore and Beach Preservation

jseda — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:26:40 +0000

The annual meeting of the Florida Shore and Beach Preservation Association (FSBPA) was held at the Tradewinds Hotel (St. Petersburg Beach, Florida). The conference started during the afternoon of February 18^th and ended Friday morning, February 20^th, 2009. The meeting brought together professionals specializing in ocean engineering, coastal modeling, environmental evaluation, mitigation, and rehabilitation. A total of 42 presentations were made at the conference. Eighteen (18) of these talks focused on coastal structure design and engineering, of which eleven (11) dealt with the evaluation of problem coastal areas and seven (7) were mainly related to the use and reliability of the current group of numerical models to describe coastal processes. The remaining six (6) presentations focused on habitat rehabilitation and mitigating the environmental effects of development projects.

Highlighting the conference, with respect to potential application in the Caribbean, were several presentations that dealt with coral rehabilitation and evaluation of biological stress. This conference and the pre-conference workshop on the US Army Corps of Engineers Coastal Modeling System provided an opportunity to canvass the coastal engineering community with respect to critical research areas in the Caribbean. The questionnaire that we used as a scoping tool is a modification of the four questions that we presented at our GCFI scoping session last November. We based our survey questions on the suggestions for research areas gleaned from an earlier e-mail survey that we conducted in 2006. Of the approximately 150 people attending the conference and workshop, 30 participants were found with experience in the Caribbean and asked to respond to our written survey. Six (6) submitted their response at the conference and an approximately equal number promised to send a response by fax or email. The results are being added to a database for analysis and new results are being included as we receive them.

Contributed by K. Grove

Photo: Beach shoreline at Bahia Honda, Florida Keys (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida)

Florida Beach and Shore Preservation Association – http://www.fsbpa.com/