Protecting Corals and Island Nations: conservation group and the President of Palau both speak out

The Center for Biological Diversity is blowing its environmental horn not only to draw attention to its own actions but those of other nations concerned with the fate of marine ecosystems and the forces that impact them worldwide:

Settlement Requires Protecting 82 Corals
"On Tuesday the Center for Biological Diversity and the [U.S.] National Marine Fisheries Service reached an important agreement that will move 82 species of coral closer to protection. The agreement, following a 2009 petition and two notices of intent to sue by the Center, requires the Service to make decisions on protecting 82 U.S. corals -- including the mountainous star coral, blue rice coral and several Acropora corals -- under the Endangered Species Act by April 15, 2012. The Center has already earned protection for elkhorn (another Acorpora species) and staghorn corals."

As reported in the Houston Chronicle, "Unless we protect them right now, coral reefs will be lost within decades, and our grandchildren will never see these colorful underwater forests teeming with life," Miyoko Sakashita, the director of the organization's oceans program, said in a statement.

Currently, only reef-building staghorn and elkhorn corals are listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act. Of the species under review, 75 are found in the Pacific. Nine exist in Hawaii waters, including ringed rice coral, which sometimes has a purple hue but is other times rust orange or brown. It's a candidate for listing because it's only found in the Hawaiian islands. This makes the species vulnerable to being wiped out if there's a heat wave or an invasive species infiltrates its habitat. Protection under the Endangered Species Act could put fishing, dumping, dredging, offshore oil development and other activities under stricter regulatory scrutiny.

Palau Speaks Out Against Climate Change
"The Pacific island nation of Palau has announced it will urgently seek an "advisory opinion" from the United Nations on whether some polluting countries have a legal responsibility to ensure that their greenhouse gases don't harm other countries. Under international law, Palau points out, states are required to take all necessary measures to stop their activities from harming other states. Despite mounting evidence that the climate crisis is only deepening, the U.S. has failed to make significant strides in reducing carbon dioxide emissions and, in fact, some in Congress are pushing to weaken the Clean Air Act rather than harness it to do what's needed to reduce greenhouse pollution and avert the worst effects of the global climate crisis."

Palau President Johnson Toribiong told the General Assembly’s annual general debate that, along with the Marshall Islands, Palau will call on the 193-member Assembly to urgently seek an advisory opinion – which would be non-binding – from the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the World Court. Palau is one of several Pacific island countries that have repeatedly spoken out at the General Assembly about the impact of climate change, with rising sea levels resulting from the emissions of greenhouse gases threatening to swamp their islands.

"Article 194(2) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea provides that States shall take all measures necessary to ensure that activities under their jurisdiction or control do not spread and do not cause damage by pollution to other States. It is time we determine what the international rule of law means in the context of climate change,” the president was quoted as saying in the UN News Centre.

In today's difficult economic climate, we see the impact of globalization; that our economic health can not be isolated or immune from the financial conditions being experienced by other nations. The same is certainly true for the environment - we're all in this together.

Watch a video of President Toribiong speaking to the General Assembly.

Marine Mammals Postscript: act today in advance of Congressional hearing

As a follow up to yesterday's post about captive marine mammals (whales and dolphins), the folks behind the documentary film The Cove have sent out an email apprising people about a Congressional subcommittee hearing regarding marine mammals on display.

At question is the National Marine Fisheries Service's permitting process that requires that education and conservation - not entertainment - be the foundation for issuing permits to hold marine mammals in captivity. Whether this is being adhered to or that it requires some tightening is one of the key issues. As you can expect, there will be significant pressure from organizations like SeaWorld to keep things as status quo.

There is a public comment period that expires Friday, May 7th. If you would like to send a brief and respectful comment, you can email subcommittee clerk Katherine Romans at katherine.romans@mail.house.gov

Here is some suggested copy from David Phillips of the "The Cove" - Save the Dolphins group:

"There is no educational value to the whale and dolphin shows prominent within public display facilities today. The ethics of riding atop these wild animals, feeding and forcing interactions with them, goes against everything we are taught about them – in fact, those types of encounters are illegal in the wild. And yet, public display facilities promote this bad behavior and even encourage it for paying customers.

This is a manipulation of fact for the benefit of financial enterprise.

I strongly urge you to establish strong oversight of the education programs for public display facilities of marine mammals. Under the current law they have become performance spectacles that serve our amusement rather than our education."

Here is the body of the email I sent:

"Dear Ms. Romans:

Please forward or print this email for the appropriate subcommittee members.

Since the very first marine mammals (ie: whales and dolphins) were placed in captivity, scientists have learned more about the intelligence and complex social and physiological behaviors of theses animals – behaviors that are in direct conflict with the conditions that these animals are subjected to today while in captivity. While scientific study and educational outreach to better understand mankind’s impact globally on marine mammal populations is a valid activity, the priority today of marine amusement parks like SeaWorld is entertainment and an economic return on investment. We have evolved beyond the need for animals jumping through flaming hoops or balancing balls on their noses to appreciate their important roles within a marine ecosystem.

While some might advocate the release of all captive marine mammals, I side with those advocates, like Jean-Michel Cousteau, who feel that these animals have, unfortunately, been in captivity long enough (some since birth) that the prospects for successful introduction into the open oceans is doubtful. However, I support a ban on seeing any other marine mammals taken captive in the future accept for quantified and justified scientific research solely and not for public display.

Congress needs to initiate agencies to exercise greater oversight in granting permits for the capture and display of whales and dolphins. Large pelagic animals – animals that roam the open seas – should not be subjected to the confines of tanks and forced to perform tricks for our amusement. We are a better species than that. And these species deserve better treatment than that.

Respectfully,

Richard Theiss
RTSea Productions"

Yes, I know. I run a bit long. So, pick and choose as you like, but send something to Ms. Romans today.

Read USA Today article about upcoming Congressional hearing.

Coral Under Review: U.S. to determine status of 82 species

Some good news for coral reefs within U.S. territorial waters: the National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS) will spend the next year conducting an evaluation on the status of 82 different coral species in light of data presented by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD). The review will determine the current health of the various corals in Florida, Hawaii, and other island territories. By doing so, the NMFS can ascertain whether any coral species warrant threatened or endangered status under the Endangered Species Act, similar to elkhorn and staghorn coral which are currently listed as threatened.

Corals are the building blocks of tropical reefs but exist within a narrow band of environmental factors. Changes in water temperature, ocean acidification, pollution from commercial development - any one of these can lead to a degradation of the reef, often through a process called "coral bleaching." Unhealthy or dead reefs can be torn down by wave action, and this can have a serious effect on coastline or island erosion - not to mention the disruption to tropical reef ecosystems when corals that provide shelter and food for a variety of aquatic species disappears.

"The status review is an important step forward in protecting coral reefs, which scientists have warned may be the first worldwide ecosystem to collapse due to global warming," said Miyoko Sakashita, lawyer for CBD.

Read Washington Post article.

Black Abalone: living on the edge and in need of critical habitat

When I first began scuba diving over 25 years ago, my enthusiasm for the sport took me in all directions - photography, teaching, wreck diving, hunting, you name it. As I learned more about the health of the oceans, I soon abandoned hunting and have focused on the visuals, following the adage of "shoot only pictures, leave only bubbles, take only memories."

But back in my hunting days, abalone, a large shellfish found along the California coast and adjacent Channel Islands, was highly sought after. In fact, back then a diver could reach the State-allowed limit for a multi-day dive trip (a total of 8) in just one dive. The dive boat would anchor at one of the prime spots where you could find large abalone strewn across the bottom like hubcaps!

Then times changed. Already impacted by commercial harvesting, recreational harvesting was limited even further. The dive boats would often avoid the good spots, which were becoming harder to find anyway. And eventually a full moratorium was put in place.

There are several species of abalone - black, red, pink, white, green (their names based on either a basic shell color or the color of the short tentacles and fleshy mantle that extend from underneath) and each species today faces various degrees of decline, although all have suffered badly over the years.

The black abalone has declined as much as 99% since the early 1970s. Historically, abalone was harvested by the Chumash Indians that inhabited the California coast and Channel Islands. With the onslaught of the otter fur trade (otters also fed on abalone), the population of black abalone swelled. But, in response, so did the commercial harvesting industry. With abalone populations in decline, their overall health and robustness impacted, they have experienced a near fatal blow with the outbreak in the '80s of a bacterial disease called Withering Syndrome which attacks the digestive enzymes and the abalone begins to basically wither away.

The black abalone has been placed on the IUCN Red List as critically endangered. In 1999, the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) began considering the black abalone for endangered status but, with considerable prodding from outside conservation groups, it took nearly 10 years for the black abalone to be officially designated as an endangered species.

While such a designation legally requires that measures be taken to protect the species, to date no critical habitat has been set aside for the black abalone. And this has spurred the Center for Biological Diversity to file an intent to sue.

“Critical habitat protections have a proven track record helping endangered species to survive,” said Catherine Kilduff, a staff attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “Species with critical habitat are twice as likely to be recovering as species that don’t have it. Black abalone is on the cusp of extinction, and any further delay of federal habitat protection may well seal the species’ fate.”

The black abalone is in a precarious position: it's numbers reduced by over-harvesting; hammered by a pernicious Withering Syndrome; with increasing ocean temperatures that will aid the spread of the disease and the potential of ocean acidification to weaken the health of early-stage juveniles. The NMFS needs to act quickly and the world must recognize that another "canary in the coal mine" species is living on the edge due to the effects of climate change and CO2 emissions.

Read press release from the Center of Biological Diversity.

Hawaii's Longlines: new regulations stir up controversy

I recently posted some information about improvements in the U.S. regarding marine by-catch. While there may be some overall improvements, specific issues come up from time to time that require consideration and action.

One such issue is taking place regarding the Hawaiian swordfish longline fisheries and new proposed regulations that would allow an increase in the number of sets (fishing gear deployments) in addition to an increase in the number of legally-allowed sea turtle entanglements.

To meet the industrial-strength demands for seafood, longline fishing has grown over the years, but it is a very indiscriminate method of fishing, generating tremendous levels of by-catch ranging from sharks to whales and dolphins to sea turtles and even sea birds. The vast majority of the by-catch is wasted as it does not have sufficient economic value to the boats. While some improvements in methods and hooks have been made, many conservation groups look to the statistics as to their ultimate effectiveness: the continued drop in overall populations of many of these accidentally-caught species and the growing numbers seen caught, entangled, and/or killed in longlines as recorded by federally-mandated observers.

The proposed new regulations has been making the rounds of the local Hawaiian press and several NGOs, including Oceana and the Sea Turtle Restoration Project have been pushing hard with campaigns to make the National Marine Fisheries Service reconsider the proposed new regulations, which came about as a recommendation from the commercial fishery group, Western Pacific Fisheries Management Council.

Look into it and let your voice be heard.

Wolves, Seals & Tuna: some encouraging news

My apologies for my not keeping up with new postings. I have been immersed in some video & editing assignments. So let's see what's been going on lately . . .

Some good news:

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has placed the wolves of Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin back on the endangered species list. Once protected, these wolves of the Great Lakes were demoted from endangered to threatened by the Bush Administration and then all protection was removed in 2007. Following legal action by several NGOs, protection was reinstated but then it was removed by the new administration just this past April. New legal action again by NGOs has now once again reinstated the wolves endangered status.

It could continue to seesaw back and forth as the anti-wolf lobby, headed by cattle ranching interests, fights back. But the potential loss of these wolves has consequences, as seen in the past when open hunting of wolves caused a spike in the deer population and throughout a wide range of small animals and rodents. Cattle ranchers, in protecting their herds, now had a whole new set of problems to deal with as deer grazed on the lands and small animals ran amok in numbers. Nature demands that we keep our top predators to insure a balanced ecosystem.

Hawaiian Monk Seals have long been considered one of the most endangered of all marine mammals. Their existence in the Hawaiian Island chain, particularly in the northern islands, has been tenuous at best.

But the National Marine Fisheries Services has recently agreed to extend protection for the seals across the entire chain with federally protected habitat, thereby hopefully improving the seals chances for survival. This particularly important in the northern islands where the seals have had the greatest difficulty due to starvation, disease, and entanglement with fishing nets and gear.

Populations of tuna have been decimated worldwide as market demand for this seafood continues to grow. Realizing their future industry is at stake, several of the world's leading tuna processors have formed the International Seafood Sustainability Foundation (ISSF). Included in the foundation are Bumble Bee, Starkist, and Chicken of the Sea.

The foundation's goals are to commit to processing only tuna that:

• Comes from well-managed, non-depleted stocks
• Can be verified as to being legally caught
• Has not been caught using methods that generate unacceptable levels of bycatch
• Has not been transshipped (offloaded) at sea

All of these news items are good news but will require vigilance on the part of NGOs and government watchdog agencies or organizations to insure that they are properly carried out.

Still, it's nice to start the week on an optimistic note.

Hawaii's Sea Turtles: increasing threat from longlines

The Sea Turtle Restoration Project (STRP) has been hard at work for many years getting government decision makers and commercial fishermen to take steps to protect the several species of sea turtles. They are currently concerned with proposed changes in federal regulations regarding turtle, false killer whales, and humpback whales in Hawaiian waters.

Apparently, commercial longline fisheries' desire to increase their take of dwindling swordfish stocks is the motivating force behind the changes. Potentially, the number of turtles that can legally be killed in the process of fishing could be tripled from the current limit of 17.

Longline fishing is controversial because the technique - miles of long fishing lines with hundreds of baited hooks attached along the lines - is very indiscriminate in what it catches, from sharks to sea birds, to turtles: a tremendous amount of bycatch that is tossed aside.

The National Marine Fisheries Service has not responded to issues regarding whale deaths from long lines (in addition to the loss of Pacific loggerhead and leatherback sea turtles). The STRP has filed a lawsuit to get the NMFS to respond in keeping with the Marine Mammals Protection Act.

To learn more about the turtle's predicament and what you can do, check out the Sea Turtle Restoration Project web site.

Sharks and Turtles: the yin-yang of government action

The Yin: Sharks

Over the past months I have mentioned the progress of HR 81, the Shark Conservation Act that requires sharks to be landed whole with fins attached. This will allow for better enforcement and monitoring of shark catches. Additionally, it indirectly imposes on captains to re-think the value of shark as a catch, once they are no longer allowed to fill their holds with only higher-priced fins. It's U.S. legislation that helps the U.S. to encourage other nations to be leaders in shark conservation.

"The Shark Conservation Act will improve existing laws that were originally intended to prevent shark finning. This legislation will also allow the U.S. to take action against countries whose shark finning restrictions are not as strenuous, labeling the U.S. as a continued international leader in shark conservation," says Beth Lowell, Oceana federal policy director.

The legislation died on the floor of the Senate last year, but was reintroduced by Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo (D-Guam) for this new session. Earlier this month it was passed by the House and has once again moved on to the Senate. This is the government moving in the right direction, so to ensure its final passage, take a moment and send an email or call the senator from your state. You can find contact information for your senator by clicking here.

The Yang: Sea Turtles

On the other hand, regarding the protection of sea turtles, particularly loggerhead and leatherback turtles in U.S. waters, the government - specifically the National Marine Fisheries Service - failed to respond to petitions filed to review their status as threatened or endangered species (many populations have dropped by as much as 80% through commercial fishing and/or loss of nesting habitats). Petitions must be reviewed within 12 months and as the NMFS failed to do this, they are in violation of the Endangered Species Act.

The Turtle Island Restoration Network, Center for Biological Diversity, and Oceana have filed petitions to sue - once again taking proactive measures to break the government's legacy of indifference and inaction left over from the prior administration.

"It's time for the Obama administration to overturn the Bush policies of hostility and disregard toward endangered marine species. We are asking for immediate action based on the best available science to determine their current endangered status and better protect them by creating designated critical habitat," said Todd Steiner, biologist and executive director of the Turtle Island Restoration Network.

What this all says is that government action is critical in protecting our natural resources, but it must be supported by diligence on the part of all of us, least specific issues fall through the cracks.

Arctic Industrial Fishing: hands off for now

With the effects of climate change becoming more apparent above the Arctic Circle, commercial interests - ranging from fishing, drilling, and shipping - are lining up to take advantage of reduced sea ice and more open seas year-round. But do we take a more prudent course and allow scientific research to take place first to determine what, if any, detrimental effects may occur? A step in that direction is coming to pass regarding industrial fishing (large scale commercial fishing).

The North Pacific Fishing Management Council (NPFMC), a government council affiliated with NOAA, recently voted unanimously to prevent the expansion of industrial fishing in U.S. waters north of the Bering Strait. This establishes one of the largest precautionary measures in the history of fisheries management.

Warming water temperatures are pushing many fish species northward and with the associated melting sea ice, there will be tremendous pressure from commercial fishing operations to move into these northern regions. However, we are just now seeing the effects of climate change but do not have the scientific data to accurately document the implications on indigenous human and wildlife populations or other ecosystems - particularly from the possible effects of increased commercial operations. This recommendation from the NPFMC provides time to study Pandora's box before we open it.

The NPFMC's recommendation is both prudent and bold. The National Marine Fisheries Service will need to review/approve the recommendation before submitting for federal approval by the end of the year. It is expected to move forward, based on the new political climate in Washington with a new administration, and it could serve as a template for other future policies regarding international conservation of the Arctic Circle.

Read a press release from Oceana.

Loggerhead Turtles: proposal to protect them from bottom longlines in Gulf

The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, a U.S. regional council established by the Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976, is considering a proposal to request that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) issue an emergency rule prohibiting the use of bottom longlines at a depth of 50 fathoms or less. The primary purpose of the prohibition is to limit the negative impact on loggerhead turtles that are often caught in the nets as they drag across the bottom to catch snapper and grouper.

Loggerhead turtles are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Nearly 1,000 turtles were caught in this fishery in just 18 months - eight times the federally authorized level.

"Under the ESA, immediate changes in this fishery must be taken to protect loggerhead sea turtles," said Elizabeth Griffin, marine wildlife scientist at Oceana.

The emergency closure would last for five months while the NMFS pursues a permanent solution. The council is expected to make its final review and approval today. Read entire press release from Oceana.

Right Whales: speed regulation to avoid ship collisions

The New York Times recently reported that the National Marine Fisheries Service has adopted a long-debated regulation requiring large ships (over 65 feet) to reduce speed to less than 10 knots in certain coastal areas on the east coast from Massachusetts to Florida.

The purpose of this speed restriction is an attempt to avoid hitting and injuring or killing Right Whales that populate the selected areas. Scientists estimate that only about 400 right whales exist today, even though hunting them was made illegal in 1935. These whales were so heavily hunted in the 1800's and early 1900's that, even with a 70+ year moratorium, their future is tenuous at best.

One or two whales are reported killed each year by ship collision - and that's just the reported cases. With a population so small, the loss of even one whale can have a negative impact.

This regulation was a long time in coming due to political pressure exerted by the shipping industry who refute the correlation between speed and the possibility of collision. The regulation will take effect in less than 60 days and will be subject to review in 5 years based on scientific monitoring of its effectiveness. Let's hope the results are positive for the whale's sake.

U.S. Commercial Fishing Regulations: new proposal needs strengthening

Following up on yesterday's posting, here's some information I just received from Oceana.org about a proposed U.S. commercial fishing regulation that needs some strengthening:

Our high demand for seafood has changed the way we fish. There are more ships at sea, there is more money fueling the fleets and advances in technology have brought about new gear and practices. Ironically, these "advances" have resulted in inefficient and irresponsible fishing. Bottom trawlers, longlines, and gillnets allow fishermen to catch unsustainably huge amounts of fish and other marine life, destroying the very resource they depend on. After years and years of overfishing, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has finally proposed a rule to combat this unsustainable and damaging practice. Unfortunately, the rule falls dangerously short in a number of ways. This rule is long overdue and has the potential to change the face of our fisheries management. The solution to the overfishing crisis can be summed up in three words: count, cap and control. These principles are noticeably absent from the Administration's proposed rule.

Tell the Administration Its Rule is Not Good Enough >>

This rule is long overdue and has the potential to change the face of our fisheries management. The solution to the overfishing crisis can be summed up in three words: count, cap and control. These principles are noticeably absent from the Administration's proposed rule.

Count - count all of the fish caught, including the ones discarded at sea.
Cap - set a limit on mortality amount for all populations
Control - actively manage fisheries to end and prevent overfishing. This control must be paired with enforcement to ensure that management is truly effective.
Not only are the three C's missing, the rule also fails to set limits on domestic fishing of international species and it does not call for a full assessment of the rule's environmental impacts.

This rule will affect every fish stock and fishery in the United States. It's vitally important to get this rule right the first time around. Now that Congress has finally mandated an end to the problem, let's not waste the opportunity with a flawed proposal. Please take action today.

For the oceans,
Buffy Baumann
Fisheries Advocate
Oceana