No,
the tide is not coming in higher than normal and there is no need to head
inland. But for those of us with any interest in, or love for the ocean,
there is cause for celebration. The “sea change” to which
I’m referring is the approval of the Draft
Final Report, An Ocean Blueprint for the 21st Century, by the U.S.
Commission on Ocean Policy on July 22, 2004. This report is expected to
guide our national ocean policy for years to come. Following its unanimous
approval by the Commission (USCOP), the report was then sent to the President
and Congress, and we eagerly await their respective responses and action.
How
did we get here?
Earlier this year, the USCOP
issued its preliminary report to the Governors and other interested parties
after two years of effort reviewing scientific and technical information,
and convening public hearings. Mandated by the Oceans Act of 2000 (P.L.
106-256), the 400+ page report contained nearly 200 recommendations that,
if enacted, would provide a “balanced approach to protecting the
marine environment while sustaining the vital role oceans and coast play
in our lives and national economy.”*
The impact of the recommended changes could be far-reaching, both economically
and environmentally. According to the USCOP web site, the final draft
report takes into consideration the 600 pages of comments received from
37 governors, five tribal leaders, one regional governors association,
800 interested stakeholders, and other technical experts. The reports,
USCOP meeting minutes, and public comments can be reviewed or downloaded
from this web site.
By passing the Oceans Act of
2000, Congress re-emphasized the importance that the oceans have for our
country. Pursuant to the Act, President Bush named 16 individuals to comprise
the Ocean Commission, representing diverse backgrounds and interests (see
box, p. 9). The Commissioners’ charge was to “establish findings
and develop recommendations for a new comprehensive national ocean policy”.
Three decades ago, in a report called Our Nation and the Sea, the last
comprehensive review of national ocean policy was issued by the Stratton
Commission. Among other things, that report led to the establishment of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in 1970, and
the enactment of the Coastal Zone Management Act in 1972. Although the
nascent NOAA, embedded in the Department of Commerce, lacked cabinet status
and control over many federal marine activities, it did become a “center
of federal ocean expertise,” bringing together a number of programs
including the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries (precursor to the National
Marine Fisheries Service) and the Sea Grant Program. While progress was
made in meeting some of the Stratton Commission's recommendations, the
USCOP report documents how our coastal areas have continued to develop
and change, and outlines much more that needs to be done.
The report makes it very
clear that the oceans have an enormously critical role in the U.S. economy
that cannot be overlooked or downplayed. It’s important that action
starts now, so that momentum is not lost and fickle attention spans turn
elsewhere. As Commission Chairman Retired U.S. Navy Admiral James D. Watkins
said recently, “Reform of national ocean policy needs to start this
year, and accelerate next year and the year after, while it is still possible
to reverse distressing declines, seize exciting opportunities, and sustain
the oceans, coasts, and their valuable assets for future generations.
We can’t wait even five or ten years to make changes or it will
be too late.”
Our
Oceans are Invaluable
The report is divided into ten parts and
31 chapters. It is clearly a LOT to digest, but is well-written and contains
a wealth of interesting facts and figures that illustrate how closely
our national economy and well-being are tied to the oceans. In fact, to
better understand and emphasize those ties, the USCOP partnered with the
National Ocean Economics Project to complete an economic study called
“Living Near…And Making a Living From…The Nation’s
Coasts and Oceans”, which is included as Appendix C in the Commission
report. The report makes the distinction between the ocean economy and
the coastal economy, and summarizes some interesting facts and figures.
For example, the value of goods handled by the nation’s ports is
$700 billion annually; the cruise industry and its passengers contribute
$11 billion to the economy annually; commercial fishing and recreational
saltwater angling are valued at $28 billion and $20 billion annually,
respectively; retail expenditures on recreational boating is a $30 million
per year sector; and the U.S. retail trade in ornamental fish is worth
about $3 billion per year (USCOP, 2004). Some intangibles with values
difficult to quantify (e.g. clean water, safe food, healthy habitats,
good environments in which to live and recreate) are nonetheless equally
important contributions of the oceans and coasts.
Shifting
Management Styles to Focus on Ecosystems
The USCOP
report recommends a number of critical actions, some of which are
summarized in the following paragraphs. While some can be formally adopted
and more easily implemented, others will literally take an “Act
of Congress” to come to fruition. To achieve an effective U.S. ocean
policy, the Commissioners strongly propose that traditional management
philosophies and principles be exchanged for a principle of ecosystem-based
management. This type of management is founded in an understanding of
ecosystems, and “accounts for and addresses the complex interrelationships
among the ocean, land, air, and all living creatures, including humans,
and considers the interactions among multiple activities that affect entire
systems”. Wholesale application of this principle requires that
relevant geographic management areas are defined based on ecosystem, rather
than political boundaries. This will be challenging.
The report delineates eight possible
Large Marine Ecosystems (LME) for the U.S., that “encompass coastal
areas out to the seaward boundaries of the continental shelves and major
current systems, and takes into account the biological and physical components
of the marine environment as well as terrestrial features such as river
basins and estuaries that drain into these ocean areas” (USCOP,
2004). Connecticut is included in the Northeast LME, which, as proposed,
encompasses the area from Maine to Cape Hatteras.
Three
Themes for Change
The existing structure of authorities and programs
that manages our oceans and coasts is fragmented, unable to meet all of
the needs and challenges that must be addressed. Therefore, the USCOP
identifies necessary changes based on three fundamental and cross-cutting
themes:
• Create a
new national ocean policy framework to improve decision-making
• Strengthen ocean and coastal science and generate high-quality
accessible information to inform decision-makers
• Enhance ocean education to instill future leaders and informed
citizens with a stewardship ethic
To create a new framework for national ocean
policy, the USCOP first recommends that federal leadership and coordination
be improved. A proposed first step is to establish a National Ocean Council
within the Office of the President, chaired by an Assistant to the President
and composed of all cabinet secretaries and independent agency directors
with ocean-related responsibilities. Next, they recommend that a presidential
Council of Advisors on Ocean Policy be established, consisting of nonfederal
representatives (e.g. state, territorial, tribal, and local governments,
nongovernmental organizations, academics, and private sector entities).
This latter Council would create a formal means for nonfederal stakeholders
to provide input on ocean and coastal policy matters. The USCOP also recommends
steps to streamline the implementation of national ocean and coastal policies,
that also enhance the ability of agencies to address links among ocean,
land, and air. For example, they emphasize that NOAA should be the lead
agency for ocean and coastal programs, but also point out that the agency
needs to be reconfigured and strengthened. Overlapping and redundant programs
among all agencies with ocean and coastal responsibilities should be consolidated
to increase efficiency and effectiveness.
In keeping with the LME concept, the Commission
also proposes that voluntary, nonregulatory regional ocean councils be
established, to enable state, territorial, tribal, and local entities
to develop regional goals and priorities, improve responses to regional
issues, and improve coordination. Initially, pilot projects could be started
where interest and capacity are strongest. These regional councils would
facilitate coordination with federal entities to address connections and
conflicts among watershed, coastal, and offshore resources and their uses
that cross jurisdictional lines in a more timely and efficient manner.
The second major theme contained in cross-cutting
the report’s recommendations is the strengthening of ocean science
and making the results and findings more accessible to any interested
party. Over the past two decades, the modest amount of federal funding
appropriated for ocean research has been cut in half, plummeting from
7% of the total federal research budget to just 3.5% today. The Commission
recommends doubling ocean research funding as a starting point. The objectives
for this increase are to improve scientific understanding of ocean and
coastal environments, ensure effective science-based measures are used
to protect and restore ocean and coastal resources, and enhance our overall
ability to observe, monitor and forecast ocean and coastal conditions.
This last objective involves the implementation of a national Integrated
Ocean Observing System (IOOS), based on a backbone of coordinated, interconnected
U.S. regional ocean observing systems and linked to the international
Global Ocean Observing System. Local data-collecting systems, such as
the “My Sound”
project for Long Island Sound, would tie into the IOOS through the Northeast
region. The IOOS network would significantly enhance our ability to observe,
monitor and forecast ocean conditions, generating numerous economic and
environmental benefits.
One goal for IOOS is to have observing
systems that operate continuously, rather than intermittently, as is largely
the case now. One way to address this is for NOAA to take over the operation
of a satellite after NASA completes a project, so that valuable data streams
can be maintained. These data can be used in innumerable ways to protect
public health and safety alone. For example, the U.S. Coast Guard could
use real-time data on wind and currents to predict where a life raft might
drift from a disabled or sunken ship, to make the search and rescue mission
more efficient.
The USCOP estimates that start-up costs for IOOS alone would approach
$138 million. By 2010, it may cost about $650 million annually to fully
maintain the operational network. It sounds like a lot of money, but this
network could save the U.S. an estimated $1 billion per year in “enhanced
weather forecasts, improved resource management, and safer, more effective
marine transportation”.
Still, just having the means to collect
large quantities of data continuously is not enough. People need quick
and easy access to the data in the form of timely, useful, and relevant
information products, in order to facilitate informed decision-making.
Turning streams of data into these products necessitates planning, collaboration,
and cooperation among federal agencies, academics, and the private sector,
otherwise the IOOS will not be the beneficial tool it has the enormous
potential to be.
Educate, Educate,
Educate
If you polled a sample of people in a coastal community about the ocean,
you would find that they appreciate the ocean or coast for a variety of
reasons. It soothes, relaxes, and rejuvenates. It provides entertainment
through body surfing, sandcastle building, shell collecting, fishing,
and birding. It provides livelihoods, transportation, food. But it takes
a report like this one to help us more fully understand just how connected
our lives are to the oceans, whether we live in sight of it or 1,000 miles
away. It is to our mutual benefit that we take steps as a nation to ensure
that those making decisions that affect our coasts, oceans, and their
watersheds do so in as informed a manner as possible, having access to
and making use of good science. Further, it is to our benefit as a nation
that a stewardship ethic be nurtured and encouraged in all citizens, young
and old. This requires education. The USCOP strongly recommends that ocean
science be fully integrated into the standard science curricula of our
nation’s K-12 schools, universities, and colleges, to foster a future
generation of marine resource managers, ocean scientists, and environmental
stewards. Exciting and effective informal educational programs are needed
to awaken and develop the stewardship ethic among the broader adult public.
Ocean Policy
is International
The USCOP also looked at our national ocean policy in a global context.
They recommend that the U.S. accede to the United Nations Convention on
the Law of the Sea immediately. Why do they consider this step important?
For more than 200 years, the U.S. participated in the formation of customary
international ocean law, a set of uniformly applied rules that nations
accept as binding. In 1982, the United Nations Convention on the Law of
the Sea codified many of these longstanding laws. This ‘Constitution’
for the oceans “provides a comprehensive delineation of rights,
duties, and responsibilities of nations within the territorial sea, EEZ,
continental shelf, and high seas” (USCOP, 2004). Despite its earlier
role, however, the U.S. was not among the 145 parties to the Convention
in 1982, objecting to rules governing deep seabed mining in areas outside
national jurisdictions. Today, the U.S. is still not a party to the Convention,
even though most of the provisions we objected to were modified ten years
ago. It is hard to be a player if you are not a member of the team, and
that is the situation the U.S. is in. This very year, for the first time,
the Convention is open to amendment by its partners. The USCOP is concerned
that if we cannot participate in the 2004 Convention, we may lose this
important opportunity to ensure that our national interests as a maritime
power and coastal state are protected, and that if we do not join, our
ability to remain credible as a leader on global ocean issues is questionable.
Public Response
As stated earlier, the Final Draft Report was modified based on the comments
received from the Governors, tribal leaders, and interested stakeholders.
Broad support for the preliminary draft and its recommendations were expressed,
and most comments were generally favorable. For example, an excerpt from
the response submitted by former Connecticut Governor John Rowland states
“The Commission has rendered a vital service in drawing attention
to the significant challenges we face and in sounding a call to action
to protect the coastal and ocean resources, uses and values that are so
important to every coastal state and to the nation as a whole.”
Among the biggest concerns expressed related to funding issues, participation
of states, territories, and tribes in national policy development, and
the need for flexibility in the implementation of such policies. Many
of the comments emphasized the need for greater recognition of state responsibilities
for management of coastal resources, and for full funding of existing
programs before increasing responsibilities by adding new initiatives.
Cost, Timing,
and Action
After receiving the report, the President
is directed by the Oceans Act of 2000 to consider the recommendations
contained in it, consult with state and local governments, and other non-federal
stakeholders, and submit his response to Congress within 90 days. Congress,
too, is reviewing the report and beginning to take action. Members of
the U.S. House of Representatives recently introduced the Oceans Conservation,
Education, and National Strategy for the 21st Century Act, known as Oceans
21, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act, both
of which include provisions that address key findings and recommendations
of the USCOP. These actions are particularly encouraging given the timing
of the report—we are both at war and in an election year. All things
considered, the estimated price tag is high but not staggering. The USCOP
estimates that it will cost $1.5 billion to implement the recommendations
in the first year, rising to about $3.9 billion annually in subsequent
years. The Commissioners did identify a potential source of revenue to
support implementation. They recommend that the U.S. government establish
an Ocean Policy Trust Fund, supported with revenues from offshore oil
and gas development activities and other new and emerging offshore uses,
monies that currently go directly into the Treasury.
This far-reaching report is not easy
to summarize in a short article; you’ve only been given a taste
of the ‘nutmeats’ it contains. There are sections covering
sustainable fisheries, marine aquaculture, marine mammals, coral reefs,
coastal community development, natural hazards, and offshore energy resources,
that haven’t been touched upon. It is a good read, even if you just
skim through parts, and represents an enormous amount of effort by the
Commissioners and their staffs. As the “review phase" shifts
to the “action phase,” let’s hope that the momentum
the USCOP report has generated continues, and that appropriate and prompt
action is taken to address the shortcomings of our current ocean and coastal
policies by building a new policy that “balances use with sustainability,
is based on sound science and educational excellence, and moves toward
an ecosystem-based management approach” (USCOP, July 28, 2004 press
statement). This is our opportunity…carpe diem.
References
Preliminary Report by the U.S.
Commission on Ocean Policy, Governors’ Draft, Washington, D.C.,
April 2004.
http://www.oceancommission.gov
Editor's note: the Final USCOP Report was issued as this issue went to
press - same URL.
|
