PARTNERSHIPS: The Growth of Collaborative Research at a Regional Level Series, Part 3: Interview with Sean Morton, Sanctuary Superintendent

Part 3 of a three-part series on the Tortugas Ecological Reserve, NOAA Ocean Science Blogger is pleased to sit down with Mr. Sean Morton, Superintendent of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) of NOAA’s Office of National Marine Sanctuaries.  As Superintendent, Sean is responsible for all aspects of management, operations, and policy implementation.  We’re pleased he could take a few moments to talk with us about the role of science for decision-making within a sanctuary and the dynamic role research plays for ongoing management of the FKNMS.

This series also includes Part 1 featuring an overview interview with NCCOS‘ Chris Jeffrey and Part 2 featuring ONMS’ Bob Leeworthy about socioeconomic research on this project. The NOAA announcement is available online.

Sean Morton

Guest Blogger Biography: Sean Morton has been the Superintendent of NOAA’s Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary since February 2009. Prior to his current position, Sean held several positions in NOAA including Management Plan Coordinator for the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, Program Analyst in the Office of the Director for National Marine Sanctuaries in Silver Spring, Maryland.  He has also worked in NOAA’s Program Coordination Office and as the Deputy Associate Director for Ocean and Coastal Policy at the White House Council on Environmental Quality.  From 1993 to 2001, Sean was a planner for the Santa Barbara County Planning and Development Department working on long-term coastal planning studies and offshore oil and gas permit review and compliance. Sean holds as Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics and Environmental Studies from the University of California, Santa Barbara and a Masters in Public Administration from American University in Washington DC.

Thank you for speaking with our readers, Mr. Morton
Pleasure to be here.

Here at NOAA, there are many offices focusing on a variety of ocean science.  Why do you feel NOAA’s Office of National Marine Sanctuaries and NOAA’s National Center for Coastal Ocean Science are good partners for projects like this?
Sanctuary sites conduct their own scientific research, but also rely on research from other parts of NOAA, including the NCCOS and the National Marine Fisheries Service. Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary manages the entire marine ecosystem, including numerous habitat types like seagrass beds, bank systems and coral reefs. Partnering with NCCOS and other science agencies allows us to leverage the scientific specialties of their researchers, that when integrated with our research help tell a complete story of ecosystem health.

What do you see as the role of research as it relates to management of a Sanctuary such as the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary?
Research is an absolute necessity for effective management, and here at Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary sound science informs all of our management decisions. The Florida Keys are one of the most widely studied marine areas in the world, and through long-term monitoring efforts like our Water Quality Protection Program we are able to document changes in environmental conditions and detect positive trends resulting from our management decisions.

Why is this report important to NOAA and the Sanctuary stakeholders and why do you feel NOAA’s NCCOS was a good fit for partnering with the NOAA’s ONMS for this effort?
It’s one thing to say “we think things are improving” and it’s a totally different thing to say “we know things are improving and we have the research to prove it.” Research reports such as this show our stakeholders that our decisions were wise, and that marine conservation and strong economies can coexist.

In your opinion, what do you find are the most compelling points of this report as a regional stakeholder?
Prior to the Tortugas Ecological Reserve designation, some stakeholders in the fishing communities were apprehensive of how the reserve might affect their business. This report shows that those fears were not realized; the reserve didn’t hurt their fishing businesses as they originally feared. There was no economic loss to commercial or recreational fishers, in fact in some instances like the reef fish fishery, the catches of those commercial fishers went up. Through research shared in in reports like this one, we also know that stakeholders outside the Florida Keys are also benefiting from the Tortugas Ecological Reserve, since fish larvae spawned there are carried through ocean currents and “seed” Florida Keys waters, and the east and west coasts of Florida, with fish.

I understand this initial project spurred additional efforts that have since continued in the region.  Can you tell readers a bit more about those?
By protecting Riley’s Hump with in the Tortugas Ecological Reserve, researchers have seen the reoccurrence of a mutton snapper spawning aggregation they had previously thought to have been wiped out by fishing. Emerging research has documented other spawning aggregation sites just outside the reserve’s boundaries which aren’t as well-protected. This research and the documented successes of Sanctuary management efforts have led to a call by many members of the public, scientific community and fishermen to duplicate the success achieved in the TER in other areas, and to protect additional spawning aggregations and other species.

How does the sanctuary plan to use the data from this report to inform decision-making within the sanctuary?
This research will help inform a review of sanctuary zones and regulations. Currently, our Sanctuary Advisory Council, along with extensive involvement from the public, is evaluating whether existing management strategies, including regulations and marine zones, are sufficient for addressing threats to marine resources, and if new or expanded protection strategies are warranted to better address these threats. The “Condition Report 2011 of Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary,” complemented by research reports such as this and stakeholder input, helped determine the goals and objectives, and priorities, of this review.

How has this study shaped future scientific research in the sanctuary? What do you consider to be future research needs of the sanctuary?
Studies like this demonstrate the need for both long-term monitoring of the ecosystem as well as the socioeconomic landscape. Our partners at Nova Southeastern University conduct annual rapid ecological assessments of habitat types and invertebrates throughout the Keys to provide a long-term picture of ecosystem health, both inside and outside of our marine zones. We support this important work through vessels, staff and trained science divers. Additional research with partners at NOAA Fisheries, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and University of Miami examines the population dynamics of reef fish inside and outside our Tortugas Ecological Reserve, and through acoustic telemetry studies their movements between those areas. Future research should continue to answer questions about management effectiveness in protecting marine ecosystems as well the economic livelihood of those than live in and enjoy the Florida Keys.

Where can readers find out more about this project?
This report is available on the NCCOS website. For details on the socioeconomic research in this report, visit ONMS’ website.

Visit the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary website to learn more about sanctuary marine zones at sanctuary science. 

Where can readers learn more about the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary?
Readers can visit our website, or become our fan on Facebook. If you happen to visit Key West, stop by the Florida Keys Eco-Discovery Center and learn about the wonders of the our natural and cultural resources.

PARTNERSHIPS: The Growth of Collaborative Research at a Regional Level Series, Part 2: Socioeconomics Focus with Dr. Bob Leeworthy

In an effort to show illustrate the role of economics in coastal and ocean resource conservation and management decision-making, NOAA Ocean Science Blogger sat down with Dr. Vernon (Bob) Leeworthy to talk about a study he conducted before and after the Tortugas Ecological Reserve closing from a economics perspective.

This is Part 2 of a three-part series on the Tortugas Ecological Reserve, Part 1 with the Dr. Chris Jeffrey (NOAA/NCCOS/CCMA/Biogeography Branch) provides an overview of the report and project while Part 3 is an interview featuring Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary‘s Superintendent, Sean Morton on the role of research within a Sanctuary. The NOAA announcement is available online.

Thanks for doing this interview, Dr. Leeworthy.
Thank you for inviting me.

How did NOAA’s NCCOS and ONMS come together to do this project? Please describe your role on this project.  How did it complement what NCCOS did?
This was the coming together of the physical, natural and socioeconomic science for the first time.  NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science had developed an integrated ecosystem assessment tool and NOAA’s Office of National Marine Sanctuaries was looking to build upon the monitoring it had already begun in the Tortugas region.  The timing was perfect to apply the NCCOS tool to the questions ONMS was looking to answer.  Would fishermen be socioeconomically impacted with limited access to the study area? 

Who were your partners in the project?
Of course, NCCOS and ONMS were partners on this project, but we also worked closely with fishermen, regional natural resource managers, and other regional stakeholders to ensure we were developing a balanced approach to conserving and supporting the Tortugas’ coastal economic resources.

Since much of what ONMS does is connected to the NMFS, we worked closely with them to ensure information was being shared, resulting in efficient use of NOAA resources to accomplish ONMS as well as NMFS priorities and mandates.

How did you and your partners develop the idea for this project?
As I said, ONMS had begun monitoring in the region and as we were looking to move forward to better understand the Tortugas resources, NCCOS was looking to apply its integrated ecosystem assessment tool on a broader scale.  Once we brought the idea to the fishing community and regional managers, it began to take on a life of its own, becoming a fluid and dynamic (and very effective) process of co-developing an approach that we were all happy to move forward with. 

What need were you hoping to fill by completing this project? And, how does your work address these needs?
We wanted to apply numbers and test assumptions we thought were in play for this region with real data and actual scenarios provided by the fishing and regional stakeholders.

We worked closely with NCCOS to engage with stakeholders to gather the important data on practices, focus areas and fish population dynamics.  Once I had that in hand, I began to drill down and look at the potential impacts of different activities.

What processes did you undergo to plan and carry out this work?
We did this through a series of open engagement workshops and meetings with panels, councils, state and federal partners.

From those discussions, ONMS took the surveys to identify key socioeconomic impacts and benefits of different real-time fishing and management activities taking place across the region.

At every stage of the process, all stakeholders were at the table to review results and tweak the process.  That close collaboration continued to happen through the entire 5 years of the project, which resulted in the report we co-published with Chris Jeffrey and his team at NCCOS.  There are several peer-reviewed journal publications in the pipeline for the coming year from both NCCOS and ONMS.

Were there any findings that surprised you or the partners?
First, that the fishermen did not supper socioeconomic loss as a result of the limited access to the study area and that there was a rebound in the first two years of the study!

On the science side, and the part that fascinates me, is that we discovered that two of our major assumptions 1) that there would be “opportunity costs” (losses) and 2) that all reef fish throughout the Florida Keys was overfished were both incorrect!

What are the future implications on this project to the region?
Since this project was completed several years ago, ONMS has already take this approach and applied it to the Sambos, and Channel Islands assessments.  We’ve also used this approach in the Morey’s project.

Stakeholders in St. Augustine, FL who saw this approach have expressed great interest in learning more about how it might be applied for balancing conservation and human use of their resources.

Are their plans for future work to be done on this topic?
Outside of those additional success stories, we are seeing that at least considering the two above assumptions in the process of management decision-making may be a necessary shift in how we look at answering these types of questions in other sanctuaries.

At the end of the day, the coordination between all the partners on this project along with ONMS and NMFS coordination on information-sharing proved the best tool for bringing about a broadly-supported plan in the region. 

Where can readers find out more about your results and work on this project?
To learn about the project check out Chris Jeffrey’s blog.  You can also download the report from the NCCOS website.  To learn more about other socioeconomic work ONMS is doing, visit my page.

Dr. Bob Leeworthy

Guest Blogger Biography: Dr. Vernon R. (Bob) Leeworthy is currently the Chief Economist for the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Ocean Service (NOS) located in Silver Spring, Maryland.  Dr. Leeworthy came to NOAA in 1985 as a National Sea Grant Fellow from Florida State University and was Leader of NOS’s Coastal and Ocean Resource Economics Program from 1986 to 2007.   Dr. Leeworthy designed and has been overseeing implementation the Socioeconomic Research and Monitoring Program for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary since 1998 and is currently working on expanding the social science capacity of the National Marine Sanctuary System. Click here to learn more about Dr. Leeworthy’s socio-economic research.

PARTNERSHIPS: The Growth of Collaborative Research at a Regional Level Series, Part 1: Overview with Dr. Chris Jeffrey

In an effort to give readers a sense of how research changes over time, building on historical approaches, informing future study directions, NOAA Ocean Science Blogger sat down with NOAA’s Dr. Chris Jeffrey of the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science‘ Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment, Biogeography Branch, to talk about one such project which took place in the Tortugas region off the coast of Florida. 

This is Part 1 of a three-part series on the Tortugas Ecological Reserve, Part 2 with NOAA’s Office of National Marine Sanctuaries‘ Dr. Bob Leeworthy covers the socioeconomic part of the project while Part 3 is an interview featuring Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary‘s Superintendent, Sean Morton on the role of research within a Sanctuary.

Thank you for speaking with our readers, Dr. Jeffrey.
Glad to be here!

Can you tell me briefly about the goal of this study?
The NOAA Tortugas Integrated Biogeographic Assessment presents an analysis of demographic changes in living resource populations, as well as societal and socioeconomic benefits that resulted from Tortugas Ecological Reserves during the first five years after their implementation. The NOAA announcement is here.

Who were the partners in the NOAA project?
Nearly two dozen scientists, researchers and managers contributed to this report. Partners include: NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, ONMS, National Marine Fisheries Service’s Southeast Fisheries Science Center (NMFS, SEFSC); University of Miami; and University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

What was the goal of the project?
The TER Integrated Assessment had two broad goals: 1) to determine if expected demographic changes such as increases in abundance, average size and spawning potential of exploited populations occurred in the Tortugas region after reserve implementation; and 2) to determine whether short-term economic losses occurred to fishers displaced by the reserve.

What needs were you hoping to fill by completing this project?
This was the first effort to provide a compendium of information for the Tortugas region through the synthesis of existing data on living resource distribution; analysis and interpretation of existing data to demonstrate the ecological effectiveness of marine reserves in reducing fishing mortality and increasing economic benefits of adjacent fisheries.

Islands and management zones of the Tortugas region, Florida Keys. The two sections of the reserve—Tortugas Ecological Reserve North and Tortugas Ecological Reserve South—are shown in the yellow-and- green-striped boxes. Map: C.F.G. Jeffrey.

How did you develop the idea for this project?
As the research capacity within NOAA’s National Ocean Service (NOS), NCCOS is responsible for supporting ocean research and conducting scientific investigations on coastal habitats and the interconnectivity between habitats and resources.  The goal of this assessment was to develop a case study to demonstrate how a biogeographic assessment approach could be used to determine the ecological and societal benefits of implementing reserves, thereby providing data to the regional management community about the effectiveness of various management approaches in meeting ecological and societal goals for resource management.

By engaging other NOAA programs and offices, state and federal agency, and academic researchers, we, as a team, designed an assessment that would meet regional stakeholder needs while leveraging cross-office, agency and sector talent and expertise.  That collaborative approach was both efficient as well as effective for meeting our shared goals for this assessment.

The coral reef ecosystems of the Tortugas Ecological Reserve support a diverse faunal assemblage.            Photo credit: NCCOS/CCFHR

What process did you follow to plan and carry out this work?
We coordinated with relevant scientists working in the Tortugas region as well as other NOS and NOAA programs to obtain data, conduct the analyses, and develop the final report over the course of several years.

Can you describe additional types of projects this assessment has led to since its completion and some broader applications of this approach?
Since its completion, the assessment has spurred additional monitoring and research as well as related projects at ONMS, NMFS, University of Miami and University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

ONMS continues to look at the economics of this region and NMFS continues to monitor fish populations. University of Miami and University of Massachusetts have continued field research and my NCCOS colleagues at the Center for Coastal Fisheries and Habitat Research (CCFHR) are planning to publish their fish acoustic results from this study next summer. This work is also informing a biogeographic assessment currently taking place, on a much broader scale, for the Florida Keys Reef tract.

The National Park Service also issued a report in 2012 talking about resources within the NPS boundaries.

Dr. Christopher Jeffrey

NCCOS Blogger Biography: Dr. Christopher F.G. Jeffrey is a CSS-Dynamac contract marine biologist with NCCOS‘ Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment, Biogeography Branch. Dr. Jeffrey is an ecologist with specialized expertise in coral reef ecosystem science, geospatial statistics, conservation biology, sustainable use of resources, and quantifying spatial [landscape] patterns in the distribution and occurrence of marine organisms. Dr. Jeffrey joined CCMA in 1999, where he is a currently a scientist with CCMA’s Biogeography Branch.  Prior to joining NOAA.  Chris earned his Ph.D. and M.S. degrees from the University of Georgia and a B.S. from the University of the U.S. Virgin Islands. Before emigrating to the U.S Virgin Islands in to attend college in 1989, Chris lived in the 133 square-mile tri-island state of Grenada, Carriacou, and Petit Martinique.

Coral Reef Conservation Milestone: Report Highlights 12 Years of NOAA U.S. Coral Reef Ecosystem Mapping Progress

By Alicia Clarke
Science writer and editor, Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment,
National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science

Since 2000, the National Ocean Service and partners have mapped and identified nearly three million acres – equivalent to 1.2 million football fields – of U.S. shallow water (approximately 0- to 90-feet deep) coral reef habitats in the Pacific Ocean, Atlantic Ocean and Caribbean Sea. Mapping is an essential first step in conserving coral reef ecosystems because they help to prioritize areas for further study and protection, as well as offer key information needed to evaluate changes in ecosystems over time.

A new report highlights the more than a decade of U.S. shallow-water coral reef ecosystem mapping work led by NCCOS, the Coral Reef Conservation Program and the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries. Photo credit: NCCOS

The results of this body of work are summarized in a new report released by the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), “National Summary of NOAA’s Shallow-water Benthic Habitat Mapping of U.S. Coral Reef Ecosystems.” This effort was led by a partnership between NCCOS, Coral Reef Conservation Program, the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries and the Coastal Services Center.

The scope of the report encompasses 10 areas of highly productive and diverse coral reef regions. Detailed information for each region has been previously published in reports on each island and/or jurisdiction. This document serves as a comprehensive summary of the previous studies and provides key information in a single report.

Since 2000, NOS and partners has mapped shallow-water coral reef ecosystems in U.S. states and territories around the globe. The maps are an essential first step in conserving these unique marine resources. Photo credit: NCCOS

The sea floor habitat maps have greatly enhanced efforts to preserve and manage coral reef ecosystems around the nation. Managers, scientists and decision makers have already relied upon theses tools for accomplishing critical tasks, such as evaluating the benefits of marine protected areas and developing plans to minimize impacts from growing human communities that depend on the ecological services provided by coral reefs (e.g., food).

With the publication of the national summary report, NOAA aims to further facilitate application of coral ecosystem mapping data in order to preserve, sustain and restore valuable coral reef ecosystems for future generations.

To learn more about this and other NCCOS sea floor mapping efforts or to download a copy of the report, visit our Coral Reef and Seagrass Ecosystems page. To request a hard copy of the document, e-mail Alicia.Clarke@noaa.gov

Related Information 

• http://coralreef.noaa.gov/aboutcrcp/news/featuredstories/jan13/

New England Offshore Areas will Reopen for Atlantic Surfclam and Ocean Quahog Fishing Following NOAA Supported Research

NOAA Ocean Science Blog discussed with Dr. Quay Dortch from NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research, to talk about the recent news of the opening of New England’s Surfclam fisheryand how ECOHAB research contributed to the opening.

What is the protocol and how has it contributed to the recently announced opening of Georges Bank shellfish harvesting?

First it is necessary to give some background about shellfish harvesting on Georges Bank.

The Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank sometimes experience blooms of Alexandrium fundyense, the New England red tide.  This algal species produces a suite of potent neurotoxins that can accumulate in shellfish.  If humans consume toxic shellfish they may become sick or die of Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning (PSP).  In near shore waters where states have jurisdiction, each state has a monitoring program that tests for toxicity in shellfish.  When toxicity exceeds the FDA regulatory action level, shellfish beds are closed for harvesting by the state to protect public health (MA, NH, ME).

When PSP toxins were found in shellfish from federal waters of the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank, shellfish harvesting was banned in 1990 because these resources are too remote and cover too wide an area for routine monitoring.  Surf clams and ocean quahogs support a multimillion-dollar fishery on the east coast but, as clam stocks have decreased in areas to the south where Alexandrium blooms do not occur, interest in harvesting clams from these closed areas has increased.  The shipboard screening/dockside testing protocol was developed and tested in a pilot program to solve the monitoring problem.

During the pilot program, that was part of the GOMTOX: Dynamics of Alexandrium fundyense distributions in the Gulf of Maine project and led by FDA researchers, fishermen were trained to use toxin screening methods on the boat.  Before harvesting, they did test trawls and screened shellfish for toxins.  If toxin levels were below the regulatory threshold, harvesting proceeded.  When the ships came back to port, the shellfish were tested at NSSP-approved labs to ensure safety and then the product could be sold.  Data were collected for a number of years comparing the quick screening tests with the lab-based tests to make sure the quick tests performed adequately.  Once the efficacy of the method had been documented, the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Commission  (ISSC) approved the method and FDA concurred.

Many shellfish samples were collected during the pilot program and NCCOS funded additional shellfish sampling in the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank, through the GOMTOX project.   In general, PSP-toxin levels were low during the entire period.  Thus, the risk of PSP from consuming shellfish from federal waters is low, and the testing protocol will be used to keep toxic shellfish out of the food supply if toxicity does occur.

As a consequence of the approval of the testing protocol by the ISSC and the availability of data indicating low toxicity in shellfish from Georges Bank, the Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council requested that NMFS open an area on Georges Bank to shellfish harvesting, under authority provided by the Magnunson-Stevens Act.  NMFS published the proposed new rule in the federal register and after a comment period, has now published the interim final rule, opening shellfish harvesting in January, 2013.

 Who were the partners/stakeholders involved in this effort?

Although the large GOMTOX project had many partners, the main partners/stakeholders in this part of the project are the clam fishing industry and the two U.S. agencies that have joint responsibility for insuring the safety of seafood harvested from federal waters, the Food and Drug Administration and NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS).

The fishing industry has been so interested in developing methods of safely harvesting shellfish from Georges Bank that they participated with academic researchers and the FDA in writing the proposal for the GOMTOX project that was submitted to ECOHAB.  Early in the GOMTOX project, the fishermen were trained in the use of several quick tests, which they then used in the pilot project testing the protocol.  After the development of the protocol the Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Council requested the opening of Georges Bank, using the protocol so that this large, untapped resource could be safely harvested.

Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, FDA and NMFS share responsibility for regulating seafood from offshore federal waters.   Consequently, FDA scientists led the effort to test the shipboard screening/dockside testing protocol with support both from the NOAA GOMTOX project and also considerable in kind support from FDA.

What is the GOMTOX project?

The GOMTOX project is a large regional, ecosystem study ($9M over 7 years) with many goals.  The primary purpose is to understand the growth and toxicity of Alexandrium in the Gulf of Mainein order to better predict blooms and shellfish toxicity and to develop better monitoring methods.  In addition to the shipboard screening/dockside testing protocol, the project has also yielded the development of predictive models for A. fundyense blooms.   Such models are used to provide HAB forecasts, similar to weather forecasts.  Since 2008 project investigators have provided state shellfish and public health managers with seasonal outlooks of bloom severity and weekly forecasts of bloom intensity and location.  The most recent forecast in 2012 predicted a moderate red tide.  Such forecasts are used to plan for the upcoming year and to improve monitoring to protect public health and minimize economic impacts.

The GOMTOX project was funded by the Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms (ECOHAB) Program, which is a national, competitive program that funds research to understand the causes and impacts of Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) in order to improve HAB response and management.  ECOHAB and the related Monitoring and Event Response for Harmful Algal Blooms (MERHAB) Program and the Prevention, Control and Mitigation of Harmful Algal Blooms (PCMHAB) Program are housed in the NCCOS Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research (CSCOR) and are authorized by the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act (HABHRCA).

The GOMTOX project built on earlier ECOHAB and MERHAB projects, funded since 1997, that investigated Alexandrium distributions in the Gulf, and built and tested the first Alexandrium models.  Other studies investigated the distribution and transport of the seed-like cysts of Alexandrium that are responsible for the initiation of blooms every spring

Will NCCOS continue research on Alexandrium in the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank?

The GOMTOX project is winding down, but the work is being continued through three new, competitive projects and collaborations with NCCOS scientists.

·         Forecasting Alexandrium blooms will be operationalized within NOAA, like a weather forecast, through a PCMHAB project “Implementation of an Operational Model for Prediction of Alexandrium fundsyense Blooms in the Gulf of Maine.”  Partners include Dr. Rick Stumpf of the NCCOS Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment (CCMA),  Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services (COOPs), Coastal Survey Development Lab (CSDL), and, academics, federal and state resource managers, industry and the regional Ocean Observing System, NERACOOS.

·         Improve the ability to monitor for Alexandrium cells and toxins in the Gulf of Maine through the deployment of Environmental Sample Processors (ESP).  ESPs can provide on-site (in situ) collection and analysis of cells or toxins in water samples from the subsurface ocean.

• MERHAB:   Incorporation of Environmental Sample Processor Technology into Gulf of Maine HAB Monitoring and Management
• PCM HAB: Environmental Sample Processor (ESP) Development: Targeting Cost Reductions, Robustness and an Improved User Interface
• Dr. Greg Doucette, of the NCCOS Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular Research (CCEHBR), is developing a PSP-toxin sensor module for the Environmental Sample Processor (ESP).

Where can readers learn more about this topic?

For more information on the Shipboard Screening/Dockside Testing Protocol

or to learn more about the NCCOS programs involved with this effort, readers can follow links to the Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms (ECOHAB) Program  and

GOMTOX (ECOHAB project)

For more information on the study area, readers can see a map of closed areas in Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank

I’ve also provided some links to Red tides in the Gulf of Maine

Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning

and Federal Register Notice Describing Interim Final Rule for folks interested in additional information.

Coastal Economies: Researching Aquaculture for Nutrient Mitigation in Long Island Sound

NOAA Ocean Science Blog sat down with Dr. Suzanne Bricker of NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment (CCMA), Coastal Ocean Assessments, Status, and Trends (COAST Branch), to talk about her research to leverage aquaculture as a potential means for mitigating nutrient impacts on Long Island Sound.

Thank you for sitting down with us, Dr. Bricker.
Its great to be here.

How did the project come into existence?
The Long Island Sound Study’s EPA Regional Ecosystem Services Program is re-evaluating the region’s Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) and Nutrient Trading Programs (TMDL/Nutrient Trading Program), and is trying to determine if aquaculture farmers should be included into that program. The goal of this study is to evaluate the significance of nutrient removal by shellfish aquaculture in Long Island Sound, and also Great Bay, NH since EPA region 1 is also involved in the program.

Who are the partners in this project? What roles do they play?
This project is being undertaken across a broad variety of partners from the federal, state, private sector, and non-profit sectors. NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Longline Environment, Ltd., Shellfish Environment Services, and HydroQual Inc., will be leading project design, execution, and application of the FARM  and SWEM models . The economic modeling phase will be led by Northern Economics, Inc., and Shellfish Environment Services. Finally, the collection and sharing of data will be led by the NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service’s Northeast Fisheries Science Center, the EPA Long Island Sound Office, and New Hampshire’s Department of Environmental Services.

What is the project design?
This diagram shows the project design better than I could describe, it is a modeling exercise informed by experimental research results and other experts. This was part of a presentation,”Shellfish aquaculture and eutrophication reduction in Long Island Sound,” presented at the National Shellfish Association in Baltimore on March 30, 2011 in a session called,” Carrying Capacity, Modeling, Ecosystem services.”

The Farm Model applied to Long Island Sound.  Image Credit: NOAA/NCCOS/CCMA/COAST Branch

What are the economic benefits that are possible through this project?
Aquaculture farmers  may be able increase their income, and the number of aquaculture jobs in the region may potentially increase from money that would otherwise be paid for waste-water treatment. Another economic benefit is that there may potentially be more aquaculture facilities, therefore increasing the amount of shellfish available for consumption within the state as well as supporting potential inter-state commerce.

What are the larger implications/ benefits of this project?
One of the objectives of this research project is to assess the potential to use shellfish aquaculture as a nutrient management measure that is complementary to traditional management measures. This approach is designed to be applicable, with minor adjustments, to other water bodies such that the significance of shellfish aquaculture can be evaluated and put into operation. This could be another option for states looking to decrease nutrient runoff to their bays and increasing coastal economies through aquaculture.

Dr. Suzanne Bricker

NCCOS Blogger Biography: Suzanne Bricker is a physical scientist with NCCOS and manager of NOAA’s National Estuarine Eutrophication Assessment (NEEA).  Her main responsibilities include research on nutrient-related water quality problems in coastal areas and finding solutions for these challenges. She was the lead scientist for the U.S. NEEA study, which provided an integrated framework for eutrophication assessment, and carried out a comprehensive overview of 138 estuaries in the U.S.

Ocean Discoveries: Predicting Mesophotic Coral Distributions in Hawaii Blog Series, Part 2 – A Word with Dr. Malia Chow, Superintendent of NOAA’s HIHWNMS

Dr. Malia Chow, Superintendent of NOAA’s HIHWNMS

Dr. Malia Chow is the Superintendent of NOAA’s Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary (sanctuary), a role that necessitates experience working with stakeholders, researchers and government officials, etc. on varying levels. What readers might not know is that Malia also holds a Ph.D. in molecular and cellular biology from the University of Pennsylvania and did her post-doctoral fellowship with University of Maryland’s Center for Marine Biotechnology, giving her a great understanding and appreciation of laboratory and field research. I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention that she’s also a former academic researcher with University of Hawai‘i’s Hawai‘i Institute of Marine Biology. She has also worked hand-in-hand with local communities and government officials to tackle marine management and stewardship issues across the Pacific through training and skills development activities, which has given her incredible insight into collaboration and team work.  Needless to say, NOAA’s Coastal and Ocean Science Blog was excited when Dr. Chow agreed to speak with us about a recently-completed Hawai‘i coral mapping study published by researchers from the Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment at NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) in partnership with the sanctuary and other stakeholders across the region and NOAA. 

Thank you for sitting down with us, Dr. Chow.
Thank you for inviting me to meet your readers.

What was the impetus for the “Modeling Mesophotic Coral Distributions in the Au’au Channel, Hawaii” report?
The sanctuary is currently undergoing a review of its management plan. As part of the review process, the sanctuary held a scoping period during which sanctuary users, members of the public and agencies had opportunities to comment on current sanctuary management strategies and allowed stakeholders to provide input on what issues and problems they see as management priorities for the sanctuary. It was during that process that several leading scientists provided letters identifying the unique features of mesophotic corals and the urgent need for their protection in the Main Hawaiian Islands. In response to those letters, the sanctuary looked for ways to gather more information.

What made NCCOS scientists a good choice for the project?
The Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment (CCMA) at NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Research (NCCOS) was the best choice for this project because their scientists are able to conduct field observations on a regional and national scale. They are also very good at synthesizing the best available scientific information for resource managers.

Map of Hawaiian Islands with Sanctuary boundary in red. Image Credit: NOAA/HIHWNMS

How did the sanctuary coordinate with NCCOS scientists to design the scope and goals of this effort?
Sanctuary staff reached out to NCCOS to develop a study for evaluating existing survey data and map additional existing mesophotic coral beds which we lacked data on within the Maui Nui complex area. There was significant interaction between NCCOS and sanctuary researchers to define the scope and goals of this effort and to identify key scientists who had collected the existing data.

Who were the other partners besides NCCOS who collaborated on this report?
NOAA Fisheries Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center Coral Reef Ecosystem Division and Protected Species Division, the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources and US Fish and Wildlife also collaborated on this effort.

How did you strike a balance between resource conservation and local stakeholder needs inside the sanctuary?
As the sanctuary considers protecting and conserving additional natural and cultural resources of national significance under the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (Act), there has been considerable engagement with various stakeholder groups. Sanctuary management will continue to facilitate multiple uses within the sanctuary that are consistent with the primary purpose of resource protection defined by the Act.

How does the sanctuary plan to use the data from this recent report to inform decision-making within the sanctuary?
This report will be used to understand the distribution and abundance of mesophotic corals in the Main Hawaiian Islands and their associated threats, and to assess whether additional management action is warranted for their protection and conservation.

How will this study shape future scientific research in the sanctuary? Outside of mesophotic corals, what additional needs does the sanctuary foresee wanting to address in the way of research for meeting its management and conservation goals?
The sanctuary is considering a wide range of both natural and cultural resources for possible inclusion in the sanctuary. A proposal for inclusion will be completed as part of the sanctuary’s management plan review process. The results of this study will inform the decision as to whether mesophotic corals should be included in the sanctuary and will likely direct future research in the sanctuary. A draft proposal will be made available for comment before the proposal is final.  We expect to have a draft to share with the public towards the end of 2013.

Where can readers find out more about this project?
Readers can visit the NCCOS website to see the final report or visit Bryan Costa’s blog post to learn more about this project.

Where can readers learn more about the Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary?
Please visit our website to learn more about the Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary.