coastal policies nrem 665 policy.pdf · 1. 6/15/2006: papahānaumokuākea marine national monument...

Wetland, Seagrass, Coral Reef, &Wetland, Seagrass, Coral Reef, & Coastal PoliciesNREM 665

I. Wetland PolicyyA. 1850s -- U.S. Swamp Land Acts

B. 1899 -- Rivers & Harbors Act (RHA)

1. Transfer federal land to states w/ stipulation of drainage

1. Requires approval by War Secretary for all construction & deposition of refuse into navigable H Os

B. 1899 Rivers & Harbors Act (RHA)

& deposition of refuse into navigable H2Os

2

C. 1969 -- National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

1. Required ACoE, still operating under RHA, to consider env. impacts on proposed dvpmts

EIS F d i i i ff i li f EISa. EIS on Fed. activities affecting env., applicant pays for EIS, states followed

b 5 options for mitigation:b. 5 options for mitigation:

3

D. 1971 -- Ramsar Convention

1. International conf. in Ramsar, Iran

2. Treaty provides framework for WTL, SGB, CR protection

3.

4

6

E. 1972 -- Clean Water Act, Section 404 Program

1. Primary vehicle for WTL protection in US

2. Dredging & filling “waters of the US” requires a permit from ACoE

3. Process involves a sequence of avoidance, minimization, iti timitigation

a. If WTL destroyed it must be

7

CWA S iUSFWS

CWA Section 404

NMFSEPA

Developer ACoE

DenyImpact to Wetland

404 Permit

Deny

Modify

Compensatory Wetland MitigationDelineation

8

F. 1973 -- Endangered Spp. Act

1 Applies to various wetland flora & fauna1. Applies to various wetland flora & fauna

9

G. 1977 -- Executive Orders of Pres. Carter

1 O 11990 f1. EO 11990: Protection of WTLs a. Requires Fed agencies too consider WTL protection as important policy

2. EO 11988: Floodplain Mgmt a. Requires Fed agencies to avoid activity in the FP whenever possibleFP whenever possible

H. 1985 -- Swampbuster

1. Fed subsidies denied to farmers that convert WTLs to ag after 1985

I. 1988 -- No Net Loss Policy

1. Pres. G.H.W. Bush endorsed idea of “no net loss” f WTLof WTLs

2. 10

J. 1970s-90s: Supreme Court Cases/Precedents

1. 1977 NRDC vs Calloway: 404 doesn’t just apply to navigable H2Os, but all H2Os of U.S.

2. 1983 Avoyelles Sportsman vs Marsh: Land clearing for agviolates 404 if leveling or substantial earth moving occurs

3. 1985 U.S. vs Riverside Bayview Homes: Court upholds broad interp. of ACoE def. of WTLs that included areas saturated by GW & SW

4. 1998-2000 U.S. vs SWANCC (Solid Waste Authority of Northern Cook County, IL)

a 404 doesn’t cover waters in abandoned sand & gravel pits &a. 404 doesn t cover waters in abandoned sand & gravel pits & other isolated WTLs of U.S.

b.

11

II. Seagrass PolicyA. 1899 RHA, 1969 NEPA, 1977 CWA apply to SGs

B. Despite pandemic decline of Zoostera (eelgrass) in p p ( g )1930s, no policies developed

1.

C. 1970s: Advent of SCUBA lead to ↑ in study & it i f SGBmonitoring of SGBs

D. 1st International Seagrass Workshop, Leiden, Holland 1973Holland, 1973

1.

12

E. Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) include SGs

1. 1975 GBR Marine Park MPA protects as much as 40,000 km2 of SGBs

2. FL Keys NMS protects SGBs of FL, other NMS & NERRs protect SGBs

QF. 1994 Queensland Fisheries Act

1. Allows for destruction/damage of SGs only when permit has b d & i dbeen assessed & issued

2. Permitted impacts involve avoidance &/or mitigation

3. Violations involve fines & mandated restoration

13

G. Endangered Species Act & SGs

1. Halophila johnsonii listed as Threatened 9/14/1998

2. Critical habitat designated 4/5/20002. Critical habitat designated 4/5/2000

3. Recovery plan published on 10/4/2002

H. 1999 Southern CA Eelgrass Mitigation Policy

1. Invoked after attempts @ avoidance & minimization, part of larger no net loss policy

I. SGs as Indicators

1. SGs currently used as 1 of 5 sensitive indicators of pollution

14

III. Coral Reef PolicyA. 1899 RHA, 1969 NEPA, 1973 ESA, 1977 CWA, all apply to CRs

B 1906 -- Antiquities ActB. 1906 -- Antiquities Act

1. Pres. can designate sites of hist./sci. interest as Nat. Monuments

2. Used by Pres. Clinton to est. Virgin Island Coral Reef National Monument & expand Buck Island Reef National Monument

a.

15

16

17

C. 1972 -- Marine Protection, Reserve, & Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA)

1. Designed to create & manage national marine sanct. in U.S.

2. Current Sanctuaries: Fagatele Bay (Am Samoa), Hawaiian I l d H b k Wh l G ’ R f (GA) Fl id K (FL)Islands Humback Whale, Gray’s Reef (GA), Florida Keys (FL), Flower Garden Banks (TX), Channel Islands (CA), Monterey Bay (CA), Gulf of Farallones (CA), Cordell Bank (CA), Olympic Coast (WA) Thunder Bay (MI) Stellwagen Bank (MA) Monitor (VA/NC)(WA), Thunder Bay (MI), Stellwagen Bank (MA), Monitor (VA/NC)

3. Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument dedicated 5/2/20075/2/2007

18

Locations of U.S. National Marine Sanctuaries

19

D. 1975 -- Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES) of Wild Fauna & Flora

1. International convention, 160 nations, 130 spp of coral listed

G f GE. 1975 -- Gov’t of Australia establishes GBR MPA

1. Goal of GBR Marine Park Authority:

“provide protection, wise use, understanding of GBR in perpetuity thru dvp & care of GBR Marine Park”

20

21

F. Various countries developed MPAs

1. 2003: 4,116 marine protected areas (Spalding et al. 2003)

G. 1982 -- United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)

1 Signed by 157 nations involves preservation of marine env1. Signed by 157 nations, involves preservation of marine env., conservation of marine spp, pollution reduction

H. 1996 -- Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Cons. & Mgmt Act

1. Affects CRs thru fisheries mgmt councils1. Affects CRs thru fisheries mgmt councils

2. Initially authorized mgmt based on single spp., reauthorized in 2006 w/ more EBM approach

22

I. 1998 -- Clinton Exec. Order 13089 CR Protection

1. Requires all Fed agencies to ensure, w/ some exceptions, their actions will not degrade CRsexceptions, their actions will not degrade CRs

2. Established US Coral Reef Task Force (CRTF)

Ch i d b S f C & I t 7 G & P FSMa. Chaired by Sec. of Comm. & Int., 7 Governors, & Pres. FSM, Rep. of Palau, etc.

b Responsibilities: (i) map & monitor all U S CRs; (ii) researchb. Responsibilities: (i) map & monitor all U.S. CRs; (ii) research causes of, & solutions for CR degradation; (iii) reduce & mitigate CR degr from pollution & overfishing; (iv) implement strategies to promote conservation & sustainable use of CRs internationallypromote conservation & sustainable use of CRs internationally

3. Takes complaints from public who feel Feds violate order

23

a. Puerto Rico vs Rumsfeld 2001

24

J. 2000 -- Clinton Exec. Order 13158 on MPAs

1. Places responsibility for developing national system of MPAs w/ DoI & DoC

25

K. 2000s: Era of the Massive MPA

1 6/15/2006: Papahānaumokuākea Marine1. 6/15/2006: Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument (MNM) est. by Pres. Bushproclamation (363,000 km2)

2. 1/28/2008: Republic of Kiribati expands Phoenix Islands Protected Area (PIPA) to 410,500 km2

3. 1/8/2009 Bush est. 3 MNMs in Pacific (Mariana Trench, Pacific Remote Islands,

2Rose Atoll; ~300,000 km2)

4. 4/2/2010 U.K. est. Chagos Island MPA south of India (544 000 km2)south of India (544,000 km2)

5. 7/10 Papahānaumokuākea MNM becomes UNESCO World Heritage SiteUNESCO World Heritage Site

26

IV. Coastal Zone PolicyA. Coastal Zone Mgmt

1. 1972 Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)

a. Estab. voluntary program w/ fed assistance to states that develop mgmt programs for CZs

b.

2 Many of world’s 123 coastal countries now have CZM plans2. Many of world s 123 coastal countries now have CZM plans

3. 1993 World Coastal Conference in Netherlands

a. Integrated Coastal Zone Mgmt (ICZM) concept emerges

b. World Bank pub. suggests

27

p gg

V. EIA = Env. Impact Assessment p

A. Aim is to prevent, reduce, or offset adverse impacts of each & every major development affecting the environmenteach & every major development affecting the environment, including the sea

B EIA i f l t id tif & di t i t fB. EIA is formal process to identify & predict env. impacts of a project, w/ a view towards mitigating adverse impacts

C. Required for oil rig construction & extraction, wind farm construction & operation, & aggregate extraction

1.

28

2. Hawaii EIS example

29

E. EIA ideally provides focus for individuals of society to f freview potential impacts of activity thru submissions from

public & gov’t bodies

F. EIA usu. involves multi-stage process:

1 Scoping: All potential impacts listed1. Scoping: All potential impacts listed2. Quantification: Magnitude of each impact assessed in relation to habitat3 R t P d ti Di i t d t bli3. Report Production: Disseminated to public4. Decision on Project: Accept or reject5. Development: If project approvedp p j pp6. Monitoring: If project approved

G

30

G.

VI. Ecolabelling

A. Consumer choice can have powerful influence on use of coastal/marine environment

1. Ex: boom in sales of “dolphin -friendly or “dolphin-safe” tuna when public saw 1st pictures of dolphin kills in purse seine net fisheries

31

B. Great Britain: Marine Conservation Society published “Good Fish Guide” to help consumers chose fish that come pfrom sustainably managed fisheries

32

C. Marine Stewardship Council assess & certifies fisheries as sustainablefisheries as sustainable

33