Incorporating Ecosystem-based Management into Washington State Marine Resource Management

Transcription

1 To: Michele K. Culver, WDFW From: Ruth Howell Date: February 21, 2006 Re: Policy Memo: Ecosystem-based Management Incorporating Ecosystem-based Management into Washington State Marine Resource Management Background: Ecosystem-based management (EBM) is emerging as a promising new approach to managing coastal resources. There are many working definitions of ecosystem-based management. The Scientific Consensus Statement on Marine Ecosystem-based Management (published March 21, 2005) describes EBM in the following manner: Ecosystem-based management is an integrated approach to management that considers the entire ecosystem, including humans. The goal of ecosystem-based management is to maintain an ecosystem in a healthy, productive and resilient condition so that it can provide the services humans want and need. Ecosystem-based management differs from current approaches that usually focus on a single species, sector, activity or concern; it considers the cumulative impacts of different sectors. Specifically, ecosystem-based management: emphasizes the protection of ecosystem structure, functioning, and key processes; is place-based in focusing on a specific ecosystem and the range of activities affecting it; explicitly accounts for the interconnectedness within systems, recognizing the importance of interactions between many target species or key services and other non-target species; acknowledges interconnectedness among systems, such as between air, land and sea; and integrates ecological, social, economic, and institutional perspectives, recognizing their strong interdependences. Fluharty (2005) defines the ecosystem approach to management simply and pragmatically as using what is known about the ecosystem to manage fisheries. Ecosystem-based resource management can and should complement existing approaches to resource management by incorporating additional information about ecosystem processes into management schemes resulting in increased abundance of over-harvested fish stocks and increased economic stability of fisheries (EPAP, 1999). In addition to the potential for better management of capture and aquaculture fisheries, there has been considerable political momentum to employ an EBM approach for management of all coastal resources. In 2004 the US Commission on Ocean Policy Report identified Ecosystem-based management as one of the guiding principles for comprehensive national ocean policy. It recommended that, U.S. ocean and coastal resources should be managed to reflect the relationships among all ecosystem components, including humans and nonhuman species and the environments in which they live (USCOP, 2004). NOAA, as the lead federal agency to implement EBM, has developed an Ecosystem Goal Team which has created a vision, goals, strategies, and outcomes (Dunnigan, 2006) for EBM. Figure 1 contrasts current NOAA management approaches with the new ecosystem approach.

2 Figure 1: NOAA s comparison of current mandated management approaches with ecosystem-based approaches to management Internationally EBM is also a key component of the U.N. agreement on Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks, the US Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and the Plan of Implementation from the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Babcock and Pikitch, 2004). Washington State joins other coastal states, nations, and international bodies in evaluating ways to employ ecosystembased management approaches to coastal resource management. Several management tools have been identified as potentially effective for incorporating ecosystem knowledge into resource management. These include marine zoning, marine protected areas, fishery ecosystem plans, and comprehensive modeling of ecosystems incorporating the human dimension (EPAP, 1999). Community-based ecosystem based management processes such as the San Juan County Marine Stewardship Area Initiative also offer promising ways to comprehensively manage local resources and build local support (SJC). Washington State has already demonstrated leadership in communitybased resource management and it is an area with many opportunities for success. These tools and others must be evaluated for their usefulness in applying EBM. Problem: Washington State lacks a specific ecosystem-based strategy or process (legislated or otherwise) for managing its marine resources. Such a strategy would improve the effectiveness of Washington State s marine resource management through evaluation of ecosystem processes and functions, thus allowing for implementation of management measures based on ecosystem knowledge and specifically designed to achieve the management goal.

3 Ecosystem-based management is a relatively new term and there is some debate about what it means and how to apply it. The effectiveness of using traditional single species management of marine resources to achieve sustainable marine wildlife and habitats and single sector-based management of coastal activities has also been the subject of much discussion. Management of marine resources such as fish, shellfish, seabirds, and habitats has been viewed as fragmented, failing to take into account critical ecosystem variables. Proponents of ecosystem-based management believe that understanding the relationships between all members and activities within the ecosystem, including the human dimension, would significantly improve the effectiveness of marine management measures. Currently there is no explicit treatment of ecosystem-based management in Washington State law, primarily because the state s jurisdiction is limited and collaboration among the state agencies, federal agencies, and tribes is critical to truly achieving ecosystem-based management. Several laws incorporate ecosystem knowledge into management of marine resources but do not specifically call for ecosystem-based management (i.e. Shoreline Management Act WAC 173, Water Quality Standards WAC , Best Available Science WAC , and Ecosystem Standards WAC ). The Shoreline Management Act (WAC ) defines Ecological functions and Ecosystem-wide processes which should be taken into account when developing a working definition for Ecosystembased Management : "Ecological functions" or "shoreline functions" means the work performed or role played by the physical, chemical, and biological processes that contribute to the maintenance of the aquatic and terrestrial environments that constitute the shoreline's natural ecosystem. See WAC (2)(c). "Ecosystem-wide processes" means the suite of naturally occurring physical and geologic processes of erosion, transport, and deposition; and specific chemical processes that shape landforms within a specific shoreline ecosystem and determine both the types of habitat and the associated ecological functions. It can also be interpreted that the Shoreline Management Act already incorporates ecosystem based management principles by requiring shoreline master programs to address and maintain important ecological functions (WAC ). The RCW section on Land Leases (RCW ) includes designation of terrestrial-based ecosystem standards which also may help inform incorporation of ecosystem principles into marine management. Successful ecosystem-based management will require coordination and integration of state, tribal, and federal agencies and management practices which have traditionally operated in isolation. Following is an overview of coastal activity sectors which coexist in the Washington state marine ecosystem and the management structure for each. It should be noted that the concept of applying EBM to fisheries management is more fully

4 developed than its application to other sectors. This is because fisheries management itself is well established and has more to gain from incorporating ecosystem considerations than do the other activity sectors. To derive the full benefit of EBM, Washington State should evaluate in a future policy memo how EBM should be applied to the management of all activity sectors included here. Fisheries Management The Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) has a biennial management process for groundfish whereby the groundfish stock assessments are conducted during oddnumbered years; the results of the assessments are then considered for use in managing fisheries for the next two-year management cycle (e.g., stock assessments done in 2005 are considered for use in managing fisheries for 2007 and 2008). The stock assessments through the PFMC process have been focused on single stocks, with little regard to ecosystem parameters, with the exception of sablefish. The recent sablefish stock assessments (2003 and 2005) have included environmental factors in the recruitment models. The Stock Assessment Review Workshop, sponsored by the National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest Fisheries Science Center and PFMC, which convened in mid-january 2006, included a brief discussion about ecosystem-based management. However, the lack of data continues to be the limiting factor. Many of the single species stock assessments are considered data poor and, while environmental and oceanographic data are available, the relationship between those factors and the groundfish stocks is relatively unknown. However, there appeared to be a general consensus regarding the need to move toward ecosystem-based management as much as possible. PFMC has made progress over the past year in identifying and protecting ecologically sensitive areas. In June 2005, PFMC adopted measures to close a series of large-scale areas to bottom trawling off the West Coast, as well as additional measures to protect groundfish essential fish habitat. While these measures were directed toward groundfish habitat, there will likely be benefits to other benthic species as well as overall ecosystem benefits resulting from this action. At the 14 th Western Groundfish Conference held in late January 2006, information on fish-habitat relationships and the results of recent and ongoing research off Alaska, British Columbia, and the West Coast were shared and discussed. There has been much effort recently, and additional are projects planned, to further develop the information database on ecological functions and relationships. As co-managers of Washington State natural resources, tribes are integral to management of the state s natural marine resources. The Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission (NWIFC) manages its fish stocks in a similar single-species manner as PFMC, outlined above. NWIFC does include natural ecosystem considerations in its management decisions, particularly with regard to species and habitat recovery programs. These recovery programs include inventory, monitoring, and assessment of habitats and species such as the Salmon and Steelhead Habitat Inventory and Assessment Project, the Skagit

5 River System Cooperative restoration project, and publication of The State of Our Watersheds Report (NWIFC). Marine Commerce and Transportation The marine commerce and transportation industry utilizes the coastal waters of Washington State as an important marine highway for shipping goods to domestic ports south and international ports in Asia and elsewhere. This activity has the potential to impact coastal ecosystems by water quality degradation from oily waste discharge and marine debris, increased marine noise levels, and invasive species introductions from ballast water exchange. These environmental effects of marine commerce and transportation activities are currently regulated by a multitude of federal laws and regulations such as the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), the National Invasive Species Act, the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, and the Oil Pollution Act. The Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary has designated an Area To Be Avoided recognized by the International Maritime Organization. This area is designed to protect sanctuary and ecosystem resources from potential negative impacts of vessel traffic ( The environmental effects of marine commerce and transportation activities occurring in Washington State s marine ecosystem should be considered when developing management strategies based upon ecosystem principles. Any governance structures, policy procedures, or laws created to implement ecosystem-based coastal management must include the needs and impacts of marine commerce and transportation. Coastal Development and Upland Activities As coastal communities along Washington State s outer coast expand, negative anthropogenic impacts on the coastal ecosystem could increase without proper management. These potential impacts include increased water pollution, habitat degradation and disruption of ecological and physical functions through coastal development and armoring, and wildlife disturbance due to population growth. The Shoreline Management Act which governs coastal development includes ecosystem principles and aims to consider cumulative impacts of coastal development. Emerging Coastal Activities Coastal areas of Washington State have been identified as possessing potentially favorable conditions for development of offshore net pen aquaculture and coastal energy industries. Neither of these activities is currently underway in Washington State, but interest exists in developing these industries. In developing management measures and best practices for these industries, Washington State could exhibit foresight by taking into account the cumulative effects these activities would have on the ecosystem. (Please see policy memos on Aquaculture and Coastal Energy prepared for the Ocean Policy Work Group in Fall 2005 for more information on these emerging coastal activities available at

6 Current Sources of Baseline Ecosystem Information for EBM Implementation: The State of Washington and NOAA already conduct on-going ecosystem monitoring programs whose results could provide baseline information for EBM implementation. Most Washington State marine monitoring programs are conducted within Puget Sound, but there are several focused on the outer coast. Washington Department of Ecology operates an Environmental Assessment Program with the goal of providing objective, reliable information about environmental conditions and reporting environmental status, trends, and results. This program includes yearly monitoring of marine water quality, sediments, and watersheds (WA DOE). Washington Department of Natural Resources conducts research and monitoring of nearshore habitats as a part of the Nearshore Habitat Program. This program aims to determine the health of nearshore habitat and provide timely and useful information on the status of nearshore habitat through inventory, monitoring, and research projects (WA DNR). NOAA operates the Northwest Association of Networked Ocean Observing Systems (NANOOS), which aims to provide essential ecosystem data and products to coastal managers, scientists, industry, and the public. NANOOS is a regional component of the national Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) and consists of an offshore ocean monitoring component and a pilot project to monitor nearshore environments (estuaries and beaches) (NANOOS). In addition to ecosystem status and trends, it is important to be aware of existing management strategies in order to analyze cumulative impacts of overlapping management efforts. Reports by the Pacific Fisheries Management Council such as Fishery Management Plans and Essential Fish Habitat designation documents contain important information about the management environment. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has prepared an inventory of marine protected areas (MPAs) along the outer coast and straits (Culver) and a similar effort inventoried MPAs in Puget Sound (Murray). These sources of information create a satisfactory base of ecosystem information which can be utilized immediately for ecosystem-based management, but acquiring additional knowledge, particularly regarding the human dimension of the ecosystem, is critical to successful implementation of EBM. Ecosystem-Based Management Case Studies: Although many regions have experimented with implementing Ecosystem-Based Management, the application of this approach is still new and relatively untested

7 (Matthews Amos, 1). A report for the Pew Charitable Trust prepared by Amy Matthews Amos evaluates the use of EBM and EBFM in the United States over various scales, approaches, and geographic locations from Mid-Atlantic Fishery Ecosystem Plans to community-based EBM in Washington State (please see the aforementioned report in Appendix I for detailed analysis of 19 examples of EBM or EBFM application). The main conclusions of this report are a continuing need for more scientific information, increased inclusion of the human dimension (including local stakeholder buy-in), and creating effective governance structures. She emphasized that application of EBM should not be delayed by waiting for more or better science but groups should implement EBM now utilizing a precautionary approach in the face of uncertainty (Matthews Amos, 4). Ecosystem-Based Management is mandated in Canada by the Oceans Act of British Columbia, Washington State s northern neighbor, has established an Ecosystembased Management Framework through collaboration by the Provincial government, First Nations, local governments, and non-government interests (Coast Information Team, 1). This report is attached as Appendix II. Through this initiative, the partners developed a definition of EBM, agreed upon EBM principles and goals, and outlined a strategic approach to EBM as a framework for planning and management (CIT, 1). This resulted in two guidebooks: the EBM Planning Handbook and the Hydroriparian Planning Guide. Washington State would do well to engage their neighbors to the north to share lessons learned from their experiences implementing EBM. The San Juan County Marine Resources Committee, located in Washington State, demonstrates a locally-driven, bottom-up approach to EBM implementation. The county has designated its waters a marine stewardship area and aims to manage its marine environment based upon ecosystem considerations and with the goal of protecting the marine resources while allowing sustainable use to continue (San Juan County). Such community-based processes build local understanding and lasting support for necessary management measures. Evaluation of successes and weakness of these and other EBM case studies can help Washington State chose effective and efficient strategies to incorporate EBM into its marine resource management. Stakeholders: Washington State resource management agencies (i.e. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Natural Resources, and Department of Ecology) have a strong interest in the results of this policy analysis as it may result in alterations to their current procedures for managing marine resources and developing policies. Tribal governments maintain co-management responsibilities for marine resources of Washington State and thus have a vested interest in any changes to management of these resources to reflect ecosystem processes.

8 Local Government plays a critical role through local planning efforts and initiatives and Shoreline Master Programs and Critical Area Ordinances- particularly with regard to land/sea connections that are critical to any ecosystem approach to coastal resource management. All commercial and recreational users of the marine environment (including for example fishermen, shipping operators, upland and submerged landowners, boaters, kayakers, whale watching operators, bird watchers, surfers, scuba divers, general public, etc) may be affected by changes in management measures and potential regulations resulting from this analysis. Federal resource management agencies such as NOAA and the Department of Interior who share jurisdiction over some marine resources and maintain complete authority over other marine resources within Washington State marine ecosystems such as marine mammals. Specific agencies within NOAA and Department of Interior with an interest in this memo include NOAA Fisheries, the National Marine Sanctuary Program (see below), the National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Minerals Management Service. Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary is responsible for management of approximately 2,500 square nautical miles of the Washington coast. Its mandate includes ecosystem protection and research priorities and could be an important partner with the state in implementing ecosystem-based management measures. The Olympic National Park and the San Juan Island National Historic Park (SJINHP) have jurisdiction over 924,000 acres (over 1410 square miles) of upland land and SJINHP protects 6.1 miles of shoreline. The National Park Service will be an important partner to Washington State in implementing EBM. Possible Alternative Solutions: 1) Develop working definition of Ecosystem-Based Management for use in Washington State coastal resource management. 2) Develop a collaborative governance structure or process to facilitate exchange of ecosystem information among state agencies, federal agencies, and tribes for the purposes of coastal resource management. 3) Explore and consider using ecosystem-based management tools such as marine zoning, marine protected areas, time-area closures, ecosystem modeling, etc through state, federal, and tribal management processes. Works Cited:

9 Babcock, Elizabeth A., and Pikitch, Ellen K. Can We Reach Agreement on a Standardized Approach to Ecosystem-based Fishery Management? Bulletin of Marine Science, Vol 74, No 3, pp Coast Information Team. Ecosystem-based Management Framework. April Available at Dunnigan, Jack. NOAA Assistant Administrator. NOAA s Ecosystem Approach to Management. NOS Science Seminar Presentation. February 7, Ecosystem Principles Advisory Panel (EPAP), Ecosystem-Based Fishery Management: A Report to Congress by the Ecosystem Principles Advisory Panel Fluharty, David. Evolving ecosystem approaches to management of fisheries in the USA, Marine Ecology Progress Series, Vol. 300, 2005, pp Matthews Amos, Amy. Moving Forward: A Snapshot of U.S. Activities in Ecosystem- Based Fisheries Management. A Report to the Lenfest Ocean Program at The Pew Charitable Trusts. June Available at Murray, Mike. The Status of Marine Protected Areas in Puget Sound. Prepared for the Puget Sound/ Georgia Basin International Task Force Work Group on Marine Protected Areas NANOOS website. NANOOS Pilot Project About. and Accessed 2/21/06. Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission. Comprehensive Tribal Natural Resource Management: A Report from the Treaty Indian Tribes in Western Washington Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary website: (accessed 2/9/06) Scientific Consensus Statement on Marine Ecosystem-based Management. March 21, US Commission on Ocean Policy. An Ocean Blueprint for the 21 st Century. September 20, Olympic Coastal National Marine Sanctuary website. Accessed 2/9/06. San Juan County Marine Resources Committee website. Development of a Marine Stewardship Area. Accessed 2/21/06.

10 Washington Department of Ecology Website. Environmental Assessment Program Overview. Accessed 2/21/06. Washington Department of Natural Resources website. Nearshore Habitat Program Research Projects. Accessed 2/21/06. Appendices: Appendix I: Matthews Amos, Amy. Moving Forward: A Snapshot of U.S. Activities in Ecosystem- Based Fisheries Management. A Report to the Lenfest Ocean Program at The Pew Charitable Trusts. June Available at Appendix II: Coast Information Team. Ecosystem-based Management Framework. April Available at