Gulf Coast Restoration Plans: conservation groups submit recommendations to Presidential Task Force

This week a coalition of leading conservation groups focused on finding long-term solutions for the Gulf of Mexico following last year's disastrous Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, submitted a blueprint for federal, state, and local action to restore the region's ecology and help communities dependent on the Gulf. Their recommendations were delivered to the Presidential Task Force on Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration which has an October deadline to develop a comprehensive strategy, dictated by executive order, "to effectively address the damage caused by the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, address the longstanding ecological decline, and begin moving toward a more resilient Gulf Coast ecosystem."

The Nature Conservancy, the Harte Research Institute for Gulf of Mexico Studies, National Audubon Society, Ocean Conservancy, National Wildlife Federation, Environmental Defense Fund, and the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation cooperated to produce the recommendations, entitled a Strategy for Restoring the Gulf of Mexico.

According to PRNewswire, the timing of the work is important. "The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee is expected to soon vote on legislation that would provide funding to implement the Presidential Task Force's restoration plans. The Senate bill, the RESTORE Gulf Coast States Act, would dedicate 80 percent of the oil spill fines to restoring the Gulf's communities, economies and environments. Under current law, most of the fines will be used for general government spending, rather than being directed towards the Gulf."

"The Gulf is a national treasure and restoring it must be a national priority," said Wes Tunnell of the Harte Research Institute. "Too much time has already passed. We cannot miss this important opportunity to rebuild the Gulf and ensure it continues to support our nation's economy, communities and wildlife."

PRNewswire reported that some of the blueprint's recommendations include:

• Restoration activities should provide both environmental and social benefits.
• Ensure sufficient delivery of freshwater flows to the Gulf in order to maintain ecological health of bays and estuaries.
• Restore populations of endangered marine mammals, where their probability of extinction in the next 100 years is less than 1%.
• Construct and operate a series of large-scale diversions of freshwater and sediment from the Mississippi River sufficient to build and sustain Delta wetlands to provide storm surge protection for people and restore habitat for economically vital fisheries.
• Implement management plans for oyster reefs that support fish production, water filtration, nitrogen removal, coastal protection and other services that benefit both people and nature.

"If we really care about the Gulf and the communities that rely on it for survival, these fines must be used to restore the wetlands, marshes, oyster reefs, mangroves, fisheries and other natural resources that provide food, income and shelter to local communities – and the nation as a whole," said Cindy Brown, The Nature Conservancy's Gulf of Mexico Program Director. "The Gulf suffered the brunt of the spill and the fines should be used to bring the Gulf back to health."

Given the current mindset of Congress following the debt limit debacle, it will be interesting to see how the blueprint fares in light of the political trend towards spending cuts. It remains to be seen whether funding from fines will be directed to the project, thereby offsetting governmental outlays, or whether the fines will be retained to offset the current lack of government revenues.

"Although born of tragedy, there is a tremendous opportunity now for recovery of the Gulf. But we must think big," said Chris Canfield, Vice President of Gulf Coast Conservation/Mississippi Flyway with the National Audubon Society. "We must look and work across political and organizational boundaries. We know how to restore the Mississippi River Delta, to bring back wetlands and barrier islands, to make a better home for birds, fish and our communities. All we need is the resolve to do it."

"We hope our recommendations will help the task force develop its strategy, but the task force can't implement its strategy without the necessary funding that the RESTORE Gulf Coast States Act provides," said Courtney Taylor, policy director for the Mississippi Delta Restoration project at Environmental Defense Fund. "That's why Congress must hold the parties responsible for Gulf oil spill damage accountable by passing the RESTORE Gulf Coast States Act to ensure that we invest the oil spill penalties to restore the Gulf, or we risk losing this ecological and economic treasure."

We can only hope. But perhaps not. Perhaps we can do more. Let the White House and your Senators know that you want to see the Presidential Task Force and the RESTORE Gulf Coast States Act move forward. With the recent debt crisis, they finally acted, in part due to response from their constituencies. Perhaps we can get them to act responsibly again. Wouldn't that be a change of pace.

Stefanie Brendl: shark conservation mover and shaker

Over the past couple of years I had the pleasure of getting to know Stefanie Brendl through a series of email conversations and then meeting up with her at last year's BLUE Ocean Film Festival and Conservation Summit in Monterey, CA.

Stefanie hails from Hawaii where she first came to my attention as the owner of Hawaiian Shark Encounters, one of Oahu's leading shark diving operations and a leader in shark conservation efforts in the state. Her shark conservation efforts progressively broadened as she formed the non-profit Shark Allies and worked more and more with the political decision makers responsible for shark fin prohibition legislation in Hawaii, Marianas Islands, Guam, and elsewhere. She currently works closely with WildAid in pushing for more and more shark conservation legislation throughout the Pacific Islands and the U.S. West Coast. She is definitely becoming one of the preeminent figures in productive shark conservation efforts.

The 7th Generation recently conducted a video interview with Stefanie. Take a peek at someone who is part of a small circle in the field of shark conservation who are helping to make a difference.

Guardians of the Ocean - Interview with Stefanie Brendl from Carsten Essig on Vimeo.

10/10/10 Global Work Party: this Sunday's international event for climate change awareness

350. This is a number that has great significance with many climatologists and supporters of positive steps to slow down, if not arrest. global warming. The number 350 stands for the level of carbon dioxide emissions in the atmosphere, in parts per million, that many scientists believe must be attained if we are to have any control over the issue of climate change - and it needs to be reached sooner than later (we currently stand at around 390ppm and rising).

To help get that message out, to policymakers and the general public, is the mission of 350.org. And to do that, 350.org has in the past staged worldwide events that included everyone from children to students to politicians. Last year they held an International Day of Climate Action that encouraged people of all ages to recognize the need to reduce carbon emissions. It was a grass roots event that saw participation from Sydney to San Francisco, from South Africa to Sweden.

Coming up this Sunday, October 10th, will be the organization's 10/10/10 Global Work Party: A Day to Celebrate Climate Solutions. Once again, across the globe, 350.org has rallied folks at the grass roots level in over 150 countries with thousands of local events taking place, all designed to not only bring awareness to the problem of carbon emissions but to also promote what we can do about it.

According to 350.org, "We’re calling it a Global Work Party, with emphasis on both 'work' and 'party'. In Auckland, New Zealand, they’re having a giant bike fix-up day, to get every bicycle in the city back on the road. In the Maldives, they’re putting up solar panels on the President’s office. In Kampala, Uganda, they're going to plant thousands of trees, and in Bolivia they’re installing solar stoves for a massive carbon neutral picnic."

350.org's goal with this one-day event is not to solve the issue of climate change in one grand sweeping gesture - they are too pragmatic for that. Instead, 10/10/10 Global Work Party is designed to send a strong political message to the decision-makers of the world, that people recognize the importance of managing carbon emissions in a demonstrable way and are prepared to do what it takes.

"On 10/10/10 we'll show that we the people can do this--but we need bold energy policies from our political leaders to do it on a scale that truly matters. The goal of the day is not to solve the climate crisis one project at a time, but to send a pointed political message: if we can get to work, you can get to work too--on the legislation and the treaties that will make all our work easier in the long run."

350 parts per million. This is something that needs to be much more than a long-range, near-mythical goal for the world's energy policies. It is a very real objective that must be met quickly, before we find ourselves at a point of no return.

10/10/10. More than just a clever twist of the calendar; it's a day to show your support. Check out the 350.org website to see what events are taking place in your area. There's even still time to start an event of your own for this Sunday.

Visit the 350.org website.
Learn more about 10/10/10 Global Work Party.

BLUE 2010 Shark Conservation Panel: discussing new strategies to protect sharks

The BLUE Ocean Film Festival & Conservation Summit came to a close this past Sunday, leaving behind a terrific week of conversation seminars, ocean films, and meetings with some of the ocean's leading defenders in the film, scientific, and political arenas. The film festival's big prize winner was Bag It, by Reel Thing, a personal journey of one man to learn and unravel the issues surrounding the use and impact of plastics on the environment.

On Saturday, I moderated a discussion panel, New Strategies in Shark Conservation, at the Monterey Conference Center's Steinbeck Forum. I was honored to have four panelists who have been deeply involved in shark conservation, and their particular perspectives were very insightful as to what the future holds for shark conservation.

Shark Conservation Panelists
Peter Knights, executive director of WildAid: Peter's work with WildAid has been focused on the illegal trade in endangered species and he typically directs his battles toward the international frontlines. In particular, he sees great potential in bringing the issue directly to the people of China. This is a nation that not only has a sizable population - one that he says is not fully aware of the implications of the commercial shark market - but is also a nation that can have influence on many other Asian nations. WildAid continues with its campaign of public awareness to Asian-speaking populations with the wide use of Asian celebrity endorsements.

Stefanie Brendl, involved in Hawaii's recent shark fin prohibition legislation: Stefanie, as owner of Hawaii Shark Encounters, has jumped feet-first into the legislative arena, seeing what can be realistically accomplished through the halls of regional, state, and national politics. She is currently working with WildAid, which is based in San Francisco, to determine ways in which possible legislation can be initiated in California. The Hawaiian anti-fin bill can be an inspiration but, for California and anywhere else, a new political initiative means a minefield of new players, political influences, and constituencies. One of Stefanie's observations was that many of the emotional issues that fuel the shark conservation movement on a personal level have no resonance in the world of politics - it's a matter of economics and political logic supported by hard, undeniable data.

Laleh Mohajerani, director of Iemanya Oceanica: Mexico brings together many components involved in the shark conservation issue - governmental regulations and the viability of enforcement based on available resources; public awareness to a population whose focus can be on more fundamental needs of food and survival; and a local fishing population that has not fully been afforded economic alternatives to the overfishing of valuable marine resources. Laleh's organization is directing campaigns to bring not only more awareness to the Mexican public in general but to also show local fishing communities ways to support themselves without decimating the populations of sharks, turtles, and many other ocean species. These types of directives can be applied to other second and third world nations.

Dr. Greg Stone, senior scientist of the oceans, Conservation International: Greg brings a wealth of both scientific and international diplomacy experience and much of what Conservation International has been involved in has included scientific research that provides the hard, indisputable data for the policy and decision makers. The organization also works by bringing together the interests of multiple nations to form large-scale policy and regulatory agreements, such as the Phoenix Islands marine reserve and the Pacific Oceanscape - examples of large geographic zones where marine resources are protected, monitored, and enforced. Greg emphasized the importance of having the accurate facts and data to define the important role that sharks play in maintaining a healthy marine environment and that the larger organizations, - like Conservation International, WildAid, and the Humane Society - are perhaps best equipped to accomplish these critical, large-scale international goals that can produce quantifiable results.

Shark Conservation Maturing
The shark conservation movement is at a critical stage of maturation. It has been fueled by emotional hot buttons like the cruel hunting methods of shark finning and the seeming waste of a luxury item like shark fin soup or shark cartilage. But there was much agreement within the panel that, as important as these components are to the debate, to see quantifiable change in policy we must deal with the harsh realities of politics and economics. There are fundamental cultural differences between peoples that may never be resolved regarding attitudes towards sharks or seafood in general. And to challenge or resolve those cultural roadblocks may take too long or be too divisive. Instead, developing fact-based platforms that speak to the specific needs of nations will more and more become the model for future progress.

So where does this leave us as individual advocates and supporters? The panel still felt there was a strong need for the individual efforts, the grass-root movements. Concern was raised though that with so many "save the shark" groups today, each fighting for a measure of recognition and funding, the movement can become dissipated. Peter Knights noted that the individual choices we make regarding sharks and seafood in restaurants and supermarkets, what we tell our friends and acquaintances about the shark problem (calmly and matter-of-factly), all still can have a tremendous impact. Greg Stone commented that we all need to make careful, informed decisions about what organizations we support financially, learning what groups can show real and tangible accomplishments.

Stefanie Brendl noted that, while many shark supporters are inundated with one petition after another from a variety of groups and causes and may question whether so many of these are nothing more than feel-good exercises to rally the troops, the concept of the petition (or personal email, hand-written letter, or phone call) can be effective if properly directed to the right policy or decision-maker. And that is something that can often be best accomplished by yourself rather than relying on another group to be your water boy.

And, as a filmmaker, I reiterated my position that sharks need to be represented accurately and without over-sensationalism or, as sometimes happens with ardent shark supporters, misrepresentations of sharks as cuddly pets. Shark conservation is a tough enough proposition for many in the general public (or in the halls of congress) to appreciate; no need to come across as shark-hugging lunatics to those we are trying to persuade.

The Future
In the future, we may see a combining of efforts that will bring many shark advocate organizations to align themselves with larger organizations to consolidate power. This will be an important step in securing sensible political and economic measures on both a national and international level. And all of us will need to take greater personal responsibility for our involvement - mindful of the impact of rational and reasoned arguments in a complicated multi-cultural world, and cautious as to who we support and why.

Pacific Oceanscape: a tremendous step for conservation in the Pacific

When governments and policymakers listen to the scientists and listen to the voices of the people, every once in a while they get it right and something of value is truly accomplished. That would be the case with the recent announcement by a consortium of Pacific nations with the formation of the Pacific Oceanscape - a proposal to form a cooperative stewardship involving an enormous area of the Pacific Ocean equal to that of Canada, the U.S., and Mexico combined.

A result of the Pacific Islands Leadership Forum and heavily supported by the conservation and scientific research efforts of Conservation International, the Pacific Oceanscape, according to a recent press release, "aims to address all ocean issues from governance to climate change, as well as design policies and implement practices that will improve ocean health, increase resources and expertise, and encourage governments to factor ocean issues into decisions about economic and sustainable development. It represents perhaps the largest marine conservation management initiative in history, as measured by countries and area, and a new united Pacific voice on ocean conservation and management."

First introduced in 2009 by the president of Kiribati (read original proposal in PDF), the Pacific Oceanscape agreement includes the participation of nations from Australia and New Zealand to the Marshall and Solomon Islands, Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia, and many other Pacific island nations.

Commented Dr. Greg Stone, Chief Ocean Scientist and Senior Vice President for Marine Conservation with Conservation International, “It is, without doubt, the most ambitious, most innovative, and most well-grounded marine initiative I have seen in my 32 years as a marine biologist and conservationist. What we are seeing here is the dawning of a new era for marine management at such a massive, multi-national scale, and the kind of leadership that brings about real, positive change.”

With so many issues facing ocean ecosystems, particularly those fragile tropical environments that not only offer such beauty but are the backbone of survival for many island communities, this is certainly a major step in the right direction. To see this many nations in cooperation over a common goal and prepared to set policies and take steps to conserve precious marine resources, well, it certainly provides a welcome uplift and a measure of hope. The rest of the world needs to take notice.

Read press release about the Pacific Oceanscape.
Read the original proposal from Kiribati.

What Next?: Gulf oil spill legacy signals need for new energy paradigm

The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is the unwanted gift that keeps on giving. I awoke this morning to televised news reports of tar balls being found in the Florida Keys. While not totally unique to this area, these tar balls will be sent to labs for analysis to determine whether they are from the current Gulf oil spill. If so, it represents evidence of the oil reaching the Loop Current that could ultimately deposit oil as far away as the Atlantic Ocean coastline off the Carolinas.

Several scientific and tracking organizations, like SkyTruth, have reported that the oil spill will enter the Loop Current - which runs from the mid-Gulf, around Florida and up the east coast - if not now, then eventually. This current not only adds another later of complexity to the catastrophe in the Gulf, but it also reminds us of the consequences of our age-old attitude regarding the oceans: that it is a vast open resource - a source of limitless bounty and capable of handling endless abuse. Such thinking is total folly.

To the media and much of the general public, the biggest concern is what we can see: oil splashing up on the shore, oozing into the marshlands, and coating shorebirds - these are the visible signs that something has invaded our backyard. Unfortunately, if these events do not occur, or at least not in great magnitude, then we have a tendency to think we dodged the bullet.

Initially, weather played a role in delaying or keeping the oil at bay, far offshore. And the interplay of the onshore/offshore winds even got some people to wonder where the oil was or whether the spill was as disastrous as claimed. But there is close to 6 million gallons of oil (a conservative figure; other estimates run into the hundreds of thousands) that has leaked into the Gulf and it has to be somewhere.

I have to admit, when I first heard about the Loop Current, I imagined a current hugging the coastline around the eastern Gulf of Mexico. As it turns out, the current starts in the middle of the Gulf - behind, or south, of the site of the spill - then proceeds towards the tip of Florida, where it whips around the tip then stays close to the east coast shoreline. So, if we breathe a sigh of relief that the oil has, to a large extant, stayed offshore, it's ironic that any movement away from shore means it is heading directly into the current to spread an even wider and unexpected path of pollution.

There have been some reports of a large swath of oil moving below the surface, relatively undetected. These reports have been questioned by some government agencies and so further investigation continues, but it would not surprise me if there is a political media person somewhere saying that the longer the oil goes missing, the better. Again, out of sight, out of mind.

But there's no escaping the fact that we are talking about millions of gallons of oil.

• Oil that has settled on the bottom? That would be disastrous for marine life as the oil would work its way into the fundamental base food chain that impacts a variety of shellfish and other bottom feeders.
• Oil that has dissipated or spread itself into a thin micro-globular layer? There it can be ingested by plankton, spread across sensitive coral, or enter the atmosphere through evaporation.
• Or how about broken down by hundreds of thousands of gallons of dispersant (a toxic brew unto itself) to be eaten by hungry microbes which, in turn, would consume oxygen in the process, thereby degrading water quality.

There is no getting around it - whether we can see it or not, oil and water (in this case, sea water) don't mix.

My growing concern and question is: What will the decision-makers learn from this? What will the oil companies? And perhaps most importantly, what will we learn from this?

If anything, the Gulf oil spill highlights the complexity and multi-disastrous impact such an event can have on marine ecosystems near and far. What will it take to finally make definitive steps away from fossil fuel - our national, in fact global, addiction? As a society we are definitely in the throes of an addiction. We know that it is bad for us, we know that it harms the environment, we know that it produces lopsided economic dependencies - but we do nothing of any lasting consequence. That's textbook addiction.

Hopefully, British Petroleum will contain and stop the oil leak soon. We will have to live with degraded marine environments throughout the Gulf and perhaps along the southeast coast. And seafood commercial fisheries will be cut off from the stocks that they have plundered for years to meet demand. Tourism will suffer and seafood prices will rise. Gasoline prices too, perhaps.

But what will we do next? It has been said that the drug addict, regardless of his or her past bad experiences, must decide that they have now hit rock bottom before they can change their lives. Are we there yet?

Alaska & Arctic Oil Drilling: moves of protest within government

While many conservation groups bemoaned the recent U.S. administration's announcement of oil drilling, all is not lost. The proposed strategy, which included areas in Alaska and the Arctic, has led many to either believe that President Obama is back-tracking on campaign promises or that (as I believe) he is compromising in an attempt to gain bipartisan support for future climate and energy legislation.

However, while conservation groups are initiating email and letter write-in campaigns to voice their protest, there are significant wheels in government that are turning that could also make a difference. Here is an excerpt from an article from Los Angeles Times writer Kim Murphy about various actions which we should be watching:

What's next for oil in the Alaskan Arctic?

"Just because the Obama administration has finally settled on its strategy for offshore oil and gas development on the Outer Continental Shelf, don't think the issue of what happens in the Alaskan Arctic is settled -- far from it.

Already, lots of new developments are underway. New briefs have been filed in the attempt to stop Shell Offshore Inc.'s plan to drill exploration wells in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas; a new Government Accountability Office report criticizes the Minerals Management Agency in Alaska for how it conducts its environmental reviews; and now the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is turning attention back to the classic battleground over Arctic oil, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The agency announced it is beginning its first update in more than two decades of the conservation plan for the 19.2-million-acre refuge that lies west of the Prudhoe Bay oilfields on Alaska's North Slope -- home to grizzly bears, moose, wolverines, Dall sheep, birds, a massive herd of caribou and, if you're feeling optimistic, as much as 10.4 billion barrels of oil.

About 8 million acres of the refuge already are protected as wilderness. The new study could recommend additional areas for wilderness protection (read: no oil drilling, ever) including, conceivably, the so-called 1002 area of the coastal plain designated by Congress to study for possible oil development.

'There are no avenues of discussion closed off to the public,' Fish and Wildlife Service spokesman Bruce Woods said."

Read the entire article to learn who, within government, is supporting the protection of the Alaskan/Arctic wilderness and what is going on behind the headlines.