|
ANDREW A. ROSENBERG
New policy needed to preserve oceansIN THIS COUNTRY and around the world, people have taken the oceans for granted for a very long time. A sense of beauty, bounty, fear, and delight -- but rarely care, and only a modicum of understanding -- has characterized our attitude toward our coasts and oceans. In New England our oceans and coasts are part of our lives and the character of the place we call home. But that ocean heritage is at risk.
This week the US Commission on Ocean Policy released a report more than two years in the making. It concludes that our oceans are in trouble. The management framework for protecting marine ecosystems and support for the science upon which policy decisions must be based is inadequate. The result is an alarming decline in the state of our oceans and coasts and an urgent need to take new direction for ocean policy. The commission, mandated by Congress through the Oceans Act 2000, examined a broad range of ocean policy issues. Its recommendations focus on three major themes for needed change in ocean policy: creating a new governance structure, nationally and regionally, for the conservation and management of the oceans that is ecosystem-based, recognizing all components physical, biological, chemical, and human, of ecosystems and the linkages between them; generating more and better accessible scientific information for decision-making; and enhancing the education and understanding of leaders, practitioners, and citizens in the role and function of the world's oceans so that we become stewards, not just users. Ecosystem-based management is not a series of buzzwords. It is an effort to assert what scientists know is the reality of the functioning of natural systems -- that everything is connected to everything else. In conserving and managing coastal and ocean environments, the pieces of the management structure also must be connected. Currently, fisheries are managed separately from pollution, which is managed separately from coastal development. The result in many cases is confusing, conflicting, and incoherent policies that often don't take into account how the impacts of human activities interact. Without question we must do a better job of fishery management, and the commission recommends changes to make it more science-based and less political. We need to manage runoff and pollution. Considering the broader view does not mean not concentrating on doing a good job managing each activity itself. But we need to do more than that and consider how these pieces of the ocean management puzzle fit together. Coastal development is a good example. Currently we have a general outline of a coastal management plan. But then, as each project on or near the coast is proposed, it is considered for permitting and approval on its own as if no other development, filling of wetlands, or changing of the beach were occurring. In other words, the coastline is in danger of death by a thousand cuts. Each change may seem small, but put them together and the coastal ecosystem may no longer be able to function. While the New England coast is still beautiful and vibrant, the combined effects of all of our development, pollution, fishing, and other activities is more than its ecosystems can bear if we don't change course. In addition to ecosystem management, the US Commission report calls for doubling the federal ocean science budget over the next five years with specific suggestions on funding mechanisms. The report relays a frightening statistic. Twenty-five years ago, US ocean-related research funding comprised 7 percent of the total federal research budget. Today it is just 3.5 percent. The infrastructure for ocean research has not been maintained, training and education budgets haven't kept pace, and data and information management systems are fragmented. Education and training of the next generation of ocean scientists and managers must begin in earnest. Ocean science is the biology, chemistry, and physics of the ocean, but it is also the economics and sociology of ocean use and the public policy that results. If we don't invest in K-12, undergraduate, graduate, professional, and public education, the trouble with our oceans will almost certainly get worse. New England is a center for ocean research and education. Here perhaps more than anywhere else, we have the capacity to lead a revolution in ocean science and management. The US Commission on Ocean Policy report will generate some controversy. That's good as a hallmark of coming changes. Even if there is some disagreement over the details of the recommendations, it is essential that the imperative for changes in ocean policy, science, and stewardship come through. In a sense, the commission is challenging our government and people of this country to make the changes needed to understand and care for our oceans so that we all continue to benefit from their incredible richness.
Andrew A. Rosenberg, a professor of natural resources at University of New Hampshire Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans, and Space, is a member of the US Commission on Ocean Policy. |
