Yesterday the Commonwealth of Massachusetts released the final management for all of the state’s ocean waters. Despite centuries of land use planning experience in the US, this is the first time in history that a state has developed such a comprehensive approach to planning uses of the ocean. This is a true victory for our oceans and all who use them. Much congratulations to Gov. Patrick and the hard working people in the Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs who were working on the details through the holidays. Read the joint release CLF and Mass Audubon issued yesterday.

What does it mean for the economy? A study by the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management estimates the annual output of the state’s marine economy at $14.8 billion a year. The results of better planning will help facilitate more responsible use and enable a serious leap to development of clean, renewable energy that will add to the economy. For me, I like that we have a state plan that protects special places and ocean wildlife habitat (about two-thirds of the state’s waters are protected in one way or another) so that we can continue to enjoy the waters, beaches and bays for a few more generations. Let it be an example to all other states!

Could a little paint and elbow grease fix this baby right up and get it ready for the coast of Florida?

Looking for the perfect holiday gift for the special do-it-yourselfer roughneck in your life? Here is a rare deal for you. Now that the Montara drilling platform in the remote Timor Sea is just a smoldering wreck its likely to be on the market soon at bargain prices. They say it couldn’t fail, but this low mileage, state-of-the-art, everything but fire-proof deep sea drill rig set the international oil cartels abuzz with its flamboyant four day blaze that rendered the quarter-billion dollar roman candle into an island of charred and twisted metal. In fact, everyone but the American media seemed to follow the story of the three month long oil spill that preceded the grand finale inferno. 

Actually, I don’t know what the future holds for the Montara rig (also referred to as “West Atlas” in some reports) but there has to be a few options that are better than spending more millions to put it back into the drilling business. How about using it as a movie set for the next dozen apocalyptic action thrillers? What about doing something useful such as recycling the rig into wind turbines? Or, is that too practical? Yeah, probably.

 Well, maybe it could be designated as a “Monument to Hubris and Stupidity” and at least pulled out of the water to rust away on shore.

In October 2008 CLF and three citizens petitioned NOAA to protect the Atlantic wolffish under the Endangered Species Act. You may recall the news headlines from that time such as “Protection sought for sea brute” or ”Group to seek protection for a toothy sea monster,” not to forget my personal favorite “Group seeks protection for ugly New England fish.”  The Atlantic wolffish is, apparently, considered unattractive by both humans and most headline editors. In any event, it’s largely true that wolffish are best known for their fang-like teeth. What can you say about the fact that their eating habits consist of crushing whole scallops and sea urchins — not to mention the occasional wayward crab? Check our video, courtesy of Jonathan Bird, of the wolffish in action. It’s an admitted charismatically gruesome fish, but there are those of us who love it.

So, after sitting patiently by the mailbox for almost 14 months we received the answer from NOAA: DENIED! No protection for you, wolffish!

How could that be? The number of wolffish being caught crashed 95% in less than 15 years, the species has been listed as a “Species of Concern” (two steps shy of an endangered listing) since 2004, numbers have not gone up since then, and even more wolffish habitat has been plowed by bottom trawls in the last half-decade. Well, says NOAA, there are a lot of them in Canada. How is that the case since Canada protected Atlantic wolffish under their Species at Risk Act several years ago? That may be, NOAA says, but fewer wolffish “will likely” be caught once the Amendment 16 fishery management plan for groundfish like cod and haddock gets into place. How can we be sure that will work since Amendment 16 is not yet approved and if it does get approved it still won’t go into effect until May of 2010? By the way, the New England Fishery Management Council, not known for its preservationist tendancies, voted to create a zero possession limit for commercial and recreational fishing. NOAA claims that “although Atlantic wolffish discard mortality rates are not specifically known” the catch and release of bycatch will help wolffish survive at a rate that “may be as high as 100%.” Can I ask another question here — how do you measure that 100% when the boats are out to sea with few onboard observers and the crew have no training in catch and release of wolffish?

Friends, can you see where I’m going with this? Let’s just say we have a lot of questions.

Mama Humpback and calf

When whale researchers decide they know enough about a particular whale to identify it they give it a name. Naming the whale helps with future tracking over the course of their research and helps other researchers in sharing information such as feeding and migration patterns, what other whales that particular whale might be associating with, etc. The thing is, you can’t just slap any old tag on a whale — there are rules. Just who came up with the whale naming rules is one question (a bored process-junkie is my answer) but the way it usually plays out is that the one who applies the name is usually a researcher who has followed the whale and her family, knows the whale pretty well and, I’m guessing, has probably used the name for a while before it becomes “official.” One solid whale naming rule, however, is that the whale’s name is supposed to be based on the pigmentation patterns on the whale’s flukes. Sensible enough, but this seems like a pretty subjective standard because, as we all know, the beauty of fluke pigmentation is definitely in the eye of the beholder. What might look like a trident mark to me could easily look like a seagull in flight to someone else, you know?

Sometimes this same subjective standard happens when the government develops rules and policies for managing resources. A regulation that one agency official might see as a progressive step in, say, wildlife conservation another well-informed and equally interested party might see as an onerous restriction on commerce and another might see as something less than helpful to wildlife. Different folks, different views, same policy. Yet, there is always going to be a decision made. (And yes, failing to make a decision is still a decision.) The great thing about developing government policy is that all of us get to have a say too — either through government process or eventually though the ballot box. President Obama’s “Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force” is developing a national ocean policy that will drive the federal government’s approach to just about everything in their power related to our oceans, coasts and Great Lakes. I think it should be a policy founded on the principles of environmental sustainability, marine habitat protection and wildlife stewardship. Some others might think that maximum extraction of oil, fish, and minerals should be the foundation. At the end of day there will be a decision. Here is your chance to have your say.

By the way, the other rules for naming whales are: 1) Can’t be gender specific, 2) Can’t be a name of a real person, 3) Name should be easy to say and be heard when on a moving boat.

Is the ship of state ready to set the right course?

New England’s ocean and coastal waters have long suffered from management that only allows a single-sector approach. One agency is in charge of energy, one agency in charge of commercial fishing and another is in charge of water quality. This leads to a situation in both state and fedaral waters where no one is watching out for the overall health of the ocean ecosystem. Both the Pew Oceans Commission and the US Ocean Commission, hundreds of scientists and regional leaders from several coastal states have called for protection of ocean and coastal habitat and an ecosystem-based approach to management.

In Massachusetts we have the Massachusetts Ocean Plan, the first-ever-in-the-nation attempt at comprehensive ocean planning. There is a draft plan out now and a final due to be implemented by the end of 2009. The Commonwealth is having several public hearings over the course of September and all the info is right here.

On the federal level we have pretty well fallen behind due to a past administration that largely saw ocean management as another way to favor their friends in the oil business. Except for some truly exceptional Marine National Monuments - for which President Bush deserves sincere credit - the past administration left the recommendations of the Pew and US Ocean Commission on the shelf while they rammed through oil and gas drilling, held up or removed protections for marine mammals and seriously dragged their heels on clean, renewable energy.

That’s all set to change. On June 12 President Obama created a federal interagency task force with the charge to propose a singular national ocean policy and a framework for “marine spatial planning.” Just a mention sends a thrill down the spine doesn’t it? Well, if you are an ocean user or care about ocean wildlife it should. The problem is that our oceans, coasts and Great Lakes are managed through a jumble of 20 different agencies and about 140 not-always-coordinated laws. This management scheme creates confusion and discord among well-meaning agencies that want to cooperate with one another and fosters absolute mayhem among those agencies already inclined towards turf battles and internal politics. Even inside a single agency there may be conflicting directives that cause a stalemate between resource conservation and resource extraction. (Take a look at our own Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary where an abundance of fishing and fishing gear has altered undersea habitat, reduced overall fish and wildlife populations and still threatens the North Atlantic right whale, one of the rarest animals on the planet, but the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries still sits on its hands.)

So, the President wants an ocean policy and he will get a proposal from his task force on Sept. 10. After the 10th, the task force tackles the issue of marine spatial planning, which is really a term that means “planning various uses of a particular area.” (We’ve been doing it on land in New England for a few hundred years.) There is something else that happens after the 10th — the President’s Ocean Task Force comes to New England. They are planning a series of regional “listening sessions” for each area of the country and the east coast gets to represent on Sept. 24th in Providence at the Rhode Island Convention Center. CLF and our partners are working to highlight the necessary components of a national ocean policy, starting with a mandate to protect, maintain and restore our ocean, coastal and Great Lakes ecosystems. Without a strong environmental sustainability tenet a national ocean policy won’t be worth using. We’ll be fortunate to have the draft policy to respond to by then. The Council on Environmental Quality is heading up the ocean task force and you can read the presidential memo that started it all here. Keep a sharp eye on the CLF marine program page for alerts and news.