Posted on 04/21/2004 9:15:58 AM PDT by cogitator
Rather than read the various media interpretations, here's the commission's press release in its entirety.
Oceans in Serious Trouble: Must Act Now
Delicate Balance Between Use and Sustainability is Key to Future of Our Oceans
Historic Report to be Reviewed By Governors and Stakeholders
Washington, D.C. – Calling on Congress and President Bush to establish a new national ocean policy that balances use with sustainability, is based on sound science and educational excellence, and moves toward an ecosystem-based management approach is the centerpiece of the Preliminary Report released today by the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy.
“Our oceans and coasts are in trouble, and we as a nation have an historic opportunity to make a positive and lasting change in the way we manage them before it is too late,” said retired Admiral James D. Watkins (USN), Chair of the US Commission on Ocean Policy. “If the recommendations contained in our report are adopted, we will create sustainable oceans and coasts for many, many years. We will create sustainable ocean resources; sustainable fisheries; sustainable recreation for our children and their children; sustainable economic development; and a sustainable future for our oceans and coasts.”
The last comprehensive review of U.S. Ocean Policy was conducted thirty-five years ago by the Stratton Commission. Since then our nation’s oceans and coasts have changed drastically. More than 37 million people, 19 million homes, and countless businesses have been added to coastal areas. Marine transportation and coastal recreation and tourism have become two of the top drivers of the national economy. These developments, however, come with costs, and we are only now discovering the extent of those costs in terms of depleted resources, lost habitat, and polluted waters.
Living ocean and coastal resources, once thought to be boundless, have revealed their limits. Coastal areas are essential spawning, feeding, and nursery areas for over three quarters of U.S. commercial fish catches, however about 40,000 acres of coastal wetlands disappear yearly. Current projections indicate 50-60 percent of coral reefs may be lost during the next 30 years. Twelve billion tons of ballast water is shipped around the world each year, spreading alien and invasive species.
When Congress passed the Oceans Act 2000 (P.L. 106-256) it acknowledged both the costs and the significance of the oceans and coasts to this country. Pursuant to the Act, the President appointed 16 members from diverse backgrounds to the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy. The Commission’s mandate was to establish findings and develop recommendations for a new and comprehensive national ocean policy.
The Commission began its work in September 2001 with a series of 15 public meeting and 17 additional site visits in every coastal region of the country and the Great Lakes. The Commission heard testimony from 440 experts, including many of the nation’s top ocean scientists and researchers, environmental organizations, industry, citizens and government officials, as well a receiving written testimony from countless others. It was the most comprehensive and thorough review ever conducted of our nation’s oceans and coasts.
After significant thought, careful deliberations and the consideration of a wide range of potential solutions, the Commission is releasing its Preliminary Report to be reviewed by the nation’s Governors and other stakeholders. The Commission’s recommendations balance the interest of stakeholders to create a the framework for a national ocean policy that effectively and efficiently preserves and utilizes our nation’s oceans and coasts and their resources.
“Our report puts forth long overdue bold and broad-reaching recommendations for reform to our national ocean policy,” said Watkins. “ Reform that needs to start now, while it is still possible to reverse distressing declines, seize exciting opportunities, and sustain the oceans, coasts and their valuable assets for future generations.”
The over-arching theme of the Commission’s Preliminary recommendations is ecosystem-based management. The Commission concluded that it is critical that ocean and coastal resources be managed to reflect the complex interrelationships among the ocean, land, air, and all living creatures, including humans, and consider the interactions among the multiple activities that affect entire systems. The Commission identified a number of needed changes based upon three fundamental themes:
* Creating a new national ocean policy framework to improve decision-making
* Strengthening science and generating high-quality accessible information to inform decision makers;
* Enhancing ocean education to instill future leaders and informed citizens with a stewardship ethic.
According to the report, a new national ocean policy framework must be established to improve federal leadership and coordination to enable agencies to address the ocean, land and air as one inter-connected system. This framework also enhances opportunities for state, territorial, tribal, and local entities to develop common regional goals and priorities.
The Commission found that policies and decisions about ocean and coastal resources need to be based on the most current, unbiased, credible scientific information. This requires new investment in the infrastructure to support data collection and research and the means to effectively translate scientific findings into useful, timely information for policy managers, educators, and the public.
The report also focuses on the importance of enhancing ocean education to improve decision makers’ understanding of the oceans, for the general public to develop a sense of stewardship, and to prepare a new generation of leaders to confront issues dealing with oceans and coasts.
Building on the foundation of these themes, the Commission’s report contains recommendations that span the gamut of ocean and coastal issues, ranging from upstream areas to the depths of the oceans floor, from the practical problem-solving issues, to philosophical approaches that will guide us into the next century.
The Commission concluded that the following actions are critical:
* Establishment of a National Ocean Council in the Executive Office of the President chaired by an Assistant to the President;
* Creation of a non-federal President with Presidential Council of Advisors on Ocean Policy;
* Strengthen the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and improving federal agency structure;
* Develop a flexible, voluntary process for creating regional ocean councils, facilitated and supported by the National Ocean Council;
* Double U.S. investment in ocean research;
* Implement the national Integrated Ocean Observing System;
* Increase attention to ocean education through coordinated and effective formal and informal programs;
* Strengthen the link between coastal and watershed management;
* Create measurable water pollution reduction goals, particularly for nonpoint sources, and strengthen incentives, technical assistance, and other management tools to reach those goals;
* Reform fisheries management by separating scientific assessment and allocation, improving the Regional Fishery Management Council system, and exploring the use of dedicated access privileges;
* Accede to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea; and
* Establish an Ocean Policy Trust Fund based on revenue from offshore energy activity and other new and emerging offshore uses to pay for implementing the recommendations.
“This is a crossroads moment for our country and the future of our nation’s oceans and coasts,” said Watkins. “It will require great political will, investment and support of the public. But the benefits and pay off to this country--and its citizens--will far exceed the cost and the effort for generations to come.”
-- end –
The Commission’s Preliminary Report is part of a two-stage process. In this stage, the report will be available for review and comment by the nation’s governors and interested stakeholders. Availability of the Preliminary Report appears in the Federal Register and includes information about the comment period, which begins April 21, 2004 and ends May 21, 2004. An electronic copy of the report and detailed instructions for submitting comments also is available on the Commission website, http://oceancommission.gov.
Stage two begins when the public comment period closes on May 21, 2004. At that point, the Commission will take time for a comprehensive review of the comments received from the governors and others. Once all comments are considered, the Commission will prepare and deliver its final report and recommendations on a coordinated and comprehensive national ocean policy to the President and Congress.
Not really. There was not one specific proposal in the whole report to reduce the problem. Just a bunch of create this commission, increase funding to study this, increase communication. I did not see one specific proposal that would do anything to help the environment. All I see is a bunch of jobs created for environmental bureaucrats.
Unfortunately, I'm not knowledgeable about the Law of the Sea convention, but I expect that it would infringe on U.S. territorial rights to some extent. That may not be as important as many of the other critical recommendations in the report, and I think to focus on that particular one as a "deal-breaker" might cause many to tend to ignore the other important things that need to be done. There's a lot the U.S. can do by itself without worrying about the U.N. at this stage.
Some of them are like that. Some of them are more forceful, like doubling research investment, changing the way that fisheries are managed, and establishing an Oceans Trust Fund. Those are decent "action items".
It must really be serious. They don't even have time to use verbs or pronouns.
Yeah but get some Ranch dip and Salsa and man o'man is that a meal or what?
I wouldn't quote him as an expert.
I'm not sure, but I think the oceans still survive.
Fortunately, nature is somewhat resilient. The report doesn't say that the oceans are doomed; it says they're in trouble. It's a call for action before the situation gets significantly worse.
Again, what exactly does any of those mean in concrete terms. Do they want to put more regulations on fishing? I assume they know what the problem is, so why double research, why not say what they think needs to be done? Establish a Oceans Trust Fund for what? These weenies are afraid to take a specific stand and say what they think. They just want blanket authority so they can create regulations without any input from the public. If they think we are over fishing, why not say we must reduce fishing by half? Instead they want to create some regulatory body that can do that without saying that is what they are doing up front.
Some of them are like that. Some of them are more forceful, like doubling research investment
Has there ever been a report by any commission that suggested a reduction in government spending in their area?
Answering that might require reading the report rather than just the press statement. I admit that I haven't done that, because it just came out, but I'd like to have it looked over by the end of the month.
Kinda looking at your questions in general; regarding research, there may be ways to determine how climate variability acts fisheries (i.e., lower the catch quotas in "bad" years). Regarding cutting fishing in half, that's a rather antiquated way to address the problem and the commercial fishing community wouldn't like it. Part of the problem with fisheries management is that commercial fishermen frequently exaggerate their catch statistics to make the fishery look more robust than it actually is. Fisheries managers use catch statistics to set quotas, and higher-than-actual reports lead to higher-than-they-should-be quotas. This kind of positive feedback was one of the main reasons that the Grand Banks cod fishery collapsed. Since it doesn't work, there needs to be a better way.
Imagine the volumes of waste paper that would be created by these new UN commissions and studies. Now the UN building is in NYC, on the Hudson River which flows into the Atlantic Ocean, right?
Where does NYC dump the UN's waste?
Probably not, but I can confidently say that if the report indicated a potential crisis (or at least a serious situation requiring rectification) that the report wouldn't ask for less money.
This one statement identifies the authors as left wing enemies of the US. Any other recommendations they have would have to be seen through a "how are they trying to screw the US with this one" filter
I didn't see the main proposal that would improve our oceans. Increase off shore drilling for petroleum. The Gulf of mexico is being poisoned by oil leaking into it from natural fissures. We need to increase drilling to decrease the pressure pushing this oil into the ocean
It's all about money, duckets, rand, cash , sources of revenue for the polidiots ! Has nothing to do with our environments future at all..........
That's my rant on the matter......Stay safe !
But aren't you completely ignoring the possibility that reports are biased by the fact that the authors are directly benefiting only if a "crisis" is identified? It sounds to me like you're saying we must judge reports based on the need for more money - and the need for more money must mean there is a potential crisis.
You seem to have omitted the possibility that this is little more than a sham.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.