What’s All the Fuss about Ecosystem Based Management?

1. What’s All the Fuss about Ecosystem Based Management? Successful Regional EBM Efforts around the Country: Models for Action April 14, 2008

2. Portrait of an Ecosystem

3. Ecosystem-Based Management Rationale • Governance Challenges: • Sector-specific laws and institutions that do not allow for consideration of cumulative impacts • Overlapping mandates may lead to management and/or user conflict or create redundant management systems • Fragmented governance leads to legal and regulatory gaps • Mismatches of scale (geographic and temporal) exist between governance and ecosystems

4. EBM Issues to Consider Regional (e.g., Outer Continental Shelf energy siting) Ecosystem Issue & Scale Coarse (e.g., harmful algal blooms) Intermediate (e.g., invasive species establishment and spread) Local (e.g., post-rain elevated bacterial count at local beaches) LEGAL & INSTITUTIONAL SCALE Local State Multi-State Federal Multi-Lateral Laws & Regulations Land-use laws, ordinances, zoning, plans, critical areas… State ESAs, NEPAs, CZMs, plans, fisheries, land-use mgmt Inter-State compacts, agreements, fishery councils. . . CWA, MSA, CZMA, ESA… International treaties, multi-lateral treaties, soft-law documents, regional initiatives… Scientific Provisions and Standards Defined by state and local law Permit requirementsdesignated uses… TMDLs, sustainable use, basin requirements BMPs, BATs, MSY, EFH… Defined by agreements Institutions & Actors Mayors, city boards, developers, planners, Governors, legislatures, state agencies… Commission,Councils, regional bodies… NMFS, EPA, CZM, NERR… Commission, Councils…

5. EBM Components • Ecosystems • Recognize need for biological diversity • Recognize dynamic nature of ecosystems • Protect ecosystem structure, function and key processes • Accounts for interconnectedness within and among systems • Range of spatial and temporal scales • Intergenerational sustainability • Science • Measurable goals • Decisions informed by good science • Humans • Humans are components of the system • Integrates ecological, social, economic, and institutional perspectives • Stewardship • Approach • Place-based with ecosystem focus • Adaptive management • Precautionary • Public information and participation

6. Case Studies • California Ocean Protection Council • Chesapeake Bay Program • Great Lakes • Gulf of Maine Council • Gulf of Mexico Alliance • Puget Sound Partnership • San Luis Obispo Science and Ecosystem Alliance

7. Coordination and Cooperation

8. Coordination and Cooperation • WHAT INSTITUTIONS ARE INVOLVED? • Federal Agencies • State Agencies • Municipalities • Private Sector • Environmental Organizations • Citizen Groups

9. Coordination and Cooperation • Chesapeake Bay Program: An Example • Signatories to the Agreement • Chesapeake Bay Commission, PA, VA, DC, MD, EPA • Headwater States • DE, NY, WV • Federal Agencies • Chesapeake Bay Environmental Enforcement Coalition, USDA, Department of Commerce, DOD, Department of Education, DOI, US DOT, USPS, U.S. General Services Administration, NASA, National Capital Planning Commission • Others • Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, American Forests, Anacostia Watershed Society, Center for Chesapeake Communities, Center for Watershed Protection, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Chesapeake Bay Trust, Consortium for Int’l Earth Science Information Network, Ducks Unlimited, Ecosystem Solutions, Int’l City/County Management Association, Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin, Low Impact Development Center, Metropolitan Washington Council of Government, Montgomery County Environmental Protection, Nat’l Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Potomac Conservancy, Susquehanna River Basin Commission, Upper Susquehanna Coalition • Academic Institutions • Academy of Natural Sciences, Chesapeake Research Consortium, Cornell Cooperative Extensive, Old Dominion University, Penn State University, SERC, University of Delaware Cooperative Extension, University of MD, University of PA, UVA, Virginia Cooperative Extension Office, Virginia Tech, West Virginia University

10. Chesapeake Bay Watershed New York Pennsylvania Maryland Delaware West Virginia District of Columbia Virginia • 64,000 square miles • 150 major rivers and streams • ~ 16 million people

11. Key Problems 1. Human Population/Land Use Change 2. Water Quality Problems 3. Habitat Degradation 4. Living Resources Decline 5. Toxics/Sediments

12. The Program Partnership Governor of MD Governor of PA Governor of VA Mayor of DC EPA Administrator Executive Council Chair of Chesapeake Bay Commission

13. Chesapeake 2000 Agreement Five Major Areas: • LIVING RESOURCE PROTECTION AND RESTORATION • VITAL HABITAT PROTECTION AND RESTORATION • WATER QUALITY PROTECTION AND RESTORATION • SOUND LAND USE • STEWARDSHIP AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

14. Implementation Categories • Water Quality and Quantity • Habitat Conservation, Preservation and Restoration • Aquatic Living Resources • Land Use • Marine Activities • Human Health and Well-Being

15. Implementation Categories • Water Quality and Quantity • Description. Regulating or restricting activities that impact the marine and freshwater quality (including biological, physical, and chemical integrity) and freshwater quantity. • Ecological Scope. Headwaters to the pelagic marine environment. • Relationship to Other Categories. Water quality and quantity is closely linked with all of the categories described. Water quality and quantity affects habitats, living resources and human health and well-being. Water quantity can also affect land use and maritime activities. All categories can cause impacts to water quality.

16. Implementation Categories • Habitat Conservation, Preservation and Restoration • Description. Conserve, preserve, and restore habitat for the purpose of protecting biodiversity and important places. • Ecological Scope. Entire watershed (both terrestrial and freshwater environments) and the marine environment. • Relationship to Other Categories. Habitat conservation and preservation is directed at protecting a specific ecoregion for its ecological function and intrinsic value, including biodiversity. This category is closely linked to the land use; living resources categories; and human health and well-being objectives, especially culture and recreation. Habitat conservation, often has the added affect of protecting environments beyond the particular habitat conserved. Conflict may arise with other maritime and living resource objectives. Protection of terrestrial habitats may positively affect water quality and negatively interact with land use objectives.

17. Implementation Categories • Aquatic Living Resources • Description.Regulate or manage individual species or groups of species - extraction of target species and non-target species. This category does not include however, regulation of aquaculture or livestock, which are included in maritime activities and land use. • Ecological Scope.The ecological scope of this category includes all land and water within the EBM boundaries. • Relationship to Other Categories.Regulation of living resources has important links to habitat conservation. Also, regulation of living resources can affect water quality – e.g., healthy oyster beds provide a mechanism to maintain water quality. Water quality and quantity can impact the abundance and survival of living resources. Land use and maritime activities may interfere with living resources. Also, extraction of living resources has human health and well-being components, including offering recreational and cultural opportunities as well serving as an important economic resource.

18. Implementation Categories • Land Use • Description. Land uses are wide and varied, ranging from rural practices such as silviculture and agriculture to residential and industrial development to urban infrastructure. Laws and policies affect the uses of lands, development patterns, decisions to engage in, activities, and the practices employed on the lands. • Ecological Scope. The ecological scope of land use includes the entire terrestrial environment, as well as wetlands. • Relationship to Other Categories. Many land use regulations target protection of water quality, closely linking these two categories. Land use decisions may affect habitat conservation and living resources regulation. Also, land use decisions are tightly linked to human health and well-being.

19. Implementation Categories • Marine Activities • Description.Including shipping and navigation, non-living resource use or extraction – e.g., extractive industries such as oil and gas or sand mining, as well as non-living resource uses such as wind farm developments. • Ecological Scope.The ecological scope of maritime activities includes the marine environment from internal waters to offshore activities. • Relationship to Other Categories.Maritime activities may impact water quality and living resources. It is important for human health and well-being by providing important economic resources. It may also adversely affect recreational and cultural activities, as well as human health in some instances. While not directly impacting land use, the presence of maritime activities can affect the nature of surrounding land use, because maritime activities are linked to the land. For example, shipping and oil and gas production may require large land-based transportation infrastructures. Pipelines and cables may run from the terrestrial environment and into the marine environment.

20. Implementation Categories • Human Health and Well-Being • Description.This category specifically focuses on laws and institutions that directly target human health and well-being. • Ecological Scope.The ecological scope of human health and well being covers the entire EBM region. • Relationship to Other Categories.Human health and well-being is a category in and of itself as well as being a universal driver for activities that fall under the previous categories. Legal, regulatory and policy decisions regarding the above categories are often considered within the context of human health and well-being. Conflict may arise both within this category and among other categories. For example, activities that support economic well-being may conflict with those supporting cultural well-being or human health.

21. NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office Activities Coastal Observations Habitat Fisheries Education • Winds, waves, tides, currents, air quality • Remote Sensing • Interpretive Buoys • Student Bay Experiences • Teacher Training • Workshops • Oysters • Submerged Bay Grasses • Community Projects • Blue Crabs • Non-native Oyster Research • Multi-species Management

22. Fisheries Ecosystem Planning • Collaborative effort to develop guidance for Ecosystem-based Approaches to Fisheries Management • FEP for Chesapeake Bay adopted as regional guidance for EBFM

23. Integrated/Ecosystem Approach Future Management Process Current Management Process Striped Bass Striped Bass Menhaden Menhaden Weakfish Weakfish Bluefish Bluefish Spot/Croaker Bay Anchovy Zooplankton

24. Ecosystem Modeling • Chesapeake Bay Fisheries Ecosystem Model (CBFEM) • Data sets from a variety of users (as drivers and validators) • Community review of model • Applications for multi-species interactions

25. Ecocheck • Scientific communication newsletters on timely/topical issues • Chesapeake Bay Report Card and Health Assessment