Full document / COSOC-W-86-002 - the National Sea Grant Library

Full document / COSOC-W-86-002 - the National Sea Grant Library Full document / COSOC-W-86-002 - the National Sea Grant Library

nsgl.gso.uri.edu
from nsgl.gso.uri.edu More from this publisher
11.02.2013 Views

724 Thayer, G.W., M.S. Fonseca arid W.J. Kenwortliy. 1982. Restoration oficagiass meadows for enhancement of nearshore productivity. In: Ning Labbish Chao and William Klrby- Smilh (ed.), Pioceedings of the International Symposium on Utilization ofCoastal Eco systems: Planning, Pollution and Productivity. Nov. 21-27, 1982, Rio Grande, RS- Brasll. Vol.1. Tutin, T.G. 1938. The autecology otZostera marina in lelatlen to its wasting disease. New Phytol. 37:50-71.

Estuarine and CoastalManagement-Tootsof the Trade. Proceedingsof the TenthNationalConference of TheCoastalSociety. October12-15.1986. New Orleans.LA. Copyrightby TheCoastalSociety 1987. Preface EVOLVING RATIONALES FOR FEDERAL HABITAT PROGRAMS Thomas E. Bigforrj Habitat Conservation Branch National Marine Fisheries Service National Oceanicand AtmosphericAdmsuslntion Gloucester. MA 01930-3097 This paper is the opinion of the author. It may not represent the views of other agencies or staff. Nonetheless, it does explain some of the pressures affecting habitat conservation programs during an era of decreasing federal budgets and growing coastal development pressures. Introduction Federal habitat programs In the Northeast, and perhaps elsewhere, are entering a new era In their efforts to restore and protect living marine resources and their habitat. These new challenges to existing programs threaten to change program emphasis, affect the breadth of coastal resource planning, and limit the tools of federal habitat managers. This trend is most obvious at the budget and management decision levels where pressures from development and oonruercial Industries and politics are most severe; fortunately, many staff biologists and planners still operate with the full agency mandates In mind, unperturbed by the neglect accorded to their work by decision-makers. Regardless the inefficiencies and frustrations of this situation will probably continue. Hopefully, habitat conservation programs and employee morale will endure. What Does This Mean to Resource Managers? The Implications of this growing shift are significant. In NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service, habitat conservation has always been a broad concept related to coranercial, recreational, forage, and protected species. Specific mandates provided NMFS with an entree into habitats for existing anadromous and marine species and for historical habitats vital to species under restoration such as Atlantic salmon and striped bass. However, with the narrowed emphasis on habitats related to species with oonrnerical value and with political pressures to support major development 725

Estuarine and CoastalManagement-Tootsof <strong>the</strong><br />

Trade. Proceedingsof <strong>the</strong> Tenth<strong>National</strong>Conference<br />

of TheCoastalSociety. October12-15.19<strong>86</strong>. New<br />

Orleans.LA. Copyrightby TheCoastalSociety<br />

1987.<br />

Preface<br />

EVOLVING RATIONALES FOR FEDERAL HABITAT PROGRAMS<br />

Thomas E. Bigforrj<br />

Habitat Conservation Branch<br />

<strong>National</strong> Marine Fisheries Service<br />

<strong>National</strong> Oceanicand AtmosphericAdmsuslntion<br />

Gloucester. MA 01930-3097<br />

This paper is <strong>the</strong> opinion of <strong>the</strong> author. It may not represent <strong>the</strong><br />

views of o<strong>the</strong>r agencies or staff. None<strong>the</strong>less, it does explain<br />

some of <strong>the</strong> pressures affecting habitat conservation programs<br />

during an era of decreasing federal budgets and growing coastal<br />

development pressures.<br />

Introduction<br />

Federal habitat programs In <strong>the</strong> Nor<strong>the</strong>ast, and perhaps elsewhere,<br />

are entering a new era In <strong>the</strong>ir efforts to restore and protect<br />

living marine resources and <strong>the</strong>ir habitat. These new challenges<br />

to existing programs threaten to change program emphasis, affect<br />

<strong>the</strong> breadth of coastal resource planning, and limit <strong>the</strong> tools of<br />

federal habitat managers. This trend is most obvious at <strong>the</strong><br />

budget and management decision levels where pressures from<br />

development and oonruercial Industries and politics are most<br />

severe; fortunately, many staff biologists and planners still<br />

operate with <strong>the</strong> full agency mandates In mind, unperturbed by <strong>the</strong><br />

neglect accorded to <strong>the</strong>ir work by decision-makers. Regardless <strong>the</strong><br />

inefficiencies and frustrations of this situation will probably<br />

continue. Hopefully, habitat conservation programs and employee<br />

morale will endure.<br />

What Does This Mean to Resource Managers?<br />

The Implications of this growing shift are significant. In NOAA's<br />

<strong>National</strong> Marine Fisheries Service, habitat conservation has always<br />

been a broad concept related to coranercial, recreational, forage,<br />

and protected species. Specific mandates provided NMFS with an<br />

entree into habitats for existing anadromous and marine species<br />

and for historical habitats vital to species under restoration<br />

such as Atlantic salmon and striped bass. However, with <strong>the</strong><br />

narrowed emphasis on habitats related to species with oonrnerical<br />

value and with political pressures to support major development<br />

725

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!