United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office Of Water
Gulf Of Mexico Program
Stennis Space Center, MS 39529
EPA 8OO-S-94-OOZ
July 1994
Habitat Degradation
'O^y
Action Agenda
For The Quit Of Mexico
First Generation—Man;
Committee Report
srnent
Habitat
Degradation
-------
Habitat Degradation
Action Agenda
for the
ulf of Mexico
Recycled/Recyclable '
Printed on paper that.contalris
at least 50% recycled fiber (
-------
Preface
PREFACE
One of the initial goals for the first five years of the Gulf of Mexico
Program was to establish a "framework-for-action" for implementing
management options for pollution controls, determining research
direction and environmental monitoring protocols, and implementing
remedial and restoration measures for environmental losses. As a means
of developing this framework-for-action, the Gulf Program established
eight committees, composed of experts, to deal with the following
environmental issue areas:
Q Habitat Degradation
Q Marine Debris
Q Freshwater Inflow
Q Nutrient Enrichment
Q Toxic Substances & Pesticides
a Public Health
Q Coastal & Shoreline Erosion
Q Living Aquatic Resources
Each committee was charged with: 1) characterizing the status of the issue,
2) developing goals and objectives for remedial and restoration activities,
and 3) developing descriptions of the projects and tasks to be implemented
in order to achieve the stated objectives. This information was
incorporated into an "Action Agenda" for each environmental issue area.
This document is the first generation of one of these Action Agendas.
Representing the consensus of a large number of subject specialists, this
document is considered to be a draft working paper for the Gulf of Mexico
Program Management Committee. Since this first generation Action
Agenda has not been reviewed and approved by all agencies, it is being
made available for informational purposes only.
Gulf of Mexico Program Action Agenda
-------
-------
Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Gulf of Mexico contains ecological and commercial riches matched by few other
bodies of water. Yet its blue-green waters disguise the increasing environmental
threats that endanger those resources. In recognition of these threats, Regions 4 and
6 of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), which share jurisdiction ;
over the five Gulf Coast States (Alabama/Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas),
initiated the Gulf of Mexico Program in August 1988. The goal of the Gulf of Mexico
Program is to protect, restore, and enhance the coastal and marine waters of the Gulf
of Mexico and its coastal natural habitats, to sustain living resources, to protect
human health and the food supply, and to ensure the recreational use of Gulf
shores/beaches, and waters—in ways consistent with the economic well being of the
region.
The Gulf of Mexico Program is a cooperative partnership among federal, state, and
local government agencies, as well as with people and groups who use the Gulf of
Mexico. During the early stages of Program development, eight priority
environmental problems were identified and the following Issue Committees have
been established to address each of these problems: Marine Debris, Public Health,
Habitat Degradation, Coastal & Shoreline Erosion, Nutrient Enrichment, Toxic
Substances & Pesticides, Freshwater Inflow, and Living Aquatic Resources. There
are important linkages among these various Issue Committees, and the Gulf of
Mexico Program works to coordinate and integrate activities among them.
The Habitat Degradation Committee was charged with characterizing habitat
degradation problems and identifying ways to restore damaged habitat and prevent
this damage from continuing. The Issue Committee has been meeting for more
than four years—to review information and data collected by citizens and scientists,
identify problem areas, discuss actions that can resolve the problems, and evaluate
methods for achieving and monitoring results. The culmination of Issue
Committee efforts is this Habitat Degradation Action Agenda which specifies an
initial set of activities needed to reduce, and eventually eliminate, habitat
degradation in the Gulf of Mexico. This Action Agenda is the first generation of an
evolving series of Action Agendas that will be developed to meet the future needs
of the Gulf of Mexico.
Chapter 1 of the Action Agenda provides an overview of Gulf of Mexico resources,
and the threats now facing those resources. In addition, Chapter 1 describes the
structure of the Gulf of Mexico Program including the Action Agenda development
process.
Chapter 2 is a summary of the scientific characterization information compiled by
the Habitat Degradation Committee. Chapter 2 is currently heavily focused on
coastal wetland and seagrass habitats of the Gulf of Mexico coastal plain, because the
characterization work describing the status and trends of areal coverage of these
habitats has been completed. The Issue Committee acknowledges the need for
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation-Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Executive Summary
further characterization work and addresses this need through action items in
Chapter 4. Action items for eliminating habitat degradation in non-wetland coastal
habitats will be addressed in future iterations of this Action Agenda as additional
characterization research is completed.
Chapter 3 describes the legal and institutional framework currently in place in the
Gulf of Mexico to address habitat degradation issues and support protection and
restoration efforts.
Chapter 4, The Unfinished Agenda, contains the goals, objectives, and specific
activities established by the Gulf of Mexico Program to address habitat degradation.
The two long-term goals established by the Habitat Degradation Committee are to:
Q Protect, restore, enhance, and create Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Q Foster public understanding, appreciation, and stewardship of Gulf of
Mexico habitats.
Forty-two action items have been developed to support these goals and are grouped
under six types of activities and ten objectives (see index of Habitat Degradation
Objectives). The action items included in Chapter 4 have been screened by the Gulf
of Mexico Program and represent those activities that are currently the most
significant and most achievable. This is a fairly comprehensive, but not exhaustive,
list. This document begins an evolving process of Action Agendas in which action
items are designated, implemented, and then reassessed as progress in the Gulf is
made. In the future, new action items will be developed to meet the changing needs
in the Gulf of Mexico.
Action items contained in Chapter 4 are not listed in priority order. Each action
item is supported by one or more project descriptions. Some of the actions are
already underway but not yet completed. Others are included because they will
guide federal, state, and local government agencies and private sector organizations
in allocating resources where they are most needed and in justifying future
management strategies. This Action Agenda should prompt specific agencies and
groups to become involved.
The Gulf of Mexico Program recently developed ten short-term environmental
challenges to restore and maintain the environmental and economic health of the
Gulf. Within the next five years (1993-1997), through an integrated effort that
complements existing local, state, and federal programs, the Program has pledged
efforts to obtain the knowledge and resources to:
Q Significantly reduce the rate of loss of coastal wetlands.
D Achieve an increase in Gulf Coast seagrass beds.
D Enhance the sustainability of Gulf commercial and recreational fisheries.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Executive Summary
G Protect the human health and fopd supply by reducing input of nutrients, toxic substances, and
pathogens to the Gulf.
Q Increase Gulf shellfish beds available for safe harvesting by ten percent.
Q Ensure that all Gulf beaches are safe for swimming and recreational uses.
Q Reduce by at least ten percent the amount of trash on beaches.
O Improve and expand coastal habitats that support migratory birds, fish, and other living
resources.
Q Expand public education/outreach tailored for each Gulf Coast county or parish.
Q Reduce critical coastal and shoreline erosion.
This Habitat Degradation Action Agenda supports these five-year environmental
challenges.
For the public, this Gulf of Mexico Action Agenda should serve three purposes.
First, it should reflect the public will with regard to addressing habitat degradation.
Second, it should communicate what activities are needed for eliminating habitat
degradation and provide the momentum for initiating these actions. Third, it
should provide baseline information from which success can be measured.
This Action Agenda is a living document; therefore, the Gulf of Mexico Habitat
Degradation Committee intends to periodically revise and update this document.
Gulf of Mexieo Habitat Degradation Actiion Agenda (4.1)
iii
-------
Executive Summary
Index of Habitat Degradation Objectives
Monitoring & Assessment
Objective: Assess the status and trends of important Gulf of Mexico coastal habitats to establish a framework
for developing corrective measures and setting priorities.
Objective: Identify the causes of habitat declines in the Gulf of Mexico region to assist in determining
necessary and appropriate corrective measures.
Objective: Plan and monitor pilot restoration projects Gulfwide in coordination with local, state, and other
federal programs, and evaluate the effectiveness of enhancement, restoration, and creation in replacing Gulf of
Mexico habitats.
Research
Objective: Conduct research to increase knowledge of the functions of Gulf of Mexico habitats and to
determine the relationships between habitat types and the effects of stress on these habitats.
Objective: Conduct research to improve habitat restoration and enhancement projects in the Gulf of Mexico.
Planning & Standards
Objective: Enhance the effectiveness of federal and state standards and management programs to protect and
conserve coastal habitats in the Gulf of Mexico region.
Compliance & Enforcement
Objective: Provide maximum protection for Gulf of Mexico habitats by assuring full compliance with federal
and state regulatory permit conditions and vigorous violation detection and resolution.
Preservation & Protection
Objective: Provide a comprehensive preservation and protection framework for Gulf of Mexico habitats of
significant ecological value.
Public Education & Outreach
Objective: Develop educational materials and programs to promote awareness and appreciation of Gulf of
Mexico habitats, as well as their value and importance.
Objective: Prevent or correct Gulf of Mexico habitat degradation and loss through public involvement
activities.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
IV
-------
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables „ vii
List of Figures.................. viii
1 OVERVIEW OF THE GULF OF MEXICO. 1
The Gulf of Mexico -A Vast & Valuable Resource......................... 1
The Gulf of Mexico - A Resource at Risk..................................... 3
The Gulf of Mexico Program - Goals & Structure.................. 4
The Habitat Degradation Committee............................ 9
2 HABITAT DEGRADATION IN THE GULF OF MEXICO. 11
Geographical & Ecological Limits.... 11
Value of Gulf Resources................. 11
Climatological Influences..... 14
Causes of Habitat Degradation.............................................. 15
Status of Habitats in the Gulf of Mexico.. 17
State-By-State Overview.... 29
Alabama[[[ 29
Florida 29
Louisiana[[[ 3O
Mississippi.... „ 31
Texas...................... 31
-------
TabDe of Contents
THE UNFINISHED AGENDA 35
Goal. 35
Action Agenda Framework.... 35
Monitoring & Assessment 41
Research. 54
Planning & Standards[[[ 6O
Compliance & Enforcement.................................................. 68
Preservation & Protection 72
Public Education & Outreach.. 76
In Closing..... 83
Bibliography............. 84
APPENDIX A Federal & State Framework................ 92
APPENDIX B Acronym Guide.................. 13O
APPENDIX C Glossary.... , 133
APPENDIX D Participants in the Action Agenda Development Process....... 137
-------
List of Tables
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1
Totals (Acres) of Selected Wetlands
by State for the Gulf of Mexico
14
_
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
vii
-------
List of Figures
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Gulf of Mexico Coastal Population
per Shoreline Mile
Figure 1.2 Gulf Program Structured Partnership 6
Figure 2.1 Wetland Resources of the Gulf of Mexico .„ 12
Figure 2.2 Coastal Habitats of the Gulf of Mexico.... 18
Figure 2.3 Zones & Localities of Major Biogeographical
Significance in the Gulf of Mexico.
26
Figure 2.4 Locations of Known Chemosynthetic
Communities at Hydrocarbon Seeps in the
Northern Gulf of Mexico................................
28
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
viii
-------
Overview of the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 1
OVERVIEW OF THE GULF OF MEXICO
The Gulf of Mexico - A Vaslt & Valuable Resource
Bounded by a shoreline that reaches northwest from Florida along the shores of
Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, and then southwest along Texas and Mexico,
the Gulf of Mexico is the ninth largest body of water in the world. The Gulf's U.S.
coastline measures approximately 2,609 km (1,631 miles)—longer than the Pacific
coastline of California, Oregon, and Washington. The Gulf region covers more than
1.6 million km2 (617,600 mi2) and contains one of the nation's most extensive
barrier-island systems, outlets from 33 major river systems, and 207 estuaries (Buff
and Turner, 1987). In addition, the Gulf receives the drainage of the Mississippi
River, the largest river in North America and one of the major rivers of the world.
A cornerstone of the nation's economy, the Gulf's diverse and productive
ecosystem provides a variety of valuable resources and services, including
transportation, recreation, fish and shellfish, and petroleum and minerals.
Encompassing over two million hectares (five million acres) (about half of the
national total), Gulf of Mexico coastal wetlands serve as essential habitat for a large
percentage of the U.S.'s migrating waterfowl (USEPA, 1991). Mudflats, salt marshes,
mangrove swamps, and barrier island beaches of the Gulf also provide year-round
nesting and feeding grounds for abundant numbers of gulls, terns, and other
shorebirds. Five species of endangered whales, including four baleen whales and
one toothed whale, are found in Gulf waters. These waters also harbor the
endangered American crocodile and five species of endangered or threatened sea
turtles (loggerhead, green, leatherback, hawksbill, and Kemp's Ridley). The
endangered West Indian (or Florida) manatee inhabits waterways and bays along the
Florida peninsula. The Gulf of Mexico also provides essential habitat for the
endangered brown pelican and the threatened piping plover and Arctic peregrine
falcon.
In addition, a complex network of channels and wetlands within the Gulf shoreline
provides habitat for estuarine-dependent commercial and recreational fisheries.
The rich waters yielded approximately 771 million kg (1.7 billion pounds) of fish and
shellfish in 1991. Worth more than $641 million at dockside, this harvest
represented 19 percent of the total annual domestic harvest of commercial fish
(USDOC, 1992). The Gulf boasts the largest and most valuable shrimp fishery in the
U.S. and also contributed 41 percent of the U.S. total oyster production in 1991
(USDOC, 1992). Other Gulf fisheries include diverse shellfisheries for crabs and
spiny lobsters and finfisheries for menhaden, herring, mackerel, tuna, grouper,
snapper, drum, and flounder. The entire U.S. Gulf of Mexico fishery yields more
finfish, shrimp, and shellfish annually than the South and Mid-Atlantic,
Chesapeake, and Great Lakes regions combined.
Gulf of Mexleo Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Overview of the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 1
The Gulf's bountiful waters draw millions of sport fishermen and beach users each
year. It is estimated that the Gulf supports more than one-third of the nation's
marine recreational fishing, hosting four million fishermen in 1985 who caught an
estimated 42 million fish (USDOC, 1992). Popular nearshore catches include sea
trout (weak fish), cobia, redfish, flounder, grouper, red snapper, mackerel, and
tarpon; offshore catches include blue marlin, white marlin, sailfish, swordfish,
dolphin, and wahoo. Tourism-related dollars in the Gulf Coast States contribute an
estimated $20 billion to the economy each year (USEPA, 1991).
Gulf oil and gas production are equally valuable to the region's economy and are a
critical part of the nation's total energy supply. In 1990, more than 1,600 Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) leases were in production, yielding approximately 90
percent of U.S. offshore production. These OCS royalties annually contribute about
$3 billion to the Federal Treasury. Thirty-eight percent of all petroleum and 48
percent of all natural gas reserves in the U.S. are estimated to be in the Gulf of
Mexico. The industry employs some 30,000 people in the Gulf of Mexico.
Approximately 45 percent of U.S. shipping tonnage passes through Gulf ports,
including four of the nation's busiest: Corpus Christi, Houston/Galveston, Tampa,
and New Orleans. The second largest marine transport industry in the world is
located in the Gulf of Mexico. According to USEPA, vessel trips in and out of
American Gulf ports and harbors exceeded an estimated 600,000 trips in 1986. The
U.S. Navy is also implementing its Gulf Coast Homeporting Plan, designed to dock
at least 25 vessels in Ingelside, TX, Pascagoula, MS, and Mobile, AL.
Millions of people depend on the Gulf of Mexico to earn a living and flock to its
shores and waters for entertainment and relaxation. The temperate climate and
abundant resources are attracting more and more people. The region currently
ranks fourth in total population among the five U.S. coastal regions, accounting for
13 percent of the nation's total coastal population. Although the Gulf region is not
as densely settled as others, it is experiencing the second fastest rate of growth;
between 1970 and 1980, the population grew by more than 30 percent (USDOC,
1990b). According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Gulf's total coastal
population is projected to increase by 144 percent between 1960 and 2010, to almost
18 million people. Figure 1.1 shows the Gulf of Mexico coastal population density
or population per shoreline mile projected to the year 2010. Florida's population
alone is expected to have skyrocketed by more than 300 percent by the year 2010. The
increasing coastal population is of concern because as the population increases, so
does the potential for environmental degradation.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
2
-------
Overview of the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 1
Figure 1.1 Gulf of Mexico Coastal Population per Shoreline Mile
•"SaaSsfc.
(Source: USDOC, 1990b)
The Gulf's resources and environmental quality are affected not only by the
millions living and working in the region, but also by activities occurring
throughout much of the nation. Two-thirds of the land area of the contiguous U.S.
drains into the Gulf, bringing with it potential environmental problems associated
with pesticides, fertilizers, toxic substances, and trash.
The Gulf of Mexico - A Resource At Risk
Increasing population pressures mean increased use and demands on Gulf of
Mexico resources. Until recently, the Gulf was considered too vast to be affected by
pollution and overuse. Recent trends indicate, however, serious long-term
environmental damage unless action is initiated today. Potential problems or
causes of degradation throughout the Gulf system include the following (USEPA,
1991):
Fish kills and toxic "red tides," and "brown tides" were an increasing
phenomenon in Gulf waters during the 1980s.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Ov&rvl&w of the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 1
Q Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas are among those states that
discharge the greatest amount of toxic chemicals into coastal waters.
Q Diversions and consumptive use for human activities have resulted in
significant changes in the quantity and timing of freshwater inflows to
the Gulf of Mexico.
Q More than half of the shellfish-producing areas along the Gulf Coast
are permanently or conditionally closed. These closure areas are
growing as a result of increasing human and domestic animal
populations along the Gulf Coast (USDOC, 1991a).
Q Louisiana is losing valuable coastal wetlands at the rate of
approximately 14-66 km2/year (5-25 mi2/year) (Dunbar, et ai, 1992).
Q Almost 1,800 kg/mi (2 tons/mi) of marine trash covered Texas beaches
in 1988.
Q Up to 9,500 km2 (4,000 mi2) of oxygen deficient (hypoxia) bottom waters,
known as the "dead zone," have been documented off the Louisiana
and Texas coasts (Rabalais, et al., 1991).
Q Gulf shorelines are eroding up to 30 m/year (100 ft/year). Few coastal
reaches in the Gulf can be characterized as "stable" or "accreting."
The Gulf of Mexico Program - Goals & Structure
Problems plaguing the Gulf cannot be addressed in a piecemeal fashion. These
problems and the resources needed to address them are too great. The Gulf of
Mexico Program (GMP) was formed to pioneer a broad, geographic focus in order to
address major environmental issues in the Gulf before the damage is irreversible or
too costly to correct.
The program is part of a cooperative effort with other agencies and organizations in
the five Gulf States, as well as with people and groups who use the Gulf. In addition
to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), other participating federal
government agencies include: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA), U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC), U.S. Department of Defense
(USDOD), U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE), U.S. Department of the Interior
(USDOI), U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), U.S. Food & Drug
Administration (USFDA), and Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry
(ATSDR).
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Overview of the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 1
The Gulf of Mexico Program also works in coordination and cooperation with five
National Estuary Programs (NEPs) within the Gulf: Tampa Bay, Sarasota Bay,
Galveston Bay, Corpus Christi Bay, and the Barataria-Terrebonne Estuarine
Complex. The Gulf of Mexico Program supports and builds on certain activities of
these programs, bringing a Gulfwide focus and providing a forum for addressing
issues of Gulfwide concern.
By building on and enhancing programs already underway, as well as by
coordinating new activities, the Gulf of Mexico Program will serve as a catalyst for
change. The program's overall goals are to provide:
Q A mechanism for addressing complex problems that cross federal, state,
and international jurisdictional lines;
Q Better coordination among federal, state, and local programs, thus
increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of the long-term effort to
manage and protect Gulf resources;
Q A regional perspective to address research needs, which will result in
improved transfer of information and methods for supporting
effective management decisions; and
Q A forum for affected groups using the Gulf, for public and private
educational institutions, and for the general public to participate in the
solution process.
The Gulf of Mexico Program is supported by four committees: Policy Review Board
(PRB), Management Committee (MC), Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), and
Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) (see Figure 1.2). Composed of 20 senior level
representatives of state and federal agencies and representatives of the technical and
citizens committees, the Policy Review Board guides and reviews overall program
activities. The Management Committee guides and manages Gulf of Mexico
Program operations and directs the Action Agenda activities of the Issue
Committees. The Citizens Advisory Committee is composed of five governor-
appointed citizens who represent environmental, fisheries, agricultural,
business/industrial, and development/tourism interests in each of the five Gulf
Coast States. This committee provides public input and assistance in publicizing the
Gulf of Mexico Program's goals and results. Representatives of state and federal
agencies, the academic community, and the private and public sectors are members
of the Technical Advisory Committee and provide technical support to the
Management Committee.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Overview of the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 1
Figure* 1.2
Gulf Program Structured Partnership
I Policy Review Board I
| ClUzviw Advisory 1
I Cwnmltt** •
r..
1 U«u* Co
I C*-Ch>tr Rovlow I
1 Council • Public
it Cemmltt** 1
1 T«ehnlo«l Advisory 1
1 Cemmltto* I
nmlltooc
•gradation
Health
Freshwater Inllow
Marine Debris
Coastal & Shoreline Erosion
Nutrient Enrichment
Toxic Substances &
Pesticides
Living Aquatic Resources
Progrnm Oaoratlane Support
X" V
Gulf of Mexico
Program Office
Public Education &
Outreach Operations
Data & Information
Transfer Operations
\^ ^^
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Overview of the Gulf of Mexico
Chanter 1
The Gulf of Mexico Program has established the following eight Issue Committees,
each co-chaired by one federal and one state representative, to address priority
environmental problems:
Q Habitat Degradation of such areas as coastal wetlands, seagrass beds,
and sand dunes;
Q Freshwater Inflow changes resulting from reservoir construction,
diversions for municipal, industrial, and agricultural purposes, and
modifications to watersheds with concomitant alteration of runoff
patterns;
Q Nutrient Enrichment resulting from such sources as municipal waste
water treatment plants, storm water, industries, and agriculture;
Q Toxic Substances & Pesticides contamination originating from
industrial and agriculturally based sources;
Q Coastal & Shoreline Erosion caused by natural and human-related
activities;
Q Public Health threats from swimming in and eating seafood products
coming from contaminated water;
Q Marine Debris from land-based and marine recreational and
commercial sources; and
Q Living Aquatic Resources.
Two cross-cutting technical operating committees support the public education and
information and resource management functions of the eight environmental Issue
Committees. These are:
Q Public Education & Outreach Operations
Q Data & Information Transfer Operations
The action planning process used by each Gulf of Mexico Program Issue Committee
includes the following key activities:
Q Definition of environmental issues;
Q Characterization of identified problems, including sources, resources,
and impacts;
Q Establishment of goals and objectives;
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Overview of the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 1
Q Evaluation/assessment of corrective actions and control measures,
including cost/benefit analysis;
Q Selection of priority action items;
Q Establishment of measures of success;
Q Implementation of actions; and
Q Evaluation of success and revision of the Action Agenda.
As the Issue Committees progress through each of these activities^ ample
opportunities are provided for public review and Policy Review Board endorsement
is requested at appropriate points. The Gulf of Mexico Program will continuously
work to integrate related activities of the eight Issue Committees. Through the
consensus of Program participants, a coordinated response will be directed to the
successful maintenance and enhancement of resources of the Gulf of Mexico.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Overview of the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 1
The Habitat Degradation Committee
The Co-Chairs and membership of the Habitat Degradation Committee are as
follows:
Co-Chairs:
Larry Goldman
Eugene Turner
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Louisiana State University
Members:
Steve Branstetter
Carl Brown
Tom Calnan
William Cibula
Art Dyas
Johnny French
Gary Gaston
Bill Good
Kenneth Haddad
Kenneth Heck
Rex Herron
Clyde Hoef t
Bill Kruczynski*
Bennett Landreneau
Larry Lewis
Robin Lewis
Andreas Mager Jr.
Paul Montagna
Rudy Nyc
Leland Roberts
Robert Rogers
Stephanie Sanzone
Peter Sheridan
Brent Smith
Robert Stewart Jr.
Ronald Ventola
*Previous Co-Chair
Gulf & South Atlantic Fisheries Development Foundation, Inc.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Texas General Land Office
National Aeronautics & Space Administration
Southeastern Natural Resources—CAC
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
University of Mississippi
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources
Florida Department of Natural Resources
Dauphin Island Sea Lab
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 4
Soil Conservation Service
Brown & Mitchell
Lewis Environmental Services, Inc.
National Marine Fisheries Service
University of Texas
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department
Minerals Management Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Department of Energy
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Overview of the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 1
The Habitat Degradation Committee developed the following long-term goals for
addressing habitat degradation in the Gulf of Mexico:
Q Protect, restore, enhance, and create Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Q Foster public understanding, appreciation, and stewardship of Gulf of
Mexico habitats.
In developing this draft Action Agenda, the Habitat Degradation Committee has
sought input and advice from other technical Issue Committees as well as from
organizations, interest groups, and private concerns outside of the Gulf of Mexico
Program. An "Action Agenda Workshop" was sponsored by the Issue Committee
in New Orleans, LA, on January 8-10,1992. Approximately 40 persons comprising a
mix of Program and non-Program participants gathered to review an early version
of this Action Agenda. In addition to Gulf of Mexico Program participants,
representatives from the following agencies, organizations, and industries attended
the workshop: Chevron, Office of the Governor of Louisiana, Center for Marine
Conservation, Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries, Mote Marine
Laboratory, Mississippi Power Company, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management
Council, The Nature Conservancy, Louisiana Landowners Association, Alabama
Department of Environmental Management, and Florida Audubon Society. That
workshop generated a significant number of comments that were addressed in the
present document. (See Appendix D: Participants in the Action Agenda
Development Process.)
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
10
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
HABITAT DEGRADATION IN THE GULF OF MEXICO
Geographical & Ecological Limitations of This Action
Agenda
This section describes the function and status of coastal habitats that nourish marine
and estuarine species along the Gulf of Mexico coast. For the purposes of this Action
Agenda, habitats are defined as those elements of an environment that sustain
organisms and communities. Funding and scheduling restrictions allowed the
Habitat Degradation Committee to consider only those habitats occurring between
the seaward edge of the continental shelf [water depth about 200 m (656 ft)] and the
landward limits of coastal management zones defined by each state. However, it is
recognized that many valuable habitats exist outside this area which contribute to
the biodiversity of the Gulf region. In addition, this Habitat Degradation Action
Agenda is heavily focused on coastal wetland and seagrass habitats of the Gulf of
Mexico coastal plain because the characterization work describing the status and
trends of areal coverage of these habitats has been completed. Action items for
addressing degradation of non-wetland coastal habitats will be addressed in future
versions of this document. Figure 2.1 depicts the wetland resources of the Gulf of
Mexico region.
Value of Gulf Resources
Coastal habitats provide food and shelter for many coastal species, including some
that are considered threatened or endangered by extinction. For example, five
species of threatened or endangered sea turtles inhabit the coastlines of all five Gulf
Coast States. Other documented rarities which are found in Gulf coastal habitats are
the West Indian manatee, Florida panther, key deer, Mississippi sandhill crane,
Florida everglade kite, Arctic peregrine falcon, Kirtland's warbler, red-cockaded
woodpecker, piping plover, whooping crane, gopher tortoise, pine barrens tree frog,
and red hills salamander (USDOI, 1980).
Coastal emergent wetland habitats, such as salt marshes and mangrove forests,
seagrass beds, and reefs provide a nursery habitat for many species and offer
protective cover from prey. Also, coastal wetlands contribute organic matter to the
estuarine food web and are integral to the processing and flow of nutrients needed
by marine life.
Coastal wetlands provide habitats for numerous species of sport and commercial
fishes. In the Gulf of Mexico alone, an estimated 95 percent of commercial fish
landed and 85 percent of the sport fish catch (by weight) spend at least a portion of
their lives in coastal wetland arid estuarine habitats (Thayer and Ustach, 1981;
Lindall and Thayer, 1982).
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
11
-------
,' '•-' t >
^' X- A J .
•—-' / v - '
J- •- f i
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
12
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
Annually, Gulf of Mexico habitats yield more than 771 million kg (1.7 billion
pounds) of fish and shellfish; in addition, the Gulf contains six of the top ten fishery
ports in the nation by weight (USDOC, 1992), Bell (1989) studied the importance of
estuarine wetlands to commercial and recreational marine fisheries in Florida and
found that wetlands were linked to approximately 80 percent of the total weight of
fish landed by recreational fishermen and to nearly 92 percent of Florida's
commercial landings. These data are probably applicable to the Gulf Coast in
general.
Because they store water, wetland habitats can play a significant role in controlling
flood waters. Wetlands associated with streams can absorb flood waters, decrease the
velocities of stream waters, reduce downstream peaks during flooding, and decrease
the duration of floods. They also may lessen wind damage to inland areas during
storms and hurricanes and reduce the impact of droughts by holding and slowly
releasing water.
Wetland habitats also tend to purify waters by acting as natural filters. They remove
organic pollutants, excess nutrients, and suspended particles from water as it flows
from the land to the sea. Because of this capacity, natural and created wetlands have
been used to treat waste waters (Sather and Smith, 1984).
Although it is difficult to place a monetary value on many coastal habitat functions,
several studies have quantified the role of coastal wetlands in fisheries production.
For example, data presented by Turner and Boesch (1987) support the hypothesis
that wetland habitat quality and quantity control adult stocks of penaeid shrimp.
Also, the fact that other aquatic animals inhabit similar ecosystems and have similar
life histories implies that the quantity and quality of these habitats directly limit the
productivity of other fisheries as well. In a 1982 study, Turner concluded that, if the
reported figure of a one percent loss of wetland habitats per year is equivalent to a
one percent decline in the potential fishing yield, then the impact on cumulative
loss in dockside dollar value over a 20-year period (1982-2002) would be $380 million
(Turner, 1982).
The Gulf of Mexico's coastal estuaries, wetlands, and barrier islands also support
large populations of wildlife, including waterfowl, shorebirds, and colonial nesting
birds. For example, the Gulf provides essential habitat for a large percentage of the
migratory waterfowl crossing the U.S.
The coastal zone of the Gulf of Mexico is endowed with immensely productive
habitats whose ecological functions enhance all of the Gulf's wildlife and fishery
resources. The Gulf Coast contributes approximately half of the nation's total
wetland areas (USEPA, 1988). The Gulf of Mexico provides approximately 19 percent
of commercial fish landings, supports the most valuable shrimp fishery in the U.S.,
and contributes approximately 41 percent of the U.S. total oyster production
annually (USDOC, 1992). This may be due to the vast acreage of wetland habitats
which contribute to the productivity of Gulf Coast estuaries.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
13
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
The pressure to develop coastal habitats has not abated despite increased awareness
of the value of these natural habitats, particularly emergent marshes, mangroves,
and submerged aquatic vegetation. The most recent comprehensive summary of
current emergent wetland acreage was performed by the National Oceanic &
Atmospheric Administration (Field et al, 1991). Current acreage estimates for Gulf
Coast States are summarized in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1
Totals (Acres) of Selected Wetlands by State for the Gulf of Mexico1-*
State
Texas
Louisiana
Mississippi
Alabama
Florida
Salt Marsh
432,000
1,722,800
58,800
25,500
257,200
Fresh Marsh
(Tidal)
22,500
65,000.
_3
100
9,800
Forested
Scrub-Shrub
(Estuarine)
2,600
10,200
900
2,800
613,700
Forested
Scrub-Shrub
(Tidal Fresh)
7,400
4,800
--
2,000
18,400
Tidal
Flats
275,100
31,800
2,300
4,100
192,900
Total
739,600
1,834,600
62,000
34,500
1,092,000
Percentage
of Total
20
49
2
0
29
TOTALS
2,496,300
97,400
630,200
32,600
506,200 3,762,700
1 Acreage originally reported as acres x 100
2 Calculations based on USFWS wetland inventory maps
3 None recorded
(Source: USDOC, 1991)
Climatological Influences
Habitats are unique combinations of ecological variables including primary
productivity, nutrient availability, and physical structure. These factors are, in turn,
influenced by seasonal and daily climatic changes, tidal regime, the amount and
distribution of rainfall, temperature ranges, and the type and distribution of soils.
Catastrophic events, such as floods, droughts, and hurricanes, are overprinted on
local climatic conditions.
Both latitude and orientation are important in the evolution of Gulf coastal
habitats. The region is subtropical which both defines and limits habitat diversity.
Darnell (1992) observed that the Gulf shoreline has an east-west orientation
throughout most of its length and is directly exposed to north-south winds
throughout much of the year. North winds generate colder temperatures than
normal for subtropical latitudes, and prolonged southerly winds result in water
levels higher than predicted. Year round, incoming radiation exceeds outgoing
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
14
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
radiation by about 0.0003 cal cm'2 sec"1 at this latitude (Weyl, 1970). As a result/
evaporation often exceeds precipitation, resulting in increased salinity which is
periodically offset by heavy rainfall or flooding. Hypersaline basins develop along
the South Texas Coast where rainfall and runoff are low and circulation is limited.
Hurricanes, originating from a south-southeasterly direction, occur on an average of
once every two years and may generate waves with heights of 6 m (19 ft) or greater
(Darnell, 1992). Waves of that magnitude are capable of flooding most coastal fresh
and salt water wetland habitats. Floods caused by excess rainfall in the watersheds of
area rivers reduce temperatures and salinities in coastal habitats. In summary, Gulf
coastal habitats are marked by a tolerance for temperature and salinity extremes not
common in other locations at similar latitudes. Accommodation of this tolerance
has resulted in the biodiversity found in the area.
Causes of Habitat Degradation
Coastal habitats are extremely vulnerable to natural and human-induced
destructive forces. Adverse human activities include the construction of canals and
channels; dredging; disposing of spoil (dredged material); draining and filling;
industrial, municipal, and agricultural point and nonpoint source discharges and
runoff; and construction of darns upstream on rivers, resulting in the loss of
freshwater inflows and sediment deposition to coastal estuaries. Human activities
far upstream from Gulf of Mexico estuaries can also seriously degrade coastal
habitats. These upstream activities include reduction of sediments and freshwater
inflows through dam construction and nutrient-laden storm water runoff from
urban areas and farms. Physical and biological processes that can adversely affect
coastal wetland habitats include erosion, rising sea level, subsidence (i.e., the sinking
of wetlands and their replacement by open water), storms and droughts,
phytoplankton blooms, plant diseases, and "eat-outs" by animals (e.g. nutria).
Subsidence, an ongoing natural occurrence, is the fate of delta marshes that undergo
cyclic periods of construction and deterioration. Much of the subsidence resulting in
wetland losses is probably caused by oil and gas extraction (White and Calnan, 1990).
The destructive phase occurs when subsidence rates exceed the accumulation rates
of organic and inorganic materials. This results in the loss of large areas of wetlands
(Leibowitz and Hill, in preparation). Rising sea level can cause or hasten the
conversion of subsiding wetlands to open water habitats. Darnell (1992) estimates
that sea level has risen by 130 rn (426 ft) in the past 18,000 years and converted most
of the continental shelf to an open water habitat. Natural events (hurricanes and
storms), and oil, gas, and water extraction, and other human activities that disrupt
hydrologic and sedimentation patterns accelerate this cycle. For example, of the
more than 8,000 hectares (20,000 acres) of submerged vegetation that were located
and mapped in Mississippi Sound in 1969, about 4,700 hectares (11,650 acres) were
lost to Hurricane Camille (Eleuterius and Miller, 1976).
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
Construction and maintenance of dams in Texas and navigation canals and levees
in Louisiana are major causes of changes in sedimentation patterns and wetland
loss in these states (Johnson and Gosselink, 1982; Turner, 1987; Turner et al., 1982;
Chabreck, 1982; Lindall et al., 1979; Baumann and Turner, 1990). Johnson and
Gosselink (1982) reported that construction of canals contributes directly and
indirectly to the disappearance of Louisiana's coastal wetlands. First, dredging to
create the canals results in the conversion of wetlands to open water. Then
propeller wash from both high speed pleasure boats and large, slow moving ships
erodes the banks and widens the canals, resulting in further wetland losses. In
addition, canal construction related to oil and gas production, especially those that
breach natural ridges, can result in saltwater intrusion which has resulted in the loss
of many acres of Louisiana's freshwater coastal marshes. The end result has been a
dramatic decrease in Louisiana's marshes and swamps and a concurrent increase in
areas of open water, mud flats, canals, and spoil disposal sites.
Historic dredging and filling operations in coastal habitats have significantly altered
the ecological balance of many coastal ecosystems throughout the Gulf Coast. For
example, Taylor and Saloman (1968) demonstrated that dredging and filling for a
development near Tampa, Florida, resulted in the loss of an estimated 1 million kg
(1,100 tons) of seagrass, 1.6 million kg (1,800 tons) of invertebrates, and 66 thousand
kg (73 tons) of fishery products. "
Urban development and population increases affect coastal wetlands, often resulting
in coastal habitat losses and water quality degradation. As new homes are
constructed, in many localities, the original sand or drained marsh is covered with
lawn grasses that are fertilized, watered, and treated with pesticides and herbicides.
Runoff from lawns carries the nutrients and pesticides, as well as particulate
material, into the poorly flushed canals. Hopkinson and Day (1979) found that
nutrient runoff and subsequent episodes of hypoxia, resulting from eutrophication,
have caused fish kills, in Louisiana's Lake Cataouatche, following storm runoff from
the West Bank area of New Orleans. These fish kills indicate that the lake is losing
its value as a prime nursery area for commercial fish and other aquatic organisms.
Water quality in canals and adjacent waters is further reduced because of failed
septic tank systems (USEPA, 1982) and by other pollutants such as oil, gasoline, and
detergents related to shoreline development. Broutman and Leonard (1988) found
that sources of fecal coliform pollution that contribute to the permanent or
temporary closing of shellfish areas include sewage treatment plants that discharge
inadequately treated wastes or raw sewage through an outfall pipe during an
overload period; "straight pipes" through which untreated sewage is discharged
directly; industrial discharges; septic systems that leach improperly treated material
to surface waters; raw sewage from boats; urban runoff from storm sewers and
drainage ditches; overland runoff from urban areas; runoff from agricultural
operations and feedlots; and runoff from wildlife areas.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
Status of Habitats in 1:he Gulf of Mexico*
"NOTE: This section Is not Intended to provide a comprehensive characterization, but
rather an overview of the habitats found In the Gulf of Mexico region.
In this section, coastal habitats are described sequentially from infrequently flooded
land to the abyssal plain (see Figure 2.2). Habitat names were liberally adopted from
Cowardin et al. (1979). Coastal terrestrial habitats, although important ecologically,
will be evaluated more extensively in future versions of this document.
The Gulf of Mexico is bordered by 207 estuaries (Buff and Turner, 1987). The total
open water area of these estuaries at mean high water is about 3.2 million hectares
(7.9 million acres), distributed among the states as follows (Lindall and Saloman,
1977):
Louisiana 43 percent
Florida 26 percent
Texas 19 percent
Mississippi 6 percent
Alabama 5 percent
The Gulf's U.S. coastline measures approximately 2,609 km (1,631 mi) and is
characterized by many diverse vegetated habitats: tidal marshes, mangroves, and
submerged seagrass beds. These three habitats serve as feeding, reproductive, and
nursery habitats for many species of aquatic organisms, and their existence is critical
to important Gulf fishery and recreational resources (Thayer and Ustach, 1981).
Coastal marshes and mangrove forests typically occur between the marine and
terrestrial habitats of the Gulf region. Seagrass beds are found between emergent
vegetation and unvegetated estuarine and coastal bottoms. However, the extent of
these habitats varies throughout the Gulf. In some areas, fringing wetlands and
seagrass meadows are only narrow bands; in others, vegetated areas are broad and
expansive.
Upland Forests. The once vast coastal plain forests of loblolly, slash, and longleaf
pines that encircled the Gulf of Mexico from central Florida to east Texas define a
unique ecosystem. The slowly percolating, silty-sandy loams underlying the region
are particularly suitable for growing herbaceous plants and shrubs. These plants and
shrubs provide food and shelter, under the forest canopy, for a variety of open land
and woodland wildlife, including game birds and animals that are popular with
recreational hunters.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
17
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
Flgur* 2.2
Coastal Habitats of the Gulf of Mexico
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
18
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
Many acres of pine forests have been clearcut and converted to farm land or
replanted as sources for pulp wood. Clearcutting opened the land to erosion. In
these areas, the physical, chemical, and biological characteristics of the natural
community have been dramatically altered and have resulted in a. marked decrease
in habitat quality and biodiversity.
Forested Wetlands. Bottomland Forested Wetlands. Forested wetlands occur adjacent to
streams and drainage ways, as well as depressional areas, which may or may not be
stream fed. Forested wetland soils are frequently wet, highly acidic, less permeable,
usually infertile, and poorly suited for agricultural or commercial use. Common
trees in forested wetlands are water oak, overcup oak, sweet gum, sweet bay, black
gum, tupelo gum, and loblolly and slash pines. The understory vegetation can
include 'various sedges, joint grasses, ferns, shrubs (such as blueberries and hollies),
and climbing vines (such as blackberries and catbriars). Zonation in forested
wetland systems is dependent upon light, soil, moisture, and length of flood period.
Forested wetlands are productive and diverse habitats.
Historically, many acres of forested wetlands have been drained and cleared for
silviculture, agriculture, and other uses. The value of this habitat has been recently
recognized, and programs are being implemented to curtail conversions to other
uses.
Cypress Swamps. After the great cypress swamps were deforested, faster growing
species such as willow, maple, poplar, and gum flourished along with the
remaining scattered cypress. The soils supporting this habitat-type are semi-fluid
clays that are acid to neutral at the surface and increasingly alkaline at depth.
Undergrowth and open area vegetation, such as elephant ears and alligator weed,
are highly productive. Frequently flooded, cypress swamps provide habitats for
nutria, opossum, raccoons, deer, and other small mammals. However, these
habitats are not well suited to intensive wildlife management because of the
difficulty of installing and maintaining water control structures. Bald eagles favor
the remaining tall cypress trees for nesting.
Mangroves. Approximately 202,350 hectares (500,000 acres) of mangroves occur
along the Gulf Coast, almost exclusively in Florida. The organic productivity of the
four native species of mangroves rivals that of agricultural crops (Wood et al, 1969).
Because of their high productivity, mangroves play a major role in the dynamics of
estuaries. Many species of invertebrates and fishes derive energy directly from
mangrove detritus (Odum et al. 1982). Odum et al. also observed that the diverse
structural habitats of mangroves harbor a greater variety of bird life than salt
marshes, mud flats, or beaches. In addition, intertwined mangrove roots act as a
wave buffer by binding sediment and retarding erosion, thus extending coasts and
building islands. Because mangroves can tolerate open ocean salinity, they form an
effective and long lived buffer against storm surges.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
19
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
Impounding or ditching for mosquito control, cutting or excessive trimming,
dredging and filling, and reduction of freshwater flow are prime reasons for
mangrove forest degradation. About 60,705 hectares (150,000 acres) or 23 percent of
Florida's mangrove forests have been lost; irreparable decline in fisheries
production will result from additional losses (Lewis et al, 1985b).
Emergent Marshes. Tidal marshes exist throughout the Gulf Coast and represent 63
percent of the total area of tidal marsh in the U.S. (Lindall and Saloman, 1977). Field
et al. (1991) summarized the distribution of Gulf tidal marsh habitat as follows:
Louisiana 69 percent
Texas 17 percent
Florida 10 percent
Mississippi 2 percent
Alabama 1 percent
Durako et al. (1985) reported that more than 1,100 species of vertebrates and
invertebrates depend upon salt marsh estuarine habitats for at least one stage of
their life cycle. In addition, most authors agree that fish and shellfish species that
make up about 90 percent of the Gulf's commercial and recreational catch (by
weight) spend a portion of their life cycles in tidal creeks and marshes, primarily
because of the large detrital-based food supply. Fresh marshes occur in coastal areas
and are characterized by common rush, cattails, pickerelweed, and bulltongue while
marsh hay, cordgrass, olney and saltmarsh bulrush, and dwarf spikerush are
common in brackish marshes. Saline marsh vegetation typically includes smooth
cordgrass, seashore saltgrass, and needlegrass rush. All of these plants are very
productive and produce great amounts of detritus.
Salinity differentiates marsh type. Fresh marsh salinity can reach 5 o/oo but is
usually less than 3 o/oo; brackish marsh averages about 8 o/oo but may reach 18-20
o/oo. Gradational boundaries between marsh types are maintained by a delicate
balance between freshwater and saltwater inflows.
Canal dredging and coastal development have resulted in significant losses in the
areal extent of emergent marshes. Fresh marshes have a series of ridges [usually less
than 30 cm (1 ft) relief] oriented parallel to drainage. These ridges serve to channel
flow and maintain the balance between water types. Historically, canals were
dredged and levees built without regard to local topography, resulting in the
diversion of the freshwater supply and its replacement by saltwater. Saltwater
intrusion has killed the freshwater vegetation in many areas and caused large open
water ponds.
Seagrass Beds. Submergent seagrasses occupy over 323,760 hectares (800,000 acres)
within the estuaries and shallow near-coastal waters of the Gulf (Iverson and
Bittaker, 1986). Approximately 95 percent of this acreage is in Florida and Texas,
where seagrasses occupy about 20 percent of the bay bottoms (Thayer and Ustach,
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
20
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
1981). Although often considered continuous around the Gulf's entire periphery, a
combination of low salinity and high turbidity results in only scattered patches of
seagrass communities, mostly in bays, from Alabama to Laguna Madre, TX. In fact,
the distribution and species composition of seagrasses in the lower Laguna Madre
has changed in recent years because of human impacts; these changes are a major
cause for concern. Collectively, seagrasses provide shelter and sustenance for a
variety of fishes, crabs, grass shrimps, gastropods, and burrowing worms. The
diversity and amount of biomass produced in or dependent on seagrass beds are
enormous.
The distribution of seagrass beds is limited by light attenuation. Two primary factors
affecting light attenuation are depth and turbidity. Increased depth, resulting from
subsidence, limits the occurrence and density of seagrass beds. Activities which
increase water turbidity, such as dredging, runoff, and increased nutrient loading,
result in phytoplankton and epiphyte blooms which can have devastating effects on
the existence of seagrasses. Lewis et al. (1985a) noted that Tampa Bay had lost about
80 percent of its original seagrass beds by 1982. The seagrass beds which remain in
Tampa Bay, and other bays and nearshore areas, are stressed and impacted by
human activities (Zieman and Zieman, 1989). For example, propeller scars,
prominent in many seagrass meadows, may take years to heal by revegetation. A
large die-off of seagrasses in Florida Bay has been recently documented; the causes of
this catastrophic loss are still being investigated (Robblee, et al., 1991).
Tidal Flats. The term "tidal flats" is used to describe two habitat types. Landward of
intertidal marsh or mangrove habitat is a supralittoral platform which is flooded
only once or twice a month by high spring tides. These salt flats (or salterns) are
most commonly found in Florida and Texas. Due to high interstitial salinities,
greater than 50 percent of the surface area of these flats are typically unvegetated.
Plant cover that is present is typically composed of fleshy halophytes such as
Salicornia, Batis, and Sesuvium (Lewis, 1989). The second "flats" habitat is the
sublittoral mud or sand flat lying between the lower tidal limit of intertidal
vegetation and the upper edge of the submerged aquatic vegetated zone (seagrasses),
if present. Both tidal flat habitats are seasonally important as feeding areas for
wading birds and certain fish species, during those seasons of the year when high
tides and rainfall may keep them flooded with very shallow water for weeks at a
time (Powell, 1989; Lewis, 1989).
Intertidal flats are a distinct habitat and major resource of the middle and lower
Texas coastal zone. Laguna Madre tidal flats are ideal foraging areas for resident and
migrating wading birds because these birds prefer to feed in shallow water. Many
flats are covered by algal mats and are very productive; their most important
function may be the export of nutrients to other estuarine habitats (Pulich and
Rabalais, 1986; Pulich and Scalan, 1987). Yet because of their superficial "wasteland"
appearance, tidal flats continue to be developed and destroyed.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
21
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
Oyster Reefs. Many Gulf estuaries support extensive subtidal oyster reefs and
intertidal reefs formed and dominated by the American oyster. These calcified reef
structures play important physical, ecological, and economic roles in the northern
Gulf and support a great diversity of highly productive edaphic and epibenthic
species.
In terms of physical function, oyster reefs, both living and fossil, can be important in
absorbing wave energy and stabilizing shorelines. A perfect example is the
shoreline of Marsh Island, Louisiana. This shoreline is fronted by oyster reefs and
has remained stable while the adjacent coastline to the west has eroded during
recent times (Adams et al.f 1976). The construction of new oyster reefs, from clumps
of live oysters in wire mesh bags, is presently being considered as an experimental
means of slowing shoreline erosion along several sites in Louisiana.
Oysters provide ecological, environmental, and commercial benefits. The ecological
function of oyster reefs includes providing stable substrate for a dense concentration
of epibenthic fauna. The filter feeding members of the oyster reef community
reduce water turbidity and metabolize carbon at a high rate (Bahr and Lanier, 1981).
The reef community is important in remineralizing organic matter and releasing
nutrients to the water column (Dame et al., 1985). The community also provides
concentrated food sources for estuarine fish, shellfish, and birds. Oyster harvests
provide a significant resource for fishing economies in Texas, Louisiana, and
Florida. Environmentally, in the vicinity of active delta formation, buried reefs can
enhance the deltaic building process by raising the subaqueous platform on which
subaerial land can develop. In the past, oyster shell was dredged as a source of
minerals for agricultural and farm animal nutrients and for building materials.
This dredging depleted stocks severely. Between 1912 and 1964, the volume of
oyster shell dredged from Texas bays 190 million m3 (248 million yd3) was greater
than the volume dredged to create the Panama Canal 184 million m3 (240 million
yd3) (Beasley, 1965). Most of the oyster shell (78 percent) came from Galveston Bay.
Today, because of ancillary environmental damage, oyster dredging has been almost
eliminated along the Gulf Coast.
Oyster reefs are currently threatened by point and nonpoint source pollution. Bay
harvest closings due to human and animal generated contaminants are common
throughout the Gulf of Mexico. In addition, construction of dams and reservoirs
has cut off river inflow to estuaries, depriving oysters of a source of nutrients. In
South Texas oyster beds have almost disappeared.
Related to oyster reefs in function, are the serpulid reefs in hyper-saline Baffin Bay,
Texas. These carbonate reefs are formed by filter feeding polychaetes. Many of the
reefs are relicts, and little is known about the cause of their death. Worm reefs also
occur in the Ten Thousand Islands of Florida.
Open-Water Bay Bottoms. Open water covers the largest area in Gulf of Mexico
estuaries and is typically associated with fine-grained sediments. Muddy bottoms
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
22
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of M&xico
Chapter 2
are a habitat for many fish and invertebrate species, a storehouse for organic matter
and inorganic nutrients, and a site for many vital chemical transformations and
physical interactions. Many important commercial species such as crabs, shrimps,
oysters, flounder, and black drum utilize estuarine bottoms. Unfortunately,
trawling and dredging to harvest these species disturb large bottom areas. This
disturbance increases sediment turnover rates and water turbidity, and can mobilize
contaminants in sediments. Other disturbances to bay bottoms include
channelization and oil and gas activities.
Littoral Zone. Fringing the edges of bays is the littoral zone, an area of highly
productive shallow water. The littoral zone is an important habitat for many fish
and epibenthic invertebrate species. Waterfowl often use the littoral zone for
feeding. The littoral zone also acts as a terrestrial buffer and a high tide refuge.
Littoral zones are areas often visited by man for recreation and occupation.
Construction of marinas, homes, industries, and roads adjacent to littoral zones has
resulted in their loss and degradation. Especially threatening is the potential
contamination from numerous drain pipes and municipal and industrial outfalls.
Drain pipes introduce contaminants from roadways and sewer systems. Outfalls are
sources of thermal, saline, and contaminant inputs. The impacts of these sources of
degradation are, individually eind in combination, poorly understood.
Barrier Islands and Dunes. Much of the coastal zone of the Gulf of Mexico is
bordered by barrier islands. These fragile ribbons of sand are unique habitats for
many plants and animals. These habitats have a varied usage. For example, turtles
use these beaches for nests and birds nest on the shorelines, dunes, and in adjacent
wetlands. Many of the islands are subject to over-development.
The sand dunes form the primary natural protection for the coastal mainland
during storms, yet construction activities have reduced or eliminated sand dune
habitats in many areas. Beach erosion is exacerbated by the human proclivity to
build breakwaters, groins, and other beach protection devices. Studies (Penland and
Boyd, 1981) have shown that about 80 percent of the Gulf shoreline is actively
eroding, possibly because of sediment starvation. This is due to leveeing, the
breaching of barrier islands by hurricanes, and housing and pipeline construction.
Oceanic Realm. The oceanic realm extends from the low tide line to abyssal depths.
For the purposes of this Action Agenda, the oceanic realm includes the surf zone,
the continental shelf and slope, and the deep ocean floor. The surf zone extends
from the lowest berm to wave base which is usually less than 10 m (33 ft), except
during catastrophic events. The continental shelf is a gently sloping plain (less than
0.2°)extending from low tide level to the continental slope (2°- 5°)- The Gulf of
Mexico continental shelf varies in width from about 280 km (174 mi) off Florida to
about 200 km (124 mi) off east Texas and Louisiana; off southwest Texas the shelf
narrows to 110 km (68 mi). The continental shelf is more thoroughly studied than
other oceanic areas because of the value of its fishery and petroleum reserves and its
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
23
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
proximity to shore. The continental slope extends from the shelf break at about 200
m (656 ft) to the Sigsbee Abyssal Plain at a depth of 3,650 m (12,000 ft). In the western
Gulf, the abyssal plain floor and the shelf surface are disrupted by salt diapirs that
form gentle hills and ridges and provide habitats for bottom dwelling fauna.
Habitats in the oceanic realm are horizontally and vertically zoned because of
preferences of fauna and vegetation for specific water density, clarity, depth, bottom
type, and circulation. In this discussion, species associated with beaches, reefs, an'd
passive sediment regimes are considered occupants of horizontally zoned habitats.
Vertically zoned habitats are home to both pelagic and benthic species. For example,
according to Weyl (1970), four algae phyla (blue-green, green, brown, and red) occur
between the shoreline and the maximum depth of light penetration [about 100 m
(328 ft)].
Human activities in the oceanic realm are a primary cause of environmental concern.
Commercial seining is largely species indiscriminate, resulting in the loss of large numbers
of "incidental" species which may be important in the food chain. Many of the larger
game fishes are heavily fished, resulting in decreases in the population. For example, the
1990-91 average commercial tuna harvest was about 50 percent lower than the 1986-90
average commercial tuna harvest (USDOC, 1992). Modern offshore oil drilling platforms
are self-contained but the potential for accidental discharges is significant. The risk of a
major tanker oil spill will increase as the number of tankers increase in response to oil
import demands. Drilling support boats and commercial ships do not always follow
prescribed regulations when discharging garbage and wastes. Pipeline burial can create
significant short-term turbidity.
Beaches and Surf Zones. The surf zone extends from the lowest berm to breaker depth,
which in the Gulf is less than 10 m (33 ft), except during catastrophic events. This
depth is sufficient to keep submarine bars in a near-constant state of agitation and
winnow clay-sized particles from incoming sediments. Many Gulf beaches are
relatively low energy and, in the intertidal zone, support a benthic infauna of
burrowing worms and molluscs and an epifauna of molluscs, crustaceans, and fish.
Relative to other habitats, beach and surf zone productivity is low. Even so, this
habitat comprises a critical foraging area for migratory shorebirds and other species.
Shorebirds, collectively, are declining, and the loss of feeding habitats along their
migration routes is recognized as a major cause of the decline. Open beach and
washover areas in' Texas are also foraging areas for peregrine falcons.
Several species of endangered sea turtles and some sea birds nest on the berm or
higher on the dune. Erosion and human exploitation of beaches and surf zones
have led to degradation of breeding grounds and loss of reproductive capacity for
many species.
Hard Bottoms and Reefs. Hard bottoms and reefs (banks) are distinctive marine habitats
found throughout the Gulf of Mexico along the continental shelf. Although they
occur in waters of low nutrient availability compared to other coastal habitats, these
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
24
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapters
systems are biologically productive, taxonomically diverse, and form a unique
ecosystem. Hard bottom substrates, which often occur in high energy.
environments, may consist of naturally occurring rock outcrops or shell middens
and artificial substrates such as shipwrecks, dumpsites, and manmade reefs.
Organisms that inhabit this environment depend, not only on the substrate and
vegetation, but also on the associated sessile epifauna for their existence.
Many reefs (banks) occur in the Gulf (see Figure 2.3). The northerly location and
selective isolation of the Flower Garden Banks, off the Texas coast, have resulted in
their designation as a National Marine Sanctuary. The Banks, the most northern
location of reef building corals in the Gulf of Mexico, have local relief of about 130 m
(425 ft) and minimum crest depth of about 20 m (65 ft) (Rezak et al, 1985). They are
the surface expression of salt diapirs capped by living coral. A brine lake and
numerous brine seeps show that the central salt core is dissolving. The crest of the.
Flower Garden Banks is occupied by leafy algae and live hermatypic corals, while the
lower slopes are typically rubble with branching sponges, crinoids, and other sessile
forms. Fish species are diverse and abundant (Rezak et al., 1985).
Hard bottom communities are susceptible to many pressures. Overfishing is
thought to be a major reason for their decline. Vandalism and mistreatment by
divers have caused other reefs to decline. Habitat destruction by dragging anchors
and fishing nets has not been quantified but is known to be locally devastating.
Studies that compare acreage, diversity, and abundance of current and historic reef
habitats are geographically limited.
Soft Bottom Habitats. On the Continental. Shelf, soft bottom habitats support organisms
such as clams, shrimp, crabs, flatfishes, glass sponges, crinoids, worms, and some
solitary, soft corals. The shrimp fishery is the most valuable Gulf of Mexico fishery.
Other rare habitats are located near the bottom of the continental shelf. These
habitats are associated with cold water, hot water, or oil seeps and are caused by
outcropping source rocks. Some faunas within this ecosystem appear to live on
bacteria that grow by oxidizing hydrogen sulfide within the water or using the
reduced compounds of sulfur and carbon in the seeping oil. Near the base of the
Florida scarpment, a sulfur-rich cold water seep supports an assemblage of giant tube
worms and large vent clams. In addition, 43 oil seep-related communities have
been found between the 88°W and the 95°W meridians (see Figure 2.4)
(MacDonald et al., 1992). Water depths at these sites range between 350 m (1,150 ft)
and 2,200 m (7,220 ft). Tube worms, mussels, and clams are the dominant fauna; at
Alaminos Canyon these chemosynthetic species support an abundant epifauna of
shrimp and galatheid crabs (MacDonald et al., 1992). The areas occupied by seep
generated fauna are generally small [less than 100 m2 (1,075 ft2)] because the volume
of seeping material is small and quickly dispersed.
Pelagic Habitats Water density, circulation, and turbidity are the primary factors
controlling vertically distributed water column habitats. Temperatures average
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
25
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
Figure 2.3
Zones and Localities of Major Biogeogtraphical
Significance in the Gulf of Mexico
10
CO
0>
«
0
«
N
0
CC
0
0
3
O
M
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
26
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
18°C (64°F) in winter and 29 °C (84°F) in summer. In shallow coastal waters, air
temperatures approximate sea surface temperatures. Freshwater from rivers
entering-the northern Gulf lowers surface salinity to about 32 o/oo over the inner
shelf and increases turbidity; salinity in the upper 50 m (164 ft) of the outer shelf and
abyssal Gulf is usually in excess of 35.5 o/oo. In both the eastern and western Gulf,
surface salinity will be higher because of increased evaporation. To a depth of about
20 m (66 ft), the water column is turbid; in deeper water, turbidity evolves into a 5-25
m (16-82 ft) thick nepheloid layer that extends over the shelf break (Rezak et«/.,
1985). An 8,000 km2 (3,100 mi2) offshore area between the Mississippi and Sabine
Rivers is subject to recurring incidences of oxygen depletion. This area is
surrounded by the nation's richest and most extensive fishing grounds. Pollution
in the form of nutrient enrichment is a major cause of oxygen depletion, although
naturally occurring water column density stratification may be a contributor
(Rabalais, 1992). Recently, a smaller oxygen depleted area was discovered off Florida.
Certain pelagic species, such as menhaden, prefer turbid water; other species
(marlin/tuna) avoid areas of high turbidity and tend to concentrate along the
boundaries of density-differentiated water masses.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
27
-------
Habitat Degradation In the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
Figure 2.4
Locations of Known ChemosynHhetlc Communities
at Hydrocarbon Seeps in the Northern Gulf of Mexico
(Arrow indicates Alaminos Canyon)
o
O
CO
o
00
CVJ
w
o>
O)
o
CO
CM
o
Q
O
a
o
2
o
(A
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
28
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
State-by-State Overview of Habitat Degradation
The following case histories provide a summary of specific wetland losses and
modifications that have occurred in each of the five Gulf Coast States.
Alabama. Data from Watzin et ul. (in preparation) reveal that, between the 1940s
and 1979, emergent marsh habitat in Alabama's Mobile Bay declined by more than
4,047 hectares (10,000 acres), to 35 percent. Also, a probable loss of 50 percent or more
of the submerged aquatic vegetation occurred during the same time period. In
addition, the hydrology of the bay has been markedly altered by a profusion of spoil
areas in open water and by the excavation of a deep channel through the center of
the bay. According to Stout (1979), historically, the most significant human impacts
noted in the bay were the direct and indirect effects of dredged material disposal.
Habitat loss due to erosion along the shoreline of the Mississippi Sound in
Alabama, including adjacent islands, was about 8.5 hectares/year (21 acres/year), or a
total of 255 hectares (630 acres) from 1955 to 1985. Much of this loss was marshland
(Smith, 1989). Continued loss is expected under the prevailing natural system, and
this progressive loss is due to the action of natural forces: wind-generated waves,
tides, currents, and the predicted drowning effect of sea level rise.
Florida. Approximately 75 percent of Florida's population live in coastal counties.
This has resulted in the continuing loss of fringing wetland habitats from filling
activities, the decline of seagrass communities from pollution and dredging, and the
deterioration of water quality from point and nonpoint discharges. About 31
percent of Florida's Gulf Coast estuaries are severely affected by pollution (Comp
and Seaman, 1985).
Lewis et al. (1985a) also estimated that about 80 percent of Tampa Bay's seagrass
meadows have been lost since the 1800s, a decrease that has~been postulated to have
adversely affected both the bay's fisheries and other organisms which are dependent
on the bay. Seagrass losses were primarily caused by deteriorating water quality
(Haddad, 1989).
In Sarasota Bay, alterations in wetland habitat acres, from 1948 to 1987, include losses
of 35, percent of seagrass beds, 45 percent of mangrove swamps, 85 percent of tidal
marshes, and increases of oyster beds (16 percent) and bay waters (12 percent)
(McGarry MacAualy, personal communication). These losses of emergent and
submerged aquatic plants are symptomatic of the rapid development of coastal
Florida.
Large segments of the original Everglades have been separated from the natural
system by canals and levees. Today, the Everglades face many complex water
resource and environmental management issues including:
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
29
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
Q Fragmentation resulting in the loss of connection between the central
Everglades and adjacent transitional wetlands.
Q Changes in timing, distribution, and quantity of discharges into and
within freshwater wetlands and estuaries.
Q Impacts on natural ecosystems due to agricultural water discharges.
Q Invasion of native plant communities by exotic species.
Q Timing and distribution of discharges from freshwater areas into
estuaries of Florida Bay, Manatee Bay, and Barnes Sound.
Solutions proposed to alleviate the environmental problems of coastal Florida
habitats must include an understanding of how physical features and hydrologic
processes interact to affect water movement, quantity, and quality. The physical
features and operational policies of the water management system must be linked to
the natural features and hydrology of the region. This approach has been somewhat
successful.
Although the establishment of a preserved wetland fringe around Charlotte Harbor
was successful in maintaining the mangrove community, the concurrent loss of
seagrass beds and salt marshes substantiates the need for managing the entire
ecosystem, including the drainage basin. Salt marsh decreases were probably caused
by dredging and filling, as well as by extensive upland development (Haddad, 1989).
Louisiana. Encompassing almost 728,000 hectares (1.8 million acres), not including
forested wetlands, Louisiana's Mississippi River Deltaic Plain is the largest
continuous wetland system in the U.S. These marshes represent about 22 percent of
the total coastal wetlands area in the 48 continental states (Gosselink, 1984). The
major environmental concerns include loss of salt marshes and the maintenance of
habitat and water quality. If current trends continue, an ecosystem that supports 33
percent of the nation's fishing industry and North America's largest fur-producing
area will become extinct (LGS and USEPA, 1987).
Wetland losses in the deltaic plain have been studied by Turner (1990), Gosselink
(1984), and Leibowitz and Hill (in preparation). All authors agree that the rate of
marsh loss to open water has accelerated over the past 50 years and that human
activities have interfered with the cycle of delta formation and accretion. Between
1956 and 1978, approximately 51 percent of coastal Louisiana's freshwater marsh and
16 percent of the forested wetlands were lost; salt marsh increased by 2.4 percent.
Total wetland acreage in coastal Louisiana declined by 21 percent (1956-1978) (Turner
and Cahoon, 1988). During that time period, there also was a concurrent 272 percent
increase in acreage used for disposing of dredged material. Other studies have
shown that about 34 percent of Louisiana's marshes were changed to non-
marshlands from 1945 to 1980, and that the current net loss of coastal wetlands is
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
30
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Guflf of Mexico
Chapter 2
approximately 80 km2/year (31 mi2/year) (Dunbar et al., 1990). More recent analyses
(Dunbar et al., 1992) show that land loss in the Louisiana Coastal Plain peaked at
approximately 110 km2/year (42 mi2/year) in 1970 and has since decreased to
approximately 66 km2/year (25 mi2/year) in 1990.
Causes of these changes in wetland acreage include: direct loss from dredging,
construction, filling, erosion, arid machinery (marsh buggies); loss of river-borne
sediments; oil and gas withdrawal; soil drying within diked areas; and alterations in
the quantity and quality of vegetation from changes in organic deposition and
sediment trapping and the death of plants from pollutants. Natural causes of
emergent marsh habitat loss include rising sea level, catastrophic weather, and "eat-
outs" by animals.
One of the Mississippi River Deltaic Plain's nine drainage basins, Barataria Basin,
has been closed to river flow since the leveeing of the Mississippi River in the 1930s
and 1940s. Marsh acreage in Barataria Basin decreased by 25 percent between 1956
and 1978. Subsidence and erosion are two major factors; however, human activities
in the basin also have altered Barataria's natural hydrologic patterns, which may
cause long-term modification of wetland habitats (Conner and Day, 1987).
Ultimately, the entire basin may become an open-water brackish bay or sound
unless the flow of the Mississippi River is reintroduced to the area.
Mississippi. The main estuaries feeding the Mississippi Sound include the
Pascagoula River, Biloxi Bay, Bay St. Louis, and the Pearl River. The importance of
Mississippi's estuaries as a breeding and nursery ground for a multitude of species
has been well documented (USDOC, 1990a). At least 97 percent of the state's
fisheries resources are estuarine dependent.
Eleuterius (in press) observed a decline of the area covered by seagrass and a decline
in occurrence of seagrass species in the Mississippi Sound. In 1975, seagrass acreage
was about 60 percent of that found in 1969, and losses are continuing. Hurricane
damage, and destruction by freshwater discharged from the Mississippi River
through a spillway and Lake Pontchartrain, account for approximately half of the
observed loss. The cause of the remaining loss is not known, but may be related to
sediment quality or disease (Eleuterius, Gulf Coast Research Laboratory, Ocean
Springs, MS, pers. com.).
Texas. From 1930 to 1980, more than 70 percent of the total loss of wetlands from
seven Texas river deltas (Colorado, Nueces, Guadalupe, Lavaca, Trinity, Neches, and
San Jacinto) occurred along the San Jacinto and Nueces Rivers (White and Calnan,
1990). Major factors responsible for these losses included a rise in water level
because of human-induced and natural subsidence; global sea-level rise; and the
reduction of natural sedimentation in marshes caused by channelization, reservoir
development in river drainage basins, and the disposal of spoil on natural levees.
The general trend in deltaic wetlands along the Texas coast is conversion of
wetlands to open water and barren flats.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
31
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
The most extensive changes in the Beaumont-Port Arthur area have occurred along
the river valleys. The Neches River is a dramatic example. Between Port Neches
and Bridge City, extensive marshes which existed in 1956 had been replaced with
open water by 1978. This habitat loss is attributed to dredged canals, the reduction of
sedimentation, subsidence, and sea-level rise.
Galveston Bay is the seventh largest estuary in the U.S. and the largest in Texas.
The Bay provides the nursery and spawning grounds for about 30 percent of the
total fisheries harvest from the Texas coast (Sea Grant College Program, 1989). In
addition, 139 species of birds associated with the bay's wetland and coastal habitats
have been reported, and the numbers of active nesting colonies have increased from
20 in 1973 to 42 in 1987 (Whitledge and Rag, 1989).
Not only are large portions of Galveston Bay often closed to shellfishing, primarily
as a result of bacteria introduced by runoff from surrounding lands, but seagrasses in
the bay have also declined by approximately 90 percent since 1979 (Pulich and
White, 1990).
The Laguna Madre is a narrow, 209 km-long (130 mi) estuary that is unique in the
U.S. The estuary is hypersaline and has shallow bottoms dominated by seagrass
beds. The Laguna Madre region has been the source of 53 percent of the commercial
finfish harvest (predominately black drum) in Texas during the last 20 years (Texas
Parks & Wildlife Department, 1988). Degradation of the Laguna Madre has been
caused by construction and continued maintenance dredging of the Intracoastal
Waterway, channelization to exploit hydrocarbon resources, and the construction of
hundreds of "cabins" on the spoil islands. In addition, a recent brown tide lasting
two years (1990-1992) has resulted in massive alteration of the food web structure
and may result in future losses of seagrasses due to high turbidity (Montagna, 1991).
Natural and human activities have also disrupted the dynamics and habitats of the
Texas barrier islands (Longley and Wright, 1989).
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
32
-------
Habitat Degradation in the Gulf of Mexico
Chapter 2
Conclusion
Habitats of the Gulf of Mexico are rich and highly productive components of the
ecosystem. They support wildlife and fisheries of the Gulf, abate the impact of flood
waters and storms, help improve the quality of surface water, and generate and
process nutrients essential to natural systems. An estimated 95 percent of
commercial fish landed and 85 percent of the sport fish catch (by weight) spend a
portion of their lives in coastal wetland and estuarine habitats (Thayer and Ustach,
1981; Lindall and Thayer, 1982). In addition to providing winter quarters for
millions of game birds, coastal wetlands support North America's largest fur
production.
Habitats, particularly wetlands, of the Gulf of Mexico region are being rapidly
damaged or destroyed by a variety of causes. Human activities, such as flood
control, agriculture, waste disposal, real estate development, shipping, commercial
fishing, and oil and gas exploration and production, demand a high price. Natural
processes, in the form of rising sea level, sediment compaction and submergence,
droughts, animal "eat-outs," storms, and floods also exact a heavy toll. A focused
and coordinated effort by all citizens, as well as local, state, and federal agencies, will
be required to counter these negative factors.
Coastal habitats are an integral part of the coastal ecosystem and perturbations
beyond normal ranges to any component may affect the entire system. This
realization must guide efforts to devise and execute plans for protecting, restoring,
enhancing, and creating habitats. This Habitat Degradation Action Agenda points
the way, and effective action is the shared responsibility among many.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
33
-------
Federal & Stale Framework
Chapter 3
3 FEDERAL & STATE FRAMEWORK FOR ADDRESSING
HABITAT DEGRADATION
Many federal agencies are mandated by legislative statutes to address habitat
degradation issues and support protection and restoration efforts. These agencies
include: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Commerce,
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, and U.S. Department of Transportation. Each of the five Gulf of
Mexico States also has a regulatory framework for addressing habitat degradation.
(For a description, see Appendix A.)
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1).
34
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
THE UNFINISHED AGENDA -
Both Current Commitments & Uncommitted Activities
Goal
This Habitat Degradation Action Agenda for the Gulf of Mexico sets forth a
framework for protecting, restoring, and enhancing Gulf of Mexico habitats. The
Gulf of Mexico Program has established the following two long-term goals for
addressing habitat degradation in the Gulf of Mexico:
Q Protect, restore, enhance, and create Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Q Foster public understanding, appreciation, and stewardship of Gulf of
Mexico habitats.
Action Agenda Framework
This chapter of the Action Agenda provides objectives, action items, and specific
project descriptions for addressing habitat degradation in the Gulf of Mexico and for
meeting the long-term goals as stated above. Objectives and action items are
clustered under six types of activity: 1) Monitoring & Assessment 2) Research, 3)
Planning & Standards, 4) Compliance & Enforcement, 5) Preservation & Protection,
and 6) Public Education & Outreach (see Index of Objectives and Action Items).
The forty-two action items represent the Committee's best judgment today, based on
existing data and information, as to what must be done initially to tackle habitat
degradation problems in the Gulf of Mexico.
Lead. The Habitat Degradation Committee has identified a lead agency for each
project—the agency with the most authority or jurisdiction over the particular issue.
A proposed action item or project may involve the execution of legislative or
regulatory authorities or programmatic initiatives which derive from these
authorities. In other cases, a proposed action item or project may involve the
facilitation or coordination of activities among several agencies or organizations. In
these cases, and where there is no clear legislative authority involved, the "lead"
could be the agency or organization who expresses an interest in taking on the task
during Gulf of Mexico Program Committee deliberations, the action planning
workshop or public comment period, or, in the Issue Committee's judgment, is best
able to guide multiple parties in carrying out the activity. This does not necessarily
mean that the agency has agreed to carry out the activity or that the agency has the
necessary funding. The Habitat Degradation Committee understands these action
items will require commitments by agencies and organizations that are dependent
on budget decisions. However, the Committee members hope this document
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Actllon Agenda (4.1)
35
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
provides the rationale and support for such commitments and that future iterations
of this document will include additional specific commitments.
Initiation Date. The date indicated represents a determination by the Committee of
the most realistic initiation date for the project. As lead agencies begin
implementation planning for specific activities, these initiation dates may change
due to resource availability and prioritization within the individual agencies.
Underway or Completed Action Items/Projects. Some of the action item projects
may already be underway or even completed. In these cases, short status reports are
provided and completion dates are provided if known. These projects are
designated with the following icons:
Underway
Completed
Some action items are cross referenced to other action items and are designated with
a "-+" sign in the left hand column. This signals a close relationship among those
actions and a need for coordination.
The Gulf of Mexico Program recognizes the need to identify indicators of
environmental progress relative to this Action. Agenda for habitat degradation.
Many of the action items specified in Chapter 4 of this document will aid the
Program in developing a baseline for measuring success in the future. For the time
being, however, acceptance and completion of action item projects specified in this
Action Agenda will be considered a measure of success. As future iterations of this
document are written, and current projects are completed, new action items and
projects will be developed to better measure environmental progress.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
36
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Index of Habitat Degradation Objectives & Action Item*
Monitoring & Assessment
Objective: Assess the status and trends of important Gulf of Mexico coastal habitats to establish a framework
for developing corrective measures and setting priorities.
Action Item 1: Convene the Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation Committee to review
data on Gulf of Mexico coastal habitat resources and prioritize important habitat types.
Action Item 2: Assess the status and trends of wetland and seagrass communities in the Gulf of
Mexico.
Action Item 3: Assess the status and trends of Outer Continental Shelf habitats in the Gulf of Mexico.
Action Item 4: Analyze existing data on Gulf of Mexico habitats and develop ecosystem models to
predict cumulative impacts.
Action Item S: Develop techniques and data bases to measure the current state of habitat health and
to continue long-term monitoring of habitat health in the Gulf of Mexico.
Objective: Identify the causes of habitat declines in the Gulf of Mexico region to assist in determining
necessary and appropriate corrective measures.
Action Item 6: Quantify the loss of Gulf of Mexico coastal habitats due to physical and chemical
alterations.
Action Item 7: Quantify the sources of man-induced declines of seagrass and wetlands habitats in
the Gulf of Mexico.
Objective: Plan and monitor pilot restoration projects Gulfwide in coordination with local, state, and other
federal programs, and evaluate the effectiveness of enhancement, restoration, and creation in replacing Gulf of
Mexico habitats.
Action Item 8.' Compile technical materials, techniques, and lists of technicians to support the
restoration and enhancement of Gulf of Mexico coastal habitats.
Action Item 9: Convene an intcragency Technical Working Group to review and select appropriate
monitoring and success criteria for wetlands restoration, establishment, and management in the Gulf of
Mexico.
Action Item 10: Develop and support a system of demonstration projects for the protection and
restoration of Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Action Item 11: Monitor habitat changes associated with pilot demonstration projects in the Gulf of
Mexico region, and assess the effectiveness of demonstration projects in protecting and restoring Gulf of
Mexico habitats.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
37
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Index of Habitat Degradation Objectives & Action Items (continued)
Research
Objective: Conduct research to increase knowledge of the functions of Gulf of Mexico habitats and to
determine the relationships between habitat types and the effects of stress on these habitats.
Action Item 12: Determine the ecological role of pine flatwoods in Gulf of Mexico coastal
communities and the need for appropriate regulation and management of these resources.
Action Item 13: Determine the effect of nutrient enrichment and the incidence of parasite life stages
and hosts in Gulf of Mexico wetlands.
Action Item 14: Develop and implement a research agenda to provide information on linkages ,
between and the cumulative impacts of habitats within Gulf of Mexico watersheds.
Action Item 15: Develop community profiles on the status and trends, significance, and future
impacts of important Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Action Item 16: Develop a profile of the effects of dredged barrier island tidal passes on Gulf of
Mexico coastal habitats.
Action Item 17: Determine the occurrence of phytoplankton blooms in the Gulf of Mexico, evaluate
the impact and causes of such phenomena, and develop and implement appropriate Gulfwide
management strategies.
Objective: Conduct research to improve 'habitat restoration and enhancement projects in the Gulf of Mexico.
Action Item 18: Determine the extent to which planted seagrass systems provide the ecological
functions found in naturally occurring seagrass systems in the Gulf of Mexico.
Action Item 19: Summarize the state of knowledge of Gulf of Mexico habitat creation activities and
identify and prioritize research needs.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
38
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Index of Habitat Degradation Objectives & Action Items (continued)
Planning & Standards
Objective: Enhance the effectiveness of federal and state standards and management programs to protect and
conserve coastal habitats in the Gulf of Mexico region.
Action Item 2O: Review and evaluate the operation of federal, state, and local regulatory programs,
and develop recommendations for improvement based on an assessment of losses and gains of Gulf of
Mexico habitats.
Action Item 21: Develop an implementation strategy to improve the federal, state, and local
regulatory programs that impact important Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Action Item 22: Minimize the loss of emergent Gulf of Mexico habitats due to sea level change
through appropriate management and development techniques.
Action Item 23: Evaluate existing compensatory mitigation projects, and provide standardized
guidance and success criteria for future projects in the Gulf of Mexico region.
Action Item 24: Promote, guide, and facilitate the development of state comprehensive wetland
management plans in the Gulf of Mexico region.
Action Item 25: Promote, guide, and facilitate the development of seagrass community
management plans in the Gulf of Mexico.
Action Item 26: Provide a Gulfwide agency framework and funding mechanisms for habitat
restoration programs throughout the Gulf of Mexico.
Action Item 27: Implement Advanced Identification [Section 404 (c) Clean Water Act] projects for
the Gulf of Mexico region to protect valuable habitats from dredging and rilling activities.
Action Item 28: Develop specific water quality standards for the estuarine, nearshore, and offshore
areas of the Gulf of Mexico.
Compliance & Enforcement
Objective: Provide maximum protection for Gulf of Mexico habitats by assuring full compliance with federal
and state regulatory permit conditions and vigorous violation detection and resolution.
Action Item 29: Inventory and evaluate existing compliance and enforcement programs Gulfwide
which support habitat protection.
Action Item 3O: Promote increased interagency cooperation and consistent approaches within
habitat compliance and enforcement programs throughout the Gulf of Mexico region.
Action Item 31: Provide training and sources of expertise to enhance compliance with habitat
protection requirements across the Gulf of Mexico region.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
39
-------
Tho Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Index of Habitat Degradation Objectives & Action Items (continued)
Preservation & Protection
Objective: Provide a comprehensive preservation and protection framework for Gulf of Mexico habitats of
significant ecological value.
Action Item 32: Identify and prioritize special ecological areas in the Gulf of Mexico that are worthy
of increased levels of protection and preservation.
Action Item 33: Coordinate and facilitate, using all programs, resources, and mechanisms, the
preservation and protection of special ecological habitats in the Gulf of Mexico.
Public Education & Outreach
Objective: Develop educational materials and programs to promote awareness and appreciation of Gulf of
Mexico habitats, as well as their value and importance.
Action Item 34: Develop educational programs and materials for use in school systems to increase
understanding of the value of Gulf of Mexico habitats and the need for preservation and protection.
Action Item 35: Develop public outreach materials and programs to increase understanding of the
value of Gulf of Mexico habitats and the need for preservation and protection.
Action Item 36: Utilize interpretive centers, displays, and signs to inform the public about Gulf of
Mexico resources through a "hands-on" experience.
Action Item 37: Inform business and industry groups about the value of Gulf of Mexico habitats and
the need for preservation and protection.
Objective: Prevent or correct Gulf of Mexico habitat degradation and loss through public involvement
activities.
Action Item 38: Initiate an outreach program to inform and involve the general public in activities
necessary to prevent or correct habitat degradation and loss in the Gulf of Mexico region.
Action Item 39: Develop an outreach program for tourists that promotes an awareness of the value
and the need to protect Gulf of Mexico habitats in important resort and recreational communities.
Action Item 4O: Increase knowledge on the laws, regulations, and ordinances pertaining to
regulation of coastal habitats in the Gulf of Mexico.
Action Item 41: Develop a citizen involvement program to monitor losses and gains in Gulf of
Mexico habitat acreage and quality.
Action Item 42: Develop an "Adopt-A-Shoreline" Program to involve the public in the preservation
and protection of Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
40
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Monitoring & Assessment
The quantity, occurrence, location, and type of habitat degradation in the Gulf of
Mexico is currently reported on a limited basis. Increased monitoring in this area is
crucial because this information forms the technical underpinnings of future policy.
Monitoring is necessary to establish baseline conditions and determine trends.
Geographical Information Systems (GIS) should be used to increase the ability to use
and integrate all different types of data. Gulfwide priorities should be set for
important and endangered habitats, and procedures should be established to
improve inventorying, monitoring, and coordination among agencies and
programs.
Specific objectives, action items, and project descriptions follow:
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
41
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Objective: Assess the status and trends of important Gulf of Mexico coastal habitats
to establish a framework for developing corrective measures and setting priorities.
Action Item 1: Convene the Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee to review data on Gulf of Mexico coastal habitat resources and
prioritize important habitat types.
Project Description: Regularly convene the Gulf of
Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation Committee and
appropriate experts and citizens to identify and prioritize
important habitat types, review status and trends data, and
inform the Gulf of Mexico Program of new or continuing
cases of habitat degradation.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee and Citizens Advisory Committee.
Initiation Date: 1989
Status: 1) With funding provided by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency—Region 4, the Texas
Parks & Wildlife Department is extending its wetlands
prioritization,project coastwide and is developing an
interagency wetlands GIS data base. Completion of the
prioritization project is scheduled for the end of August
1994. The Texas wetlands GIS data base and the Louisiana
wetlands GIS data base, being developed with Coastal
Wetlands Planning, Protection & Restoration Act support,
are scheduled to be completed during 1995. Output from
these projects will assist the Gulf of Mexico Program's
panel of wetlands experts in reviewing status and trends
data and prioritizing important habitat types.
2) The U.S. Coast Guard has initiated area contingency
planning to respond to oil/hazardous material spills. Key
habitat areas are being identified from this process on a
Gulfwide basis.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
42
-------
Tfie Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 2: Assess the status and trends of wetland and seagrass
communities in the Gulf of Mexico.
Project Description: Develop and periodically update a
status and trends inventory of wetland and seagrass
communities in the Gulf of Mexico.
Lead: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, in coordination with
Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation Committee.
Initiation Date: 1992
Status: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Texas Parks
and Wildlife Department, and Texas General Land Office
have initiated an update of the National Wetland
Inventory in Texas. Aerial photography was scheduled
October through December 1992, however, inclement
weather delayed completion of the photography until the
spring of 1993. Completion of the updated inventory is
targeted for December 1995. Seagrasses will be added from
other databases.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
43
-------
TH& Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Itom 3: Assess the status and trends of Outer Continental Shelf habitats
in the Gulf of Mexico.
Project Description A: Summarize data on status and
trends of Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) habitats and
living resources and identify agencies responsible for
stewardship of OCS resources.
Lead: Minerals Management Service, in coordination
with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Regions 4
and 6, National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service.
Initiation Date: 1991
Status: The Minerals Management Service plans to
continue three projects contributing to a definition of the
status and trends of OCS habitats and living resources.
These are as follows: a) Flower Garden Banks long-term
monitoring project to monitor environmental conditions
and biological health of the reef crest for three years; b) a
project, initiated in 1991, with completion in 1994, to
establish monitoring stations in chemosynthetic
communities, relate community size to seep size, and
develop methods of detection with remote sensing
technologies; and c) a characterization, to be completed in
1996, of continental shelf habitats and communities, for
the area from the Mississippi Delta to Apalachicola Bay,
from the shoreline to the 400 meter isobath, to build on
the recently completed Mississippi-Alabama Shelf Marine
Ecosystems Study and on associated habitat mapping
projects in the area.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
44
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Project Description B: Initiate a field investigation of
long-term impacts versus natural variability on the Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS). Based upon results of the OCS
status and trends report and identification of sources of
impacts, propose an appropriate long-term field
investigation to document and quantify resource declines
and habitat degradation.
Lead: Minerals Management Service, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, and National Oceanic
& Atmospheric Administration.
Initiation Date: 1992
status: The Minerals Management Service is completing
the second year of a six year study of the marine ecosystem
between the Mississippi Delta and Apalachicola Bay.
Efforts during the remaining years will be directed toward
sedimentological and biological process studies and data
synthesis. The National Oceanic & Atmospheric
Administration plans a 1994 workshop on defining large
marine ecosystems in the Gulf of Mexico. The Gulf of
Mexico Program is working with the Ocean Studies Board
of the National Research Council to convene a March
1994 workshop on science and policy which investigates
the cumulative effects of the offshore oil and gas industry
on coastal environments..
Action Item A: Analyze existing data on Gulf of Mexico habitats and develop
ecosystem models to predict cumulative impacts.
Project Description: Convene a Gulf of Mexico regional
workshop (every five years) to summarize habitat or
living resource impacts and conditions responsible for the
impacts, analyze existing data bases and prioritize future
studies, and develop appropriate ecosystem models to
include cumulative impacts and long-term impacts.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1995
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Hem 5: Develop techniques and data bases to measure the current state
of habitat health in the Gulf of Mexico and to continue long-term monitoring of
habitat health.
Project Description A: Create, catalog, and link spatial
data bases in the Gulf of Mexico in order to develop
standards and methodology for short-term and long-term
mapping programs. Catalog existing GIS-type data bases in
terms of base map, aerial photography, satellite image
coverage, resolution, adequacy of cultural parameters, and
protocols for communication with other data bases.
Develop standards for communication between data bases
and for the creation of new data bases. Adapt interactive
mapping technology, such as developed by the Defense
Mapping Agency, to habitat models to predict effects of
habitat modifications.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in coordination with Data & Information
Transfer Operations and federal and state agency GIS
development groups.
Initiation Date: Ongoing
Status: Low resolution Gulfwide GIS habitat data bases
are available commercially; high resolution habitat data
bases are under construction by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service, Minerals Management Service, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Louisiana Department of Natural Resources,
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department, and other coastal
state agencies. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency—Region 6 funding requires the Texas Parks &
Wildlife Department's data base, currently under
construction, to conform to data standards of the Texas
Department of Information
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
46
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Project Description B: Establish a long-term strategic
assessment program for the Gulf of Mexico to monitor
selected habitat types. Augment existing information
with high resolution multispectral data and biomass stress
analysis techniques in order to monitor and map changes
in selected habitats.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, National Oceanic & Atmospheric
Administration, and other state and federal agencies
conducting mapping programs.
Initiation Date: 1993
Status: The Gulf of Mexico Program, through a Success
in '93 Initiative, funded the Environmental Protection
Information Center (EPIC) of Bishop State College to
provide prototype GIS service for Alabama coastal
communities. This project will consider factors necessary
i for data base linkage and a baseline for habitat mapping in
I that area. An interim report is due by the end of 1994.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
47
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Objective: Identify the causes of habitat declines in the Gulf of Mexico region to
assist in determining necessary and appropriate corrective measures.
Action Item 6: Quantify the loss of Gulf of Mexico coastal habitats due to
physical and chemical alterations.
Project Description: Identify and quantify the loss of
coastal habitats in the Gulf of Mexico due to physical and
chemical alterations, such as freshwater inflow, changes
in salinity patterns, sedimentation rates, and subsidence.
Lead: Minerals Management Service, U.S. Fish &
Wildlife Service, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Gulf State
agencies, Gulf of Mexico Program—Freshwater Inflow
Committee.
Initiation Date: Ongoing
Status: The lead agencies are continuing studies to
quantitatively determine the loss of coastal habitats due to
changes in salinity, sedimentation, subsidence, etc. by
expanding GIS data bases, 7.5 minute quadrangle mapping
of wetlands, comparative mapping, and analysis of
multispectral thematic map data to determine the health
of wetland biomass.
Action Item 7: Quantify the sources of man-induced declines of seagrass and
wetlands habitats in the Gulf of Mexico.
Project Description: Quantify, on a recurring basis, man-
induced declines of seagrass and wetlands habitats in the
Gulf of Mexico, including industrial and municipal
effluents, nonpoint source discharges, dredge and fill
activities, and habitat conversions.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in conjunction with Nutrient Enrichment
Committee, National Oceanic & Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish
& Wildlife Service, and Gulf States.
Initiation Date: 1992
Status: The report, "Status and Trends of Emergent and
Submerged Vegetated Habitats, Gulf of Mexico, USA"
(USEPA/800-R-92-003) has been completed, and much of
the relevant information is summarized in Chapter 2 of
this Action Agenda. Additional survey work, is necessary.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Aetlon Agenda (4.1)
48
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Objective: Plan and monitor pilot restoration projects Gulfwide in coordination
with local, state, and other federal programs, and evaluate the effectiveness of
enhancement, restoration, and creation in replacing Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Action item 8: Compile technical materials, techniques, and lists of technicians
to support the restoration arid enhancement of Gulf of Mexico coastal habitats.
Project Description: Convene a Gulfwide workshop of
agency and industry representatives to address plant
suitability and availability to create and restore Gulf of
Mexico habitats.
Lead: Soil Conservation Service, in coordination with
Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation Committee
and Cooperative Extension Service.
Initiation Date: 1993
Status: A planning meeting is scheduled for Winter
1993, and the workshop is scheduled for Summer 1994.
The purpose of the workshop will be to identify and
prioritize suitable plant species by Gulf region. The
workshop will also develop recommendations for
encouraging the development of commercial sources of
iplant material.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
49
-------
T7io Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 9: Convene an intera'gency Technical Working Group to review
and select appropriate monitoring and success criteria for wetlands restoration,
establishment, and management in the Gulf of Mexico.
Project Description: Convene an interagency Technical
Working Group to review and select appropriate
monitoring and success criteria for wetlands restoration,
establishment, and management in the Gulf of Mexico.
Members of the group will include representatives from
federal and state agencies, academia, conservation
organizations, and the private sector. The final product
will be a "Technical Manual of Wetlands Monitoring and
Success Criteria."
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in coordination with
Gulf of Mexico Program, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Soil Conservation
Service, U.S. Forest Service, Federal Highway
Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, 'and
Gulf States.
Initiation Date: 1992 Completion Date: 1994
status: The Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat
Degradation Committee has funded a "-Technical Manual
of Wetlands; Monitor^
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
50
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 1O: Develop and support a system of demonstration projects for the
protection and restoration of Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Project Description A: Identify, develop, and facilitate the
funding of a system of demonstration projects to protect
and restore habitats at the county or conservation district
level throughout the Gulf of Mexico region. Use these
projects to demonstrate proven methods and for field-
testing. Advertise the projects, encourage visitation as
results appear, and communicate successes and failures to
the public and to others involved in similar efforts.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in cooperation with state, local, and other
federal programs.
Initiation Date: Ongoing
Status: A workshop, convened in December 1991,
reviewed pre-proposals for demonstration projects. Pre-
proposals were ranked and recommendations for funding
were submitted to the Gulf of Mexico Program Office.
-> 26
Project Description B: Select and fund a Gulf of Mexico
pilot project on habitat restoration to investigate
techniques to restore wild celery beds (oligohaline
grassbed habitat) using fruits. The pilot project should
examine whether these techniques result in more rapid
and less destructive revegetation than transplanting1
shoots taken from existing beds.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico.Program-Habitat Degradation
Committee, using cooperative agreement with Dauphin
Island Sea Laboratory, and in coordination with Coastal &
Shoreline Erosion Committee.
Initiation Date: 1991 Completion Date: 1993
!Status: A pilot project was selected and funded from pre-
iproposals received in 1991. Seeds were collected, stored,
land planted during Summer 1991. The final report is
jscheduled for completion in 1993.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Tho Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action item 11: Monitor habitat changes associated with pilot demonstration
projects in the Gulf of Mexico region, and assess the effectiveness of
demonstration projects in protecting and restoring Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Project Description A: Develop a monitoring system to
establish baseline conditions and monitor habitat losses or
gains associated with pilot demonstration projects around
the Gulf of Mexico. The system should be accessible to
Gulf States for use in preparing their comprehensive
management plans.
Lead: National Wetlands Research Center and National
Wetland Inventory, in coordination with Gulf of Mexico
Program—Habitat Degradation Committee.
Initiation Date: Ongoing
Status: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers—Mobile
District, has created data bases for permit information.
The U.S. Geological Survey has twenty-six 7.5 minute
quads of soil survey data almost digitized and is beginning
the Alabama portions of the remaining five quads of soil
surveys. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has the 1955
and 1976 National Wetlands Inventory maps digitized
and approximately 25 of 31 quads of the 1989-90 National
Wetlands Inventory maps digitized. The National
Aeronautics & Space Administration has georeferenced
and classified two thematic satellite scenes of the study
area. GIS coordination to assemble all coverage into one
system and develop a user friendly menu for making
information more usable by 404 permit reviewers in the
cooperating agencies is currently lacking.
-» 24, 26, 41
Project Description B: Develop teams to monitor the on-
site progress of selected demonstration, projects to protect
or restore Gulf of Mexico habitats. Monitoring should
occur annually and teams should report status in a
consistent format (to be developed).
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program-Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1994
-» 41
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Project Description C: Convene workshops (every two to
three years) to evaluate the status of habitat
demonstration, protection, and restoration projects in the
Gulf of Mexico. Assessments and recommendations
should be provided to the Gulf of Mexico Program-
Habitat Degradation Committee. Workshop reports
should be sufficient for making mid-course corrections in
the field and in project development, developing new
public outreach information, and refining the Gulf of
Mexico's Five Year Strategy.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1994
-» 26
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
53
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Research
Findings from monitoring efforts should be analyzed to understand and establish
the underlying processes and relationships that result in particular observations. It
is important to learn how something "works," to accurately predict succession
patterns (for example) or other ecological changes in various similar and dissimilar
environmental settings. To develop that understanding, it is essential to elucidate
some of the important biological and environmental forces that structure and
control the system.
In addition to improving scientific knowledge, research is also integral to
developing more accurate, practical, and cost-effective methods and technologies for
monitoring and sample analyses. Most research funds are administered by federal
agencies or state program offices in support of specific missions, with only limited
funding going to research that examines the cumulative effects of decisions on the
ecosystem as a whole.
Mechanisms need to be developed to provide a means for producers, consumers,
and funders of research to agree on the priorities for research. A closer connection
should be established between the research agenda of the scientific community and
the information needs of managers, regulators, and those involved in decisions for
the management of the Gulf of Mexico.
Specific objectives, action items, and project descriptions follow:
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
64
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Objective: Conduct research to increase knowledge of the functions of Gulf of
Mexico habitats and to determine the relationships between habitat types and the
effects of stress on these habitats.
Action Item 12: Determine the ecological role of pine flatwoods in Gulf of
Mexico coastal communities and the need for appropriate regulation and
management of these resources.
Project Description: Conduct a paired watershed study in
the Gulf of Mexico to assess ecological changes resulting
from conversion of pine flatwoods to monotypic pine
stands grown on raised beds. This assessment will help
elucidate the ecological role of pine flatwoods in the
coastal community and lead to a more rationale
regulation and management of these resources.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program-Habitat Degradation
Committee, in conjunction with U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest
Service, and Soil Conservation Service.
Initiation Date: 1998
Action Item 13: Determine the effect of nutrient enrichment and the incidence
of parasite life stages and hosts in Gulf of Mexico wetlands.
Project Description: Conduct field studies in Gulf States
on the effect of nutrient enrichment and incidence of
parasite life stages and hosts in constructed and natural
wetland habitats.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in conjunction with University of Florida,
Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission and
Southwest Florida Water Management District.
Initiation Date: 1994
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
fifi
-------
Th& Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 14: Develop and implement a research agenda to provide
information on linkages between and the cumulative impacts of habitats within
Gulf of Mexico watersheds.
Project Description A: Sponsor a joint Gulf of Mexico
Program—Habitat Degradation/Fresh water Inflow
Committee workshop to determine the freshwater inflow
needs of Gulf of Mexico estuaries, and develop a research
agenda to provide information on linkages between and
cumulative impacts of habitats within Gulf of Mexico
watersheds.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in cooperation with Freshwater Inflow
Committee. .
Initiation Date: 1995
Project Description B: Implement the research agenda
developed in Project 14A to provide information on
linkages between and cumulative impacts of habitats
within Gulf of Mexico watersheds.
Lead: Appropriate federal and state agencies and
academia.
Initiation Date: 1996
Action Item 15: Develop community profiles on the status and trends,
significance, and future impacts of important Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Project Description A: Develop a community profile on
the status and trends, significance, and future impacts of
Gulf of Mexico estuarine hard bottom habitats (Gulfwide).
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in coordination with U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service.
Initiation Date: 1994
Project Description B: Develop a community profile on
the status and trends, significance, and future impacts of
Gulf of Mexico tidal flat habitats (Gulfwide).
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in coordination with U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service.
Initiation Date: 1995
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item -J6: Develop a profile of the effects of dredged barrier island tidal
passes on Gulf of Mexico coastal habitats.
Project Description: Develop a profile of the effects of
dredged barrier island tidal passes on Gulf of Mexico
coastal habitats (Gulfwide).
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1997
Action Item 17: Determine the occurrence of phytoplankton blooms in the Gulf
of Mexico, evaluate the impact and causes of such phenomena, and develop and
implement appropriate Gulfwide management strategies.
Project Description A: Prepare a science-based review
paper on the incidence of estuarine and marine
phytoplankton blooms, conduct a survey of the severity of
the problem in Gulf States, and develop management
remedies at a workshop.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program-Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1994
Project Description B: Prepare a long-term estuarine and
marine phytoplankton bloom strategy document,
including management remedies, for the appropriate state
and federal agencies. This document should include a
goal statement, strategy, and timetables for measuring
success.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program-Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1995
Project Description C: Based on the completion of
Projects 17A and 17B, assign five-year responsibility to one
federal agency to implement appropriate estuarine and
marine phytoplankton bloom management strategies
Gulfwide. Annual progress reports should be submitted
to the Gulf of Mexico Program—Policy Review Board.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program-Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1995
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
67
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Objective: Conduct research to improve habitat restoration and enhancement
projects in the Gulf of Mexico.
Action item 18: Determine the extent to which planted seagrass systems provide
the ecological functions found in naturally occurring seagrass systems in the Gulf
of Mexico.
Project Description: Sponsor a study which compares the
ecosystem structure and function of natural seagrass beds
to created, planted beds of differing ages in Laguna Madre,
Texas. The study will: 1) define important ecological
parameters necessary to assure success of seagrass
planting, 2) define measures of success, and 3) determine
the extent to which planted systems provide the ecological
functions found in naturally occurring seagrass systems.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1992 Completion Date: 1994
Status: The study has been completed and the final
report is due by 1994. _
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
68
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 19: Summarize the state of knowledge of Gulf of Mexico habitat creation
activities and identify and prioritize research needs.
Project Description A: Convene a panel of experts every
five years to summarize the state of knowledge of
important Gulf of Mexico habitat creation activities,
identify and prioritize research needs, and inform
regulators and potential funding agencies or organizations
of the need to reduce the loss of important Gulf of Mexico
habitats.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1990
Status: The first workshop was convened in April 1990,
in Jackson, MS.
Project Description B: Prepare a report on the status of
Gulf of Mexico coastal hardwood forest
restoration/creation activities with recommendations on
management and permit actions for this community type.
The report will summarize all known information and
develop a research plan to eliminate data gaps.
Lead: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers.
Initiation Date: 1995
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
59
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Planning & Standards
The most effective way to reduce and eliminate habitat degradation is to control
those activities and actions that threaten endangered and sensitive areas. It will cost
far more to restore habitats after they have been destroyed than to control actions
now before more damage is done. This should be a shared responsibility among
all—federal, state, and local governments, the private sector, and citizens in the Gulf
region. Numerous options include: open space programs, sensitive area protection
programs, zoning ordinances, clearing and grading ordinances, drainage ordinances,
as well as comprehensive and subarea plans. Restoration and enhancement of
coastal habitats is also a necessary component of any program that seeks to balance
out habitat gains and losses. Specific restoration programs must also be forged at all
levels of government.
Specific objectives, action items, and project descriptions follow:
Objective: Enhance the effectiveness of federal and state standards and
management programs to protect and conserve coastal habitats in the Gulf of
Mexico region.
Action Item 2O: Review and evaluate the operation of federal, state, and local
regulatory programs, and develop recommendations for improvement based on
an assessment of losses and gains of Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Project Description: Sponsor an interagency workshop to
identify and assess federal, state, and local regulatory
programs and their demonstrated performance in
protecting important Gulf of Mexico habitats. Develop
recommendations for improving the federal, state, and
local regulatory programs.
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Initiation Date: 1996
-» 21
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
60
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 21: Develop an implementation strategy to improve the federal,
state, and local regulatory programs that impact important Gulf of Mexico
habitats.
Project Description: Convene an Interagency Regulatory
Group to develop an implementation strategy to improve
the federal, state, and local regulatory programs that
impact important Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Initiation Date: 1996
-» 2O
Action Item 22: Minimize the loss of emergent Gulf of Mexico habitats due to
sea level change through appropriate management and development
techniques.
Project Description: Identify and work with appropriate
groups and agencies to regularly convene a workshop of
all Gulf States to exchange information, and apprise
regulators of development techniques, in order to
minimize the loss of Gulf of Mexico emergent habitat and
property due to sea level change.
Lead: The Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1993
Status: A workshop is being planned in conjunction
with the Gulf of Mexico Program's third biennial
symposium., scheduled Spring 1995.
Action Item 23: Evaluate existing compensatory mitigation projects, and
provide standardized guidance and success criteria for future projects in the Gulf
of Mexico region.
Project Description A: Evaluate compensatory mitigation
projects throughout the Gulf of Mexico region conducted
as a condition of recent federal and state permits. Prepare
a report to all concerned agencies regarding study findings,
as well as recommendations for changes and
improvements in future permit-related mitigation
projects.
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in cooperation with
Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation Committee.
Initiation Dale: 1994
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
61
-------
Tfi© Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Project Description B: Develop a standardized guidance
for specific habitat types, targeted to regulatory agencies
throughout the Gulf of Mexico region, on how
compensatory mitigation should be performed to
maximize the potential for successful habitat replacement.
The guidance should also include standardized criteria by
which the success of compensatory mitigation is
evaluated.
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in cooperation with
Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation Committee
and state and federal agencies.
Initiation Date: 1996
Action Item 24: Promote, guide, and facilitate the development of state
comprehensive wetland management plans in the Gulf of Mexico region.
Project Description A: Sponsor workshops in each of the
Gulf States for appropriate state and federal agencies to
develop and/or review provisions for comprehensive
coastal wetland management plans which embody area-
specific strategies and projects for wetland protection,
creation, restoration, and mitigation.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in cooperation with Gulf States.
initiation Date: 1995
Project Description B: Based on the results of the
workshops sponsored in Project 24A, develop guidelines
for future state comprehensive coastal wetland
management plans.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in cooperation with Gulf States.
Initiation Date: 1996
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
62
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Project Description C: Facilitate and support the Gulf
States in the preparation of comprehensive coastal
wetland management plans, as well as initiatives leading
up to the development of these plans.
Lead: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S.
Fish & Wildlife Service.
Initiation Date: 1992
Status: 1) Alabama received a grant from the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)--Region 4 in
1992 to develop a Wetlands Conservation and
Management Initiative. Committees have been formed to
investigate mapping and delineation, functional
assessment, and education and outreach. The Alabama
Department of Transportation is in the process of
developing regional mitigation banks.
2) Florida received a grant from the USEPA—Region 4 in
1992, to investigate the feasibilit)^ of state assumption of
the federal wetlands permitting program. The Florida
Department of Transportation is in the process of
developing regional mitigation banks. The South Florida
Water Management District received a USEPA—Region 4
grant to develop a comprehensive wetland management
plan, including an inventory and conservation and
monitoring provisions. The Seminole Indian Tribe
received a USEPA—Region 4 grant to develop water
quality standards and a wetland GIS system.
3) The Mississippi Department of Transportation has an
active mitigation bank. The Mississippi Bureau of Marine
Resources received a grant in 1991 from USEPA—Region 4
to map wetlands in Jackson County and enter data into a
GIS system. Also, the State of Mississippi is developing a
functional assessment of wetland types. Work will
continue in 1994.
4) The development of a comprehensive coastal wetland
management plan for Texas coastal wetlands has been
mandated by state legislation. The Texas General Land
Office and Texas Parks & Wildlife Department were
funded during 1993 by USEPA—Region 6 to develop a
wetlands management plan which may contain a
provision for mitigation banking and be similar to
Louisiana's marsh restoration plans (developed by the
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources).
5) Comprehensive Louisiana wetlands
conservation/restoration plans are being developed and
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
63
-------
Tho Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 25: Promote, guide, and facilitate the development of seagrass
community management plans in the Gulf of Mexico.
Project Description A: Update, publish, and distribute
throughout the Gulf of Mexico the results of the Florida
Seagrass Task Force, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency/U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service seagrass workshop,
and the National Oceanic & Atmospheric
Administration/South Florida Water Management
District workshop on seagrass and water quality
standards.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1995
Project Description B: Sponsor a workshop to discuss the
development and implementation of a seagrass
community management plan that will help lead to
informed stewardship of this important natural habitat.
The report generated in Project 25A should be utilized.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1995
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
64
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 26: Provide a. Gulfwide agency framework and funding
mechanisms for habitat restoration programs throughout the Gulf Of Mexico.
Project Description A: Develop a framework to carry out
habitat-related projects throughout the Gulf of Mexico
region. The framework should include administrative
criteria for prioritizing projects, identification of project
leaders, and mechanisms for transferring funding.
Substantive components of habitat restoration programs,
such as establishing baseline conditions, monitoring
changes, evaluating and adjusting projects, and assuring
communication of successes and failures throughout the
Gulf of Mexico region, should also be included in the
framework.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program Office, in coordination
with Habitat Degradation Committee.
Initiation Date: 1994
Project Description B: Develop a comprehensive Gulf of
Mexico habitat restoration program budget request for
consideration as part of the 1996 federal budget and
thereafter.
Lead: Lower Mississippi Valley, South Atlantic, and
Southwest Division Offices of U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, in conjunction with Gulf of Mexico Program--
Habitat Degradation Committee and Gulf States.
Initiation Date: 1994
Project Description C: Provide future funds for habitat-
related projects to the five Gulf States upon completion of
required plans for comprehensive wetland management
and seagrass community management. Gulf of Mexico
Program funds should then be allocated for cost share
projects that are consistent with such plans.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1997
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
65
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 27: Implement Advanced Identification [Section 404 (c) Clean
Water Act] projects for the Gulf of Mexico region to protect valuable habitats
from dredging and filling activities.
Project Description: Support completion of existing
Advanced Identification projects and implement at least
four new Advanced Identification [Section 404 (c) Clean
Water Act] projects for the Gulf of Mexico region based
upon recommendations of the Gulf of Mexico Program--
Habitat Degradation Committee.
Lead: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Regions 4
and 6, in coordination with Gulf of Mexico Program--
Habitat Degradation Committee.
Initiation Date: 1993
Status: Advanced Identification Projects have been
funded by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region
4 for Rookery Bay, Western Broward County, Shark River
Slough, and the Florida Keys. All projects should be
completed during 1994.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 28: Develop specific water quality standards for the estuarine,
nearshore, and offshore areas of the Gulf of Mexico.
Project Description A: Establish nutrient, turbidity, and
color standards which are required for the continuance
and establishment of coastal seagrass communities in the
Gulf of Mexico. Gather water quality data in areas where
seagrasses are established, where they were historically
located, and areas of known sources of poor water quality,
and manipulate variables in a mesocosm study to define
limits for different seagrass species.
Lead: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Gulf
States, in coordination with Gulf of Mexico Program--
Habitat Degradation Committee and Nutrient Enrichment
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1993
Status: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's
Environmental Research Laboratory, as part of the
Agency's Wetlands Research Program, has finalized a
cooperative agreement with the University of Virginia to
conduct field-shading experiments on seagrasses at three
sites in the Gulf of Mexico in order to establish limits of
light to seagrass growth, survival, and recovery.
-+41
Project Description B: Convene a workshop of state and
federal experts on marine water quality and living aquatic
resources habitat requirements to discuss and make
recommendations about additional needs for defensible
water quality criteria and standards for Gulf of Mexico
coastal and estuarine waters and wetlands.
Recommended criteria and standards should be submitted
to the Gulf States and U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency in 1996.
Lead: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in
coordination with Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat
Degradation Committee, Nutrient Enrichment
Committee, and Living Aquatic Resources Committee.
Initiation Date: 1995
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
67
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Compliance & Enforcement
The effectiveness of regulatory programs is greatly enhanced by active compliance
monitoring and enforcement programs. Strong permit conditions are only effective
if permittees conform to permitted specifications. Self monitoring by the regulated
community is not, at this time, acceptable to the public for assuring permit
compliance.
The existing federal laws which regulate activities which can impact coastal habitats
include: Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, Coastal Barrier Resources Act,
and Coastal Zone Management Act. In addition, there are many state and local laws
and ordinances which can restrict the loss of coastal habitats. Many programs
condition construction permits to include compensatory mitigation to replace
habitats unavoidably impacted by the permitted activity.
Regulators recognize that compliance monitoring must be performed to assure that
projects are constructed as permitted. If permits are conditioned to include
compensatory mitigation, compliance monitoring must include investigations to
ascertain the success of attempted habitat replacement. Also, it is widely recognized
that enforcement surveillance and resolution of violations is essential to an
effective regulatory program.
Currently, many federal and state regulatory programs do not have the number of
field-level personnel which are required to achieve effective compliance and
enforcement. In addition, agencies which have not been historically active in this
arena may find it difficult to initiate new or improved compliance and enforcement
monitoring programs because of lack of required ancillary facilities, such as airplane
or helicopter time, photographic equipment, legal staff, vehicles, and training.
Finally, management must support enforcement and compliance efforts and
actively pursue resolution of cases to deter continued non-compliance and/or
violations.
Specific objectives, action items, and project descriptions follow:
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
68
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Objective: Provide maximum protection for Gulf of Mexico habitats by assuring
full compliance with federal and state regulatory permit conditions and vigorous
violation detection and resolution.
Action item 29: Inventory and evaluate existing compliance and enforcement
programs Gulfwide which support habitat protection.
Project Description A: Inventory and evaluate existing
compliance and enforcement programs Gulfwide which
support habitat protection. The inventory should include
a listing and description of agencies and authorities
throughout the Gulf States.
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Districts, in
coordination with federal, state, and local regulatory
agencies.
Initiation Date: 1995
-» 2O
Project Description B: Evaluate the effectiveness of
permitting agencies, identified in Project 29A, in
resolving: 1) enforcement cases and 2) achieving
restoration or compensation for unpermitted losses.
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in coordination with
regulatory agencies.
Initiation Date: 1996
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
69
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 3O: Promote increased interagency cooperation and consistent
approaches within habitat compliance and enforcement programs throughout
the Gulf of Mexico region.
Project Description A: Institute a program in each Gulf
State for regular joint inspections of selected permittees to
assure compliance with permit conditions. Permittees
will be identified based on potential for habitat impacts.
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Districts, in
coordination with federal, state, and local regulatory
agencies.
Initiation Date: 1995
Project Description B: Develop a compliance monitoring
guidance document for federal and state regulatory
agencies that operate in the Gulf of Mexico region. The
document should include consistent and concise permit
conditions for habitat protection and compensatory
mitigation across the Gulf States, and permit monitoring
requirements for compensatory mitigation.
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in coordination with
federal and state regulatory agencies.
Initiation Date: 1996
Project Description C: Develop and initiate effective
interagency surveillance programs in each Gulf State to
detect unauthorized destruction of Gulf of Mexico
habitats.
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in coordination with
federal, state, and local regulatory programs.
Initiation Date: 1996
Project Description D: Select one Gulf State for use as a
model, and provide assistance in developing an effective
habitat compliance and enforcement program. This
model should then be utilized by the other Gulf States in
developing their own habitat compliance and
enforcement programs.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1997
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
70
-------
Tho UnfinishedAgonda
Chapter 4
Aciion Item 31: Provide training and sources of expertise to enhance
compliance with habitat protection requirements across the Gulf of Mexico
region.
Project Description A: Convene a workshop for
regulatory agencies Gulfwide to examine management
and work sharing options to allow increased compliance
monitoring and enforcement activities for habitat
protection without increased staffing.
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in cooperation with
Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation Committee.
Initiation Date: 1995
-» 3OA, 3OD
Project Description B: Regularly sponsor enforcement
and compliance seminars and training Gulfwide which
provide up-to-date methods to identify, track, and resolve
enforcement cases throughout the Gulf of Mexico region.
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in coordination with
appropriate regulatory agencies.
Initiation Date: 1997
-» 308
Project Description C: Implement training programs and
a certification process for wetlands mitigation specialists
who carry out Clean Water Act requirements. Maintain a
list of qualified experts who have completed training
programs and a certification process for wetlands
mitigation.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, working with nonprofit service groups, such
as the Society of Wetland Scientists and Association of
State Wetland Managers.
Initiation Date: 1996
Project Description D: Develop lists of qualified expert
witnesses to be used in the legal resolution of habitat-
related enforcement cases throughout the Gulf of Mexico
region.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1995
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
71
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Preservation & Protection
Many of the critical coastal habitats along the Gulf of Mexico have been altered by
man. Increasing development pressures and the lack of dear regulatory policies to
control impacts will obviously result in additional impacts in the future. Programs
that provide a higher level of protection, including preservation for sensitive areas,
are needed. The programs should focus on maintaining the functional integrity of
the ecological system including its importance as a spawning, nesting, and nursery
area.
Coordination of coastal preservation and protection activities should be facilitated
in the Gulf of Mexico and partnerships among those agencies and governments
with a vested interest in habitat management should be established. Critical coastal
habitats and special ecological areas worthy of increased protection need to be
identified by each Gulf State. The individual lists could be compiled to form a
comprehensive list of critical areas throughout the Gulf of Mexico which could then
be prioritized based on value, levels of sensitivity, and vulnerability. . .
Methods and mechanisms for preservation including enhance4 regulations,
conservation easements, and acquisition should be identified and outlined in a
catalog for implementation. Finally, states should form a coalition for action where
relevant information and resources can be shared to develop and fulfill habitat
preservation goals for the Gulf of Mexico. .
Specific objectives, action items, and project descriptions follow:
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
72
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Objective: Provide a. comprehensive preservation and protection framework for
Gulf of Mexico habitats of significant ecological value.
Action Item 32: Identify and prioritize special ecological areas in the Gulf of
Mexico that are worthy of increased levels of protection and preservation.
Project Description A: Develop a mechanism for defining
critical habitats (i.e., limited, threatened, endangered)
throughout the Gulf of Mexico. These habitats will be
classified in terms of their geographic area,
environmental significance, and geographical extent.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program, operating through Texas
Parks & Wildlife Department, and in conjunction with
appropriate experts at state and federal level.
Initiation Date: 1993
Status: The Gulf of Mexico Program provided funds to
the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department in 1993 to develop
a model comprehensive ecological protection program.
The project will be fully coordinated with all interested
parties and produce an inventory and
approach/mechanism for protecting these most vital
areas.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
73
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Projeci Description B: Conduct a survey of Gulf of Mexico
coastal habitats to identify and prioritize candidate systems
for habitat preserves or management areas both on a state
and regional basis.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program, operating through Texas
Parks & Wildlife Department, and in conjunction with
federal, state, and private groups.
Initiation Date: 1993
Status: The Gulf of Mexico Program's Success in '93
Initiative funded proposals to select habitat preserve
coordinators for each of the five Gulf Coast States, compile
lists of suitable and available sites, and develop a
management, and reporting system. Coordinators are in
place. Site compilations and the management and
reporting plan will be completed by the end of 1994. The
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department is developing a coastal
wetlands priority acquisition plan, with U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency—Region 6 funds, which
will be completed by the end of 1994.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
74
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 33: Coordinate and facilitate, using all programs, resources, and
mechanisms, the preservation and protection of special ecological habitats in the
Gulf of Mexico.
Project Description A: Develop a compendium of
preservation and protection mechanisms for sensitive
habitats. This manual would also include information
regarding funding available to Gulf States for coastal
protection, including programs sponsored by the federal
government, foundations, private industry, as well as the
Gulf Statqs themselves.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program, operating through Texas
Parks & Wildlife Department, and in conjunction with
federal, state, and private groups.
Initiation Date: 1993 Completion Date: 1994
Status: The Gulf of Mexico Program provided funds to
the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department in 1993 to develop
a manual describing sensitive habitat preservation
methods. The manual will also include potential funding
sources and procedures for habitat acquisition and is
scheduled for completion in October 1994.
Project Description B: Establish a network of Gulf State
representatives and appropriate federal agencies, local
governments, foundations, and private groups to facilitate
the preservation and protection of sensitive ecological
habitats through the exchange of information, techniques,
methods, etc.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program, operating through Texas
Parks & Wildlife Department, and in conjunction with
federal, state, and private groups.
Initiation Date: 1994
Project Description C: Develop a strategy for collecting, -
maintaining, and distributing a network/inventory of
contacts, information sources, and sensitive area
protection efforts throughout the Gulf of Mexico region.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program, operating through Texas
Parks & Wildlife Department, and in conjunction with
federal, state, and private groups.
Initiation Date: 1994
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
76
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Public Education & Outreach
People living in two-thirds of the U.S. may ultimately affect the environmental
quality of the Gulf of Mexico. Effective prevention of habitat degradation requires
an ongoing commitment from an informed citizenry; public outreach nurtures such
a commitment. Public information, education, and involvement are three
components of an effective outreach strategy, which can reap significant benefits for
the Gulf. More and more, public outreach is recognized as an effective resource
management tool to address problems resulting from individual actions. A
committed citizenry presents both a supplement and an alternative to enforcement
programs.
Public outreach activities can foster recognition of the Gulf of Mexico as a regional
and national resource, stimulating civic, governmental, and private sector support
for changing lifestyles and developing the financial commitments necessary to
preserve the environmental quality of the Gulf. A strong outreach program
showing the effects human activities have upon the health of Gulf ecosystems
should enable all individuals, whether living on the coast or along the upper
stretches of the Mississippi River, to see themselves as caretakers of a vital, shared
resource.
Specific objectives, action items, and project descriptions follow:
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
76
-------
Tho Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Objective: Develop educational materials and programs to promote awareness and
appreciation of Gulf of Mexico habitats, as well as their value and importance.
Action Item 34: Develop educational programs and materials for use in school
systems to increase understanding of the value of Gulf of Mexico habitats and the
need for preservation and protection.
Project Description A: Develop materials, curricula, and
programs for teachers to introduce the concepts about Gulf
of Mexico critical habitats, including restoration and
protection needs, into public school education.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program-Habitat Degradation
Committee, in conjunction with Public Education &
Outreach Operations, National Oceanic & Atmospheric
Administration, National Science Foundation, U.S.
Department of Defense, and Center for Marine
Conservation.
Initiation Date: 1993
Status: The Gulf of Mexico Program and Navy
Oceanographic Office personnel are assisting Long Beach
High School (Mississippi) science teachers in developing
coastal habitat science projects that can be worked
cooperatively with another Caribbean or Central
American high school. This is planned as a continuing
program.
Project Description B: Support innovative educational
programs on the value of coastal habitats as a pilot project
for one to two years. As a start, the University of West
Florida's Wetlands Weekend should be supported and
highlighted.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee.
Initiation Date: 1994
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
77
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 35: Develop public outreach materials and programs to increase
understanding of the value of Gulf of Mexico habitats and the need for
preservation and protection.
Project Description: Develop materials to educate the
general public on the economic and societal values of
natural habitats in the Gulf of Mexico.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in conjunction with Public Outreach &
Education Operations and regulatory agencies.
Initiation Date: 1995
Action Item 36: Utilize interpretive centers, displays, and signs to inform the
public about Gulf of Mexico resources through a "hands-on" experience.
Project Description: Promote and improve existing
interpretive centers and develop new centers throughout
the Gulf of Mexico. These centers could be adjacent to, or
part of, existing parks, museums, research institutes,
refuges, and demonstration sites to inform the public
about resources and values through a "hands-on"
experience. Develop new displays and signs for
distribution.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in coordination with Public Education &
Outreach Operations.
Initiation Date: 1995
-» 11
Action Item 37: Inform business and industry groups on the value of Gulf of
Mexico habitats and the need for preservation and protection.
Project Description: Develop outreach activities targeted
for specific business and industry groups to promote an
understanding of the value of Gulf of Mexico habitats and
emphasize the need for protection and preservation.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in coordination with Public Education &
Outreach Operations and Citizens Advisory Committee.
Initiation Date: 1995
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
78
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Objective: Prevent or correct Gulf of Mexico habitat degradation and loss through
public involvement activities.
Action Item 38: Initiate an outreach program to inform and involve the general
public in activities necessary to prevent or correct habitat degradation arid loss in
the Gulf of Mexico region.
Project Description A: Develop educational materials to
inform the public of simple actions which can be taken to
help eliminate habitat loss in the Gulf of Mexico. This
should include educational signs and press releases which
inform the public of environmentally sensitive areas and
simple measures that can be taken, such as addressing
propeller damage to seagrass areas. Educational materials,
field trip opportunities, and guest lecturers to public
school systems, as well as colleges and universities which
border the Gulf, should also be provided.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program-Habitat Degradation
Committee, Citizens Advisory Committee, and Public
Education & Outreach Operations.
Initiation Date: 1995
-» 32B, 36
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
79
-------
TH& Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Project Description B: Prepare a handbook and a public
information brochure on "How to Restore or Establish
Wetlands Communities", which includes identification
and evaluation of wetland restoration and establishment
techniques used by federal and state agencies and private
groups to: 1) select locations for wetland establishment, 2)
restore or establish hydrology, 3) prepare soils, 4) select,
handle, and plant vegetation, and 5) select appropriate
engineering structures and procedures.
Lead: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service, and Soil Conservation Service, in coordination
with Gulf of Mexico Program, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, U.S. Forest Service, National Marine
Fisheries Service, and Gulf States.
Initiation Date: 1993 Completion Date: 1994
Status: The Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat
Degradation Committee will fund a handbook and a
public information brochure on "How to Restore or
Establish Wetland Communities," however, personnel
and funding constraints have delayed this project by one
year. A draft brochure will be available in 1993, and a draft
handbook will be available in 1994; both will be finalized
by the end of 1994. Publication of the handbook and
brochure will require additional funding.
i-+ 8, 1OA _.vvv
Project Description C: Expand involvement activities
conducted by Boater's Pledge leaders in each Gulf State by
providing generic materials and program guidance on
habitat degradation issues.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in conjunction with Public Outreach &
Education Operations and Marine Debris Committee.
Initiation Date: 1994
Project Description D: Add a column to "Gulf Watch"
that promotes habitat protection, restoration, creation and
enhancement projects, successes, and strategies.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program Office.
Initiation Date: 1994
-> 19A, 22A, 26A, 27, 29B, 32B
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 39: Develop an outreach program for tourists that promotes an
awareness of the value and the need to protect Gulf of Mexico habitats in
important resort and recreational communities.
Project Description: Develop educational materials
targeted toward tourists that promote awareness of the
value and the need to protect Gulf of Mexico habitats in
important resort and recreational communities.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in coordination with Public Education &
Outreach Operations.
initiation Date: 1995
Action Item 4O: Increase knowledge on the laws, regulations, and ordinances
pertaining to regulation of coastal habitats in the Gulf of Mexico.
Project Description A: Develop materials to educate the
public on the laws, regulations, and ordinances pertaining
to regulation of coastal habitats in the Gulf of Mexico.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
Committee, in conjunction with Public Outreach &
Education Operations and regulatory agencies.
Initiation Date: 1995
-» 20,21,27
| Project Description B: Develop a system to educate
i developers and their employees about the conditions of
I selected permits in terms of expected habitat results.
i Follow-up on key permits to evaluate compliance.
Develop recognition programs for developers with
:outstanding compliance records and involve them in
educational programs.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program—Habitat Degradation
iCommittee.
Initiation Date: 1996
!-» 29A, 29B, 30A
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
81
-------
The Unfinished Agenda
Chapter 4
Action Item 41: Develop a citizen involvement program to monitor losses and
gains in Gulf of Mexico habitat acreage and quality.
Project Description: Identify mechanisms to allow
concerned citizens to be involved in monitoring losses
and gains in Gulf of Mexico habitat acreage and quality.
Lead: Gulf of Mexico Program-Habitat Degradation
Committee, in coordination with Citizens Advisory
Committee and Public Education & Outreach Operations.
Initiation Date: 1995
-» 7, 10A, 11B, 26A, 28A
Action Item 42: Develop an "Adopt-A-Shoreline" Program to involve the
public in the preservation and protection of Gulf of Mexico habitats.
Project Description: Develop an "Adopt-A-Shoreline"
Program to involve the public in the preservation and
protection of Gulf of Mexico habitats. The Center for
Marine Conservation's existing Adopt-A-Shoreline
Program for marine debris should be used as a model and
perhaps coordinated with the new habitat degradation
program. The Program should also be coordinated with
ongoing "Adopt-A-Wetland" programs in the Gulf States,
such as in Corpus Christi, TX, where youths are being
taught the importance of wetlands conservation.
Lead: Center for Marine Conservation, in coordination
with Gulf States, Gulf of Mexico Program Public Education
& Outreach Operations, Habitat Degradation Committee,
and Citizen's Advisory Committee. ,
Initiation Date: 1996
-* 10A
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
82
-------
lit Closing
In Closing...
We intend this document to be a beginning, not an end.
Our hope is that this Action Agenda will serve as an
inspiration and a call to action for the millions who live
and work in the Gulf of Mexico region. Together, our
coordinated actions can make a difference in protecting
and restoring Gulf of Mexico habitats.
The Gulf off Mexico Program
Habitat Degradation Committee
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
83
-------
Bibliography
Adams, R.D., B.B. Barrett, J.H. Blackmon, B.W. Gane, and W.G. Mclntire. .1976.
Barataria Basin: Geologic Processes and Framework. Louisiana State
University. Center for Wetland Resources. Baton Rouge, LA. Sea Grant Pub.
No. LSU-T-76-006.
Bahr, L.M., Jr. and W.P. Lanier. 1981. The Ecology of Intertidal Oyster Reefs of the
South Atlantic Coast: A Community Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Office of Biological Services. Washington, D.C. USFWS/OBS-81/15.
Baumann, R.H., and R.E. Turner. 1990. "Direct Impacts of Outer Continental Shelf
Activities on Wetland Loss in the Central Gulf of Mexico." Environ. Geo.
Water Resour. 15:189-198.
Beasley, J.R. 1965. "Mudshell Exploitation and Production." Beasley letters, Ditto
no. 86 a-e. University of Texas Memorial Museum.
Bell, F.W. 1989. Application of Wetland Valuation Theory to Florida Fisheries.
Florida Sea Grant Program. SGR 95. Florida Sea Grant College. The
University of Florida. Gainesville, FL.
Buff, V. and S. Turner. 1987. "The Gulf Initiative." Coastal Zone 1987.
Broutman, M.A. and D.L. Leonard. 1988. National Estuarine Inventory: The
Quality of Shellfish Growing Waters in the. Gulf of Mexico. U.S. Department
of Commerce. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration. Strategic
Assessment Branch. Washington,, D.C. (N/OMA31).
Chabreck, R.H. 1982. "The Effect of Coastal Alteration on Marsh Plants." In:
Proceedings of the Conference on Coastal Erosion and Wetland Modification
in Louisiana: Causes, Consequences and Options. D.F. Boesch (ed.). U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. Biological Services Program. Washington, D.C.
USFWS/OBS-82/59,92-98.
Comp, G.S. and W. Seaman, Jr. 1985. "Estuarine Habitat and Fishery Resources of
Florida." In: Florida Aquatic Habitat and Fishery Resources. W. Seaman, Jr.
(ed.). Florida Chapter of American Fisheries Society. Kissimmee, FL. ISBN-
O-9616676-0-5.
Conner, W.H. and W.J. Day, Jr., (eds.). 1987. The Ecology of Barataria Basin,
Louisiana: An Estuarine Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. National
Wetlands Research Center. Washington, D.C. Biological Report 85 (7.13).
Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Department of
the Interior. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C.
USFWS/OBS-79/31.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
84
-------
Bibliography
Dahl, T.E. 1991. Wetland Resources of the United States (map). U.S. Department of
the Interior. Fish & Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. St.
Petersburg, FL.
Dame, R.F., T.G. Wolaver, and S.M. Libes. 1985. "The Summer Uptake and Release
of Nitrogen by an Intertidal Oyster Reef." Netherlands Jour, of Sea Research.
19:265-268.
Darnell, R.M. 1992. "Biology of the Estuaries and Inner Continental Shelf of the
Northern Gulf of Mexico." In: The Environmental and Economic Status of
the Gulf of Mexico: Proceedings of the Conference- on Environmental and
Economic Status of the Gulf of Mexico. .Gulf of Mexico Program Office.
Stennis Space-Center, MS.
Dunbar, J.B., L.D. Britsch, and E.B. Kemp, III. 1990. Land Loss Rates: Louisiana
Chenier Plain. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment
Station, Tech. Dept. GL-90-2.
Dunbar, J.B., L.D. Britsch, and E.B. Kemp, III. 1992. Land Loss Rates-Louisiana
Coastal Plain. Tech. Rpt. GL-90-2. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Waterways
Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS.
Durako, M.J., J.A. Browder, W.L. Kruczynski, C.B. Subrahmanyam, and R.E. Turner.
1985. "Salt Marsh Habitat and Fishery Resources of Florida." In: Florida
Aquatic Habitat and Fishery Resources. Florida Chapter of American
Fisheries Society. Kissimmee, FL.
Eleuterius, L.N. Personal communication. Gulf Coast Research Laboratory, Ocean
Springs, MS.
Eleuterius, L.N. In Press. "Catastrophic Loss of Seagrasses in Mississippi Sound."
In: Proceedings of the Minerals Management Service Information Transfer
Meeting. New Orleans, LA. Dec., 1989.
Eleuterius, L.N. and G.J. Miller. 1976. "Observations on Seagrasses and Seaweeds in
Mississippi Sound Since Hurricane Camille." /. Miss. Acad. Sci. 21:58-63.
Field, D.W., A.J. Reyer, P.V. Genovese, and B.D. Shearer. 1991. Coastal Wetlands of
the United States: An Accounting of a Valuable National Resource: U.S.
Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. National Ocean Service, Strategic Assessment Branch.
Washington, DC.
Gosselink, J.G. 1984. The Ecology of Delta Marshes of Coastal Louisiana: A
Community Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C.
USFWS/OBS-84/09.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Bibliography
Gosselink, J.G., G.P. Shaffer, L.C. Lee, D.M. Burdick, D.L. Childers, N.C. Leibowitz,
S.C. Hamilton, R. Boumans, D. Cushman, S. Fields, M. Koch, and J.M. Visser.
1990. "Landscape Conservation in a Forested Wetland Watershed: Can We
Manage Cumulative Impacts." Bioscience 40(8): 588-600.
Haddad, K.D. 1989. "Habitat Trends and Fisheries in Tampa and Sarasota Bays." In:
Tampa and Sarasota Bays: Issues, Resources, Status, and Management.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Washington, D.C.
NOAA Estuary-of-the-Month Seminar Series No. 11.
Hopkinson, C.S. and J.W. Day, Jr. 1979. "Aquatic Productivity and Water Quality at
the Upland-Estuary Interface in Barataria Basin, Louisiana," In: Ecological
Processes in Coastal and Marine Systems. R.J. Livingston (ed.). Plenum Press,
London, UK.
Iverson, R.L. and H.F. Bittaker. 1986. "Seagrass Distribution and Abundance in
Eastern Gulf of Mexico Coastal Waters." Estuarine, Coastal Shelf Sci. 22:577-
602.
Johnson, W.B. and J.G. Gosselink. 1982. "Wetlands Loss Directly Associated with
Canal Dredging in the Louisiana Coastal Zone." In: Proceedings of the
Conference on Coastal Erosion and Wetland Modification in Louisiana:
Causes, Consequences, and Options. D.F. Boesch (ed.). Baton Rouge, LA.
October 5-7,1981. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Services Program.
Washington, D.C. USFWS/OBS-82/59,60-72.
Lewis, R.R. III. 1989. "Biology and Eutrophication of Tampa Bay." In: Tampa and
Sarasota Bays: Issues, Resources, Status, and Management. National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration. NOAA Estuary-of-the-Month Seminar
Series No. 11.
Lewis, R.R, HI, J. Durako, M.D. Moffler, and R.C. Phillips. 1985a. "Seagrass Meadows
of Tampa Bay—A Review." In: Proceedings: Tampa Bay Area Scientific
Information Symposium. S.F. Treat, J.L. Simon, R.R. Lewis III and R.L.
Whitman, Jr. (eds.). May, 1982. Florida Sea Grant Report No. 65.
Lewis, R.R. HI, R.G. Gilmore, Jr., D.W. Crewz, and W.E. Odum. 1985b. "Mangrove
Habitat and Fishery Resources of Florida." In: Florida Aquatic Habitat and
Fishery Resources. W. Seaman, Jr. (ed.). Florida Chapter of the American
Fisheries Society. Kissimmee, FL.
Liebowitz, S.G. and J.M. Hill. In press. "Land Loss Hotspots in Coastal Louisiana."
Ambio.
Lindall, W.N., Jr., and C.H. Saloman. 1977. "Alteration and Destruction of Estuaries
Affecting Fishery Resources of the Gulf of Mexico." Mar. Fish. Rev. 39:1-7.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
86
-------
Bibliography
Lindall, W.N., Jr.> and G.W. Thayer. 1982. "Quantification of National Marine .
Fisheries Service Habitat Conservation Efforts in the Southeast Region of the
United States." Mar. Fish. Rev. 44:18-22. , "
Lindall, W.N., Jr., A. Mager, Jr., G.W. Thayer, and D.R. Ekberg. 1979. "Estuarine
Habitat Mitigation Planning in the Southeast." In: The Mitigation
Symposium: A National Workshop on Mitigating Losses of Fish and
Wildlife Habitats. Ft. Collins, CO. July, 16-20, 1979. U.S. Department of
Agriculture. Technical Report RM:65.
Longley, W.L., and M. Wright. 1989. Texas Barrier Island Characterization-
Narrative Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C. NWRC
Open File Rep. 89-05,
Louisiana Geological Survey and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1987.
Saving Louisiana's Coastal Wetlands: The Need for a Long-term Plan of
Action. USEPA-230-02-87-026. (RR#13148).
MacDonald, I.R., S.E. Best, C.S. Lee, and A.A. Rost. 1992. Biogeochemical Processes
at Natural Oil Seeps in the Gulf of Mexico: Field Trials of a Small Area
Benthic Imaging System (SABIS). Presented at the First Thematic Conference
on Remote Sensing for 'Marine and Coastal Environments. New Orleans,
LA., June 15-17,1992.
McGarry MacAualy, G. Personal communication. Florida Department of Natural
Resources. Marine Research Institute.
Montagna, P.A. 1991. "Effects of the Laguna Madre, Texas Brown Tide on Benthos."
In: Whitledge, T.E. and W. M. Pulich, Jr., Report: Brown Tide Symposium
and Workshop. Final Report to Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, and
USEPA Gulf of Mexico Program. Technical Report No. TR/91-002, Marine
Science Institute, The University of Texas, Port Aransas, TX. pp. 21-22.
Odum, W.E., C.C. Mclvor, and T.J. Smith III. 1982. The Ecology of the Mangroves of
South Florida: A Community Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Washington, D.C. USFWS/OBS-81/24.
Penland, P.S., and R. Boyd. 1981. Shoreline Changes in the Louisiana Barrier Coast.
The Ocean—An International Workplace. Oceans 81 Conference Record.
Boston, MA. September 16-18,1981. Vol. 1, 209- 219.
Powell, G.L. 1989. Texas Bays and Estuaries Program: A Cooperative State Program
for the Study of Freshwater Inflow Needs. Texas Water Development Board.
Austin, TX.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
S7
-------
Bibliography
Pulich, W.M., Jr. and S. Rabalais. 1986. "Primary Production Potential of Blue-
Green Algal Mats on Southern Texas Tidal Flats." The Southwestern
Naturalist 31(l):39-47.
Pulich, W.M., Jr. and R.S. Scalan. 1987. "Organic Carbon and Nitrogen Flow from
Marine Cyanobacteria to Semiaquatic Insect Food Webs." Contributions in
Marine Science. 30:27-37.
Pulich, W.M., Jr. and W.A White. 1990. Decline of Submerged Vegetation in the
Galveston Bay System: Chronology and Relationships to Physical Processes.
A Report to the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. Austin, TX.
Rabalais, N.N. 1992. An Updated Summary of Status and. Trends in Indicators of
Nutrient Enrichment in the Gulf of Mexico. Prepared for U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Gulf of Mexico Program, Nutrient
Enrichment Committee. Publication No. EPA/800-R-92-004. Louisiana
Universities Marine Consortium. Chauvin, LA.
Rabalais, N.N., R.E. Turner, W.J. Wiseman, Jr. and D.F. Boesch. 1991. "A Brief
Summary of Hypoxia on the Northern Gulf of Mexico Continental Shelf:
1985-1988." Pages 35-47 in R.V. Tyson and T.H. Pearson (eds.), Modern and
Ancient Continental Shelf Anoxia. Geological Society Special Publication No.
58. The Geological Society. London.
Rezak, R., T.J. Bright, and D.W. McGrail. 1985. Reefs'and Banks of the
Northwestern Gulf of Mexico. 1st ed. John Wiley & Sons. New York, NY.
Robblee, M.B., T.R. Barber, P.R. Carlson, Jr., M.J. Durako, J.W. Fourqurean, L.K.
Muehistein, D. Porter, L.A. Yarbro, R.T. Zieman, and J.C. Zieman. 1991.
"Mass Mortality of the Tropical Seagrass Thalassia testudinum in Florida Bay
(USA)." Marine Ecology Progress Series. Vol. 71: 297-299.
Sather, J.H. and R.D. Smith. 1984. An Overview of Major Wetland Functions and
Values. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C. USFWS/OBS-
84/18.
Sea Grant College Program. 1989. "Galveston Bay." Texas A & M University.
Galveston, TX. Gulf Watch. 1(2):24.
Sifneos, J.C., E.W. Cake, Jr., and M.E. Kentula. 1992. "Effect of Section 404
Permitting of Freshwater Wetlands in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi."
Wetlands 12(1): 28-36.
Smith, W. E. 1989. Mississippi Sound North Shoreline Changes in Alabama, 1955-
1985. Geological Survey of Alabama. Tuscaloosa, AL. Information Series 67.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Bibliography
Stout, J.P. 1979. "Marshes in the Mobile Estuary: Status and Evaluation." In:
Symposium on the Natural Resources of the Mobile Bay Estuary, Alabama.
Mobile, AL. May 1979. H.A. Loyacano, Jr. and J.P. Smith (eds.). U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. Mobile District. Mobile, AL.
Taylor, J.L., and C.H. Saloman. 1968. "Some Effects of Hydraulic Dredging and
Coastal Development in Boca Ciega Bay, Florida." U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Fish. Bull. 67(2):213-241.
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department and Texas Colonial Waterbird Society. 1988.
Texas Colonial Waterbird Census Summary. Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department, Nongame and Endangered Species Program. Austin, TX.
Thayer, G.W. and J.F. Ustach. 1981. "Gulf of Mexico Wetlands: Value, State of
Knowledge and Research Needs." In: Proceedings of a Symposium on
Environmental Research Needs in the Gulf of Mexico. Key Biscayne, FL.
May, 1981. NOAA. Washington, D.C.
Turner, R.E.. 1982. "Wetland Losses and Coastal Fisheries: An Enigmatic and
Economically Significant Dependency." In: Proceedings of the Conference on
Coastal Erosion and Wetland Modification in Louisiana: Causes,
Consequences and Options. D.F. Boesch (ed.) U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.
Biological Services Program. Washington, D.C. USFWS/OBS-82/59.
Turner, R.E. 1987. Relationship Between Canal and Levee Density and Coastal Land
Loss in Louisiana. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Washington, D.C.
Biological Report 85(14):85.
Turner, R.E. 1990. "Landscape Development and Coastal Wetland Losses in the
Northern Gulf of Mexico." Amer. Zoo/. 33 pp.
Turner, R.E. and D.F. Boesch. 1987. "Aquatic Animal Production and Wetland
Relationships: Insights Gleaned Following Wetland Loss or Gain." Pages 25-
39 In: D. Hooks (ed.), Ecology and Management of Wetlands. Croons Helms,
Ltd. Beckenham, Kent, United Kingdom.
Turner, R.E. and D.R. Cahoon. 1988. Causes of Wetland Loss in the Coastal Central
Gulf of Mexico, Volume II: Technical Narrative. Minerals Management
Service. New Orleans, LA.
Turner, R.E., R. Costanza, and W. Sciafe. 1982. "Canals and Wetland Erosion Rates
in Coastal Louisiana." In: Proceedings of the Conference on Coastal Erosion
and Wetland Modification in Louisiana: Causes, Consequences, and Options.
D.F. Boesch (ed.). U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Biological Services
Program. Washington, D.C. USFWS/OBS-82/59.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
89
-------
Bibliography
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1990a. Current Fishery Statistics No. 8900: Fisheries
of the United States, 1989. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. National Marine Fisheries Service. Fishery Statistics
Division. Silver Spring, MD.
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1990b. A Special Earthzveek Report: 50 Years of
Population Change Along the Nation's Coasts 1960-2010. National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service. April 1990.
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1991. Coastal Wetlands of the United States: An
Accounting of a Valuable National Resource. Prepared by D.W. Field, A.J.
Reyer, P.V. Genovese, and B.D. Shearer. National Oceanic & Atmospheric
Administration, Strategic Assessment Branch. Rockville, MD.
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1992. Current Fishery Statistics No. 9100: Fisheries
of the United States, 1991. Fishery. Statistics Division, National Marine
Fisheries Service, NOAA, Silver Spring, MD.
U.S. Department of the Interior. 1980. Selected Vertebrate Endangered Species of
the Sea Coast of the United States. Fish and Wildlife Service. National Fish
and Wildlife Service Laboratory. Washington, D.C. USFWS/OBS-80/01.
Vol. 1 58 species accounts.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1982. Hydrographic, Water Quality, and
Biological Studies of Freshwater Canal Systems in South Carolina,
Mississippi, and Florida. Environmental Services Division, Athens, GA.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1988. The Gulf Initiative: Protecting the
Gulf of Mexico. Gulf of Mexico Program Office. John C. Stennis Space Center,
MS.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1991. Gulf Facts. Gulf of Mexico Program
Office. John C. Stennis Space Center, MS.
Watzin, M.C., S. Tucker, and C. South. In preparation. Mobile Bay Cumulative
Impacts Study. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Research
Center. Slidell, LA.
Weyl, P.K. 1970. Oceanography. John Wiley & Sons. New York, NY.
White, W.A., and T.R. Calnan. 1990. Sedimentation and Historical Changes in
Fluvial-Deltaic Wetlands along the Texas Gulf Coast with Emphasis on the
Colorado and Trinity River Deltas. Bureau of Economic Geology. The
University of Texas. Austin, TX.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
•0
-------
Bibliography
Whitledge, T. and S.M. Rag (eds.). 1989. Galveston Bay: Issues, Resources, Status,
and Management. NOAA Estuary-of-the-Month Seminar Series No. 13.
Washington, D.C. 114.
Wood, E.J.F., W.E. Odum, and J.C. Zieman. 1969. "Influences of Seagrasses on the
Productivity of Coastal Lagoons." In: Coastal Lagoons. A.A. Castanares (ed.).
Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. Cuidad Universitaria, Mexico,
DF.
Zieman, J.C. and R.T. Zieman. 1989. The Ecology of the Seagrass Meadows of the
West Coast of Florida: A Community Profile. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Washington, D.C. Biological Report. 85(7.25).
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
•1
-------
Focfora/ & State Framework
Appendix A
FEDERAL LEVEL
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
• Clean Water Act (CWA) as amended. Waters of the U.S. protected by the Clean
Water Act (GWA) include rivers, streams, estuaries, the territorial seas, and most
ponds, lakes, and wetlands. In determining waters that are within the scope of
the CWA, Congress intended to assert federal jurisdiction to the broadest extent
permissible under the commerce clause of the Constitution. One factor that
establishes a commerce connection is the use or potential use of waters for
navigation. Other factors include (but are not limited to) use of a wetland (or
other water) as habitat by migratory birds, including waterfowl, use by federally
listed endangered species, or for recreation by interstate visitors.
Section 404. The U.S. Congress enacted the CWA to "restore and maintain the
chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters." Section 404
regulates the discharge of dredged and fill material into waters of the U.S., and
establishes a permit program to ensure that such discharges comply with
environmental requirements.
Activities regulated by Section 404 include discharges of dredged and fill material
commonly associated with activities such as port development, channel
construction and maintenance, fills to create development sites, transportation
improvements, and water resource projects (such as dams, jetties, and levees).
Other kinds of activities, such as land clearing, are regulated as Section 404
discharges if they involve discharges of dredged or fill material (e.g., soil) into
waters of the U.S. However, some activities which can adversely affect and even
destroy wetlands, such as drainage and groundwater pumping, are often
conducted without discharging dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S.,
and in those circumstances, are not regulated under Section 404.
USEPA has primary roles in several aspects of the Section 404 program including
development of the environmental guidelines by which permit applications
must be evaluated; review of proposed permits; prohibition of discharges with
unacceptable adverse impacts; approval and oversight of state assumption of the
program; establishment of jurisdictional scope of waters of the U.S.; and
interpretation of Section 404 exemptions. As a jointly administered program,
USAGE and USEPA share responsibility for enforcing the Section 404 Program.
In general, USAGE enforces against non-compliance with permit conditions;
USEPA generally focuses its resources towards discovering and enforcing against
unpermitted (unauthorized) discharges. USEPA also has the authority to veto a
USAGE permit approval.
Under the authority of Section 404(c), USEPA may prohibit, withdraw, or restrict
the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. if the discharge
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
92
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appondlx A
would have unacceptable adverse effects on municipal water supplies, shellfish
beds and fishery areas, wildlife, or recreational areas. This authority may be used
before, during, or after USAGE action on a permit application. USEPA may also
exercise this authority in the absence of a specified permit application or USAGE
regulatory action.
Anyone in violation of the Section 404 Program, either by conducting an
unauthorized activity or by violating permit conditions, is subject to civil or
criminal action or both. Section 309 gives USAGE and USEPA the authority to
impose penalties administratively, that is, without use of judicial procedures.
USEPA has developed an Administrative Penalty Policy which outlines
procedures for establishing fines. When judicial action is pursued, the violator
may be required to restore the site and may be subject to payment of fines,
imprisonment or both. Violators are frequently required to restore the site, often
in addition to other penalties.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). The National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) controls the discharge of effluent from
any point source into any surface waters, pursuant to effluent limitations
published in federal regulations. It is relevant to wetlands and coastal waters
where industrial discharge is a potential problem. Dischargers must apply for
permits that delineate site-specific requirements concerning the frequency,
quantity, and location of pollution discharges. Some permits also prescribe
abatement schedules and requirements for monitoring and reporting the
discharge. The NPDES Program also provides USEPA with the authority to
regulate oil and gas industry discharges of produced waters (brine). All Gulf
States, with the exception of Florida and Texas, have been delegated authority by
USEPA to administer the NPDES program.
National Estuary Program (NEP). In 1987, Congress realized the special need to protect
estuaries and established the National Estuary Program (NEP), under the CWA
Amendments, to protect and improve water quality and enhance living
resources. NEP jurisdiction applies not only to the mouth of a river or stream,
but to "associated aquatic ecosystems and...tributaries draining into the estuary,"
up to the historic height of fish migration or tidal influence, whichever is
higher.
USEPA, in managing NEP, is directed to identify nationally significant estuaries
threatened by pollution, development, or overuse, and to promote the
preparation of comprehensive management plans to ensure their ecological
integrity. Specifically, NEP: 1) establishes working partnerships among federal,
state, and local governments; 2) transfers scientific/management information
and expertise to program participants; 3) increases public awareness of pollution
problems; 4) promotes area-wide planning to control pollution and manage
resources; and 5) oversees development and implementation of pollution
reduction and control programs.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
93
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
The five NEPs within the Gulf of Mexico region are Tampa Bay, Sarasota Bay,
Galveston Bay, Corpus Christi Bay/and the Barataria-Terrebonne Estuarine
Complex.
Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended (SDWA). Under the Safe
Drinking Water Act (SDWA), grants are available to states from USEPA to
develop wellhead area protection plans for public ground water drinking supply
recharge areas. The grants can cover from 50 to 90 percent of the costs of
establishing and running a protection program. If a wetland is hydrologically
located such that any contaminants entering it are reasonably likely to reach a
public water supply, the protection program may apply to activities in the
wetland.
Wetlands Initiatives. Executive Order 11990. Protection of Wetlands. Executive Order
11990, Protection of Wetlands, directs federal agencies to take action to minimize
the destruction, loss or degradation of wetlands, and to preserve and enhance the
natural and beneficial values of wetlands in carrying out their activities. The
Executive Order sets forth several major requirements that federal agencies are
required to comply with before undertaking any new construction in wetlands.
They are as follows: 1) prior to undertaking an action in wetlands,'determine
whether a practical alternative to the action exists (if a practical alternative exists,
the action should not be undertaken in wetlands); 2) if the action must be
undertaken in wetlands, include practical measures to minimize harm to
wetlands which may result from such use; 3) preserve and enhance the natural
and beneficial values of the wetlands; and 4) involve the public early in the
decision making process for any action involving new construction in wetlands.
The key requirement of the Executive Order is determining whether a practical
alternative to locating an action in a wetland exists. The alternative could be:
location outside of a wetland (alternative sites); other means that would
accomplish the same purpose(s) as the proposed action (alternative actions); and
no action. If there is no practical alternative to locating an action in wetlands,
the Executive Order requires that the action include all practical measures to
minimize harm to the wetlands, and preserve and enhance the natural and
beneficial values of the wetlands.
National Wetlands Policy Forum. USEPA, in 1987, convened the National Wetlands
Policy Forum to discuss major policy concerns about how the U.S. should protect
and manage its wetlands. The Action Agenda developed by the Forum includes
three general categories of recommendations: 1) protecting the resource, 2)
improving the protection and management process, and
3) implementing the Forum's recommended program.
Wetlands Research Program (WRPV USEPA's Wetlands Research Program (WRP)
was initiated in 1987, and is a matrix-managed program located at the
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
Environmental Research Laboratory at Corvallis, OR. A research strategy for
FY92-96 has recently been finalized. Although the emphasis of this program has
been largely on freshwater wetlands, some research has been performed on Gulf
Coast systems, including the cumulative loss of bottomland hardwood wetlands
(Gosselink et al, 1990) and the effects of Section 404 permitting on freshwater
wetlands in Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi (Sifneos et at., 1992).
In FY92, the Environmental Research Laboratory at Gulf Breeze, PL, initiated a
pilot project as part of WRP to begin research on coastal wetlands. A project has
been funded to identify limits of incident light on growth, survival, and
restoration of a common Gulf of Mexico seagrass species. Resources permitting,
this research will be expanded to other species and will include an investigation
of watershed management practices, which are vital to estuarine and nearshore
wetland and seagrass communities.
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires consideration of the adverse impacts
on environmental resources caused by any federal action, including federally
funded or permitted projects. It also requires examination of alternatives to
minimize those impacts. Compliance with NEPA is an additional requirement
to regulatory programs such as Section 404 of CWA when federal agencies or
federal monies are involved in a proposed project. Environmental
investigations carried out in accordance with NEPA are documented in an
Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
National Environmental Education Act of 199O (NEEA). The National
Environmental Education Act (NEEA) is designed to increase public
understanding of the natural environment and to advance and develop
environmental education and training. NEEA builds upon the efforts that
USEPA has undertaken and establishes formal communication and advisory
links with educational institutions and other federal agencies. NEEA also
requires partnership among federal government agencies, local education
institutions, state agencies, not-for-profit educational and environmental
organizations, and private sector interests.
NEEA provides for the following mandates and authorizations: establishes an
Office of Environmental Education (OEE) within USEPA, establishes and
operates an Environmental Education & Training Program, authorizes USEPA
to enter into grants and contracts, requires USEPA to facilitate internships for
college students with agencies of the federal government, requires USEPA to
provide national awards recognizing outstanding contributions in
environmental education, establishes an Environmental Education Advisory
Council and Task Force, establishes a National Environmental Education
Foundation, and authorizes funds to carry out the Act.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
-------
Fofloral & State Framework
Appendix A
Marine Protection, Research & Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA). The Marine
Protection, Research & Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) primarily regulates the
dumping of wastes into the oceans and provides funding for ocean research
programs and ocean habitat sanctuaries. The Ocean Dumping Ban Act, prohibits
the dumping of any industrial waste or sewage sludge into the ocean after 1992.
A research program grants USEPA and NOAA money to study ocean pollution.
The National Marine Sanctuaries Program sets aside threatened or fragile areas
of ocean-based habitat as protected park-like environments for preservation and
educational purposes. The sanctuaries are maintained by NOAA, which works
closely with the nearest state and with USFWS.
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended by the Federal
Environmental Pesticide Control Act (FEPCA) of 1982, and the FIFRA
Amendments of 1975,1978, 1980, and 1988, governs the licensing or registration
of pesticide products. FIFRA also governs storage and disposal of banned
pesticides, indemnities, and enforcement. All pesticide products, with some
exceptions, must be registered by USEPA before they can be sold within the U.S.
FIFRA gives USEPA the authority and responsibility for registering pesticides for
specified uses, provided that those uses do not pose an unreasonable risk to
human health or the environment. It is a violation of the law for any person to
use a pesticide in a manner inconsistent with its label. USEPA may also suspend
or cancel a registration of a pesticide if information indicates that use of the
pesticide would pose unreasonable risks. Pesticide registration decisions are
primarily based on USEPA's evaluation of test data provided by pesticide
applicants. USEPA can require up to 70 different kinds of specific tests. This
testing is needed to determine whether a pesticide has the potential to cause
adverse effects on humans, wildlife, fish, and plants, including endangered
species. USEPA also evaluates data on environmental fate (i.e., how chemicals
react in the environment).
U.S. Department of Defense (USDOD)
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE)
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) has responsibility in its water resources
projects for flood control, hydropower production, navigation, water supply storage,
recreation, and fish and wildlife resources. Pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Clean Water Act of 1977), as amended, USAGE
also has responsibility for conducting a regulatory program that considers all
functions and values of wetlands and negative impacts and cumulative or regional
effects of individual or multiple projects in wetlands. Through its project planning,
construction, operations and maintenance (primarily of navigation and flood
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
96
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
wetlands, USAGE is
control projects), regulation, and accompanying activities in
directly involved in wetlands protection and management.
In 1990, Lieutenant General H.J. Hatch of USAGE issued two memoranda: "Strategic
Direction for Environmental Engineering" which provides an overall philosophy
that will guide current and future changes in the environmental aspects of the
USAGE civil and military programs, and "Statement of New Environmental
Approaches" which provides a more specific framework in which USAGE will
pursue Civil Works water resources development programs. These memoranda
reflect the changing philosophy of USAGE, and this new philosophy will change the
way USAGE traditionally conducts business and work for other agencies.
"The anticipation and prevention of environmental damage will
continue to require that the ecological dimensions of a project, a policy,
or a federal action be considered at the same time as the economic,
social, and engineering consideration; however, the weight we give to
environmental consequences will increase. Proposed development or
action will attempt first to avoid adverse impacts, then minimize or
reduce them, and finally compensate for unavoidable effects over the
life cycle of the project or action. Simply put, the environmental
aspects of all we do must have equal standing among other aspects—
not simply a "consideration," but part of the "go-no-go" test along with
economics and engineering. Now is the time to use our engineering,
scientific, and management capacity to advance our nation's
environmental goals. We recognize that sustaining the environment
is a necessary part of building and securing this nation."
USAGE districts perform coastal habitat restoration projects under the authority of
Section 1135 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 and in cooperation -
with other federal agencies under the Coastal America Program, National Estuary
Program, and Cooperative Agreement with NMFS for Coastal Habitat Restoration.
Major environmental enhancement opportunities in the Gulf of Mexico exist for
USAGE as part of its program to maintain navigation channels. The Jacksonville,
Mobile, New Orleans, and Galveston districts dredge an average of over 15.3 million
m3 (20 million yd3) of clean material annually. This dredged material ranges from
beach quality sand to silty material most suitable for rebuilding coastal marshes.
Beneficial uses of dredged material is an integral part of the USAGE civil works
program. However, if costs for beneficial uses of dredged material exceed the least
costly environmentally acceptable option, then additional costs must be shared with
a non-federal partner. Examples of some beneficial uses of dredged material in the
Gulf of Mexico are:
Q Gaillard Island at Mobile
Q Thin layer demonstration project at Gulfport and Mobile
Q National Underwater Berm Demonstration Study at Mobile
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
97
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
Q Louisiana coastal marsh restoration projects
Q Gulf Intracoastal Waterway Projects
Waterways Experiment Station (WES). The Waterways Experiment Station
(WES) is the major research facility for USAGE and is composed of the following
labs: Hydraulics, Geophysical, Structures, Coastal Engineering, and
Environmental. WES is responsible for most of USAGE'S environmental
research. Primary customers include federal and state agencies and the military.
WES also works jointly with conservation groups. Several of WES's activities
relate to the Gulf Coast Initiative, including the Wetland Regulatory Assistance
Program through which WES provides assistance to USAGE districts in wetland
delineation and evaluation. Dredging Research & Assistance Programs deal, in
part, with beneficial uses of dredged material (to include wetland and terrestrial
habitat development). The Aquatic Plant Research & Assistance Program is
targeted at developing techniques for keeping aquatic vegetation at desirable
levels.
WES administers the USAGE Wetlands Research Program (WRP> which is targeted at
refining techniques for wetlands delineation, wetlands evaluation, wetlands
restoration and development, and wetlands management. The purpose of WRP
is to use scientific and engineering disciplines of USAGE in coordination and
cooperation with other agencies and offices, to provide environmentally sound,
cost-effective techniques to manage the nation's wetlands. To accomplish this,
WRP encompasses a number of activities, as follows:
Q Conducting an active interagency coordination and cooperation effort
relative to the accomplishment of WRP broad purposes, including
cooperative projects.
Q Providing a mechanism for technology and information transfer from WRP
to USAGE offices, other agencies, and the general public, through a variety
of traditional and innovative channels.
Q Examining the basic processes that result in wetlands functions and relating
these processes and functions to USAGE activities.
Q Refining existing technology for delineating and evaluating wetlands in
order to provide methods sensitive to regional differences in wetlands soils,
vegetation, and hydrology.
Q Examining existing wetlands restoration, protection, and establishment sites
and evaluating success of techniques used.
Q Demonstrating and/or evaluating wetlands restoration, protection, and
establishment techniques and further refining those techniques for other
wetlands projects within USAGE activities.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Aotlon Agenda (4.1)
•8
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
Q Developing engineering and scientific guidelines and technologies for
designing, constructing, and managing wetlands.
U Developing methods to address man-caused impacts on specific wetlands
functions and critical wetlands types.
Q Developing standards for data management systems (DMS) for use in
wetlands accounting and developing standards for collecting and
interrelating remotely sensed and "on-the-ground" data.
O Refining existing mapping techniques to better serve USACE wetlands
needs and improving existing DMS technology to address large-scale
projects.
Q Demonstrating and/or evaluating reduction of nonpoint source pollution
using wetlands in USACE projects.
Q Demonstrating and/or evaluating wetlands habitat development and
management on USACE reservoirs and USACE project lands in cooperation
with federal and state agencies and their wetlands and conservation
programs.
Q Developing wetlands protection measures for preservation of existing
wetlands.
Q Developing guidelines and field manuals for regional delineation and
evaluation, wetlands restoration and creation, and stewardship and
management.
Examples of Gulf Coast work by WES include:
Q Evaluating and monitoring of four wetland engineering projects in coastal
Louisiana (Tiger Pass, Fina la Terre, several splay sites/and several siphon
sites).
Q Comparison of the performance of a wetland mitigation site on the
Mississippi coast to an adjacent natural wetland.
Q Two wetland protection/shoreline stabilization/beneficial uses of dredged
material sites in the intercoastal waterway of Texas (West Bay and Aransas).
Q Coordination with and technical assistance to the Galveston Bay interagency
working group in identifying beneficial uses of dredged material from the
expansion of the Houston Ship Channel.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
99
-------
Federal & Sfate Framework
Appendix A
Q Providing technical assistance to the USAGE Jacksonville District on
wetland projects and waterbird nesting islands in Tampa/Hillsborough Bay.
Q Continuing long-term monitoring on a number of wetland sites constructed
in the 1970s using dredged material in Florida, Alabama, Mississippi,
Louisiana, and Texas. Monitoring parameters include success or failure,
endangered species use, wildlife abundance and diversity, changes in soils,
and other physical and environmental characteristics and stability.
Two of the WRP Work Units are interfacing directly with the Gulf Coast
Initiative. WES has a Work Unit that, through an interagency working group,
will develop standards for monitoring and success criteria for wetlands.
Through partnering with the Gulf Coast Initiative, WES will use the
information from that Work Unit to develop regional wetlands monitoring and
success criteria for the northern Gulf Coast region. In addition, through this
partnering, WES will develop a brochure for wetland restoration, protection, and
creation criteria for the northern Gulf Coast. This is a spin-off of a more general
Work Unit on wetland restoration, protection, and creation.
WES uses its capabilities in the environmental, hydraulics, geotechnical sciences,
and coastal engineering fields to conduct computerized ecosystem modeling for
its customers. WES has a Cray Supercomputer that is used in the analysis of
large data bases and complex models. That equipment may prove useful to the
Gulf Coast Initiative. .
Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended. USAGE has a primary responsibility for
the Section 404 permit program and is authorized, after notice and opportunity
for a public hearing, to issue permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material.
USAGE also has responsibility for monitoring and enforcement of compliance
with Section 404 permit conditions. States can assume a portion of the
permitting program from the federal government (for some waters only), but
there has been limited interest by the states.
USEPA works with USAGE during the permit decision process whenever
possible to ensure unacceptable adverse impact are avoided, and most concerns
are resolved through this interagency consultation. USAGE and USEPA have
developed a process through a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to quickly
resolve any differences over permit decisions. USFWS and NMFS have similar
agreements with USAGE.
The individual permit process under Section 404 is sometimes intensive and
controversial. Section 230.80 of the Section 404(b)(l) Guidelines provides for a
planning process that can result in a more predictable decision making process.
In this planning process, the Advance Identification (ADID) process, information
is developed that can be used by the regulated and general public to plan and
consider potential projects.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
100
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
The products that result from the ADID process include, at a minimum,
designation of areas as generally suitable or unsuitable for use as a discharge site.
Additional actions quite often result, such as some anticipatory method of
protecting the most valuable areas. For example, ADID's may result in state or
local land use or regulatory restrictions, or use of USEPA's Section 404(c)
authority to restrict or prohibit discharges to a defined area. USAGE may issue
general permits for certain activities in portions of the area designated as suitable
for disposal.
USAGE'S evaluation of a Section 404 permit application is a two part test which
involves determining whether the project complies with the Section 404(b)(l)
Guidelines and a public interest review. A permit must be denied if the project
fails to comply with the Guidelines or is found to be contrary to the public
interest. USAGE'S public interest review is a balancing test in which the public
and private benefits of a project are weighed against its adverse impacts to the
environment. As part of this evaluation, USAGE conducts an environmental
assessment under NEPA to determine whether the project has significant
environmental impacts. Section 404(b)(l) Guidelines, published by USEPA in
conjunction with USAGE, contain substantive environmental criteria used in
evaluating discharges of dredged or fill material and establish key policies for the
Section 404 Program.
Section 401. In addition to the evaluation conducted by USAGE under the
Guidelines and their public interest review, Section 401 of the CWA must be
complied with before a permit can be issued. Section 401 requires that the state
in which an activity occurs must certify that the activity complies with the state's
water quality standards or waive its right to so certify by not taking action within
a specified time. Similarly, coastal states must concur that the activity meets the
requirements of the coastal zone management program (CZMP) of the state or
waive their right to concur by not taking action within a specified time. CZMPs
are developed by states under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972
(CZMA).
Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection & Restoration Act (CWPPRA). The
Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection & Restoration Act (CWPPRA) establishes
a mechanism to plan and fund implementation of wetland protection and
restoration projects in coastal Louisiana. Planning and implementation
activities are managed by a six-person/federal-state task force. In addition,
CWPPRA calls for development of a Conservation Plan for the State of
Louisiana and provides funds for matching grants to assist other coastal states in
implementing wetland conservation projects (i.e., projects to acquire, restore,
manage, and enhance real property interest in coastal lands and waters). Five
years of recurring funding provides up to $50 million/year, 70 percent for
Louisiana with 75/25 percent federal/state cost sharing. Extension of authority
and funding is possible, but is contingent on progress. Other pertinent
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
1O1
-------
Fodoral & State Framework
Appendix A
provisions of CWPPRA include the National Coastal Wetlands Grant Program
(Section 305) and additional funding for the North American Wetlands
Conservation Act [Section 306(c)].
Rivers & Harbors Act of 1899. The Rivers & Harbors Act regulates all
construction in or modification of traditionally navigable waters. In many
respects, its provisions are similar to those of Section 404 of the CWA. For
example, Section 10 of the Rivers & Harbors Act requires permits issued by
USAGE for any dredging, filling, or obstruction of navigable waters. Sections 9,
11, and 13 are also relevant to some activities in wetlands and near coastal
waters. When a project requires applications for permits under both the CWA
and the River & Harbors Act, USAGE often conducts the two permit reviews
concurrently.
Despite its similarity to Section 404, the River & Harbors Act differs from Section
404 in two important ways. First, the activities it covers are much broader than
those regulated under Section 404. Second, its jurisdiction extends only to the
mean high water line. As a result, this Act offers the federal government greater
regulatory authority within certain areas, but does not apply to all areas regulated
under Section 404.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)
Soil Conservation Service (SCS)
The Soil Conservation Service (SCS) is USDA's primary technical agency in the
areas of soil and water conservation and in water quality. SCS focuses its assistance
primarily on non-federal land, but assistance may also be given on public lands
upon request from the administering agency. SCS works primarily with private
landowners in planning and applying measures to reduce soil erosion, conserve
water, protect and improve water quality,.and protect other renewable natural
resources, such as plants and wildlife. The guiding principle is the use and
conservation treatment of the land and water in harmony with its capabilities and
needs.
SCS has an office in almost every county in the U.S. where it works closely with
local subdivisions of state government called Soil and Water Conservation Districts.
The Conservation Districts are governed by local citizens and typically have
legislative mandates to plan and implement comprehensive soil arid water
conservation programs within their boundaries. These boundaries often coincide
with county lines.
SCS's basic authorities were created by PL (74)-46, PL (83)-566, and PL (78)-534.
Program authorities were added under various Farm Bills including those enacted
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
102
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
in 1961 (Resource Conservation & Development Program, 1985 (Swampbuster,
Sodbuster, Conservation Compliance & Conservation Reserve Program), and 1990
(Wetlands Reserve Program and others). Under the Swampbuster provisions, SCS
assists landowners to identify and protect wetlands. Severe economic consequences,
including loss of USDA program benefits, can result for agricultural producers who
convert wetlands to make possible the production of agricultural commodities.
SCS also provides technical assistance in implementing the wetland conservation
programs under the Food Security Act of 1985.
SCS performs soil surveys and operates a system of some 27 Plant Material Centers
for selecting, developing, testing, and releasing plants for use in conservation
programs.
SCS works with private landowners and others to preserve, protect, and restore
wetlands and to develop wildlife and fisheries habitat.
• Food Security Act of 1985 (FSA). The Food Security Act (FSA) was amended in
1990 to the Food, Agriculture, Conservation & Trade Act (Swampbuster). A
major change in the Swampbuster provision of this Act is the illegality of
converting a wetland to land capable of producing an agricultural commodity.
Under the 1985 Act, an agricultural commodity would have had to actually been
planted to constitute a violation of the provision; however, the 1990
amendments make it illegal to convert a wetland regardless of whether a
commodity crop is planted. The Swampbuster provision of the FSA discourages
the conversion of wetlands to farmland by making any person who violates the
Act's provisions ineligible for most federal farm benefits. These benefits include
price-support payments, farm storage facility loans, crop insurance, disaster
payments, and insured and guaranteed loans.
A second provision of this Act is the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). This
program is designed to remove highly erodible croplands from production.
Landowners wishing to enter any of their land in the CRP sign ten-year
agreements with the Department of Agriculture. Participants receive annual
payments, as well as 50 percent federal cost-sharing for the establishment of
vegetative cover. While CRP was not initially designed for wetlands protection,
wetlands have been added to the program; nationwide, approximately 203,000
hectares (500,000 acres) of wetlands had been enrolled by 1989.
In addition to the Conservation Reserve Program, the 1990 Act established the
Wetland Reserve Program (WRP). A target enrollment of one million acres by
the end of 1995 has been set by Congress. During the first year (1992), nine pilot
states, including Louisiana and Mississippi, have been chosen to participate and
will be limited to enrolling a national limit of 20,300 hectares (50,000 acres).
Areas of farmed wetlands and the prior converted cropland are the principal
wetland types expected to be placed into the program. Landowners will receive
payments based on the length of easements they accept, either long-term (30
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
1O3
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
years) or perpetual. All lands accepted into WRP will have to be maintained
according to a wetland restoration plan for the life of the easement. It is expected
that WRP will have a significant and positive effect on the nation's wetland
resources.
Another provision of this Act that may aid in the protection of wetlands is the
Farm Debt Restructure and Conservation Set-Aside. This provision allows the
Secretary of Agriculture to grant partial debt relief to Farmers Home
Administration (FmHA) borrowers in exchange for 50 year conservation
easements on selected acres.
A related provision pertains to the resale of land in the FmHA inventory. The
inventory consists of lands whose owners defaulted on their loans to FmHA.
Section 1314 of the Act allows the Secretary to grant or sell easements, deed
restrictions, or development rights of inventory lands to local governments or
non-profit organizations, prior to resale of the properties to other parties. Actual
implementation of this provision has not yet occurred. However, since there are
currently approximately 687,990 hectares (1.7 million acres) of property (a
number expected to expand significantly in the FmHA inventory), this provision
could have sizable impact.
Agricultural Stabilization & Conservation Service (ASCS)
The Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service (ASCS) administers the
following programs: Agricultural Conservation Program, Conservation Reserve
Program, Wetland Reserve Program, and others. In addition, ASCS administers
various agricultural commodity production programs designed to balance
production of specific agricultural commodities (including cotton, rice> corn, wheat,
peanuts, tobacco, and others) with demand for those commodities. Commodity
program decisions can dramatically affect land use. ASCS has an office in essentially
every county in the U.S. SCS and ASCS work closely on implementation of
conservation programs.
Farmers Home Administration (FmHA)
The Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) administers various financial
assistance programs for rural residents and small communities. Their programs
include loans for land acquisition, farm operations, construction of homes in rural
areas and small towns, rural water and sewerage projects, and small watershed
project sponsors.
U.S. Forest Service (USFS)
The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) administers large units of land called "National
Forests" in most of the fifty states, as well as "National Grasslands" in some of the
western states. USFS is directly responsible for management of natural resources in
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
104
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
the National Forests and Grasslands. In addition, USFS assists with forestry and
silvicultural matters on private lands as appropriate.
U.S. Department of the Interior (USDOI)
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS)
As the country's principal conservation agency, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
(USFWS) has management responsibility for many coastal fish and wildlife species
including anadromous and interjurisdictional fish (fish occurring in international
waters), migratory birds, marine mammals, and hundreds of endangered species.
Since its formation over a century ago, USFWS has played a key role in the
conservation of the nation's coastal ecosystems. For instance, Pelican Island, the
first National Wildlife Refuge, was established on the Florida coast in 1903 to protect
a pelican rookery. USFWS's 1970 seven-volume coastal assessment (National
Estuary Study) was a pioneering work that helped focus attention on the plight of
U.S. coastal resources.
Today, USFWS's diverse programs, extensive field presence, and biological expertise
enable the agency to carry out a broad array of effective on-the-ground actions to
protect, restore, and enhance coastal watersheds, estuaries, and ecosystems.
Wildlife & Habitat Conservation. Through the Partners for Wildlife Program,
USFWS assists private land owners in the restoration of wetlands and other fish
and wildlife habitat. USFWS also provides expert ecological assistance and
reviews more than 36,000 proposed federal actions each year, including federal
water development projects, oil and gas leases, coastal zone management
activities, Clean Water Act permits, and hydropower licenses. Forty to 65 percent
of these activities involve coastal lands and waters, encompassing hundreds of
thousands of acres of highly important coastal habitat.
Fish & Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended in 1958. The Fish & Wildlife Coordination
Act requires that wildlife conservation be given consideration equal to the
concern for other aspects of the water resource development projects of USAGE,
Bureau of Reclamation, and other federal agencies. This Act has empowered
USFWS and NMFS to evaluate the impact on fish and wildlife of all new federal
projects and federally permitted projects, including projects permitted under
Section 404.
• National Wildlife Refuges. Approximately 40 percent of USFWS's nearly 500
National Wildlife Refuges are coastal, covering over 24.3 million hectares (60
million acres). Additional coastal acquisitions are planned.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
IOC
Fodoral & State Framework
Appendix A
Research. Approximately 50 percent of USFWS's research focuses on coastal
habitats, ecosystems, or species, providing one of the most comprehensive data
bases on coastal living resources, ecosystems, and biodiversity in the world.
Law Enforcement. Overseeing the human use of, and interactions with, fish and
wildlife resources, including the import and export of plants and animals
through coastal ports-of-entry, is a prominent focus of USFWS's enforcement
efforts.
Migratory Birds & North American Waterfowl Management Plan. Through
USFWS's Migratory Bird Program and the North American Waterfowl
Management Plan, the agency cooperates with a broad array of partners to ensure
the conservation of many species of coastal migratory birds—including
neotropical migrants (those that annually come to the U.S. and Canada from the
New World tropics), waterfowl, and other water and shorebirds. Four of the
North American Joint Venture efforts under the North American Waterfowl
Management Plan cover nearly 75 percent of the U.S. continental coastline.
Under the U.S. plan, forty private conservation organizations and state agencies
work with USFWS to assess wetland and waterfowl conservation needs and
submit proposed projects to the North American Wetlands Conservation
Council. Supervised by the Cabinet-level Migratory Bird Conservation
Commission, the Council evaluates projects and establishes priorities for
funding. Funds for selected projects will come from authorized appropriations,
proceeds from fines and penalties under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the
Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act.
Environmental Contaminants. Through USFWS's Environmental
Contaminants Program, the agency responds to and assesses the impacts of oil
spills, point and nonpoint source pollution, and hazardous materials in coastal
areas. The Contaminants Program also carries out efforts to repair damages to
living resources at Superfund sites and other contaminated or polluted habitats.
Endangered Species Act of 1373. As habitats for a great variety of plants and
animals, some wetlands are offered protection under this Act. The principal
purposes of the Act are the conservation of threatened and endangered species
and the ecosystems on which they depend. Among its provisions, Section 7 of
the Act requires federal agencies to ensure that any actions they authorize, fund,
or carry out will not jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or
result in the destruction or adverse modification of its designated critical habitat.
USFWS's administration of the Endangered Species Act not only protects listed
species and their ecosystem, but implements actions to recover and restore them
to full productive capacity. With 50 percent of endangered and threatened
species dependent upon or occurring in coastal areas, USFWS administration of
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
106
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
the Endangered Species Act plays an important role in the recovery and
conservation of these species and their imperiled coastal ecosystems.
Wetland Acquisition Programs. USFWS administers a number of Wetland
Acquisition Programs. The Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp
Act of 1934 requires all waterfowl hunters to buy "duck stamps," the proceeds of
which are used by USFWS to acquire migratory waterfowl habitat. The Small
Wetlands Acquisition Program, also administered by USFWS, offers a
landowner the opportunity to sell a wetland and surrounding upland area
outright, or to enter into a perpetual easement agreement that places a restriction
on the wetland. Lease and purchase prices under this program reflect current
market conditions. Additional monies for the purchase of wetlands are available
through USFWS's Land & Water Conservation Fund.
•Emergency Wetlands Resources Act of 1986. This Act expands and enhances the
sources of funds for wetlands acquisition. The law also directs the Secretary of
the Interior to develop, in consultation with USEPA and other federal and state
agencies, a National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan that identifies the type
of wetlands and wetland interests to be given priority for federal and state
acquisition.
National Wetlands Inventory. This USFWS program provides wetland maps at
various scales. Digital maps are also available. Maps depicting wetland losses
along the U.S. Gulf of Mexico coastline will be available during 1994.
National Wetlands Research Center. The National Wetlands Research Center is
headquartered in Lafayette, LA, with field stations in Vicksburg, MS, and Corpus
Christi and Padre Island, TX. Research focuses on migratory birds, spatial
analysis, and wetlands ecology. Migratory bird research emphasizes wintering
waterfowl and neotropical migrants, as well as shorebirds and colonial nesting
birds. Research includes the inventory and monitoring of migratory bird
populations, population modeling, habitat and ecosystem requirements,
estimates of time-specific survival rates, and development of management data
bases and models.
Spatial analysis studies include research (GIS, remote sensing, and spatial
decision support systems for wetland management, oil pollution, and
contaminant effects), inventorying and monitoring (land use trends, Coastal
Barrier Resources Act Inventory update, Gap analysis, hazardous waste, and
contaminant surveys), and technical assistance (remote sensing and GIS training
and support and advance spatial analysis techniques). Wetland ecology studies
include the potential effects of global climate change on sediment accretion rates
in coastal wetlands and on structure and function of submerged aquatic
vegetation; impacts of hurricane disturbance on coastal emergent wetlands and
bottomland hardwood forests; efficacy of current marsh management practices;
tolerance of wetland plant communities to environmental stressors; effects of
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
107
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
disturbance on successional trends in wetlands; and ecosystem modeling of
hydrologic effects on wetland structure.
The Center is involved in the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection &
Restoration Act, the Oil Pollution Act, and various other task forces.
* Coastal Barriers Resources Act (CBRA) of 1982, as amended by the Coastal
Barrier Improvement Act of 199O. The Coastal Barriers Resources Act (CBRA)
bans federal assistance for new development within units of the Coastal Barrier
Resources System, including a ban on federal flood insurance. Certain
exceptions are allowed after consultation with USFWS. These include
maintenance of infrastructure in place prior to the unit being placed in the
system, fish and wildlife and conservation activities, and research and national
security activities. CBRA became effective in 1982, with a substantial expansion
of the system in the 1990 amendments. It has proven effective in substantially
reducing development of coastal barriers and impacts on associated wetland
resources.
National Park Service (NPS)
• Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP). SCORP identifies
state wildlife protection and recreation area needs and establishes priorities for
proposed acquisition and development projects.
Land & Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). LWCF was established in the early
1960s to allocate money to the states for acquisition and development projects.
The majority of the Fund is distributed among four federal conservation and
land use agencies-NPS, USFWS, USFS, and BLM-for specified projects. The
remainder of the Fund is distributed directly to the states in the form of
matching grants. Forty percent of the total available for state grants is divided
evenly among the 50 states; the remaining 60 percent is allocated in proportion
to state population. States qualify for LWCF by completing a SCORP at least once
every five years. States with SCORP's approved by NPS may use their LWCF
money to help fund their most urgent conservation projects.
• Wild & Scenic Rivers Act of 1968. The goal of the Wild & Scenic Rivers Act is to
protect outstanding natural free-flowing rivers from damming and other forms
of development. NPS is responsible for managing all designated river segments,
except those managed by states, USFS, or BLM. The Act also encourages river
protection by authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to provide technical
assistance to state and local governments and to private interests in support of
the law's objectives. Many state programs have benefited from this assistance.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
108
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC)
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
The National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is a lead federal
agency in the development and dissemination of scientific information and
products for the nation's estuarine and coastal ocean waters. NOAA provides a
wide range of observational, assessment, research, and predictive services for
estuarine and coastal ocean regions. In the Gulf of Mexico, NOAA maintains coastal
and marine research facilities, National Estuarine Research Reserves, and National
Marine Sanctuaries, oversees approved Coastal Zone Management Plans in coastal
states, and has direct ties to universities and colleges through the National Sea
Grant College Program. NOAA has developed an impressive array of programs to
address not only national-scale estuarine issues, but also specific problems affecting
individual estuarine and coastal ocean systems.
• Office of Chief Scientist. The Office of Chief Scientist is responsible for
establishing NOAA scientific policy and providing guidance to NOAA managers
on scientific and technology issues. The Office serves as the focal point within
the federal government to administer the National Climate Program; the
National Ocean Pollution Planning Act of 1978, as amended; and the Acid
Precipitation Research Program. The Office manages NOAA's technology
transfer program and provides national overview and leadership for NOAA's
estuarine programs. It is responsible for coordinating all NOAA activities
involving NEPA, ecological and environmental conservation matters, and
serves as the focal point for NEPA compliance and implementation.
National Ocean Service (NOS). The National Ocean Service (NOS) supports a
variety of estuarine activities related to the broad mission of NOAA. Many of
these efforts are associated with the historical mission related to navigation in
estuarine and coastal waters. NOS has a major program in tide and tidal current
prediction and in nautical charting, including maintenance of U.S. coastal charts.
NOS provides information for marine boundary determinations and generates
records of long-term sea level change.
NOS also manages specific programs directed at estuarine assessment. Within
the Ocean Assessments Division (OAD), the Strategic Assessment Branch (SAB)
carries out assessments of multiple resource uses. Products include a National
Estuarine Inventory & Atlas and the National Coastal Pollution Discharge
Inventory (NCPDI). Located with OAD, the Hazardous Materials Response
Branch provides scientific support for hazardous material spills, e.g., oil spills,
using numerical modeling and environmental sensitivity analyses.
NOS has a number of programs directed at coastal and estuarine management.
Within the Office of Ocean & Coastal Resources Management (OCRM), the States
Assistance Program promotes prudent use of the U.S. coastal zone; the Interstate
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (-4.1)
108
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
Grants Program provides monies to coordinate interstate coastal zone planning;
and the National Estuarine Reserve Research Program manages estuarine
reserves. In OCRM, the National Estuarine Reserve Research Program supports
research reserves that serve as natural field laboratories for research and
education.
National Weather Service (NWS). The National Weather Service (NWS) has
three programs directed toward coastal and estuarine waters. The Hurricane
Guidance Program, the Tsunami Warning Program, and the Marine Weather
Warning Forecast Program provide timely forecasts and warnings for coastal and
estuarine waters. Other activities related to coastal and estuarine waters are the
marine forecasts and advisories routinely issued by NWS forecast offices. In
addition, the National Meteorological Center carries out operational storm surge
modeling to announce warnings during the passage of hurricanes. These
models have also been used to determine hurricane vulnerability in estuarine
areas.
National Environmental Satellite, Data & Information Service (NESDIS). The
National Environmental Satellite, Data & Information Service (NESDIS)
conducts several coastal and estuarine related activities. The Assessment &
Information Services Center (AISC) conducts studies on satellite remote-sensing
application and the use of numerical model data for circulation and bathymetry
application and for simulation of sediment transport. The National
Environmental Data Referral Service (NEDRES) is a computerized, online data
base inventory that facilitates environmental data identification for ocean and
coastal regions.
Although NESDIS conducts studies related to the remote sensing of estuaries by
satellites and aircraft, the majority of NESDIS's estuarine work is done under its
data and information program within the National Oceanographic Data Center
(NODC) and AISC. NODC manages an archive of estuarine data, responds to
queries, and produces several specialized data catalogues for specific coastal and
oceanic regions. NOAA CoastWatch synthesizes NESDIS data and additional
data and scientific analyses by the NMFS to map coastal habitats and monitor
conditions in estuaries and coastal waters.
Office of Oceanic & Atmospheric Research (OAR). The Office of Oceanic &
Atmospheric Research (OAR) conducts research directed toward understanding
and predicting coastal and estuarine processes. Estuarine programs are
conducted in OAR through four of NOAA's Environmental Research
Laboratories (ERLs) and the National Sea Grant College Program. The National
Sea Grant College Program conducts estuarine studies at sites across the country,
including the Mississippi/Atchafalaya River complex. Studies are funded by
competitive grants awarded to academic investigators working with Sea Grant
Programs in the state or region. Sea Grant environmental studies involve
research related to nutrient dynamics and primary production, trophic dynamics
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
110
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
and primary production, habitat structure and function, pollutant fate and
transport, and circulation modeling. Research in fisheries also composes a large
segment of the estuarine work. In this area, interests include environmental
control of reproduction and recruitment in estuarine stocks, improved
management of estuarine fisheries, and relationships of habitat to fisheries
production. Smaller efforts in Sea Grant estuarine research range from studies of
coastal processes to economic and policy studies.
Coastal Ocean Program (©OP). The Coastal Ocean Program (COP) provides
leadership and support to the overall national effort to provide a cleaner and
safer environment, sustainable and wholesome fisheries, and coastal
communities whose citizens are forewarned about storms, flooding, and erosion.
COP is carried out in concert with other ongoing federal, state, and local
programs and is designed to promote effective environmental decision-making
by supplementing current retrospective analyses with timely forecasts and
prediction. The ability to predict environmental change allows problem
prevention through proactive regional approaches, rather than reacting to well-
rooted problems. The goals of the COP include:
Q Prediction of Coastal Ocean Degradation and Pollution—To predict changes
in the quality of the coastal environmental and its living marine resources
to help prevent further habitat degradation and to recommend mitigative
measures;
Q Conservation and Management of Living Marine Resources—To predict
the influence of fishing, habitat degradation (pollution and alteration),
and natural forces on living marine resources .to ensure optimal
productivity today and for the future.
Q Protection of Lives and Property in Coastal Areas-To predict the
occurrence of natural physical hazards, for both short-term warnings and
long-term planning, to prevent or minimize adverse effects of storms and
erosion on coastal communities.
COP's National Status & Trends (NS&T) program provides monitoring,
research, modeling, and assessment directed towards prevention of coastal ocean
degradation and pollution. Gulf of Mexico activities include:
a
a
Expanding the existing NS&T program to encompass new sites, -
measurements, and organisms, including edible tissue; evaluation of
historical pollution trends; and determinations of biological responses to
pollutants in Tampa and Galveston Bays;
Studying seagrass and tidal wetland estuarine habitat to examine their
ability to function under natural conditions and to support important
marine life;
Guff of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
111
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
Q Mapping tidal wetlands to determine their rates of change or
disappearance, and formation of a critical basis for implementing the
President's "no net loss" wetlands policy;
Q Exploring the effect of nutrient enrichment associated with human
activities on primary production and water quality of the nation's coastal
oceans, including examination of the implications of enhanced
production to the global marine carbon cycle in the Mississippi River
plume and the adjacent Louisiana continental shelf areas, and;
Q Expanding information delivery through enhancement of NOAA's
geographic information systems, (GeoCoast and COMPAS).
Habitat Strategic Plan. NOAA has recently developed the Habitat Strategic Plan, the
agency's long-range strategy for coordinated and concerted action to address the
deterioration of the nation's coastal, estuarine, and riverine habitats and populations of |
living marine resources dependent upon such habitats. NOAA's legislative
responsibilities and capabilities in habitat protection, wetlands ecology, resource
conservation, toxicology, ocean system dynamics, fishery management, biological
processes, and coastal habitat management provide a solid foundation for addressing
these issues through an inter-disciplinary approach. NOAA has invested over $100
million per year in programs and activities that focus on habitat-related problems and
issues along the U.S. coasts and throughout the EEZ, including protectorates and trust
territories in the Pacific Ocean and Caribbean Sea.
The Habitat Strategic Plan provides detailed, agency-wide guidance for addressing
the priority issues affecting habitat important to living marine resources
throughout the nation's coastal waters. This document complements "NOAA's
Investment in Coastal Environmental Quality," which is being published
separately, but focuses specifically on living marine resources' habitats. NOAA's
role in this effort is: 1) to develop the scientific understanding of how human
activities affect natural ecosystem functioning and 2) to assess and predict the
effects of specific land and water development proposals on coastal
environments and their living marine resources. NOAA's goal for habitat
protection is to "protect, conserve, and restore the quantity and quality of habitats
of living marine resources to maintain populations of commercial, recreational,
and ecologically important species at optimal sustainable levels."
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA). The Coastal Zone
Management Act (CZMA) was designed to help coastal states develop their own
plans to manage and protect their coastal zone resources, including those affected
by offshore energy development projects. The Act provides financial and
technical assistance during the planning and administration of programs that
meet minimum federal standards. Approval of state plans is the responsibility
of the Secretary of Commerce, acting through NOAA.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
112
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
The implementation of many of these plans requires active involvement of local
communities. In accordance with the federal CZMA's "consistency" provisions,
states with approved plans have the authority to veto federal permits for
activities in wetlands or coastal waters that are inconsistent with the state's
coastal zone management plan. These states receive various grants for
construction and land acquisition projects and permitting efforts. Under the
Estuarine Research Reserve System, CZMA also provides matching grants to
states for the acquisition of estuarine areas for research and education.
Of particular interest to estuarine management is Section 309 of CZMA, which
allows NOAA to make grants to states to coordinate interstate coastal
management activities, as occurs frequently in large estuaries under the
jurisdiction of two or more states.
Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 (CZARA). Section 6217 of the
Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments (CZARA) requires states to
establish coastal nonpoint programs, which must be approved by both NOAA
and USEPA. Once approved, the coastal nonpoint programs will be
implemented through changes to the state nonpoint source pollution program
approved by USEPA under Section 319 of the CWA and through changes to the
state coastal zone management program approved by NOAA under Section 306
of the CZMA. Beginning in fiscal year 1996, states that fail to submit an
approvable coastal nonpoint program to NOAA and USEPA face statutory
reductions in federal funds awarded under both Section 306 of the CZMA and
Section 319 of the CWA.
The central purpose of Section 6217 is to strengthen the links between federal
and state coastal zone management and water quality programs in order to
enhance state and local efforts to manage land use activities that degrade coastal
waters and coastal habitats. This is to be accomplished primarily through the
implementation of 1) management measures in conformity with guidance
published by USEPA under Section 6217(g) of the CZARA and 2) additional state-
developed management measures as necessary to achieve and maintain
applicable water quality standards.
The Section 6217 program guidance identifies and explains provisions state
coastal nonpoint programs must include in order to be approved by USEPA and
NOAA. Four of the many requirements for state programs are: 1) identify
critical coastal areas adjacent to coastal waters which are impaired or threatened
by nonpoint source pollution; 2) implement additional management measures
for land uses or critical coastal areas as necessary to achieve and maintain water
quality standards; 3) establish mechanisms to improve coordination among state
and local agencies responsible for land use programs and permitting, water
quality permitting and enforcement, habitat protection, and public health and
safety; and 4) modify coastal zone boundaries as the state determines is necessary
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
113
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
to implement NOAA's recommendations under Section 6217(e) of the CZARA.
(This section requires NOAA and USEPA to determine whether the landward
coastal zone of each coastal state extends far enough inland to control significant
upland sources of nonpoint source pollution.)
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has a strong interest in estuaries.
Much of this interest stems from its responsibility under the Magnuson Fishery
Conservation & Management Act (MFCMA), which provides for fishery
conservation and management within the U.S.'s 200-mile Exclusive Economic
Zone. MFCMA provides the statutory authority for the Gulf of Mexico Fishery
Management Council which regulates the harvest of specified marine fishery .
resources through implementation of fishery management plans. Since most
species under NOAA's management authority spend some portion of their life cycle
in estuaries, NMFS is concerned about the ability of estuarine habitats to sustain
these resources. Habitat conservation activities are carried out through NMFS
regional and field offices and fisheries centers. The NMFS Habitat Conservation
Program carries out related management and research activities including impact
analyses and development of recommendations to reduce degradation or loss of
estuarine habitats due to development and other factors. The recently created
NMFS Restoration Center is also expected to play a significant role in habitat
restoration efforts nationwide and in the Gulf of Mexico.
• Magnuson Fishery Conservation & Management Act of 1976 (MFCMA). The
Magnuson Fishery Conservation & Management Act (MFCMA) extended the
nation's marine management jurisdiction from 4.8-321.8 km (3-200 miles)
offshore and mandated accelerated development of the fishing industry. It also
created eight regional Fishery Management Councils (FMCs) for the purpose of
preparing Fishery Management Plans (FMPs) for selected species and appointed
NMFS Regional Directors as the primary federal representative on each Council.
Other Council members include state fish and wildlife directors and private
citizen appointees who are designated by state governors and the Secretary of
Commerce. These appointees must be individuals who are knowledgeable and
experienced in commercial and recreational fishery conservation and
management. The Councils are advised through input from technical
committees.
The 1986 Amendments require that habitat information be included in FMPs
and that the effects of habitat change be addressed in plan development. A
second provision of the Amendments authorizes the regional FMCs to
recommend habitat protection measures for ongoing and proposed federal and
state activities. This provision also requires that federal agencies must provide a
detailed written response to Council recommendations within 45 days. By
special agreement between NMFS and the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
114
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
Council, NMFS reports to regulatory agencies may also represent or convey the
views and recommendations of the Council.
Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration. The Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration
(Pittman-Robertson Act) provides federal assistance to states for projects
pertaining to the restoration, conservation, management, and enhancement of
wild birds and mammals, or the provision of public use of and benefits from
these resources. Through this Act, grants are provided to states for up to 75
percent of the cost of projects for the acquisition, restoration, and maintenance of
wildlife areas, including wetlands. Funds are derived from the federal excise tax
on hunting equipment.
Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act of 195O (Dingell-Johnson Act). The
Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act (Dingell-Johnson/Wallop-Breaux Act)
provides federal assistance to states for projects pertaining to the restoration,
conservation, management, and enhancement of sport fish, or the provision for
public use and benefits from these resources. The Act provides up to 75 percent
for applicable projects. The Wallop-Breaux Amendment in 1984 expanded the
tax base to include essentially all items of fishing tackle and motor boat fuel taxes
and provided for expenditures on boat safety.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). For property owners to be eligible for
federally subsidized flood insurance, their communities must adopt floodplain
management regulations that will minimize future flood damage. Adoption is
typically accomplished by incorporating the regulations into the local zoning
ordinances and building codes. NFIP's restrictions on floodplain development
may, in effect, protect wetlands adjacent to the flood-prone waterway.
Communities joining NFIP are rewarded with the incentive of substantial flood
insurance, coverage, whereas communities that do not participate are indirectly
penalized, by' decreased funding for acquisition and construction purposes.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
115
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
Intoragancy Coordination
Coastal America
Coastal America lays the groundwork for an unprecedented level of cooperation
among the federal agencies with principal responsibility for the stewardship of
coastal living resources: USAGE, USEPA, USFWS, USGS, MMS, NOAA, NFS, and
USDOT. The President's Council on Environmental Quality will coordinate this
multi-agency effort to solve environmental problems along the nation's shoreline.
This initiative is the first step toward forging a strong, long-term alliance among the
public and private sectors, to address coastal problems by sharing information,
pooling field expertise, and combining management skill and resources. Coastal
America proposes activities designed to produce demonstrable environmental
results in the short-term, coupled with long-term environmental improvements.
Coastal America will also work to ensure optimum use of existing resources
devoted to coastal protection and management.
Through a series of relatively small efforts, Coastal America will provide models for
successful action and demonstrate new approaches to resolving coastal living
resources concerns. Projects will be designed to address specific coastal problems in
seven geographic regions, including the Gulf of Mexico. Examples of regional
activities that could be conducted include: establishing priorities for habitat
protection, enhancement, and restoration, and developing region-wide education
programs.
Within each region, site-specific problems will also be addressed on a watershed
basis. Examples of watershed projects could include: restoring a wetland, protecting
coastal streams from storm water runoff, cleaning contaminated sediment sites, and
sponsoring public education efforts.
At the national level, Coastal America will enhance federal, state, and local abilities
to manage and protect coastal resources. Examples of these activities include a
nationwide approach for tracking coastal management actions to provide for
accountability and a national focus on public education and outreach to facilitate
public awareness, support, and involvement.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
116
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
STATE LEVEL
Alabama
Regulatory Agencies & Programs
The Alabama Coastal Area Management Program (ACAMP) is administered
through the Alabama Department of Economic & Community Affairs (ADECA) and
the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM). ADECA is the
federal coastal zone management grant recipient in the state with responsibilities for
program planning, while ADEM is responsible for the regulatory functions of
ACAMP. ADEM's coastal program regulations are found in Division 8 of its
Administrative Code.
Through the Division 8 Regulations, ADEM regulates all activities in the coastal
area involving wetlands and submerged grassbeds. The basic premise is that these
resources cannot be filled or dredged unless the project has a compelling public
interest or is water dependent. If a permit is issued for filling or dredging wetlands,
the loss must be mitigated by creation of wetlands at a rate of 1.5:1 or 2.0:1 on an area
basis. A mitigation plan with details of site preparation, planting, and monitoring is
developed through negotiation with the applicant and consultation with other state
and federal agencies.
In addition to wetlands, beach and dune habitats are protected under the Division 8
Regulations through control of construction and other activities on the Gulf beaches
in Alabama's coastal area. This is accomplished via an established construction
control line, which was developed to protect the primary dune system and the
beaches seaward of the primary dune from activities which would adversely impact
these systems and the vegetation associated with them.
Wetland filling is also regulated by ADEM through its 401 water quality certification
of USAGE Section 404 permits for wetland fill. Permits in the two coastal counties
(Mobile and Baldwin) and Washington County are reviewed and certified by ADEM
coastal program staff, while permits in all other counties in Alabama are reviewed
and certified by the Mining & Nonpoint Source Section of ADEM's Water Division.
Alabama received a grant from USEPA-Region 4 in 1992, to develop a Wetlands
Conservation & Management Initiative. The goal of this initiative is to improve
the effectiveness and efficiency of governmental agencies and the private sector to
protect and restore wetlands in Alabama. This will be accomplished through the
identification and evaluation of existing wetlands protection programs and filling in
any gaps that may exist. The initiative will include a study of Alabama's current
wetland evaluation and classification resources, such as permit monitoring,
mapping, and geographic information systems. Committees have been formed to
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
117
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
investigate mapping and delineation, functional assessment, and education and
outreach.
Another state agency with involvement and a regulatory Interest in Alabama's
coastal habitats is the Alabama Department of Conservation & Natural Resources
(ADCNR). The Marine Resources Division is responsible for management of the
state's marine fishery resources, and the State Lands Division is responsible for all
state lands, including all state owned water bottoms.
Statutes
Act 82-612
Act 81-563
Environmental Management Act
Prohibition of vehicles on beaches and dunes.
Act 73-971 Prohibition of picking of wild sea oats.
Florida
Regulatory Agencies & Programs
Florida's Coastal Management Program, with the Department of Community
Affairs (DCA) in the lead role, integrates 26 state laws administered by 17 different
agencies. The program was approved by the Florida Legislature in 1978, and Florida
received delegation of the federal program under the CZMA.
The Coastal Resources Interagency Management Committee, consisting of the
Secretaries or Executive Directors of the state agencies with major responsibilities in
coastal management, coordinates review of major and complex issues that affect the
coast—such as review of the siting of federal offshore disposal areas, ocean and
shoreline management policy, and special area protection—and is a forum for
resolving interagency disputes that affect coastal resources. In 1989, the Florida
Legislature established the Interagency Management Committee by law.
• Florida Department of Environmental Regulation (DER). The Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation (DER) has regulatory jurisdiction
over waters of the state, to their landward extent, determined by the presence of
certain types of wetland vegetation. DER is charged by state law to protect water
quality. To help preserve these valuable areas, permits are required for many
activities in inland and coastal waters and wetlands. Some of the activities that
require permits include: dredging or filling wetlands; constructing piers, docks,
seawalls, and other structures in open waters and wetlands; constructing artificial
reefs; and restoring eroded beaches.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
118
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appatidlx A
To encourage the preservation of wetlands, promote water conservation, and
assure a consistent approach to water management practices, DER adopted a state
water policy. The policy provides guidelines to officials when making water
management decisions. The policy has a number of guidelines for wetland
protection which instruct water management agencies to: encourage
preservation of natural water management systems; discourage channelization
of natural rivers and streams; encourage non-structural solutions to water
management; and protect water storage and water quality functions of wetlands,
floodplains and aquifer recharge areas through acquisition and other means.
• Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission (GFC). The major functions of the
Florida Game & Freshwater Fish Commission (GFC) are the protection and
management of wild animals and freshwater aquatic life through biological
programs and a strong law enforcement program. Although the majority of this
agency's responsibility and authorization is related to freshwater and inland
areas, GFC provides comments to DER on wetland permitting issues and is
involved in some coastal issues. GFC also conducts some freshwater wetlands
research.
Florida Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The Florida Department of
Natural Resources (DNR) is charged with the administration, supervision,
development, and conservation of Florida's natural resources, including
management of state-owned lands. Six divisions of DNR have responsibility for
coastal habitat issues: Division of Beaches & Shores, Division of Law
Enforcement or Florida Marine Patrol, Division of Marine Resources, Division
of Parks & Recreation, Division -of Resource Management, and Division of State
Lands.
Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). Although the Department of
Community Affairs (DCA) does not have direct regulatory authority,
considerable influence on coastal development and planning is exerted by their
overview function in several areas. DCA can appeal local government decisions
in the following areas if the plans or development proposals do not meet state
planning guidelines: local comprehensive plans; developments of regional
impact; and areas of critical state concern.
Initiatives & Statutes
• Apalachieola Bay Protection Act. Under the Apalachicola Bay Protection Act,
the 1985 Legislature required state and local planning for the area. This,
combined with money for badly needed sewage treatment, helps protect the
public health and marine resources of Apalachicola Bay.
Estuarine Management. The following watershed management projects are
producing environmental results with support through DER, using federal
coastal management funds:
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
119
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
O An interstate team is studying the transport of nutrients into and through
Perdido Bay.
Q A Geographic Information System has been established by the Florida
Department of Natural Resources for the Little Manatee River Watershed in
Manatee County. This system will be used as a basis for revising land use
ordinances for the estuarine areas of the Florida Gulf Coast and, in Manatee
County, for planning recommendations and coordinating with the Tampa
Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan, and for addressing
coastal issues along the Gulf.
OH Spill Sensitivity Atlas. DNR has initiated an update and GIS automation of
the Oil Spill Sensitivity Atlas for oil spill contingency planning, response, and
damage assessment.
Federal Consistency. Reviews of federal actions and activities by Florida's
coastal agencies resulted in the withdrawal or revision of some offshore oil and
gas exploration in the Gulf of Mexico and suspension of the Navy's use of
tributyltin antifouling points (and state legislation banning the use of some of
these paints). Review of federal activities kept the federal government from
selling an environmentally sensitive part of Grayton Dunes; instead, the
property was offered to the state and is now a part of the state park.
Coastal Zone Management. Representative coastal management projects
producing environmental results with support through DER, DCA, and DNR
using Federal Coastal Management and Sport Fish Restoration funds, and State
of Florida Saltwater Fishing License and Coastal Protection Trust Funds include
the following: mapping and study of declining seagrasses, city planning for beach
access, and surveying for historical or cultural resources. Thirty to 40 percent of
the money is used for local and regional projects, while the remainder is used by
the state agencies in the coastal program.
Wetlands Protection Act. The Wetlands Protection Act, passed in 1984, provides
comprehensive wetlands protection. It improved the ability of DER to protect
wetlands and the fish and wildlife that live in them. The legislation also
strengthened and expanded the criteria by which DER evaluates wetland
resource permit applications, gives DER statutory authority to consider the
cumulative effect of many small projects in a water body, gives DER additional
rule-making authority to adopt more stringent rules in specially protected areas,
requires reclamation of areas disturbed by peat mining, and establishes a wetland
tracking system. The law delegates the regulation of agricultural activities to the
water management districts.
Surface Water Improvement & Management Act (SWIM). The Surface Water
Improvement & Management Act (SWIM) established a program to restore
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
120
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
waterbodies damaged by man's interference and protect those that are still in
good condition. SWIM delegates this authority to Florida's five water
management districts. The four goals of SWIM focus on water quality, natural
systems, land use, and watershed management. SWIM's main task is to keep
Florida's water bodies clean enough for wildlife and recreation, primarily by
controlling and treating storm water runoff. SWIM works to restore and protect
all natural systems. SWIM helps local governments make land use decisions by
providing information on the long-term effects development can have on water.
bodies. Because water is a regional resource, SWIM considers the effects of land
use and development over wide areas and makes decisions for the good of the
water resource itself, instead of for individual communities, landowners, or
other special interests.
With help from the public and local governments, each of Florida's five water
management districts made a list of its surface waters which most needed
attention. These lists include some of the most polluted waters and some of the
most beautiful and unspoiled springs, rivers, bays, and lakes. Those water bodies
in the Gulf of Mexico region include: Tampa Bay, Crystal River/Kings Bay,
Charlotte Harbor, Lake Tarpon, and Lake Thonotosassa.
Aquatic Preserves. To protect Florida's distinctive natural features for the
enjoyment of future generations, the Florida Legislature created aquatic
preserves. Aquatic preserves are submerged lands of exceptional beauty which
are to be maintained in their natural or existing conditions. The first aquatic
preserve was established in Estero Bay in 1966, the result of an increased
environmental awareness among Florida citizens in the early 1960s. By 1975, the
Florida Aquatic Preserve Act was passed, and the existing preserves were brought
under a standard set of management criteria. All but three of the 40.preserves
are located on the coast in the shallow waters of estuaries and the continental
shelf; of the three freshwater preserves, two are located on rivers and one is a
lake. The management objectives for the preserves are to maintain and improve
existing resources, such as seagrasses, mangroves, aquatic plants, birds, and fish.
Preservation 2OOO. The Florida Preservation 2000 Act legislative findings state
"imminent development of Florida's remaining natural acres and continuing
increases in land values necessitate an aggressive program of public land
acquisition during the next decade to preserve the quality of life that attracts so
many people to Florida." The only permanent solution to the protection of
critical natural areas is land acquisition; thus, in 1990, Florida created
Preservation 2000, a long-term program to provide this solution. In conjunction
with the efforts of 14 county conservation programs, the ten-year Preservation
2000 program provides for $300 million in annual funds for land acquisition
through the year 2000. By all measures, Preservation 2000 is the most ambitious
land protection program ever created and will provide funding for most of
Florida's natural land acquisition needs.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
121
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
Louisiana
Regulatory Agencies & Programs
The State & Local Coastal Resources Management Act (SLCRMA) La. R.S. 49:21, was
passed by the Louisiana Legislature in 1978 and received federal approval in October
1980. Presently the program is being administered by the Coastal Management
Division (CMD) within the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Office of
Coastal Restoration & Management.
CMD is charged with implementing the Louisiana Coastal Resources Program
(LCRP). LCRP attempts to protect, develop, and restore or enhance the resources of
the state's coastal zone. Its broad intent is to encourage multiple uses of resources
and adequate economic growth, while minimizing adverse effects of one resource
upon another without imposing undue restrictions on any user.
CMD's regulatory responsibilities include administering the Coastal Use Permit
(CUP) Program, the Consistency Program, and the Enforcement Program.
CUP is the basic regulatory tool of CMD and is required for certain projects in the
coastal zone, including, but not limited to dredge and fill work, bulkhead
construction, shoreline maintenance, and other development projects. CMD has
processed about 15,500 CUP applications since the inception of the program.
The Consistency Program determines whether the activities of all federal and some
state governmental agencies are consistent with LCRP. Particular attention is given
to environmental, economic, and cultural concerns. Most federal agencies conduct
their own consistency determination and, if projects are found to be inconsistent
with state regulations, they are not pursued. Examples of projects requiring a
consistency determination are hurricane protection levees; USACE maintenance,
dredging, locks, and drainage structures; navigation projects; freshwater diversions;
and beach restoration projects.
The Enforcement & Monitoring Program ensures that any unauthorized projects in
the coastal zone are investigated and action is taken. The Program also monitors
activities permitted by CUP for compliance with permit conditions. The Program
also gives the secretary of DNR the authority to enforce either legal or
administrative procedures including fines, cease and desist orders, and restorative
or mitigation work. The field investigative staff regularly monitors the entire
coastal area for unauthorized activities and for non-compliance with permit
conditions.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
122
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
Statutes
• State Act 6 (1989). The 1989 Louisiana Legislature passed Act 6 which requires
the State of Louisiana to annually develop a Coastal Wetlands Conservation &
Restoration Plan from both a short and long-range perspective. The initiative
for passing Act 6 was provided when it passed a voter referendum by
approximately 75 percent. The Coastal Restoration Division of DNR has the
responsibility for implementing this plan which is designed to restore, preserve,
and enhance Louisiana's coastal wetlands.
The plan is the result of over 25 years of research and involves many innovative
techniques designed to work with nature. The plan is an evolving one and
includes a large number of individual projects which are designed to meet
specific needs. Current restoration techniques include freshwater diversion,
sediment diversion, marsh management, sediment capturing, shallow bay
terracing, and structural shoreline erosion abatement devices.
On the local level, parish programs have been approved in Jefferson, Orleans, St.
Bernard, Cameron, St. James, Lafourche, and Calcasieu. Elements included in
local coastal programs include:
Q Assessment of an area's environment, natural resources, and
socioeconomic and demographic profiles;
Q Plan for the proper management of these resources and their interaction
with other state and federal programs;
Q Zoning plan for the area;
Q Description of the proposed permit program; and
Q Breakdown of the parish's environmental management units (EMU's),
including a description and analysis of each.
State Act 104O (199O). This Act requires compensatory mitigation for future
permitted activities in the coastal zone and calls for establishment of a mitigation
banking system by the DNR Secretary (proposed rules presently under
development).
• State Act 633 (1991). This Act requires development and implementation of a
coastal environmental protection trust fund and provides for a coastal
environment protection plan (not limited to wetlands) that would receive 50
percent of revenues from OCS impact assistance monies derived from offshore
Louisiana, if such funding is authorized by the federal government.
State Act 637 (1991). This Act mandates development of a long-term
management strategies plan for each existing or proposed navigation channel in
Louisiana. Dredged spoil is to be used for beneficial purposes and channel banks
are to be maintained to minimize secondary wetland losses. Funding is under
negotiation.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
123
-------
Fedoral & State Framework
Appendix A
Programs & Initiatives
Many habitat conservation programs are currently being implemented in Louisiana
that have both direct and indirect wetland restoration applications. Listed below are
many of the wetland conservation programs administered by agencies within both
state and federal government. Annual funding for many of these programs is often
determined by the Legislature and /or Congress on a year-to-year basis.
* Baraiaria-Terrebonne National Estuary Program. In 1989, the Barataria-
Terrebonne Estuarine Complex was nominated for the National Estuary
Program. In 1990, the Barataria-Terrebonne National Estuary Program was
approved by USEPA including the following provisions: 1) a five year 75/25
percent federal/state matching program; 2) broad planning requirements via a
management conference; and 3) development of a Comprehensive Conservation
& Management Plan (CCMP) for the basins.
• Coastal Restoration Policy Committee. A cabinet level Coastal Restoration
Policy Committee was established by the Governor in 1988. This committee was
charged with developing a plan to identify measures to preserve/ enhance, create,
or restore vegetated wetlands in the coastal zone. A report, with short and long-
term recommendations, was completed and adopted in August, 1988.
• Coastal Plan. A FY90/91 coastal plan and a FY 91/92 annual state coastal wetland
conservation and restoration plan were approved by the Louisiana Legislature
and implementation has commenced.
• Wetlands Creation Program. The USAGE New Orleans District Operations
Division instituted a program to create wetlands from dredge spoil from routine
ongoing channel maintenance.
• Restoration of Coastal Wetlands. Under Section 1135 (Water Resources
Development Act of 1986) the USAGE New Orleans District has instituted
specific projects restoring coastal wetlands. Examples include Wine Island
Shoals and Queen Bess Island projects (75/25 percent federal-state cost sharing
required).
• Nonpoint Source Pollution Program. The Governor's Office is coordinating the
Louisiana coastal nonpoint source pollution program (to be jointly managed by
LADEQ and DNR), including the potential for wetland enhancement. State
management measures are to be developed within 30 months after final
guidance was issued by USEPA in May, 1992. The program is to be jointly
administered by USEPA and NOAA and will dovetail with existing state
nonpoint programs previously required under Section 319 of the CWA. The
existing state Nonpoint Source Program, administered by LADEQ, involves
interagency coordination via the Nonpoint Source Interagency Committee. The
program addresses all sources of nonpoint pollution through voluntary
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
124
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
implementation of BMPs, monitoring BMPs for effectiveness, and educational
activities.
Mississippi
Regulatory Agencies & Programs
Mississippi Coastal Program. The Mississippi Coastal Program was approved by
the Commission on Wildlife Conservation on August 22, 1980, and has been
updated throughout its implementation. This program is built around goals for
guiding decisions affecting the development of Mississippi's coastal resources.
These goals include, but are not limited to the following:
Q Providing for reasonable industrial expansion in the coastal area and
insuring the efficient utilization of waterfront industrial sites so that
suitable sites are conserved for water dependent industry.
Q Favoring the preservation of the coastal wetlands and ecosystems, except
where a specific alteration of a specific coastal wetlands would serve a
higher public interest in compliance with the public purposes of the public
trust in which the coastal wetlands are held.
Q Encouraging the preservation of natural scenic qualities in the coastal area.
Q Considering the national interest involved in planning for and in the
siting of facilities in the coastal area.
The Mississippi Coastal Program makes funds available for the preservation or
restoration of wetlands and access areas. Local governments play a lead role in
any such project.
The agencies responsible for this program are the Bureau of Marine Resources
(BMR), the Office of Pollution Control (OPC), the Bureau of Land & Water
Resources, and the Department of Archives & History. These four agencies are
responsible for monitoring state and federal decisions that affect the coastal area
and for insuring that such decisions are made in accordance with program
councils.
• Bureau of Marine Resources (BMR). The Mississippi Bureau of Marine
Resources (BMR) is the lead agency responsible for the overall administration of
the coastal program. BMR regulates projects and activities under the Wetlands
Protection Law and saltwater fisheries statutes. There are three types of activities
regulated under BMR's jurisdiction. These are activities physically located in
coastal wetlands (ie., piers, bulkheads), those not located in the coastal wetlands
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
126
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
but affecting them by indirect means (ie., construction), and the erection of
structures on sites suitable for water dependent industry.
Development is directly regulated to minimize adverse impacts. This is done by
addressing special management areas (SMA). SMAs detail all regulations
affecting an area and specifically state what will and will not happen in an area.
This helps to ensure that development will occur in a predictable manner.
Coastal Preserves Program. The Coastal Preserves Program represents an effort by
BMR, in conjunction with various federal, state, and non-profit organizations, to
develop a comprehensive program for managing sensitive coastal habitats in
Mississippi. The Mississippi Coastal Preserves Program is an extension of the
Coastal Preserves Program concept developed in Texas and supported by the Gulf
of Mexico Program.
BMR's Department of Wildlife, Fisheries & Parks announced the dedication of
various tracks of sensitive coastal habitats as part of the "Coastal Preserves
Program" on April 17,1992. The Graveline Bayou Coastal Preserve and the
Grand Bay Coastal Preserve were recognized as sensitive coastal habitats along
the Mississippi Gulf Coast and will now be provided with a level of management
and protection to insure the long-term ecological health of these areas.
Graveline Bayou is a small estuary along the Northern shore of the Mississippi
Sound that serves as a nursery for commercial and recreationally important
fisheries. Approximately 243 hectares (600 acres) of wetlands will be transferred
from The Nature Conservancy (TNC) to BMR in one of the first actions of the
Coastal Preserves Program. Grand Bay Coastal Preserve is a wetlands area on the
eastern border of Mississippi that includes one of the largest undisturbed pine
savannahs in the southeastern U.S. USFWS is in the process of developing the
Grand Bay National Wildlife Refuge in this area, and BMR, in conjunction with
USFWS and TNC, will develop a comprehensive management strategy
involving over 4,047 hectares (10,000 acres) of wetlands habitat adjacent to the
refuge.
USFWS and TNC are also taking an active role in the Mississippi Coastal
Preserves Program. BMR has been awarded a $100,000 grant under the National
Wetlands Conservation Grant Program; TNC will assist the state in providing
matching funds for the grant. Finally, BMR is using grant funds from the federal
CZMP to fund an assessment process which is being conducted by the
Department of Wildlife, Fisheries & Parks-Natural Heritage Program.
\t
Statutes
• CWA/401b Water Quality Certification
• Mississippi Coastal Wetlands Protection Law of 1973
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
126
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
Projects/Special Initiatives
Projects and special initiatives in Mississippi include the Coastal Mississippi
Wetlands Initiative, Audubon Society Citizens Guide for Saving Wetlands, and
Section 309 Assessment.
Regulatory Agencies & Programs
The Texas Legislature has distributed authority for coastal resource management
among a number of state agencies. This system has evolved historically with no
formal coordination mechanism to ensure a consistent management approach.
• Texas General Land Office (GLO). The Texas General Land Office (GLO), in
conjunction with the School Land Board, manages the state's coastal public
lands. GLO is developing a coastal management plan for Texas beaches and state-
owned submerged lands from mean high tide in the bays arid estuaries to 16.65
km (10.35 miles) offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. On June 7,1991, the Texas State
Legislature passed bills directing the GLO and Texas Parks & Wildlife
Department (TPWD) to develop a Wetlands Conservation Plan for state-owned
coastal lands and a Coastal Management Plan to address coastal erosion, beach
access, dune protection, and planning and coordination of these activities. The
Governor of Texas has given notice to USDOC that Texas will submit a coastal
management plan for approval under the federal CZMA.
The Commissioner of GLO may issue permits for geological, geophysical, and
other investigations within the tidewater limits of the state. The Commissioner
may also grant easements or leases for rights-of-way across state lands for
pipelines and other transmission lines. In addition, the Commissioner is
responsible for technical assistance and compliance under the Dune Protection
Act and implementation of the Texas Coastal Preserve Program with TPWD.
• Texas Parks & Wildlife Department (TPWD). The Texas Parks & Wildlife
Department (TPWD) through its Resource Protection Division evaluates state
and federal projects, permits, and other actions affecting fish and wildlife
resources, including endangered species. TPWD also operates the state parks
system and wildlife management areas. A permit must be obtained from TPWD
for the disturbance or dredging of sand, shell, or marl in public waters not
authorized by other state or federal agencies. Public waters are defined as all the
salt and fresh waters underlying the beds of navigable streams under the
jurisdiction of the Parks & Wildlife Commission.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
127
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TMRCC). The Texas
Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) (formerly the Texas
Water Commission) has the responsibility to protect surface and groundwater
quality. TNRCC also issues Section 401 certifications. In addition to this
responsibility, TNRCC oversees surface water rights administration, dam safety
management, the National Flood Insurance Program and flood control
improvement project administration, injection well program administration,
waste minimization initiatives, and water district supervision.
Soil & Water Conservation Board. The Texas State Soil & Water Conservation
Board has the responsibility to plan, implement, and manage programs and
practices for abating agricultural and silvicultural nonpoint pollution. The State
Board also administers a voluntary conservation program with and through 211
local soil and water conservation districts which encompass over 99 percent of
the surface acres of Texas. With a voluntary program, conservation practices are
being applied by over 215,000 cooperating landowners on more than 48.6 million
hectares (120 million acres).
School Land Board. The School Land Board, in conjunction with GLO, manages
the state's coastal public lands. The Board may grant leases to certain
governmental bodies for public purposes; leases for mineral exploration and
development; easements to littoral landowners; channel easements to surface or
mineral interest holders; leases to educational, scientific, or conservation
interests; and permits for limited use of previously unauthorized structures.
Texas Railroad Commission. The Texas Railroad Commission has extensive
authority in the oil and gas industry and in pollution prevention and abatement.
The Commission also regulates intrastate natural gas pipelines and issues drill
permits for oil and gas wells. The Commission issues wastewater permits for
produced water discharge. In addition, the Commission regulates surface
mining for lignite, uranium, and iron ore to make sure that the resources are
properly developed and the environment protected.
Texas Department of Transportation- The Department is responsible for road
construction and planning. The Department administers federal funds for mass
transit and may plan, purchase, construct, lease, and contract for public
transportation systems in the state. The Department constructs and maintains
bridges and ferries, serves as the state sponsor of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway,
and can acquire easements and rights-of-way from GLO for channel expansion,
relocation, or alteration.
Texas Antiquities Committee. The Texas Antiquities Committee, created by the
Texas Antiquities Code, is responsible for preserving and protecting the state's
historical and archaeological resources. The Committee requires permits for
activities involving salvage or study of state archaeological landmarks, including
historical sites and artifacts of interest such as sunken ships, buried treasure, and
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
128
-------
Federal & State Framework
Appendix A
art works. The Committee issues eight types of permits covering virtually every
aspect of historical and archaeological investigation, including reconnaissance,
testing, excavation, and destruction.
• Texas Attorney General's Office. The Texas Attorney General's Office is not a
regulatory agency, but it has a role in resource management as the state's
enforcement agency for the Open Beaches Act and other coastal legislation. The
office protects the public's beach access rights and can bring suit on behalf of
other state agencies to enforce state laws.
• Bureau of Economic Geology. The Bureau of Economic Geology at The
University of Texas is responsible for much of the mapping of coastal resources,
energy, minerals, land, geology, and biology. It also monitors erosion along the
Texas Gulf Coast.
• Governor's Office of Budget & Planning. The Governor's Office of Budget and
Planning prepares recommendations for the budget and is responsible for
administration of state review and comment procedures for all federal or
federally funded projects.
Statutes
• Open Beaches Act. The Open Beaches Act (Sections 61.001-61.025 of the Texas
Natural Resources Code), passed by the Texas Legislature in 1959, guaranteed the
public's right of free and unrestricted access to the "public beach," which extends
from the line of mean low tide to the line of permanent vegetation of the
shoreline bordering the Gulf of Mexico. The Act makes it unlawful to prevent or
impede access to or use of the public beach by erecting barriers or by posting signs
declaring a beach closed to the public.
Programs & Initiatives
Freshwater Inflow. Studies by the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB)
between 1967 and 1979 recommended specific inflow amounts for each of the
seven major estuaries. In 1985, further legislation authorized TWDB, TPWD,
and TNRCC to document the historical patterns of abundance and species
composition of estuarine animals, their habitats, and inflow conditions
supporting ecosystem productivity. Annual and seasonal inflow requirements,
to be derived by 1996 for each estuary, will be based on multi-objective
optimization modeling in conjunction with bay circulation and mass transport
modeling.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
129
-------
Acronym Guide
Appendix B
ACAMP Alabama Coastal Area Management Program
ADCNR Alabama Department of Conservation & Natural Resources
ADECA Alabama Department of Economic & Community Affairs
ADEM Alabama Department of Environmental Management
ADID Advance Identification
AISC Assessment & Information Services Center
AL Alabama
ASCS Agricultural Stabilization & Conservation Service
ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry
BLM Bureau of Land Management
BMP Best Management Practice
BMR Bureau of Marine Resources—Mississippi
CAC Citizens Advisory Committee—Gulf of Mexico Program
CBRA Coastal Barriers Resources Act
CCMP Comprehensive Conservation & Management Plan
CMD Coastal Management Division—Louisiana
COP Coastal Ocean Program
CRP Conservation Reserve Program
CUP Coastal Use Permit Program
CWA Clean Water Act
CWPPRA Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection & Restoration Act
CZARA Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments
CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act
CZMP Coastal Zone Management Plan (or Program)
DCA Department of Community Affairs—Florida
DER Department of Environmental Regulation—Florida
DMS Data Management Systems
DNR Department of Natural Resources—Florida/Louisiana
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EPIC Environmental Protection Information Center
ERL Environmental Research Laboratory
FACTA Food, Agriculture, Conservation & Trade Act
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FEPCA Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act
FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide & Rodenticide Act
FL Florida
FMC Fishery Management Council
FmHA Farmers Home Administration
FMP Fishery Management Plan
FSA Food Security Act
GFC Game & Freshwater Fish Commission-Florida
GLO General Land Office-Texas
GIS Geographic Information System
GMP Gulf of Mexico Program
LA Louisiana
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
13O
-------
Acronym Guide
Appendix B
LADEQ Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
LCRP Louisiana Coastal Resources Program
LGS Louisiana Geological Survey ^
LWCF Land & Water Conservation Fund
MC Management Committee-Gulf of Mexico Program
MFCMA Magnuson Fishery Conservation & Management Act
MPRSA Marine Protection, Research & Sanctuaries Act
MMS Minerals Management Service
MO A Memorandum of Agreement
MS Mississippi
NASA National Aeronautics & Space Administration
NCPDI National Coastal Pollution Discharge Inventory
NEEA National Environmental Education Act
NEDRES National Environmental Data Referral Service
NEP National Estuary Program
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NESDIS National Environmental Satellite, Data & Information Service
NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service
NOAA National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration
NODC National Oceanographic Data Center
NOS National Ocean Service
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPS National Park Service
NS&T National Status & Trends
NWS National Weather Service
OAD Ocean Assessment Division
OAR Office of Oceanic & Atmospheric Research
OCRM Office of Ocean & Coastal Resources Management
OCS Outer Continental Shelf
OEE Office of Environmental Education
OPC Office of Pollution Control—Mississippi
PRB Policy Review Board—Gulf of Mexico Program
SAB Strategic Assessment Branch
SAV Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
SCORP Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan
SCS Soil Conservation Service
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SLCRMA Louisiana State & Local Coastal Resources Management Act
SMA Special Management Area
SWIM Surface Water Improvement & Management Act
TAC Technical Advisory Committee—Gulf of Mexico Program
TNC The Nature Conservancy
TNRCC Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
TPWD Texas Parks & Wildlife Department
TWDB Texas Water Development Board
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
131
-------
Acronym Guide
Appendix B
TX
USAGE
USCG
USDA
USDOC
USDOD
USDOE
USDOI
USDOT
USEPA
USFDA
USFS
USFWS
USGS
WES
WRP
WRP
Texas
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S^Coast Guard
U.S. Department of Agriculture
U.S. Department of Commerce
U.S. Department of Defense
U.S. Department of Energy
U.S. Department of the Interior
U.S. Department of Transportation
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Food & Drug Administration
U.S. Forest Service
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Geological Survey
Waterways Experiment Station.
Wildlife Reserve Program
Wetlands Research Program
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
132
-------
Glossary
Appendix C
abyssal plain
baleen whale
barrier island
benthic zone
berm
biodiversity
bloom
brackish marsh
brown tide
chemosynthetic
clearcut
coliform
compensatory
mitigation
continental shelf
continental slope
dead zone
Plain created by sediment fill in the deepest portion of the ocean basin
and defined by a gradient of <1:1000.
Whale with elastic horn-like material forming plates in the upper jaw
which are used for filtering krill, plankton, and other small organisms
from large quantities of sea water.
A long, narrow, sandy coastal island that is above high tide and
parallel to the shore; commonly has dunes, vegetated zones, and
swampy terrain.
All of the water covered ocean bottom from low tide level to deepest
trench.
Low, horizontal or landward sloping terrace on the backshore of a
beach that is formed from material thrown up and deposited by storm
waves. Also, an elongated, filled area.
The variety of species of organisms inhabiting a specific environment.
The explosive growth of one or more plankton species probably in
response to an influx of nutrients and warm, calm conditions. High
phytoplankton biomass can reduce light penetration and cause oxygen
depletion.
Marine/estuarine marsh subjected to freshwater inflow; salinity can
range between 0.5 o/oo and 30 o/oo.
Toxic condition created by an intense bloom of the microalgae
chrysophyte; usually occurs in calm waters with a low turnover rate
and high nutrient input, such as Laguna Madre, TX.
Synthesis of organic substances such as food nutrients using the energy of
chemical reactions; usually restricted to environments without oxygen.
Process of removing all trees and undergrowth from a parcel of land.
A group of bacteria whose presence is used as an indicator of
contamination by human or animal wastes.
The requirement to perform a service to offset unavoidable damages.
The water covered part of the continent from mean low tide level to the
shelf break at about 200 m (656 ft) depth; characterized by surface
slope average of >1:1()00.
Transitional area between shelf edge and the abyss which is marked by
a gradient change from >r:1000 to >1:100.
A water covered area in which the water's dissolved oxygen content is
less than 2 mg/1.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
133
-------
Glossary
Appendix C
diapir
dune
eat-out
ecosystem
edaphic species
epibenthic species
epifauna
epiphyte
estuary
eutrophication
Exclusive Economic
Zone (EEZ)
fresh marsh
Gulf Coast
Homeporting Plan
habitat
halophyte
herbaceous plants
herbicide
hermatypic coral
Dome formed in overlying rocks by the squeezing of plastic core
material, such as slate, which is pushed upward by the pressure of
overlying sediments; Jefferson and Avery Islands.
A low ridge or hill of loose, wind blown material capable of being
moved from place to place but retaining its characteristic shape.
Massive destruction of vegetation by animals (e.g., nutria/muskrat) or
birds (e.g., geese/gulls).
An ecological unit consisting of the environment with its living
elements, plus the non-living factors that exist in and affect it.
Species of plants and animals influenced by physical or chemical
conditions of the soil or substrate.
Plants and animals that live on the bottom; bottom dwellers.
Animals living upon rather than below the surface of the seafloor; the
term is also used for fauna attached to rocks, plants, pilings, boat hulls,
etc., in shallow water and along the shore.
Plant which lives attached to another plant or an inanimate object.
A partially enclosed coastal body of water where fresh water mixes
with sea water and where tidal effects are evident.
Process by which a body of water comes to be characterized by high
levels of plant nutrients especially if artificially enriched.
Arbitrarily chosen areas (shoreline to 200 mi) reserved for national
exploitation; outer limit conforms to the seaward edge of the OCS
rather than a physiographic boundary.
Herbaceous wetland in which salinity is usually <0.5 o/oo.
Department of the Navy proposal to station several Caribbean Fleet
ships each at Pensacola, FL, Mobile, AL, Pascagoula, MS, Lake
Charles, LA, and Corpus Christi, TX.
Those elements of an environment that sustain organisms and
communities.
Plants tolerant of high salinity levels.
Annual or perennial green vascular plants of low stature which are
leaf-like in appearance or texture.
Poison formulated to selectively kill certain types of plants; may
become environmentally destructive to animals when concentrated in
the food chain.
Reef building coral with associated symbiotic algae that requires light
for growth.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
134
-------
Glossary
Appendix C
hydrology
hypersaline
hypoxia
infauna
interstitial salinity
intertidal
littoral zone
low energy
environment
mangrove swamp
mean sea level
mean tide level
mesocosm
mudflat
nepheloid layer
oceanic realm
Outer Continental
Shelf (OCS)
pelagic zone
pesticide
The study of the physical properties of water movement, circulation,
and distribution.
1) Water with salinity >40 o/oo due to land-derived salts. 2) Salinity
greater than the lowest salinity at which halite can be precipitated;
abou 1350 o/oo at one atmosphere and 20 * C
Stress caused by deficiency in the amount of oxygen reaching bodily
tissue.
Organisms living within rather than on the sediments of waterbodies.
Salinity of the water filling the pore spaces of sediments.
Zone between high and low tide levels.
Depth zone between high tide and low tide.
Water covered area characterized by lack of wave or current action
which permits settling of suspended fine-grained sediments.
A subtropical, low-energy, aqueous environment, overgrown by
mangrove trees and noted for high productivity of organic matter.
The average height of the sea surface for all tidal stages over a 19 year
period as determined by hourly observations.
Surface marking the average of observed heights of high water and
low water averaged over a nodal period (about 19 years).
A representative portion of an ecosystem which can be experimentally
manipulated.
Level area of silts and clays, barren of vegetation, which is alternately
covered and uncovered by the tide.
A layer of water, up to 1000 m (3,281 ft) thick, over the shelf edge or in
the deep ocean basin, that contains a suspended sediment load
sufficient to reflect light.
Term used to describe oceans and their physical, chemical, biological,
and geological properties.
Federally mandated, submerged portion of continent which usually
starts about 4.8 km (3 mi) from shoreline and extends about 322 km (200
mi) seaward; under federal jurisdiction.
All the ocean waters including the neritic (inshore) and oceanic (open
ocean) zones; vertically, the pelagic zone is divided into the upper
lighted zone and the lower dark zone.
Poison formulated to selectively kill insects or other organisms; becomes
environmentally destructive when retained in the food chain.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
135
-------
Glossary
Appendix C
photosynthesis
polychaete
red tide
salt marsh
saltern
serpulid
shelf break
Sigsbee Abyssal Plain
straight pipe
submerged
aquatic vegetation (SAV)
subsidence
subtidal
supralittoral
turbidity
wave base
wetland
Process in which energy of light and chlorophyll are used to
manufacture carbohydrates from carbon dioxide and water. Maximum
depth about equivalent to shelf break [200 m (656 ft)].
Marine worm of Class Polychaeta, Phylum Annelida. Many live in
temporary or permanent tubes or burrows.
.Discolored seawater caused by explosive growth of one of several
species of dinoflagellates capable of poisoning fish or producing
anaerobic conditions. Rapid growth apparently caused by phosphorus
enrichment.
Meadow of intertidal, rooted vegetation which is alternately
inundated and drained by tides.
Areas generally barren of vegetation or vegetated by species tolerant of
hypersaline conditions. Formed by a concentration of salts by
evaporation; generally occur at upper limits of tidal marshes.
Any annelid (worm) of the family Serpulidae that characteristically
builds contorted calcareous tubes which may coalesce into small reefs.
Boundary between continental shelf (gradient >1:1000) and continental
slope (gradient >1:100).
Abyssal plain in the Gulf of Mexico basin at a depth below 3,600 m
(11,812 ft) and gradient of >1:2000.
Term used for the dumping of untreated sewage directly into
waterbodies.
Dense communities of vascular plants beneath the water surface in
saline environments.
Downward settling of the earth's surface with little or no horizontal
movement usually caused by compaction, dehydration, or crustal
warping.
Seaward of low tide level; always water covered.
Shore area above the high tide level.
Reduced clarity of water due to presence of suspended matter.
Depth at which waves no longer stir sediments; wave base is about 10 m
(32.8 ft) in the Gulf of Mexico.
Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water
at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal
circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted
for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include
swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
139
-------
Participants in the Action Agenda Development Process
Appendix D
The Habitat Degradation Committee
Co-Chairs:
Larry Goldman
Eugene Turner
Members:
Steve Branstetter
Carl Brown
Torn Calnan
William Cibula
Art Dyas
Johnny French
Gary Gaston
Bill Good
Kenneth Haddad
Kenneth Heck
Rex Herron
Clyde Hoeft
Bill Kruczynski*
Bennett Landreneau
Larry Lewis
Robin Lewis
Andreas Mager Jr.
Paul Montagna
Rudy Nyc
Leland Roberts
Robert Rogers
Stephanie Sanzone
Peter Sheridan
Brent Smith
Robert Stewart Jr.
Ronald Ventola
*Previous Co-Chair
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Louisiana State University
Gulf & South Atlantic Fisheries Development Foundation, Inc.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Texas General Land Office
National Aeronautics & Space Administration
Southeastern Natural Resources--CAC
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
University of Mississippi
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources
Florida Department of Natural Resources
Dauphin Island Sea Lab
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S-. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 4
Soil Conservation Service
Brown & Mitchell
Lewis Environmental Services, Inc.
National Marine Fisheries Service
University of Texas
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department
Minerals Management Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Department of Energy
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Steering Committee:
Len Bahr
Larry Goldman
Kenneth Haddad
Bill Kruczynski
Larry Lewis
Paul Montagna
Leland Roberts
Eugene Turner
John Weber
Office of the Governor—Louisiana
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Florida Department of Natural Resources
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 4
Brown & Mitchell
University of Texas
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department
Louisiana State University
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
137
-------
Participants in the Action Agenda Development Process
Appendix D
Participants in the Action Agenda Workshop & Development Process
Dan Allen
Len Bahr
Alan Ballard
Carl Brown
Sally Davenport
Donna Devlin
Fred Dunham
Linda Dye
Ernie Estevez
Mike Evans
Larry Goldman
Bill Good
Bryon Griffith
Lore Hantske
Kenneth Heck
Rex Herron
Ron Herring
Bill Holland
Richard Hoogland
Susan Jackson
Fred Kopfler
Bill Kruczynski
John Lambeth
Bennett Landreneau
Mary Landin
Larry Lewis
Robin Lewis
Doug Lipka
Paul Montagna
Rudy Nyc
Chris Onuf
David Pashley
Alex Plaisance, Jr.
Warren Pulich
Leland Roberts
Robert Rogers
Blake Roper
Peter Sheridan
Eugene Turner
Virginia VanSickle-Burkett
Lloyd Wise
John Weber
Bernie Yokel
Chevron
Office of the Governor of Louisiana
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—GMP
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Texas General Land Office
Center for Marine Conservation
Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries
Florida Department of Natural Resources
Mote Marine Laboratory
Citizens Advisory Committee
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—GMP
Texas General Land Office
Dauphin Island Sea Lab
National Marine Fisheries Service
Mississippi Power Company -
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—GMP
Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—GMP
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 4
Citizens Advisory Committee
Soil Conservation Service
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Brown & Mitchell
Lewis Environmental Services, Inc.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—GMP
University of Texas
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
The Nature Conservancy
Louisiana Landowners Association
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department
Minerals Management Service
Alabama Department of Environmental Management
National Marine Fisheries Service
Louisiana State University
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 4
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Florida Audubon Society
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
138
-------
Participants In the Action Agenda D&velopment Process
Appendix D
Written Comments on Draft Documents Received From the Following:
Dan Allen
Len Bahr
Alan Ballard
Jimmy Bates
Thomas Baugh
Ken Blan
Carl Brown
Eugene Buglewicz
John Burt
John Carlton
James Cato
Dave Chambers
Tom Czapla
Ernie Estevez
Conrad Fjetland
Johnny French
David Fruge"
Larry Goldman
Kenneth Haddad
James Hanchey
Rex Herron
George Horvath
Alan Jones
Andrew Kemmerer
Bill Kruczynski
Larry Lewis
Andreas Mager Jr.
Garry Mauro
Larry McKinney
Brandt Mannchen
Susan MacMullin
Kai Midboe
Paul Montagna
Warren Olds
Maureen O'Neill
Chris Onuf
J. Rogers Pearcy
Laura Radde
Leland Roberts
Robert Rogers
Dugan Sabins
A.J. Salem
Peter Sheridan
Brent Smith
Chevron
Office of the Governor of Louisiana
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Gulf of Mexico Program
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Soil Conservation Service—Gulf of Mexico Program
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Soil Conservation Service
Alabama Department of Environmental Management
Florida Sea Grant College
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Mote Marine Laboratory
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Florida Department of Natural Resources
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
National Marine Fisheries Service—Gulf of Mexico Program
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 6
Texas Water Commission
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 4
Brown & Mitchell
National Marine Fisheries Service
Texas General Land Office
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department
Sierra Club
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
University of Texas
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 4
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Minerals Management Service
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency—Region 6
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department
Minerals Management Service
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
National Marine Fisheries Service
U.S. Department of Energy
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
139
-------
Participants In the Action Agenda Development Process
Appondix P
Written Comments on Draft Documents Received From the Following fcontinuecH:
Dave Smith
Barbara Todd
Eugene Turner
Michael Wagner
John Weber
Phil Wieczynski
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service-Gulf of Mexico Program
Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners--CAC
Louisiana State University
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency-Region 6
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
U.S. Coast Guard
Gulf of Mexico Habitat Degradation Action Agenda (4.1)
140
-------
-------
------- |