|
Fall 1998 |
 |
|
 |
Page 3 |
|
Inside |
|
|
Vessel Management |
pg. 3 |
|
Conservation Working Group |
pg. 3 |
|
Are you concerned about resource protection in the Sanctuary? Does your organization encourage the public to get involved in marine conservation issues? If so, the Sanctuary's Conservation Working Group (CWG) is the group for you. Its mission is to help promote and achieve comprehensive and long-lasting stewardship of the Sanctuary through continued oversight and advocacy. The CWG was created in 1989 by Save Our Shores (SOS) and the Center for Marine Conservation (CMC) to focus the expertise of local, regional, and national conservation groups on the Sanctuary designation process. This ad-hoc committee (originally known as the Monterey Sanctuary Environmental Working Group) became the voice of conservationists throughout the Sanctuary designation process. It coordinated the flow of Sanctuary-related information, collaborated on public outreach materials, and communicated with the NOAA staff who were preparing the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed Sanctuary. The group was instrumental in helping to achieve designation of the Sanctuary in 1992 as the largest marine protected area in the country. Founding members included representatives of the Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife, Friends of the Sea Otter, the League of Women Voters, and Surfrider Foundation. "Our original mission was to develop tools for
engaging citizens in the designation process and to
make sure the local population knew it had an
important role to play in creating the Sanctuary,"
explains CWG Chair Rachel Saunders. Perhaps the
most important of these tools was an eight-page
"citizen's guide" to the Sanctuary designation
process. That pamphlet distilled the government's
draft EIS/Management Plan into straightforward
information on the key issues |
The Vessel Management Work Group, consisting of representatives from the shipping and petroleum industries, local, state, and federal government, conservation organizations, and the public at large, has proposed a set of strategies for a vessel traffic management system for the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. NOAA and the Coast Guard presented these strategies to the public in a series of workshops in June.
The work group's goal was to develop a vessel traffic management system that both protects the natural resources of the Sanctuary and ensures safe, efficient, and environmentally-sound marine transportation by minimizing the threat of oil spills. At the workshops, which were held in Half Moon Bay, Oakland, Santa Cruz, and Monterey, the public participated in open exchanges with work group members, and seemed generally very supportive of the proposals.
There are approximately 4,000 coastal transits of the Sanctuary each year by large vessels. About twenty percent of these are crude oil tankers; the majority of the remainder are large commercial vessels (LCVs) greater than 300 gross tons, such as container ships and bulk product carriers.
The Proposal
The group's recommended set of strategies reflects a
balance of factors combined to provide protection for the
Sanctuary, reduced risk of vessel groundings and collisions,
and efficient vessel operation, while minimizing economic
burden to industry. The recommended distances offshore
(detailed below) are based in part on an analysisof the
anticipated response time for existing rescue vessels. In
other words, if a vessel that follows the routing measures
loses power or steering capabilities, it will almost
certainly be reached by a rescue vessel before it drifts
ashore and creates a spill.
Highlights of the proposed package include the following:
- Distance from Shore: Recommended distances
offshore of Point Sur
and Pigeon Point strengthen informal patterns of current practices, and where necessary, shift vessels further offshore to reduce the level of threats to resources.
Tankers: 50 nautical miles (nm)
Barges: 25 nm
Hazmat ships: 25 nm
LCVs: 12.7 nm northbound/16 nm southbound off Pigeon Point; 15 nm northbound/20 nm southbound off Point Sur
(Note: 1 nm = 1.15 statute mile)
- Traffic Separation Schemes (TSS):
Modifications are recommended for two TSSs,
the systems which help organize vessels as they approach major ports. The "southern approach" of the San Francisco TSS would shift slightly to the west to reduce risk of groundings along the San Mateo coastline and to improve north-south alignment with the proposed Recommended Route for LCVs. Implementation of an eighteen-mile extension to the Santa Barbara Channel is also recommended to aid navigation of vessels.
- Monitoring and Reporting: Voluntary radio
call-ins by vessels within twenty-five nm of shore are
recommended to report the position of vessels at three
points: Point Arguello, Point Sur, and the existing check
in/check out of the San Francisco Vessel Traffic Service.
This reporting system would enhance abilities to respond
quickly to an accident or vessel breakdown, assist in
evaluating the effectiveness of routing measures, and
provide an opportunity to inform mariners of the
sensitivity of the Sanctuary's resources. Timely
implementation of an Automated Information System (AIS),
an electronic system that reports a vessel's position, is
also recommended.
- Rescue Vessel Network: Development of a Rescue
Vessel Network would enable response agencies to identify
and direct the nearest potential rescue vessel to the
location of a distressed vessel more quickly. This system
would include identification of tugs or other vessels
capable of rescue, and tracking of their positions
through the proposed voluntary reporting system, and when
operational,
through AIS.
- Near-miss Reporting: Timely implementation is
recommended for a national "near-miss" reporting system
which is currently being planned by the Coast Guard, the
Maritime Administration, and industry groups. This system
would provide valuable insight into dangerous conditions
before they precipitate an accident.
- Education: The overall vessel management package should include a strong education campaign for mariners to provide information on the sensitivity of Sanctuary resources, details on the new management measures, and the importance of compliance. (Please note: this is NOT a comprehensive summary of the package.)
What Happens Next
The final recommendations (taking into account public
comments), once compiled by NOAA and the Coast Guard, will
be submitted to NAVSAC (the Coast Guard's Navigation Safety
Advisory Council) in October. It is expected that they can
be submitted to the United Nations' International Maritime
Organization (IMO) at that group's next meeting, in the
spring of 1999. National implementation of some strategies
can begin later this year; international implementation
depends upon acceptance by the IMO.
Conservationists, oil and shipping industry representatives, and government officials have come together month after month to hammer out strategies that would ensure protection of the Sanctuary's resources while sustaining the economically vital operations of the shipping industry. The publication of these proposed strategies is a stellar example of how groups with diverse interests can work together - successfully - for a common goal.
Please see the Spring 1998 newsletter for background information on this topic. For further details about the work group's proposal or to obtain a written summary, please contact Holly Price at (831) 647-4247.
|
The CWG was one of the first groups to provide the new Sanctuary manager with written recommendations about the composition and structure of the Sanctuary Advisory Council (SAC). In May 1994, it was taken under the purview of the SAC as one of its working groups, and has retained its advisory role, acting as a clearinghouse for information on current and emerging resource protection issues. The group also provides advice on how to address these issues and continues to serve as a forum for collaboration among regional conservation groups. "We have pushed the Sanctuary program to be more
proactive on a number of resource protection
issues," says Saunders. These issues The group encouraged the SAC to pass a resolution with specific recommendations for vessel traffic safety within the Sanctuary. Recently, four members were chosen by NOAA and the Coast Guard to participate in an interagency panel to identify the most effective strategies for addressing that on-going threat. CWG members were also intimately involved in the process to create regulations prohibiting shark chumming in Sanctuary waters. The CWG strives to maintain links with members of the Sanctuary community and beyond. For example, it recently sponsored a forum on man-made noise in the ocean which was open to members of all working groups. The membership of the CWG organizations is one of the group's most effective means of communication with the Sanctuary and local community. "Of the four working groups, the CWG has the greatest potential for doing outreach and constituency building for resource protection," says Vicki Nichols, Executive Director of SOS. "Most of our organizations are membership-based and several have active volunteer programs. This membership base provides a conduit back into the community through which the public can be educated about - and encouraged to become more involved in - marine conservation issues," Nichols explains. CWG members' volunteer programs include the Coastal Watershed Council's Streamwalkers, SOS' Sanctuary Stewards, and CMC's BAY NET program. Individuals or organizations interested in participating in the CWG should contact Rachel Saunders, Chair, at (831) 375-4509 or Vicki Nichols, Vice-Chair, at (831) 462-5660. Meetings are always open to the public; for dates, see the calendar. Current Conservation Working Group Members: Chair and SAC Conservation
Representative: Rachel Saunders, Center for
Marine Conservation Pacific Ecosystem |
include chumming for sharks, man-made noise, and
vessel traffic. "The CWG was a catalyst to get
agencies to pull together to look at these
activities," she explains.|
|
Home | Introduction | Visitors | Education | Research | Protection | Calendar | Foundation | Search
Credits
For comments or question please refer to the Webmaster
Last modified on: June 14,
1999