<html>
Dear Listers,<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>When the
US Congress returns from recess soon, it will take up funding of NOAA's
reef and marine sanctuary programs. At the risk of getting flamed for
self-promotion, I'm going to reprint below an opinion piece I wrote on
this topic that appeared in the Miami Herald on 1 August. (It's not
self-promotion--it's sloth.) On 13 August, the Tampa [Florida] Tribune
ran their own editorial calling for full funding for NOAA. I'm including
that below, too. Please contact your representative (if American) to
register your feelings on the issue. I should think that responses by
non-American, particularly scientists, would be helpful as well. Messages
could be addressed to Olympia@snowe.senate.gov, a US Senator who is
supporting NOAA funding. Her phone number is 202-224-5344.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Osha<br>
<br>
Don’t Shortchange NOAA<br>
<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>In 1937,
Rachel Carson wrote, “Who has known the ocean? Neither you nor I. . .”
More than 60 years later, we have learned a great deal about the marine
world. Scientists have discovered deep sea vents, where bizarre tube
worms thrive on plumes of hot gasses. Taxonomists have found and
cataloged a host of previously unknown life forms, from glowing
microscopic whirl-a-gigs to species of fish that can change their sex
several times a night.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>It’s easy
to imagine Carson the marine biologist giddily cheering on these new
discoveries. One gets the queasy feeling, however, that that clear-eyed
skeptic might also point out that ignorance remains the defining
characteristic of our relationship with the ocean. Despite impressive
gains, we still know more about outer space than about the waters that
make up 99% of the planet’s biosphere, or living space.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Far worse
than our ignorance is our rampant destruction of this environment (a
process that Carson, the author of Silent Spring, knew only too well). A
burgeoning human population coupled with technological advances have
degraded the oceans, far beyond anything Carson witnessed in her
lifetime. Everywhere you look beneath the waves, you see wounds, tears in
the marine biological fabric. Each year trawling nets reduce to rubble an
area of seabed twice the size of the continental United States– the
marine equivalent of forestry’s clear-cutting. Nitrogen pours into the
ocean from farm fields and hog lots, and from sewage plants and septic
tanks, stimulating huge algae blooms that smoother coral reefs and kill
fish by the thousands, and creating huge oxygen-depleted “dead-zones.”
Over-fishing by the desperate poor, and by the greedy for the affluent,
decimate fish stocks around the world. New diseases emerge from our once
pristine waters with alarming regularity, threatening to drive some
species into the black hole of extinction.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>But if
threats to coastal waters abound, so do efforts to protect marine
habitats.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>When we
think of organizations working to preserve the oceans, the usual suspects
come to mind: Reef Relief, the Center For Marine Conservation,
Greenpeace, the Nature Conservancy, the Sierra Club. Commendable groups,
all. But the primary responsibility for safeguarding the oceans falls– as
it should– to the alphabet soup of government agencies that most people
rarely hear about, organizations such as the Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The
latter is charged with a unique responsibility in protecting coastal
waters including the most biodiverse and productive ecosystems of the
marine world: coral reefs, sometimes called “the rainforests of the
sea.”<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>The US
Senate apparently understands that a fully-funded NOAA is one of the best
investments in our nation’s aquatic future. On July 22, the Senate passed
a bill appropriating $2.5 billion for NOAA– a nearly 15% increase over
last years’ funding. In a display of bi-partisanship that was as pleasing
as it was rare, specific coral reef initiatives were advanced by
Senator’s Daniel Inouye (D-HI) and Olympia Snowe (R-ME). Florida’s
Senator Connie Mack (R) also insured that the National Coral Reef
Institute in Ft. Lauderdale would continue to receive NOAA funding, to
the tune of $1 million annually.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>The Senate
bill isn’t perfect. For example, the Clinton Administration had requested
$10 million in new funds to be spent annually on reef assessment,
monitoring and restoration. The Senate at first axed this important
measure, but, at Senator Inouye’s urging, finally allocated $6 million
for the job. And while NOAA requested $29 million to support and expand
its Marine Sanctuaries program, the Senate appropriated just $18 million
for this vitally important undertaking. (To get an idea of just how
inadequate current funding is, consider that the New England Aquarium
recently spent 50% more on an exhibit about the Stellwagen Bank, off the
coast of Massachusetts, than NOAA spent last year to manage the
Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary.)<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Still, the
Senate’s action overall is positive, representing a high watermark
(forgive the pun) for this session. And it will likely be followed by
even more “marine friendly” measures. Senator Snowe has introduced a bill
providing community-based coral conservation programs $4 million in
annual federal matching funds. She’s also backing a separate measure to
fund marine sanctuaries at a rate even higher than that requested by
NOAA. And Senator Inouye is pressing forward with his own bill,
authorizing $20 million a year earmarked for coral reef protection.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>But there
is a stinging jellyfish in the ointment.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>The US
House of Representatives seems inexplicably intent on denying NOAA the
funds it needs to do its job. The House, with the blessing of
Appropriations Chair Bill Young (R-FL), has introduced it’s own
NOAA bill, and that measure provides a whopping 25% less in funds than
the Senate version. If the House prevails, it will be a case of
penny-wise, pound-foolishness at its very worst. The consequences for
coral reefs, and for many other coastal ecosystems protected by NOAA,
would be devastating.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Perhaps
the House’s short-sightedness isn’t so baffling. Programs run by
“faceless bureaucrats” make tempting targets when budget-cutters
unsheathe their knives. But House members would do well to remember that
not all defenders of the natural world are found in activist
groups.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>Take, for
example, the marine biologist who worked for the FWS for nearly two
decades. A faceless bureaucrat she may have been, but the contributions
made by Rachel Carson are priceless–and so is the work of her
philosophical descendants at NOAA.<br>
<br>
<br>
Tampa editorial<br>
NOAA deserves serious budget help<br>
<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>The
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is one of the key
agencies charged with safekeeping the nation's ocean waters. Its role is
particularly important in Florida, virtually surrounded by the sea.<br>
NOAA helps determine the status of fisheries, measures the extent of
pollution and performs many other tasks that help maintain the health of
marine life. Of particular note, NOAA is working to rescue the ailing
Florida Keys, which have been badly damaged by water pollution and the
other effects of years of overdevelopment.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>But this
agency, which has been free of scandal and performs a useful role for
taxpayers, is under attack. A House bill would cut its budget by 10
percent, crippling its ability to do the research necessary to protect
the nation's coastal waters.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>NOAA is by
no means lavishly funded. Osha Gray Davidson, University of Iowa
professor and author of ``The Enchanted Braid: Coming to Terms with
Nature on the Coral Reef, gave an account of NOAA's plight in The Miami
Herald that pointed out ``the New England Aquarium recently spent 50
percent more on an exhibit about the Stellwagen Bank off the coast of
Massachusetts, than NOAA spent last year to manage the Stellwagen Bank
National Marine Sanctuary.''<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>The
Senate, to its credit, would adequately fund NOAA, appropriating $2.5
billion, an almost 15 percent increase. Sen. Connie Mack made sure the
National Coral Reef Institute in Fort Lauderdale would receive NOAA
funding of $1 million a year. Another provision would provide $4 million
in federal matching funds that would go toward community-based coral reef
conservation programs.<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>The House,
on the other hand, simply turned its back on the nation's coral reefs and
marine resources. Appropriations chair Bill Young of St. Petersburg has a
fine record in fighting offshore drilling for oil and other threats to
the state's coast. Surely he cannot approve of this little-noted attempt
to undermine an agency so important to marine research and resource
protection. Representatives from Florida, of all people, should
understand the value of NOAA and rally to its support.<br>
[END]<br>
<br>
<br>
<div>Osha Gray Davidson</div>
<div>Adjunct Assistant Professor</div>
<div>International Programs, University of Iowa</div>
<br>
<div>14 S. Governor St.</div>
<div>Iowa City, IA 52240</div>
<div>Phone: 319-338-4778</div>
<div><a href="http://members.home.net/oshad/books.htm" EUDORA=AUTOURL>http://members.home.net/oshad/books.htm</a></div>
<br>
</html>