Final Environmental Assessment and FONSI for the Coral Reef Conservation Grant Program

4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES

This section of the PEA presents an evaluation of the anticipated environmental impacts that could result from implementation of each of the program types (categories) described in section 2.0. Due to the variety of activities carried out under each of the programs, general types of activities, methodology and general characteristic impacts are described for each project type. The potential impacts would be applicable to the affected environment described in section 3.0. These impacts would be minor, but they may vary depending on the particular habitat-types and condition of the resources, threats, and existing management measures in place at the local project-level site. For instance, research involving the collection of a species may have no impacts in pristine areas where that species has not been exploited, while the same level of take may have minor impacts if the species had been overfished in other areas. Thus, each project needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis taking into consideration the proposed activity, other projects in the area that may result in cumulative impacts, as well as the conditions described above related to the specific site where the work will occur. A qualitative assessment of the level of significance of potential impacts is included, in terms of minor or moderate positive and/or negative short-term and long term impacts. Direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts are defined as follows:

• Direct impacts are those caused by the proposed action or no action alternative that occur at the same time and place.
• Indirect impacts are those caused or induced by the proposed action or no action alternative that occur later in time or are removed in distance from the time and location of the proposed action.
• Cumulative impacts are the impacts on the environment that result from the incremental effect of the proposed action, added to other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future actions.

When evaluating CRCGP proposals received under one of the six proposed categories, a checklist (Appendix C) is used by responsible program officers in the review of applications to ensure the potential for adverse or cumulative impacts will not occur or would be used to elevate further environmental review of a project.

4.1 General

Section 6403 (g) of the Coral Reef Conservation Act of 2000 provides a list of performance criteria used to approve coral reef grants. These criteria are an indicator of the types of impacts that are created through program implementation. From a programmatic viewpoint, achieving the performance objectives to address the serious management and health concerns over the coral reef ecosystems will result in both short- and long-term positive environmental, social, and economic impacts. The objectives of the criteria include the ability to:

• Implement coral conservation programs, which promote sustainable development and ensure effective, long-term conservation of coral reefs;
• Address the conflicts arising from the use of environments near coral reefs or from the use of corals, species associated with coral reefs, and coral products;
• Enhance compliance with laws that prohibit or regulate the taking of coral products or species associated with coral reefs or regulate the use and management of coral reef ecosystems;
• Develop sound scientific information on the condition of coral reef ecosystems or the threats to such ecosystems, including factors that cause coral disease;
• Promote and assist in implementing cooperative coral reef conservation projects that involve affected local communities, NGOs, or others in the private sector;
• Increase public knowledge and awareness of coral reef ecosystems and issues regarding their long term conservation;
• Map the location and distribution of coral reefs;
• Develop and implement techniques to monitor and assess the status and condition of coral reefs;
• Develop and implement cost-effective methods to restore degraded coral reef ecosystems; or
• Promote ecologically sound navigation and anchorages near coral reefs.

The types of measures called for in numerous conferences and initiatives over the last decade have included measures to improve coral reef resource management uses through enforcement of better laws and regulations to minimize anthropogenic impacts; education and outreach programs so that individuals and communities can make more informed decisions; better science and understanding of the complexities of the reef ecosystem environment; monitoring and assessing the state of the reefs; and conservation projects such as preventing anchor damage. The CRCGP is a complete and comprehensive program supporting the many facets of best management practices. Absence of this type of management would result in even greater deterioration of the "fragile ring of life."

By law, the CRCGP requires the use of methods and procedures necessary to preserve or sustain corals and associated species as diverse, viable, and self-perpetuating coral reef ecosystems, including:

• All activities associated with resource management, such as assessment, conservation, protection, restoration, sustainable use, and management of habitat;
• Mapping;
• Habitat monitoring;
• Assisting in the development of management strategies for MPAs and marine resources consistent with the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.) and the MSFCMA (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.);
• Law enforcement;
• Conflict resolution initiatives;
• Community outreach and education; and
• Promote safe and ecologically sound navigation.

These general types of activities result in positive environmental impacts (i.e., focusing management attention to reduce the widespread deterioration of coral reef ecosystems).

4.2 Impacts of Grant Awards and Activities Supported

The six categories of the CRCGP fund activities include field work such as monitoring, mapping and ecosystem research, management activities, enforcement, community-based conservation approaches, activities to reduce threats to coral reefs and reef resources, education and outreach, and capacity building through training, workshops, and technical assistance. The positive environmental consequences of the implementation of the CRCGP include enhanced conservation measures intended to protect fragile coral reefs and their ecosystems. Negative consequences, if any, are expected to be minimal with temporary impacts associated with the need to undertake research and studies, monitoring programs, and management techniques such as increased law enforcement to prohibit the taking of coral products.

The cumulative negative impacts associated with multiple grants that are funded within individual jurisdictions are expected to be minimal and insignificant. In some cases individual applicants receive annual funding for various projects that occur in the same location (e.g., State and Territorial Monitoring) however, these activities are non-invasive, do not involve manipulations of the environment, and only have temporary minor impacts while conducting the work (e.g., diver presence temporarily affects behavior of fishes) which disappear once the divers leave the water. In other cases, multiple projects will be funded within one jurisdiction over the life of this CRCGP, but the activities are not carried out in exactly the same location or do not involve the same organisms (e.g., one group may monitor water quality while another monitors fish and benthic communities). If any activities that involve substantial modifications of the environment (e.g., restoration) or manipulations of organisms found in these environments (e.g., removal of invasive or pest species or reintroduction of missing trophic groups), subsequent activities proposed for these same locations would be analyzed in detail to ensure that they will not affect the success of previous activities or have cumulatively negative impacts in that location.

The cumulative environmental consequences of achieving grant and individual project objectives over the life of the CRCGP will be positive with respect to dealing with anthropogenic impacts to coral on a localized scale, but may not ensure improvements on a jurisdiction-wide, regional or global scale because 1) many threats are of unknown or natural causes outside of management control; 2) most coral reef resources are in state water and implementation of initiatives and recommendations that come out of the grants are at the discretion of the local resource management agency; and 3) reefs are being impacted by multiple stressors and these projects often focus on very specific aspects of one or more of these.

The following sections include 1) discussion of the objectives and impacts of activities funded under each of the six categories; and 2) description of the major project areas and types of activities, along with an indication of the nature of impacts that would be associated with research, monitoring, mapping, and other types of activities. Many of the projects are of an administrative nature (hiring of personnel, education, plan development), while others involve substantive work within the coral reef environments such as conducting research (section 4.4). Appendix A provides examples of specific grants that were funded under each of the six categories by the CRCGP, with a description of the types of activities for each project. Appendix B provides a list of all grants awarded under the CRCGP between 2002-2004 and as well as a comprehensive list of the types of grants, the applicant, location of work and the funding amount. Table 5 describes the major project area and type of activity for activities funded under the six categories. The summary of environmental consequences of these project areas are described in Table 6. A full discussion of the CRCGP and each of the projects funded between FY2002-FY2004 are available in the publicly published document, "Progress Report - The Coral Reef Conservation Grant Program - Report to Congress" available online at: http://coralreef.noaa.gov.

4.2.1 State and Territory Coral Reef Management

The objective of the State and Territory Coral Management category is to support comprehensive programs for the conservation and management of coral reefs and associated fisheries in the jurisdictions of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI), Florida, Hawaii, Guam, CNMI, and American Samoa. The types of projects supported under this category include efforts to address threats associated with climate change, bleaching, diseases and extreme events, fishing pressure, coastal development, recreational overuse, invasive species, pollution, public awareness, national security issues and other threats. State and territory management projects would cause minor direct and indirect long-term beneficial impacts to coral reef resources. These impacts would result from new management measures and conservation initiatives and include, but are not limited, to actions designed to reduce extractive uses, mitigate erosion and point source and non-point source runoff, mitigate impacts of climate change, remove alien and invasive species, establish new zoning policies, restore degraded habitats through plantings of mangroves and seagrasses, and protect networks of marine habitats as MPAs. Some efforts may have minor indirect negative socioeconomic impacts. This could include effects on fishing activities such as the types of allowable fishing gear and the spatial and temporal scale and distribution of fishing efforts; redirection of coral reef use patterns through zoning; and modifications to coastal use and development actions.

In fiscal years 2002 and 2003, the State and Territory Coral Reef Management Grant program awarded $2,085,000, and $2,100,000, respectively, totaling $4,185,000, in grant funding to assist local managers in addressing priority management issues. In addition, in fiscal years 2002 and 2003, program Federal funds were matched by non-Federal funds of $691,524, and $578,091, respectively, totaling $1,269,615. Among the seven jurisdictions' priority issues, the need for increasing personnel took precedence, and approximately $1,452,514 was awarded to fund an average of 16 full time staff positions per year to support local jurisdictions with implementing coral reef management projects. An additional $356,800 in funding supported 18 part time or temporary positions filled as contractors, consultants, interns, and their project costs.

Other priority management issues supported by these grants in fiscal years 2002 and 2003 included enforcement, public awareness, mapping, and research. Approximately 37 grant projects implemented public awareness programs such as environmental workshops for teachers and managers, implementation of increased public awareness local action strategies, small grants for school marine science programs, and publication of educational materials. Funding for 14 projects was used to enhance compliance with laws that protect coral reefs, including support for additional enforcement staff, legal consultants, and enforcement equipment. As a result of these grant funds, state and territory managers have a greater ability to develop and implement key projects that are required to effectively protect coral reef ecosystems.

Consequently, hiring personnel for management and enforcement, conducting education awareness, etc., are activities that provide no measurable negative environmental impact and do not require any further NEPA review beyond the PEA.

4.2.2 State and Territory Coral Reef Ecosystem Monitoring

The primary objective of the State and Territory Monitoring category is to develop and implement a national monitoring network that provides information to assist in the characterization, status and trends of benthic habitats, biological community structure and water quality. Monitoring projects are managed by state and territorial resource management agencies within their respective jurisdiction with the monitoring efforts conducted through multi-organizational partnerships (local, regional, Federal, and possibly international) that build local capacity for maintaining long-term monitoring sites.

Long-term monitoring is key to understanding how coral reef ecosystems function and how they change over time in response to natural or anthropogenic forces. Monitoring provides an essential context for designing field research experiments and understanding their results. Monitoring can also play a vital role in guiding and supporting the establishment of complex or potentially controversial management strategies such as no-take ecological reserves, fishing gear restrictions, or habitat restoration, and determining their effectiveness. Monitoring programs assist resource management agencies by tracking trends in coral reef ecosystem health and identifying patterns in their condition before irreparable harm occurs.

Benthic habitat and reef fish monitoring activities are and will be conducted using non-destructive visual and photographic census techniques. All concurrent water quality measurements will be collected using passive gear (e.g., Conductivity/Temperature/ Depth meters). Minor short term impacts may be associated with in-water surveying and monitoring techniques (physical presence of divers and establishing transects see Fig. 2 and section 4.4), but when scientific methodologies and protocols are followed, those impacts are temporary and non-significant. Monitoring efforts can also have positive indirect and direct effects by providing scientific information needed to adapt management in response to changing environmental conditions. To date, no environmental impacts that would trigger the need for additional environmental assessment have been documented for surveying and mapping activities.

4.2.3 Coral Reef Ecosystem Research

The principal objectives of the Coral Reef Ecosystem Research category are to conduct research on overfishing, pollution, coral disease and bleaching, invasive species, and the impact of these stressors on coral reef ecosystems; fisheries population dynamics and ecology; effects of anthropogenic stressors on benthic invertebrates; impacts and spread of invasive species; and evaluation of management actions and strategies. These projects may involve the tagging of organisms, trapping and fishing (e.g., hook and line, trawls and gill nets) and collecting and transplanting corals (including application of fishery chemicals if necessary), placing permanent markers on the bottom, minor manipulations of the environment through introduction of missing species or removal of invasives, and other types of limited take to allow thorough study of a species or the ecosystem. These activities generally involve a relatively small number of individuals and minor short term impacts to the environment. These activities are only carried out if they will not: impact endangered species or have a significant impact on the habitat, ecosystem inhabitants, or social, cultural and environmental aspects of coral reef ecosystems. These research activities contribute to an improved understanding of ecosystem function and health, and may identify possible actions and initiatives that could be undertaken to improve the condition of the ecosystem. However, they only result in a series of recommendations, and the implementation of the recommended actions and initiatives would be undertaken by the appropriate resource management agency, if they deem it worthwhile, and this may result in a separate NEPA evaluation outside of the CRCGP. Section 4.4 describes potential research impacts in more detail.

4.2.4 General Coral Reef Conservation

The principal objectives of the General Coral Reef Conservation category are to support programs and projects to preserve, sustain and restore the condition of coral reef ecosystems, promote the wise management and sustainable use of coral reef resources, increase public knowledge and awareness of coral reef ecosystems and issues regarding their conservation, and develop sound scientific information on the condition of coral reef ecosystems and the threats to such ecosystems. Institutions of higher education, non-profit organizations, commercial organizations, local and Indian tribal governments, and Freely Associated State Government Agencies conduct these projects in consultation with state and territorial government agencies and NOAA's CRCP.

The types of activities funded by the CRCGP include monitoring and assessment of coral reef resources, research that provides information needed for management, education to user groups, training activities and other types of capacity building, socioeconomic evaluations, activities to reduce land-based sources of pollution, and efforts to mitigate environmental impacts and restore degraded reefs. The only activities in these categories that could produce some short term impacts are restoration and mitigation projects that require in-water presence. These types of projects may include environmental manipulations to restore damaged coral from breakage associated with shipgroundings or other physical impacts, marine debris removal, removal of an invasive species detrimental to the health of a natural ecosystem, such as a foreign algae, or an outbreak or invasion of a harmful predator such as the Crown of Thorns (Anthancaster spp.). These types of activities, however, are undertaken only as a managed activity that follows protocols and is approved by the various federal or state/territorial agencies that have authorities and responsibilities associated with the resources to be affected. In addition, these projects are done at a very small scale (e.g., a part of a reef) and are typically experimental in nature. The goal of these projects is to identify techniques that maximize the survival of coral reef resources and minimize environmental impacts (e.g., use of various reattachment techniques and coral fragments of different sizes) with resulting recommendations presented to resource managers for their consideration in future restoration and mitigation efforts. However, after three years experience, no environmental impacts that would trigger the need for additional environmental assessment have been documented for these activities.

4.2.5 Projects to Improve or Amend Coral Reef Fishery Management Plans

The principal objectives of the Projects to Improve or Amend Coral Reef FMPs category are to support programs and projects by the Regional FMCs to conserve and manage coral reef fisheries by: 1) reducing the adverse impacts of fishing and other extractive uses on coral reefs and associated ecosystems; and 2) incorporating conservation and sustainable management measures into existing or new Federal FMPs. There are ten types of activities that are supported under this category including:

1. Identifying, mapping and characterizing EFH, HAPC, and spawning populations: Studies that identify, map and characterize important EFH, HAPC, and spawning populations in U.S. coral reef ecosystems, assess the condition of the habitat, and determine the spatial extent of fishing induced disturbance, with emphasis on studies associated with coral reef areas that are currently, permanently, or seasonally closed to fishing or that may merit inclusion in an expanded network of no-take ecological reserves. The bulk of the work in this category occurs in federal waters within the EEZ and includes multi-beam or sidescan sonar mapping and characterization of such areas on deeper coral reefs, banks and beds.
2. Monitoring reef fish stocks: Monitoring reef fish stocks in existing no-take marine reserves and reference sites on coral reefs in the Council's jurisdiction to evaluate the effectiveness of reserves. This includes efforts to improve stock analysis of species proposed as candidates for endangered species listing, high value fisheries species, species targeted for the aquarium trade, or other indicator species.
3. Monitoring and evaluating fish stocks, fishing practices and fishing pressure within coral reef ecosystems: This includes collection of information that is needed to reduce overfishing of coral reef resources, including compilation of existing background information on currently unassessed coral reef fishery stocks, targeted assessments of such coral reef fishery stocks for which overfishing is strongly suspected, and improved means of data collection from harvesting activity for both target and non-target species including socioeconomic monitoring of fisheries and reporting and implementing observer programs.
4. Evaluating fishing practices and fishing gear and their impacts on coral reef ecosystems and resources: Studies needed to identify adverse effects of fishing and fishing gear on EFH and identify modifications and alternatives to reduce these effects.
5. Education and outreach efforts targeted towards commercial and recreational fishermen to eliminate destructive and habitat-damaging fishing practices: Studies, workshops, or consultations with fishers needed to identify and eliminate destructive and habitat-damaging fishing practices.
6. Studies to assess the adequacy of current fishing regulations: Studies, workshops, or consultations with fishers needed to assess the adequacy of current fishing regulations and the need for additional gear and anchoring restrictions to reduce habitat damage on coral reefs and other adverse impacts of fishing within the Council's jurisdiction.
7. Education and outreach efforts to recreational and commercial fishers: Enhanced education and outreach to recreational and commercial fishers specifically targeted to reduce the adverse impacts of fishing on coral reef ecosystems.
8. Studies to understand and incorporate ecosystem-scale considerations into coral reef FMPs: This includes research and development of models to improve understanding of larval pathways, trophic interactions between commercially important species and other coral reef resources and ecosystem impacts associated with fishing, and habitat impacts associated with certain types of fishing gear and practices.
9. Efforts to reduce the overexploitation of reef organisms for the aquarium trade: Studies to understand the status and trends of ornamental coral reef organisms, socioeconomic evaluations of fishermen in the ornamental coral reef trade, educational initiatives targeted at fishermen to certify them in best collection practices, recommendations on management measures to reduce the potential for overexploitation such as seasonal or spatial closures, size and bag limits, and other management measures to address harvest of reef organisms for the aquarium trade.

The types of activities carried out under this category that are related to research on fisheries may have short term minor impacts associated with collection of organisms, tagging and recapture studies, and fishery-independent monitoring. These types of research activities are discussed in more detail in the table below. The bulk of the activities involve the compilation and analysis of existing data on fisheries, including catch, effort, gear types and other fishery-dependent data, as well as education, outreach and consultations with stakeholders, which are expected to have no impacts.

The results of the projects could have longer-term positive environmental benefits, as the information may contribute to improved FMPs, reduction of fishing pressure on certain vulnerable species or in certain areas, and closure of sites to fishing through implementation of MPAs. While these actions may have short term negative socioeconomic implications (e.g., restricting where fishing can occur, lost harvest opportunities, increases in harvest cost), over the long term these actions would have positive net economic benefits, because they would rebuild depleted fisheries species and conserve biodiversity. A 2001 study found that within five years, a network of five small reserves in St Lucia increased adjacent catches of artisanal fishers by 46-90% (depending on the type of gear used). There was no change in the amount of fishing effort, number of fishermen or number of traps set per fisher. The reserves protected coral reef habitats and relatively sedentary fish species, with spillover of fish stocks into adjacent areas that could be fished. (Roberts, et. al., 2001) However, it is not yet fully understood what the biological benefits would be of spillover from MPAs, and how much the benefits outweigh the costs.

The results of the activities funded through these grants are presented to the Councils and NMFS for consideration in future Council efforts to improve or amend FMPs. They could include recommendations for new area closures, seasonal fishing restrictions, or possible designation of EFH or HAPC. However, incorporation of these recommendations into future FMPs would trigger further NEPA review and/or an environmental assessment by the FMC and subsequent review by NMFS Office of Sustainable Fisheries prior to the development of or amendment to an FMP.

4.2.6 International Coral Reef Conservation

The international grants are usually awarded to universities and NGOs such as The Nature Conservancy, World Wildlife Fund, The Ocean Conservancy, and others as they often are involved with foreign governments in support of sensitive environmental areas. No negative environmental impacts are associated with these types of activities and are activities that normally do not require NEPA review. However, as it is NOAA’s policy to consider environmental impacts in foreign territories, all grants for work in non-U.S. sites will continue to be reviewed on an individual basis to ensure there is no U.S. sponsorship of activities in foreign waters that may result in negative environmental impacts.

International activities supported under this category are likely to have no significant impacts because they primarily involve capacity building, monitoring the status of management measures to determine whether they are working (e.g., monitoring the effectiveness of MPAs), and studies to identify possible sites needing additional protection. The only activities that may have short term impacts are efforts to reduce land-based sources of pollution and efforts that support development of no-take MPAs. Pollution mitigation efforts could include activities to reduce run-off from watersheds affecting coral reefs; these actions may require more environmentally conscious development plans. Protected area projects may include benthic habitat and reef fish monitoring activities that use non-destructive visual and photographic census techniques. Minor short term impacts may be associated with in-water surveying and monitoring techniques (physical presence of divers, tagging of organisms, establishing transects and permanent markers, side scan sonar, passive autonomous hydrophones, and acoustic telemetry), but when scientific methodologies and protocols are followed, these impacts are temporary and insignificant. In addition, minor socioeconomic impacts to fishermen may result by prohibiting fishing activities in no-take MPAs. However over the long term, these restrictions are likely to be beneficial, as MPAs will protect fish populations, allowing them to reach a larger size and biomass, thus producing more offspring that will ultimately spill over into areas where fishing can still occur. Over the long term, activities to address land-based sources of pollution may have positive environmental benefits associated with the implementation of the recommendations that come out of these projects.

4.3 Types of Projects Awarded Funding

Another way to look at the CRCGP grants is to categorize them as types of funded projects and the level of impacts each may generate in a table format (see Tables 5 and 6). Appendix A provides examples of the specific types of projects funded under the six categories of the CRCGP.

4.4 Research Activities

Scientific research conducted within coral reef ecosystems may involve activities that have direct short-term impacts with indirect long-term beneficial impacts. Direct short-term impacts to coral reef ecosystems include the following activities: collecting, capturing, trapping, tagging, human diver observations using transects, observing and collecting organisms using remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) or submersibles, anesthetizing with chemicals, and sometimes the necessity to kill and dissect a species for stomach content, toxin levels, etc. To ensure that the impacts of research activities are minimal, researchers must take precautions that species other than the target species to be studied are not adversely affected and that they use the least invasive methods possible. To assess population dynamics, life history characteristics including growth rates and reproduction, and diet, some types of research include the take of fisheries in areas where species are captured for subsistence or commercial purposes. Non-fishery species (e.g., corals) may also be collected for laboratory studies or field studies including transplantation from one area to another as a component of a restoration project. Research activities may also require permanently marking study sites with stakes, tagging and marking individual corals for long-term observations, capture and tagging of mobile fishes and invertebrates to characterize growth, reproductive status and movement.

Additionally, some activities requiring specialized equipment may have minimal-to-no impacts on the marine environment. This equipment includes, acoustical transmitters and receivers used to track the movement of target species (such as movement into or out of protected areas), and multi-beam and side-scan sonar equipment used for bathymetry and imagery maps. This equipment has been demonstrated to emit a very high frequency, low power signal with a small duty cycle, with short pings that are widely separated. Based on this information, a determination has been made by NOAA Fisheries Office of Protected Resources that such instruments are above the hearing frequency of marine mammals, and thus have no significant impact on marine mammals or other protected species.

All of these activities are described in greater detail below. Prior to recommending a research project for funding, the specific activities would be closely evaluated to:
1) assess potential impacts and ensure that any impacts are of a minor or insignificant nature; 2) determine if they comply with NEPA requirements and are covered in this PEA; and 3) ensure they address other environmental and administrative review requirements and have undergone a review by other line offices as appropriate.

4.4.1 Mapping

Shallow coral reefs in clear water are often surveyed using air or satellite based remote sensing. Deeper reef environments are characterized and mapped using a multibeam bathymetry and backscatter system and/or towed side-scan sonar. Multi beam and side-scan sonar are attached to the research vessel and do not contact the benthos or any of the attached organisms. Ship-based multibeam echosounders collect bathymetry and acoustic imagery in depths of 0 meters to 3000 meters. The echosounder creates a very high frequency, low power signal with a small duty cycle, in that each ping is very short and individual pings are widely separated. This results in a sum total of a very low amount of energy at a very high pitch, which has been determined to be above the hearing frequency of marine mammals and thus will have no impact on protected species. This activity does not involve any diving or direct contact with the marine environment, and will have no short term or cumulative impacts.

4.4.2 Monitoring Techniques

Monitoring of water quality involves the collection of seawater samples (1-100s ml) from various depths and locations (e.g., along a transect extending from shore to the outside of the reef), multiple times per year. Samples are analyzed in the lab to characterize nutrients, sediments and pollutants. Sediment traps are often deployed on and around coral reefs near the substrate and various distances above the substrate.

Monitoring of fish, invertebrates and algae includes rapid ecological assessments and more detailed evaluations, depending on the particular protocol used. Monitoring may be conducted by divers towed behind a research vessel, towed or tethered recording equipment (e.g., video cameras, ROV's, still cameras) operated from the vessel, or SCUBA divers and snorkelers. In water techniques (e.g., diver and snorkeler surveys) for motile organisms can include stationary point counts, roving surveys and belt transect surveys. For the first two approaches, the diver hovers above the reef or swims along a predefined path and records the selected species on underwater data sheet; there is no contact made with the reef, benthic substrates or coral reef organisms. The third approach involves the deployment of fiberglass transects tapes either prior to conducting the survey, or while swimming along the selected path, with the tape used solely as a guide to determine the area of examination. The tape causes minimal impacts (e.g., corals will retract their tentacles) and will not injure animals because it is neutrally buoyant.

Monitoring of benthic communities can also be conducted using transect tapes, as well as quadrats and chains. In general, these surveys involve deployment of the transect in a line parallel to or perpendicular to depth gradients, and the organisms of interest are examined in a belt (a predetermined width on either side of the line), directly under the tape, or at certain points along the tape. Quadrats (PVC or hollow aluminum squares of various sizes that may be subdivided into smaller areas by a grid) are laid haphazardly, randomly, or at certain points along a transect, and the organisms are assessed within the quadrat. Chains are generally brass or stainless steel, with very small links (e.g., a few mm to cm width). These are extended along the bottom like a transect tape, but unlike the transect, the chain follows the contour of the reef and the benthic organisms. Of all survey approaches, chains can potentially have the greatest impacts because they may become entangled in branching coral and the shifting of the chain under surge conditions may abrade coral tissue. However, most researchers use small light chains that are carefully deployed and removed from the reef to avoid injury and entanglement.

Monitoring efforts can include random surveys, or repeat examination of the same area. For repeat surveys, researchers often mark the bottom with rebar stakes or permanently affix quadrats to the reef. The rebar and quadrats are typically attached in hard ground, rubble or sediment areas in locations where they will not injure or damage benthic invertebrates. Monitoring involves visual assessments as well as photographic and video documentation.

Prior to approving a monitoring project, activities will be reviewed to ensure that they use approaches that are generally accepted by the coral reef community, they are conducted such that the potential impacts are minimized, and only involve use of materials (e.g., chain transects that are small and light) that will not result in significant environmental impacts.

4.4.3 Tagging

Fish tagging - Fish are captured with fish traps, hook and line (barbless hooks) or surround and barrier nets, with efforts taken to minimize deployment time and minimize barotraumas (e.g., release of gas trapped in swim bladder due to pressure changes). In general, traps are set for a few hours to a maximum of 24-48 hours to prevent fish from starving or preying upon each other, and nets are deployed for a few hours to avoid entanglement by other non-target species. The captured fish are measured and tagged with minimal exposure to air, and released after resuscitation, generally within a few minutes to avoid post-collection mortality (or they may be held in pens up to 60 minutes to allow for recovery and to examine potential negative impacts associated with tagging). Some mortality may occur, but this varies with species, method of capture, and the life stage (e.g., larval fish exhibit higher rates of mortality), and is typically less than one percent when the fish are properly handled, revived before release, and released within as short a period of time as possible.

Typical tags include: coded wire tags (e.g., external spaghetti tags), elastomer T-bar anchor tags, 8.0 cm serially numbered plastic (nylon) dart identification tags, visible implanted fluorescent elastomer (VIFE) tags, and acoustic transmitters. Coded wire tags are small implants with relatively low levels of biological effect, but are difficult to use for the individual identification in the water, and typically rely on returns from fishermen. VIFE tags are injected between the rays of the caudal fin, similar to a tattoo. Each is comprised of 4 separate lines in differing colors that can be read underwater using a UV light source. These tags are reported to have no impact on the fish.

Projects involving underwater acoustic telemetry equipment to track fish movement patterns involve the use of transmitters that are of a small size for implantation with no effect on the fish; a relatively long battery life; an adequate detection range; and a unique signal to allow differentiation of individuals. One of the most common approaches involves fitting of fishes with internal coded acoustic tags (e.g., V8Sc or V16 tags that are 8-25 mm in size and have a battery life of 2-24 months; one supplier is Vemco, Halifax, Nova Scotia). Tags are inserted into a small incision in the abdominal wall, which is closed using a surgical stapler; fish are bathed in aerated MS-222 (an anesthetic solution to prevent stress) during the surgery. Laboratory studies suggest that acoustic transmitters placed in the body cavity do not to affect the growth and behavior of tagged fish. These transmitters transmit a train of 6 pings (pulses) per cycle at a frequency of 69kHz. The acoustic signal undergoes rapid loss due to absorption properties of the water, requiring the fish to be within 10-20 meters of the receiver to pick up the signal. Because of the low amount of energy emitted by these transmitters, this is not likely to affect any marine mammals or other protected species. Acoustic receivers are placed on the sea floor bottom and suspended 1-2 m above the ocean floor in areas where they will not affect benthic invertebrates or other habitat features, and are removed at the end of the experiment.

Shark Tags - The two principal tags that are in use are a fin tag (Jumbo Rototag) and a dart tag ("M" tag). The rototag is a two-piece, plastic cattle ear type tag, which is inserted through the first dorsal fin using seawater resistant nylon cable tie. NMFS biologists primarily used these tags on small sharks during the first few years of the CSTP. As the Program expanded to include thousands of volunteer fishermen, the dart tag was developed to be easily and safely applied to sharks in the water. The "M" tag is composed of a stainless steel dart head, monofilament line, and a plexiglass capsule containing a vinyl plastic legend with return instructions printed in English, Spanish, French, Japanese and Norwegian. These dart tags, in use since 1965, are implanted in the back musculature near the base of the first dorsal fin. More recently, a Hallprint tag has been used on a limited basis for use on small sharks in the nursery areas.

In addition to various internal and external tags, researchers will frequently chemically mark the otoliths of fishes with inorganic fluorescent substances such as oxytetracycline (oxytetracycline hydrochloride at 75 mg/kg fish body weight), tetracycline, alizarin, and clcein fluorescent green for growth and recapture studies. Oxytetracycline (OTC) belongs to a group of antibiotics used chiefly in treating infections caused by streptococci, staphylococci, Gram-negative bacilli, rickettsiae, and certain protozoans and viruses, and is now the preferred chemical because of its high retention in bony structures. OTC is injected into the coelomic cavity or the fish are bathed in an OTC solution. The use of OTC has been shown to have no effects on the vulnerability of juveniles to predation. Mortality to tagged fish is minimal when used at low concentration like that described above, and the pH is similar to seawater. While no significant mortality has been detected when OTC is used for mass markings (of 1000s of fish), smaller (larval) fishes do experience higher rates of mortality than juveniles and adults. Other chemicals used to tag otoliths, including tetracycline, are associated with higher rates of mortality, and their use in a CRCGP project would not be approved unless the applicant demonstrates that they have conducted previous work to verify that the proposed method is effective and safe, and has minimal impacts on the target species and the environment.

4.4.4 Fishery Chemicals

Quinaldine is a colorless liquid of a slightly pungent odor, first obtained as a condensation product of aldehyde and aniline. Quinaldine is used in manufacturing oil soluble dyes, food colorants, pharmaceuticals pH and as an antimalarial compound; it is also routinely used to anesthetize marine vertebrate fishes because it: 1) causes partial or complete loss of sensory awareness; and 2) ability to feel pain and ability to carry out muscle movements, thereby facilitating their capture. Quinaldine has been reported to be an irritant to the gills, and may induce hyperactivity in fishes, but tissue concentrations decrease to undetectable levels within 24 hours (Bowser, 2001).

Quinaldine is used, as an alternative to suction devices, because juveniles are highly cryptic, water is often turbid in sample locations, and adult fishes retreat to crevices within the reef, making it difficult to detect the fish using visual censuses or capture these fishes using nets. It is also preferred over other chemicals, due to dispersal characteristics and its effectiveness in high current environments typical of the sampling sites. Quinaldine sulfate is readily soluble in water and is rapidly diluted by water circulation. Because the duration of the use of quinaldine is short (typically a single application or weekly to monthly applications over six months within small areas), the concentration is low (typically a 10 percent solution is used) and application occurs in high flow environments, the chemical will be rapidly diluted and dispersed and thus will have no long term or cumulative impacts. Quinaldine has been found to be harmless to invertebrates at typical concentrations (10 percent) used for fishery research. In one funded project, a one year pilot study involving several hundred applications of quinaldine was tested to identify potential adverse impacts, and none were observed.

MS-222 (tricaine methanesulfonate) is intended for the temporary immobilization of fish, amphibians, and other aquatic, cold-blooded animals and is generally used at a concentration of 0.1g/l. It has long been recognized as a valuable tool for the proper handling of these animals during manual spawning (fish stripping), weighing, measuring, marking, surgical operations, transport, photography, and research. It is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for aquaculture, but it cannot be used for fish destined for human consumption until 21 days after treatment. There have been no reported adverse impacts on the environment.

Clove Oil is a mixture of eugenol, isoeugenol and methyleugenol that has been affirmed as "Generally Recognized as Safe" for addition to foods (21 CFR 184.1257). Isoeugenol and eugenol are also used as flavoring substances in human and animal feed and in dental fillings. The FDA does not currently approve this compound for use as a fish anesthetic and its effects on fish physiology, immune response, or olfactory ability are unknown. It has been shown to be an effective anaesthetic in field trials, although the required dose is highly dependent on the weight of the fish and recovery time was dependent on dose, not fish size. Because the impacts of clove oil are largely unknown, we would request that the applicant conduct a small pilot study to evaluate potential impacts of this anesthetic at different concentrations within the proposed area of work prior to the approval of a project using clove oil.

4.4.5 Collection of Coral Reef Species

Limited sampling of stony corals and other benthic invertebrates may be undertaken for laboratory analysis, coral culturing efforts, transplantation, and to evaluate historical physical and environmental parameters. This includes removal of cores from large massive corals, removal of individual branches, removal of selected portions of a colony, such as an area affected by disease, or the collection of an entire colony or organism.

Large cores (e.g., 10-15 cm diameter X 0.5- 5 m length) are removed from large massive colonies and also from reef environments to assess rates and patterns of reef accretion, the composition or nature of fossil assemblages, coral growth for species with annual banding patterns, and a long term record correlating environmental change with fossil records. Coring requires use of an underwater hydraulic drill, pumps and coring equipment. One standard practice to minimize potential environmental impacts (and to reduce the potential for colony mortality) involves the filling of holes left by coring with Portland cement or clay. Any CRCGP projects that involve coring of corals will not be approved unless the applicant has included methodology for filling the cores that meets these requirements.

Branches or portions of colonies (e.g., fragments, small cores) are collected for disease and health research (e.g., genetic studies, physiology and growth studies, infection experiments, histology) and for use in coral nurseries. For laboratory studies, it has been determined that small cores do not need to be more than 3 cm in diameter (and less, depending on the experiment), with up to 10 cores removed from individual colonies (e.g., 5 from the diseased location and 5 from a remote location) and portions of branches representing no more than 20 percent of the colony need to be collected. Previous studies have shown that corals are able to recover from this level of collection. No CRCGP project proposing the collection of corals for use in laboratory studies would be approved if it represents a larger portion of the colony unless the applicant demonstrates that this will not negatively impact the survival of the coral. Projects that propose to collect corals for use in coral nurseries and coral restoration projects will not be approved unless:

1. the applicant has documented a need for these efforts; and
2. they have identified a location to collect the corals and the volume of coral from this site (e.g., number of branches or individual colonies) that can be removed without having significant negative impacts on the coral population in that area. In general, preference will be given for these type of activities when they include the collection of “fragments of opportunity” which include unattached coral fragments that were generated by a storm or ship grounding and which are likely to die if left alone (e.g., corals that accumulate in sand channels).

Limited collection of fish and motile invertebrates are undertaken to characterize life history stage, fecundity, growth rates, and diet. This includes collection of fishes and invertebrates using hook and line, traps or nets that are measured, tagged and released as well as organisms that may be killed in the process of the research.

Projects involving the collection of whole organisms or parts of colonial organisms will be approved only if the applicant demonstrates that the numbers of individuals are:
1) reasonable and low enough such that they will have no significant impacts on the population of that species; 2) are taken using non-destructive techniques without damaging the environment or causing mortality to non-target species; and 3) do not include species that have undergone a substantial population decline and additional take will negatively affect the persistence of that population. Proposals involving the collection of species protected through other environmental mandates (e.g., threatened or endangered species) will not be approved until the consultation process with the appropriate line office (e.g., Office of Protected Resources for endangered and threatened species) has been completed and that office has determined that the take is allowable and not detrimental. Furthermore, no collection will be allowed unless the applicant has obtained all appropriate permits from the resource management agency responsible for managing that resource (e.g., state or territorial government, NMS, etc.).

4.5 Other Types of Projects

4.5.1 Mooring Buoy Installation

Recreational moorings: A variety of mooring systems are commonly used as a means to lessen the harmful effect of anchors on coral reefs and as an aid to coral ecosystem conservation. There are two basic types of mooring anchors - embedment anchors and weighted anchors. Embedment anchors are either embedded into the hard sea floor or are embedded into soft substrate and held in place by the weight of the sand or rubble. These moorings are installed either by drilling and cementing an anchor pin into hard bedrock or by embedding specially designed metal embedment anchors into soft substrates (Manta Ray anchors and Helix anchors are the most commonly used types). Weighted anchors consist of a mooring line that is attacked to a heavy object, such as a cement block or heavy metal plate, which sits on the sea floor. CRCGP projects proposing the use of weighted anchors in areas with coral reefs or seagrass beds will not be approved due to the potential for the weights to drag during storm events and damage large areas of coral or seagrasses.

The installation of embedment anchors requires use of an underwater hydraulic drill and pumps, a hydraulic torque motor for setting helix anchors, a hydraulic ram for setting Manta Ray anchors, and cement for setting an eyebolt pin anchor. Mooring downlines consist of a rope, line or metal chain. Although metal chains are stronger than a rope downline, chain can do significant damage to reef areas and will only be approved in areas where potential damage to reefs is not an issue. Standard practices for the selection and installation of mooring buoys are well documented by groups such as the Coral Reef Alliance, PADI Project AWARE, and the FKNMS CRCGP mooring buoy projects will not be approved unless an accepted methodology is followed.

Storm moorings: Storm moorings in the form of designated mooring fields are used to secure watercraft during turbulent weather. Mooring fields consist of open link mooring chain laid out in parallel rows and secured to the seabed with hydraulically installed helical embedment anchors. Installation of embedment anchors uses the same methodology as recreational moorings. Since the mooring chains can do significant damage to reef areas, storm moorings will only be approved in areas where potential damage to reefs is not an issue. Individual mooring lines are attached to the ground chain between the installed helical embedment anchors thereby spreading the load between the anchors. Marker buoys delineate where fore and aft secure shackle attachment points are connected to the ground chains for each boat to attach its individual down lines. Mooring fields are designed to allow sufficient room between boats and clear passageways for boats transiting each area.

Marker buoys: Marker buoys are used to designate particular areas of use/nonuse by recreational boats and jet skis, swimming, diving and snorkeling, to demarcate boundaries of preservation areas, and zones in protected areas. Buoys consist of a floating buoy or cylindrical floating pipe that can carry an informational message and are secured in a fashion similar to that used for mooring buoys. Where possible, marker buoys are generally the Helix or weighted anchor type and are placed in sand to avoid the expense and trouble of drilling bedrock.

4.5.2 Signage

Informational and educational signs are placed in strategic locations to alert and educate the public of important conservation and preservation messages. Signs are placed near streams, in coastal areas or in shallow waters at sites determined to be highly visible by the public and in areas where impact to the surrounding environment is determined to be nonexistent or negligible. Signboards are firmly fastened to a metal post or wood pole which is secured in concrete in the ground or driven with a hammer into the soft bottom substrate.

4.6 Cumulative Impacts

The CEQ defines cumulative effects as, “the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions,” (CEQ, 1997a). Therefore, analyzing cumulative effects is more challenging, primarily because of the difficulty of defining the geographic (spatial) and time (temporal) boundaries of such analyses. The spatial boundaries of the cumulative effects analysis in this PEA are coral reef ecosystems of the United States. The temporal boundaries of the cumulative effects analysis shall be three years into the past and future (2000 to 2008) because the most recent projects are most relevant and the future of program funding can fluctuate.

The impacts caused by the proposed action are, in general, short-term minor impacts related to implementation of specific projects, which then lead to longer-term minor to moderate beneficial impacts on the community, resources, and coral reef ecosystems of the United States. This is consistent with past projects funded by the CRCP. For any project proposed through the CRCP that involves in-water activities, such as monitoring, research and restoration, the Federal Program Officer will evaluate the number and type of other projects that have occurred in the same location and whether the cumulative negative impacts associated the proposed activity, as a result of previous and ongoing projects, are likely to be significant. If a project is identified that could contribute to significant cumulative impacts, the Program Officer will work with the PI of the project, and other federal agencies or offices to conduct additional NEPA analysis prior to approval of that project. If, after this review, the project is found to have the potential to cause cumulative impacts and it is a priority of the program, the Program Officer will work with the applicant to modify the project such that these impacts are minimized to the extent possible.

4.7 Mitigation Measures

For any activities that have potential environmental impacts on coral reefs, each project would be carefully reviewed to ensure that appropriate emphasis has been placed on activities to mitigate impacts. Examples of the types of mitigation that would be required are illustrated below:

Projects involving the sampling of portions of colonies through the removal of one or more cores will only be approved if the researcher has made provisions to fill the core hole with clay or epoxy.

Projects involving the transplantation of corals from a healthy site to a degraded area will only be approved if the amount of coral removed is minimal, based on best practices that have been recommended by the international community (e.g., no more than 20 percent of a colony is removed; colonies are removed from competitive interactions where they are likely to die or be overgrown instead of the removal of isolated colonies and collection follows other guidelines summarized in Bruckner, 2003)

Restoration projects involving transplantation of corals or other organisms include: 1) only transplantation of those species that were previously found in the area; 2) are of a similar genetic diversity; 3) are from the localized area and appear healthy to avoid potential introduction of pathogens or parasites (e.g., corals are not transplanted from Puerto Rico to Florida); and 4) are undertaken only if the threat responsible for the decline of the corals has been mitigated in the area where the corals will be transplanted.

• Restoration projects include a scientific hypothesis, experimental design and follow-up monitoring, including monitoring of the control sites where corals were collected from, to ensure the project does not have significant cumulative impacts, and to ensure that lessons learned from the project can be applied to future efforts thereby mitigating their potential for causing significant impacts.
• Projects involving the use of chemicals include a pilot study or evidence from previous research to ensure that the chemical has minimal impact on the target species, associated species or habitat.
• SCUBA divers that will be involved in in-water research and monitoring have proper training in diving, and are capable of exhibiting responsible dive practices (e.g., proper buoyancy) such that they do not injure organisms or cause unnecessary habitat impacts.
• Projects involving implementation of management measures that may have negative socioeconomic implications (e.g., activities that affect the livelihood of user groups), efforts are included to educate the user groups in the need for these measures and assist user groups in identifying alternatives they could pursue to minimize economic burdens.
• Projects involving the use of traps, nets, trawls or other types of fishing gear used to sample fish populations must include measures to ensure that these gear types are not placed or used in locations where they will damage habitats.
  

Return to Table of Contents.

To obtain Acrobat Reader Click: