| "We knew it was a massive task, and we just took it one step at a time." | |
| David Wiley, Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary |
|
When researchers at Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary first suggested that a slight shift in Boston's shipping lanes might better protect feeding whales, more than a few people told them it couldn't be done. This was because any change to official shipping lanes that are used for international commerce must receive approval from the U.S. government and the International Maritime Organization (IMO), a part of the United Nations.
"The key is not to allow people to tell you that you can't do it," says David Wiley, research coordinator at Stellwagen Bank. "We knew it was a massive task, and we just took it one step at a time."
On July 1, a minor northward shift in the Boston shipping lanes went into effect that should significantly reduce the threat of whale–ship collisions in the sanctuary, while having only nominal impact on the shipping industry.
The success of the multiagency effort to change the shipping lanes—known as a traffic separation scheme—was due in part to the extensive whale research conducted by scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Stellwagen Bank Sanctuary and National Marine Fisheries Service.
"It's really important to have data that you can sell all the way through this process," says Richard Merrick, chief of the Northeast Fisheries Science Center's Protected Species Branch. "The data is going to receive intense scrutiny, so the more data you have, the better off you are."
Collision Course
Collisions with ships are a major problem for several species of whales, notes Greg Silber, coordinator for recovery activities for endangered large whale species for NOAA Fisheries.
"Ten or fifteen years ago, I didn't think it was a problem for whales to share the ocean with vessels," says Silber. "I thought that because whales were so acoustically aware, and as a fairly agile marine species, they could avoid large ships. In the last five to eight years, it has become clear that shipping traffic is a major threat to a number of endangered species, including North Atlantic right whales," whose population has dwindled to about 350.
With focused governmental efforts underway to reduce threats to right whales, researchers are looking closely at related data.
"When we looked at where ship strikes were occurring along the eastern U.S., a lot were occurring in or around the sanctuary," says Wiley. "Being a hot spot for where ships hit endangered whales is not the best thing for a national marine sanctuary to be known for."
Big Picture
In 2001, sanctuary researchers began analyzing 20 years' of whale sightings from various sources to get a long-term picture of where whales are typically concentrated within the sanctuary.
"When the maps were drawn, the data showed that the Boston traffic separation scheme, which had been in effect since 1973, passed right through an area in the sanctuary with a high abundance of humpback, fin, minke, and northern right whales," says Wiley.
The data also revealed a gap in the sanctuary where whale sightings were not as dense.
Further analysis revealed ecological reasons for the sightings gap, Wiley explains. The fish that humpback and fin whales eat prefer sandy sediments, such as those found in the areas with historically high whale sightings. The sediments in the area with fewer sightings have much less sand.
Currents also push small planktonic crustaceans—the favored food of right whales—into the area where the shipping lanes were located.
"We realized," Wiley says, "that if that gap was real, we could move the shipping lanes and achieve substantial risk reduction."
Analysis of the Analysis
NOAA Fisheries personnel were "enthusiastic supporters" of the idea to move the shipping lanes, Wiley says, but they knew the road to success meant selling the idea to the different government agencies that would be involved in a review, including the U.S. Coast Guard, Department of the Interior, and U.S. Navy, as well as the shipping community and the IMO.
Making sure the data were accurate was imperative to the process.
Merrick and NOAA Fisheries researchers did a separate analysis using different databases than those used by the sanctuary. Their findings backed the sanctuary's work.
All Aboard
To ensure that the industry would be on board, Wiley took his analysis to the shipping community.
"I spent six months working with those guys. They would have questions, and I would go back and rework the data to find out the answers. We wanted them on board."
When presented with scenarios of how the traffic separation scheme could be changed, "they all came in pretty close agreement that the best track was the one proposed by the sanctuary and National Marine Fisheries Service," says Wiley.
This proposal added only a few minutes to vessel transit times but drastically reduced the potential of a whale strike—81 percent for all whales and 58 percent for right whales.
Translating Science to Policy
The U.S. reviewing agencies provided their support, and NOAA worked with the Coast Guard to develop the U.S. government note that proposed the shift and asked for IMO's approval.
"This process is not difficult, but it is very time-consuming," says George H. Detweiler, Coast Guard marine transportation specialist.
Lindy Johnson, an attorney advisor for the General Counsel for International Law in the NOAA General Counsel's office, helped shepherd the proposal through the IMO process and made the presentation at an IMO meeting in November 2006, where it won overwhelming support.
Six months later, the new route was implemented, with NOAA and the Coast Guard providing notice to mariners and updating nautical charts.
Environmental Needs
"I absolutely wouldn't have gone through this if I wasn't totally sure it would be worth it," Wiley says.
If other coastal resource managers are struggling with environmental issues that may involve the international shipping community, Johnson advises them to "call me."
"There are ways to deal with these things," she says. "Involve us early so we know what questions to ask, and we can help you understand and get through the process."
For more information, go to www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/shipstrike/. You may also contact David Wiley at (781) 545-8026, ext. 211, or David.Wiley@noaa.gov. Greg Silber can be reached at (301) 713-2322, ext. 152, or Greg.Silber@noaa.gov, Richard Merrick at (508) 495-2291, or Richard.Merrick@noaa.gov, and Lindy Johnson at (202) 482-5887, or Lindy.S.Johnson@noaa.gov.
