NEW YORK -- Environmental groups across the U.S. are asking Congress for money in the next infrastructure package to curb the negative effects of climate change on coastal states. The $10 billion in funding would benefit more than three-dozen coastal states, including New York.
Jean Flemma, director of the Ocean Defense Initiative and co-founder of the Urban Ocean Lab, said a study completed after Hurricane Sandy showed the benefits of coastal wetlands in the Northeast.
"And that analysis showed that coastal wetlands that did exist saved the communities more than $600 million in damages that would have otherwise occurred if those wetlands were not there to help buffer the impact of the storm," Flemma explained.
Superstorm Sandy caused $50 billion in damage, and significant erosion to natural infrastructure, wetland habitats and beaches down the Eastern seaboard. In the next 14 years, it's projected that New York sea levels will rise six inches and the coast will see even more destructive hurricanes.
Apurva Iyengar, youth leadership council member for EarthEcho International, debunked the notion that restoration is about improving coastal appearance.
"It's helping these communities deal with the impacts of the climate crisis better, and we know these impacts are already happening," Iyengar asserted. "Storms have already been getting much, much stronger and more devastating in the last 10 years."
New York City, Suffolk County and Nassau County are also planning solutions for sea-level rise, such as seawalls, raising the roads and fixing drainage; projects that amount to over $4 billion.
Iyengar also pointed to Hurricane Sandy as a reason for more federal investment in resilience efforts.
"As a country, we'll be able to protect those people from having to experience that again, and from being really at the mercy of the climate crisis and the storms that it creates," Iyengar contended.
A 2017 analysis by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration found coastal-restoration projects funded by stimulus money would also benefit the economy, creating around 15 jobs for every million dollars of investment.
get more stories like this via email
Anglers along the Atlantic coast want stricter regulations to help improve stocks of Atlantic herring, a forage fish vital to a healthy ocean ecosystem.
The population was once depleted from decades of overfishing and has struggled to recover, affecting the health of larger, prized fish up the food chain.
Rich Hittinger, first vice president of the Rhode Island Saltwater Anglers Association, said it hurts local fishermen and the small coastal businesses that support them.
"We see the striped bass and the other fish not showing up in an area," Hittinger observed. "Because the forage fish aren't there."
Anglers have asked the New England Fishery Management Council to reestablish a 12-mile offshore buffer zone for large herring trawlers. Nearly all respondents to a recent public comment period backed further actions to protect the Atlantic herring and other forage fish.
A recent assessment of Atlantic herring stock showed little progress has been made in rebuilding the population. Despite increased management, federal regulators say the likelihood of meeting stock targets for next year is less than 1%.
Jaclyn Higgins, forage fish program manager for the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, said she is concerned the science driving harvest restrictions of forage fish has not caught up with what is happening in the ocean.
"We really want to make sure that we use all of the information that we have to move this ecosystem-based management framework forward," Higgins urged. "Improve the models, improve what we have, and not stay stagnant with the status quo."
Higgins noted the Atlantic herring stock currently sits at just 26% of its biomass target. She is hopeful more data collection and research funding will lead to regionally specific and precautionary measures to better protect fisheries and the communities they serve.
Disclosure: The Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Endangered Species and Wildlife, Environment, and Public Lands/Wilderness. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
Marine biologists conducting deep dives near five California islands are collecting data they hope will strengthen the case for ending gillnet fishing within a three-mile radius. The Channel Islands often are called the "Galapagos of North America" - due to their diverse ecosystem.
Caitlynn Birch, a marine scientist with the group Oceana, is part of a dive team collecting environmental DNA water samples and said they're analyzed in a lab to detect virtually all the animals and plants there, through the "footprint" they leave behind in the water column.
"This is important because the Channel Islands is an extremely biodiverse region, due to the topography of the sea floor, due to the oceanographic currents - and so, it creates a really unique habitat for many animals," she explained.
Fisherman use invisible gillnets along the seafloor to catch profitable halibut and white sea bass. But whales, sea lions and sharks can also be trapped. The method is banned off the coasts of Central and Northern California, but still used in federal waters, offshore banks, and around the Channel Islands. A bill before California lawmakers would end those exemptions.
About 30 fishermen still have active set gillnet permits in Southern California, but the state has stopped issuing new permits. Those who fish the waters say it would threaten their livelihoods, while Birch believes it would help protect critical habitat for vulnerable and recovering animals.
"Each island is so diverse and different from one another - different rocky substates, and different animal and plant life on the physical islands. And then, it's interesting to see how that's correlated below and what sorts of different species and assemblages that we're seeing at each of the islands," Birch continued.
This month, divers have collected samples on Santa Barbara, Anacapa, Santa Cruz and Santa Rosa islands. The waters there provide feeding areas and migratory routes for large whales - including endangered humpback whales - nurseries for great white shark pups, breeding and foraging habitat for California sea lions and giant seabass, cold-water corals, and giant kelp forests.
get more stories like this via email
Critics of a conservative plan to expand offshore oil drilling said it endangers coastal communities who rely on a healthy ocean.
Project 2025, written by the right-leaning Heritage Foundation, aims to dramatically reshape U.S. energy policy, opening millions of acres to new oil and gas production.
Angelo Villagomez, ocean director at the Center for American Progress, said it prioritizes short-term profits over long-term climate sustainability.
"It's going to prohibit the United States from even including the word climate change in any of our government documents," Villagomez pointed out. "You can't deal with these real threats just by closing your eyes and pretending that it's not there."
While offshore drilling is illegal in New Hampshire, Villagomez noted operations elsewhere spread toxins far and wide, harming marine life and vital habitats. Supporters of the plan said offshore drilling releases fewer emissions and gets America closer to being energy independent.
Project 2025 also promotes the dismantling and privatization of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The federal agency handles the vast majority of climate, weather and marine science research as well as commercial fishing regulations. Villagomez argued breaking up the agency could lead to chaos on the water and economic instability for vital industries throughout New England.
"NOAA manages all of our fisheries," Villagomez explained. "So are we going to let all of the states have different rules for how we manage fisheries?"
Former President Donald Trump has claimed he has no knowledge of Project 2025, however many parts of the plan were written by members of his former administration. The plan would undo much of President Joe Biden's executive order to protect at least 30% of American land and ocean areas by 2030.
get more stories like this via email