National Ocean Endowment
Inherency
Partisanship is interfering with a comprehensive ocean policy.
Conathon, ’13.
Michael, American Progress, November 19.
(http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/news/2013/11/19/79615/establish-the-national-endowment-for-the-oceans/)
The National Ocean Policy, initiated under President George W. Bush and implemented via executive order by President Barack Obama
in 2010, has become a punching bag for Flores and other conservatives, particularly those on the Natural Resources Committee.
They irrationally fear that it could make an end run around congressional authority and lead to
imposition of new regulations. In reality, the policy permits government agencies to operate more
efficiently and reduce duplication of effort while allowing different regions of the country to
prioritize the ocean issues and concerns that matter most to them. Meanwhile, in the Senate, instead of constructing
roadblocks to prevent efficient ocean management, members voted to add language to its bill establishing the framework of a National Endowment for
the Oceans. And unlike the House vote—which was almost exclusively along party lines—13 Republicans joined a unanimous Democratic coalition to
pass the amendment by a vote of 67–32, paving the way for creation of a dedicated source of funding for ocean priorities.¶
Plan Text
Resolved: The United States federal government should establish the National
Ocean Endowment to do (insert plan)
Costal Infrastructure
National Ocean Endowment will acts as a mechanism to Support at Risk
Communities
Uhlenbrock 12/5/13 (Communities Threatened By Sea Level Rise May Get Help — If Congress Can Pass
Legislationhttp://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/12/05/3026311/congress-oceans-fund-sea-level-rise/) v
Thursday, behind closed doors, House and Senate conferees are meeting to negotiate an important provision in the Water Resources
Development Act (WRDA) — an investment mechanism for the oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes known as a National Endowment for
the Oceans. One of the few bipartisan bills this Congress, WRDA is one that is expected to pass before the end of the year. ¶
Proponents of the measure say creating an endowment for the oceans will provide critical resources and capacity to conserve and
restore coastal wetlands. “For all the coastal states, this is really big,” emphasized Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI).¶ “We need to
relocate critical infrastructure, like water treatment plants and bridges, which are now at risk of
being washed away. The National Endowment for the Oceans, Coasts, and Great Lakes can help coastal
states and communities protect more of this infrastructure, protect more habitat that sustains our
fisheries, conduct more research, and clean more waters and beaches. The need is great and we
must respond.Ӧ In addition, the measure would help cities and local governments prepare for the
increasing vulnerability of coastal infrastructure such as roads, sewage treatment plants, and
energy facilities to the effects of climate change. Written throughout the provision are ways to do this, including
“planning for and managing coastal development to enhance ecosystem integrity or minimize
impacts from sea level change and coastal erosion” and “protection and relocation of critical
coastal public infrastructure affected by erosion or sea level change.Ӧ When seven football fields
of coastal wetlands disappear every hour, calculated between 2004 and 2009 by a recent report
from NOAA, it’s a serious problem. The report identifies human activity, mostly urban and rural
development, as one of the main causes. Loss of these wetlands is further putting pressure on
coastal communities already threatened by rising seas.¶ Sea level will most likely rise between
1.5 and 3 feet by the end of this century, which is greater than the conservative projections from the U.N.’s
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, as recently concluded in a survey of ninety experts. Not only is that going to
displace people along the coast, but the billions of dollars that have been invested in infrastructure
will be in jeopardy.¶ In the last 80 years, Louisiana alone has lost an area of coastal land the size
of Delaware, much of which had comprised barrier islands that served a critical role defending
against hurricanes and storm surge. The same thing is happening in South Carolina where 1,200
acres have been lost in the last 25 years. And on the shorelines of Alaska, indigenous villages are
retreating as they see their houses and schools sink into the ground and the sea sneaks closer with
erosion rates reaching up to 100 feet a year.¶ “Climate doesn’t change in a nice, linear way,” says
James White from the University of Colorado Boulder on the release of a National Research
Council report on Tuesday. “There are thresholds and tipping points in the system. If we cross
one of those, handling or adapting to that is going to be a challenge. When it comes to
adaptations, speed kills.¶ Grappling with protection of coastal communities and what is needed
for adaptation is not easy. In four densely-populated southeast Florida counties — Palm Beach, MiamiDade, Broward, and Monroe — $4 billion in taxable real estate and over five million people are at risk from only one foot of sea level
rise, which is projected before the end of the century.¶ Lawmakers are pushing for a 6 mechanism, such as a
National Endowment for the Oceans, as a way to support communities faced with these
challenges.¶ The idea of a National Endowment for the Oceans stems from a recommendation made by the U.S. Commission on
Ocean Policy, comprised of members appointed by President George W. Bush. “When the commission first floated the idea of an
ocean trust fund in a draft report and asked governors for comment, support was overwhelming and bipartisan,” wrote Tom Allen,
former Representative from Maine.¶ Sen. Whitehouse has led the latest push for an oceans fund, creating a place for the bipartisan
initiative on the docket. Passed by a vote of 67-32 in the Senate, the National Endowment for the Oceans is an amendment in the
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), a behemoth of a bill to fund the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Both the Senate and
House passed versions of WRDA, yet the House bill fell short on including any language supporting direct investments in the oceans.¶
While the Whitehouse amendment to include the endowment wouldn’t actually set aside any funding, it would create the framework
for federal support and management tools to help communities effectively adapt to these challenges of coastal land use and the threats
posed by sea level rise. And this is where a dedicated stream of funding for ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes priorities can help. The
proposed National Endowment for the Oceans would grant at least 59 percent of its annual funds to coastal states, factoring in total
shoreline and population densities for a balanced distribution, to help restore, protect, and understand their coasts. It would also
support needed research for science and monitoring of our ocean, providing better certainty for management of policies such as catch
limits crucial to the fishing industry.
Economy
Investments are key to the US economy- over 50% of our GDP is tied to a
healthy coastal ecosystem.
Neill, ’11.
Peter, HuffPo, July 7.
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-neill/national-endowment-for-th_b_891257.html)
An encouraging sign of a new awareness and public awakening about the critical needs of the marine environment has been the recent
introduction by Senators Olympia Snowe (R-Me) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) of The National Endowment for the Oceans,
Coasts, and Great Lakes Act, designed to enhance America's invaluable coastal and ocean resources through protection, research, and
management. According to Senator Snowe, "...our coastal communities and economy are inextricably linked to the ocean's health and
sustainability...the Act would help to fulfill our responsibility to preserve the vitality of the critical ecosystem it supports."¶Here is
some specific language from the Act. Its purposes "are to protect, conserve, re-store, and understand the oceans, coasts, and Great
Lakes of the United States, ensuring present and future generations will benefit from the full range of ecological, economic,
educational, social, cultural, nutritional, and recreational opportunities and services these resources are capable of providing."¶
"Activities harming ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems jeopardize the economies and
social structure of communities dependent on resources from such ecosystems." ¶ "The coastal
regions of the United States have high biological productivity and contribute approximately 50
percent of the gross domestic product of the United States. The oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes are susceptible
to change as a direct and indirect result of human activities, which can inhibit ecosystem integrity and productivity, biodiversity,
environmental quality, national security, economic competitiveness, availability of energy, resistance to natural hazards, and
transportation safety and efficiency."¶ "A variety of human activities have caused dramatic declines in the
health and productivity of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems of the United States, including
chemical, nutrient, thermal, and biological pollution, including the introduction of invasive species, and the introduction of marine
debris; unwise land use and coastal development; loss and degradation of habitat, including upstream freshwater habitat for
anadromous, diadromous, and migratory fish species; overfishing and by-catch of non-target marine species; and global climate
change and ocean acidification."¶ These are strong, perhaps unexpected statements, grounded in reality, indicative of insightful
legislative purpose, based on research and best practice.¶
Costal Economies Support the National Economy
Strauss 4/2/14(Report: Overfishing bad for fish, but worse for the economy http://www.edf.org/blog/2014/04/02/reportoverfishing-bad-fish-worse-economy))
It’s undeniable that oceans are important to people and the environment. Covering nearly threequarters of our planet, oceans produce the air we breathe, house the fish we eat and provide us
with many of the products we use on a daily basis. And importantly, the oceans play a huge
role in creating employment opportunities and sustaining coastal economies.¶ According to a
new report from the National Ocean Economics Program for the Center for the Blue Economy,
the oceans economy comprised more than 2.7 million jobs and contributed more than $258
billion to the GDP of the United States in 2010. If you aren’t impressed with those numbers,
let’s think in different terms. If the ocean economy were a part of the United States of America,
it would be the 25th largest state by employment and the 20th largest state by GDP—about the
same size as Colorado.¶ The oceans economy supports employment almost two and a half
times larger than other natural resources industries like farming, mining, and forest harvesting.
Approximately 5.4 million jobs in 2010 were directly and indirectly supported by the ocean
with their total contribution estimated at $633 billion which is 4.4% of the United States’
GDP.¶ Increasingly, with disasters like the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and several tsunamis
across Asia, the United States and countries across the world are beginning to place more
emphasis on just how significant oceans’ health is to the economy. And with more than a
billion jobs around the world supported by oceans economies, it’s no surprise that the
momentum around maintaining a healthy ocean is building speed. Much of that focus has been
on ways to solve overfishing—the most urgent threat to the health of the oceans and the single
biggest cause of depleted fisheries worldwide.¶ Last month, I had the opportunity to meet with
scientists, NGO representatives and government officials from around the world, to discuss
solutions to overfishing, with particular emphasis on empowering and supporting small-scale
fishermen in developing countries. During these meetings, I shared the resources my team at
EDF has developed to help fishermen design sustainable fishery management programs and I
talked about our Fish Forever initiative, EDF’s partnership with Rare and the Sustainable
Fisheries Group at the University of California at Santa Barbara to restore small-scale coastal
fisheries.¶ Perhaps the best part of the trip was just having the opportunity to sit down with likeminded individuals to “geek out” about the ways to effectively manage small-scale fisheries,
keep our oceans resilient and protect those who rely on them.¶ Healthy and abundant oceans
create stronger coastal economies. As momentum grows to bring the oceans health in line with
sustainability principles, we must continue to be vigilant about the numerous demands and
pressures placed upon the oceans' natural resources.
Overfishing
NOE Protects the Coast from Overfishing
Conathan 11/9/13 (EstablishNationalOceanEndowmnet
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/news/2013/11/19/79615/establish-the-national-endowment-for-the-oceans/)
Politico reported last week that Congress seems to be done legislating for 2013. While such an outcome wouldn’t be shocking for an
anemic legislative body with a 9 percent approval rating that spends more time talking about a broken website than its own broken
procedures, there’s at least one piece of legislation making headway toward passage before the year runs out.¶ The House and Senate
have each passed a bill reauthorizing the Water Resources Development Act, or WRDA. While this law, first enacted in 1974,
establishes parameters for managing U.S. freshwater resources, the versions passed in each house of Congress include provisions with
sweeping ramifications for our oceans and coasts. The House bill attempts to curtail necessary enhancements for federal management
of our marine resources, while the Senate version would establish a mechanism to allocate sorely needed funding to state and federal
ocean priorities.¶ Given the nature of conference discussions, there will surely be pressure to cast aside both provisions in a standard
display of quid pro quo. But a deeper look makes it clear that these two provisions do not simply cancel one another out. The House
provision is an expression of politically motivated fears and insecurities while the Senate’s represents a huge step forward for the
economic and environmental vitality of our oceans and coasts.¶ Although these two provisions are the only ones in WRDA that focus
primarily on ocean issues, they should not be seen as a package deal. And one particular constituency can be key to their success or
failure: commercial and recreational fishermen. As the designated conferees and their staff members from each house come together
in search of mutually acceptable compromise language, lawmakers should reject the House’s proposal and include the Senate’s. ¶ Prior
to final passage of its WRDA bill, the House voted 225–193 to include an amendment by Rep. Bill Flores (R-TX) that would prevent
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers—the primary agency regulated by WRDA—from participating in any activities related to the
National Ocean Policy. Rep. Flores has successfully included several similar anti-National Ocean Policy provisions to bills in the past,
despite its potential benefits for coastal states and regions.¶ The National Ocean Policy, initiated under President George W. Bush and
implemented via executive order by President Barack Obama in 2010, has become a punching bag for Flores and other conservatives,
particularly those on the Natural Resources Committee. They irrationally fear that it could make an end run around congressional
authority and lead to imposition of new regulations. In reality, the policy permits government agencies to operate
more efficiently and reduce duplication of effort while allowing different regions of the country
to prioritize the ocean issues and concerns that matter most to them.¶ Meanwhile, in the Senate, instead of
constructing roadblocks to prevent efficient ocean management, members voted to add language to its bill establishing the framework
of a National Endowment for the Oceans. And unlike the House vote—which was almost exclusively along party lines—13
Republicans joined a unanimous Democratic coalition to pass the amendment by a vote of 67–32, paving the way for creation of a
dedicated source of funding for ocean priorities.¶ The National Endowment for the Oceans, introduced by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse
(D-RI), would also give states more of a say in how they prioritize the ocean issues they consider to be most critical, but that’s about
where the similarities between it and the National Ocean Policy end. The endowment would create a congressionally
authorized fund dedicated to ocean health. Roughly two-thirds of its annual disbursement would
go directly to coastal states in proportion to the length of their shorelines and size of their coastal
populations, while a second, national-scale grant program with similar goals would be administered by the National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation.¶ In the past, despite its potential benefits to their industry, some fishermen have been slow to warm up to the
National Ocean Policy. For starters, they felt their voices were not adequately represented during the early stages of the policy’s
development, and that initial snub has proven difficult for the industry to forget. While their concerns were not without merit, the
Obama administration and the National Ocean Council have taken great pains to address them. ¶ Regardless of how
fishermen feel about the National Ocean Policy, they would be wise to embrace the effort to
establish the National Endowment for the Oceans. There is a general consensus that the biggest
problem facing America’s fishing industry is a lack of funding for science and monitoring, a
shortfall that directly affects fishermen’s bottom lines. The law requires regulators to set
fishermen’s catch limits based on the best science available. Better data means more certainty to
assessments. In turn, that would allow fishery managers to set catch limits that more accurately
reflect the true health of fish populations. This would then either give fishermen more fish to
catch in the short term or increase the likelihood that today’s restrictions will lead to healthier fish
populations and higher future quotas.¶ A robust, well-funded National Endowment for the
Oceans would give states the option to invest in additional or supplemental assessments for
fisheries that drive their economies. It would also allow the quasi-governmental regional fishery
management councils, which develop and recommend fishery management plans to government
regulators, to apply for money to serve their most pressing research needs without having to fight
for their inclusion in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration budget.¶ In a legislative
climate where virtually every potential achievement is stonewalled by partisan bickering, ocean industries and advocates suddenly
find themselves with a rare opportunity to lead Congress to a positive decision. The establishment of the National
Endowment for the Oceans is a long-overdue nod to the economic potential of our nation’s
oceans and coasts.
Costal Regions are at Risk Without NOE
Neill 7/7/11 Director, World Ocean Observatory (National Endowment for the Ocean, Coasts, and Great Lakes
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-neill/national-endowment-for-th_b_891257.html)An encouraging
sign of a new awareness and public awakening about
the critical needs of the marine environment has been the recent introduction by Senators Olympia Snowe (R-Me) and Sheldon
Whitehouse (D-RI) of The National Endowment for the Oceans, Coasts, and Great Lakes Act, designed to enhance America's
invaluable coastal and ocean resources through protection, research, and management. According to Senator Snowe, "...our coastal
communities and economy are inextricably linked to the ocean's health and sustainability...the Act would help to fulfill our
responsibility to preserve the vitality of the critical ecosystem it supports."¶ The proposed legislation would create a funding process
based on interest from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, 12.5 percent of revenues from offshore energy development (to include oil,
gas, and renewable energy), and 10 percent of civil penalties for regulatory violations on the Continental Shelf. Overhead is capped at
3%. The Endowment would be overseen by the Secretary of Commerce, more specifically by a seven person Council comprising
additional representatives of other Federal agencies with over-lapping authority. Panels of experts and community representatives
would advise.¶ Here is some specific language from the Act. Its purposes "are to protect, conserve, re-store, and understand the
oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes of the United States, ensuring present and future generations will benefit from the full range of
ecological, economic, educational, social, cultural, nutritional, and recreational opportunities and services these resources are capable
of providing."¶ "Activities harming ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems jeopardize the economies and social structure of
communities dependent on resources from such ecosystems."¶ "The coastal regions of the United States have high
biological productivity and contribute approximately 50 percent of the gross domestic product of
the United States. The oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes are susceptible to change as a direct and
indirect result of human activities, which can inhibit ecosystem integrity and productivity,
biodiversity, environmental quality, national security, economic competitiveness, availability of
energy, resistance to natural hazards, and transportation safety and efficiency."¶ "A variety of
human activities have caused dramatic declines in the health and productivity of ocean, coastal,
and Great Lakes ecosystems of the United States, including chemical, nutrient, thermal, and
biological pollution, including the introduction of invasive species, and the introduction of marine
debris; unwise land use and coastal development; loss and degradation of habitat, including
upstream freshwater habitat for anadromous, diadromous, and migratory fish species; overfishing
and by-catch of non-target marine species; and global climate change and ocean acidification."¶
These are strong, perhaps unexpected statements, grounded in reality, indicative of insightful legislative purpose, based on research
and best practice.¶ The legislation would establish a grants program to fund projects to restore habitat, manage fisheries, plan for
sustainable coastal development, acquire coastal properties for preservation, and relocate critical coastal infrastructure. Applicants
could include states, regional associations, non-governmental organizations, and research organizations. To be eligible, states
would be required to provide an approved five-year coastal management plan and, in some cases,
match Federal grant funds dollar for dollar.¶ This is a welcome step forward, and is the logical
and practical follow-up to the nation's new National Ocean Policy that was established by President Obama
earlier this year. Now, of course, comes the hard part, as the Act enters the troubled waters of the legislative process -- review by subcommittees, full committees, the Senate, the House of Representatives, and then the so-called reconciling, trading, compromising and
diluting by opposing interests in what passes for governance these days. Think of this initiative as one of those alewives or salmon that
return home to inland places to spawn, avoiding all the dangers of the open ocean, surviving the hunters, the pollutants, and the dams.
Let's hope this one makes it; we need this initiative badly if we are ever to deal successfully with
the once and future ocean.
Solvency
The National Endowment empowers local communities and states with
financial resources to restore coastal communities.
Woglom, ’13.
Emily, Ocean Conservancy, November 15.
(http://blog.oceanconservancy.org/2013/11/15/the-most-important-congressional-action-on-the-ocean-youve-never-heard-of/#more6955)
Right now, Congress
has a major opportunity to protect our ocean and coasts. It can create a National
Endowment for the Oceans and safeguard the existing National Ocean Policy in one fell swoop.¶
How? Well, it’s a tale of two bills.¶ The House and the Senate both recently passed versions of a bill called the Water Resources Development Act
(WRDA), but their versions are different. The Senate version would establish a National Endowment for the Oceans (NEO), which would expand
scientific research, provide planning and resource management, restore habitat and much more. Conversely, the House version not only fails to establish
this endowment, it guts the existing National Ocean Policy (NOP) that ensures smart use of ocean resources. ¶ Soon, a committee made up of members of
Congress from both chambers will come together in a “conference” to combine the two bills into a single final version. The ocean will either get a big
win or suffer a big loss.¶ What’s at stake?¶ Following the recommendations of the bipartisan U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, NEO would invest in
our ocean’s future. The
endowment authorizes grants to state, regional and tribal entities as well as
academic institutions and nonprofit organizations to support ocean and Great Lakes research and restoration
projects such as:¶ •Restoration of wetlands, coral reefs, sea grass beds and watersheds¶ •Mapping, monitoring,
observation and modeling of ocean, coastal and Great Lakes systems ¶ •Adaptation to the impacts of climate change and
mitigation of coastal hazards, including infrastructure protection¶ •Research and monitoring of ocean acidification, hypoxia and harmful
algal blooms¶ •Conservation of sensitive marine, coastal and Great Lakes species and their habitats ¶ •Baseline data collection, ecosystem assessments and
mapping for use in planning for new sustainable ocean uses and protecting ecosystem health ¶ •Planning for sustainable coastal development ¶ To put the
that scientists estimate that we’ve explored less than 5 percent
of the ocean, that 91 percent of ocean species remain undiscovered, and that we have better maps
of the surface of Mars than we do of the United States’ territorial ocean waters.¶ Moreover, NEO’s
importance of this work into perspective, consider
investments would create jobs and support coastal economies. They would also ensure that present and future generations benefit from the ecological,
economic, educational, social, cultural, spiritual, nutritional and recreational resources of our ocean, coasts and Great Lakes.¶ Then, there’s the NOP.
When it comes to making decisions that impact our ocean, every tool should be on the table for gathering and sharing information. The NOP is one of
those vital, common-sense tools. It allows the entities responsible for ocean use planning to coordinate with each other, increasing efficiency and
reducing redundancy.¶ The NOP also pushes ocean and coastal management out to the regional level, putting ocean management decisions in the hands
of on-the-ground people and businesses that will be impacted by ocean management decisions. In the words of Sen. Edward Markey, opposing the
National Ocean Policy is like opposing air traffic control. ¶
NOE Requires no USFG Spending
Pew, ’11. 6/16/11TheNationalEndowmentfortheOceans: Protecting Ecosystems, Creating
Jobshttp://www.pewenvionment.org/news-room/other-resources/the-national-endowment-for-the-oceans-protecting-ecosystemscreating-jobs-85899360821)
Our oceans cannot go unprotected.¶ Millions of marine species rely on these precious ecosystems,
and the ocean is directly responsible for 2.3 million jobs.¶ President Barack Obama recognized this last July,
when he signed an executive order establishing a national ocean policy for protecting marine ecosystems and ensuring the economic
health of coastal communities that depend on the ocean.¶ Now the policy is entering its implementation phase. Twelve regional
"listening sessions" began June 9 in Washington, D.C. and Barrow, Alaska. The other sessions will be help through the first week of
July in port cities on the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, the Gulf of Mexico and the Great Lakes. ¶ Meanwhile, Congress is
considering how to fund ocean conservation and management. On May 12, Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) introduced a National Endowment for the Oceans bill. Advancing one of the primary
recommendations of the Pew Oceans Commission, this legislation would establish a national endowment for
the study, protection and restoration of America's oceans, coasts and Great Lakes. It would be funded by
revenue generated from the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, offshore energy development and a portion of the
fines and damages collected for violations of laws meant to protect our ecosystems. The bill would ensure that revenue
generated from commercial uses and misuses of natural resources would be invested in the longterm health and viability of our marine environment.
NOE Gives money to communities that need it most
Conathon, ’13. Michael, American Progress, November 19.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/news/2013/11/19/79615/establish-the-national-endowment-for-the-oceans/
The National Endowment for the Oceans, introduced by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), would also give
states more of a say in how they prioritize the ocean issues they consider to be most critical, but
that’s about where the similarities between it and the National Ocean Policy end. The endowment would create a congressionally
authorized fund dedicated to ocean health. Roughly two-thirds of its annual disbursement would go directly
to coastal states in proportion to the length of their shorelines and size of their coastal
populations, while a second, national-scale grant program with similar goals would be administered by the National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation.¶ In the past, despite its potential benefits to their industry, some fishermen have been slow to warm up to the
National Ocean Policy. For starters, they felt their voices were not adequately represented during the early stages of the policy’s
development, and that initial snub has proven difficult for the industry to forget. While their concerns were not without merit, the
Obama administration and the National Ocean Council have taken great pains to address them. ¶ Regardless of how fishermen feel
about the National Ocean Policy, they would be wise to embrace the effort to establish the National Endowment for the Oceans. There
is a general consensus that the biggest problem facing America’s fishing industry is a lack of funding for science and monitoring, a
shortfall that directly affects fishermen’s bottom lines. The law requires regulators to set fishermen’s catch limits
based on the best science available. Better data means more certainty to assessments. In turn, that
would allow fishery managers to set catch limits that more accurately reflect the true health of
fish populations. This would then either give fishermen more fish to catch in the short term or increase the likelihood that
today’s restrictions will lead to healthier fish populations and higher future quotas.¶ A robust, well-funded National
Endowment for the Oceans would give states the option to invest in additional or supplemental
assessments for fisheries that drive their economies. It would also allow the quasi-governmental regional fishery
management councils, which develop and recommend fishery management plans to government regulators, to apply for money to
serve their most pressing research needs without having to fight for their inclusion in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration budget.¶ In a legislative climate where virtually every potential achievement is stonewalled by partisan bickering,
ocean industries and advocates suddenly find themselves with a rare opportunity to lead Congress to a positive decision. The
establishment of the National Endowment for the Oceans is a long-overdue nod to the economic
potential of our nation’s oceans and coasts.
For Every 1 dollar Spent on the Oceans Coast 15 dollars are returned in
economic benefit
Conathon, 4/9.
Michael, American Progress, 2014.
(http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/report/2014/04/09/87386/the-economic-case-for-restoring-coastal-ecosystems/)
The loss of wetlands is a human-caused problem, and we have the capacity to reverse this trend with smart, targeted investments. In
addition to obvious environmental benefits, these investments provide economic returns in two categories.
First, coastal restoration investments create jobs and stimulate spending. Second—but less studied—healthy,
restored ocean and coastal wetlands ecosystems provide enhanced economic value.¶ On the issue of
employment, for example, economists with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, have found
that $1 million invested in coastal restoration creates 17.1 jobs on average. This compares to job
growth from industrial coastal activities, such as oil and gas development, in which $1 million of investment
creates an average of just 5.2 jobs.¶ The economic contribution of these activities, however, does not stop when workers lay
down their shovels. In this report, the Center for American Progress and Oxfam America delve into the second economic metric—the
ongoing economic contributions provided by healthy, restored coastal ecosystems such as wetlands, seagrass beds, and oyster reefs.
An analysis of three federally funded projects reveals that investing in well-designed coastal restoration can be highly cost effective,
returning significantly more than the cost of the restoration project. Averaging the benefit-cost ratios across the three restoration
projects studied, each dollar invested by taxpayers returns more than $15 in net economic benefits.¶
These benefits include buffering storm surges; safeguarding coastal homes and businesses; sequestering carbon and other pollutants;
creating nursery habitat for commercially and recreationally important fish species; and restoring open space and wildlife that support
recreation, tourism, and the culture of coastal communities. The benefits are not simply environmental; they are
economic and social as well. They are particularly salient in lower-income communities, where
individuals frequently rely on fisheries for employment and sustenance and lack the resources to construct costly—and frequently less
effective—