Bush's Tropical Paradise

The president sets in motion the largest ocean preserve ever—but will industry kill it?

By Sharon Guynup Posted 11.26.2008 at 11:57 am 5 Comments

Sea Change: Bush’s proposal would preserve up to 700,000 square miles of the central Pacific, including the Mariana Trench, and protect sea life, such as leatherback turtles and coral reefs. Georgette Douwma/Getty Images

In his eight years as president, George W. Bush has done little to win the hearts of conservationists. Opponents criticize his backing of widespread drilling and mining projects, lax oversight of industrial pollution, and recent attempts to dismantle the 36-year-old Endangered Species Act.

But now, as he’s leaving office, the 43rd president is attempting to “blue” his legacy by granting national-monument status to a string of pristine islands, atolls and coral reefs in the center of the Pacific Ocean. Even those most critical of Bush’s environmental policies have voiced support for what could be the largest conservation initiative in American history, one that would protect wildlife by completely prohibiting commercial activity.

The Mariana Trench: Paul Wootton

As of press time, government agencies declined to divulge details or a time frame for a decision. They did, however, confirm that the president had requested an assessment on the possibility of increased protection for up to 700,000 square miles of ocean (three times the size of Texas) west of Hawaii, as well as the Northern Mariana Islands and the Mariana Trench, a 6.8-mile chasm that marks the deepest part of the ocean and harbors hundreds of exotic marine species. Many of these islands are already national wildlife refuges, but Bush’s plan could extend the boundary of protection from between 3 and 12 nautical miles offshore to up to 200.

That’s good news for plummeting ocean diversity. The designated area boasts 19 species of whales and dolphins, giant clams, sea turtles, Hawaiian monk seals and 14 million birds, including many of the last albatross and boobies. Endangered and threatened species are rarely found in such profusion elsewhere on the planet. Don Palawski, a Pacific Islands refuge manager with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, says the region is a model of what healthy coral-reef ecosystems should look like and, if well-preserved, could teach us how to better steward damaged reefs closer to civilization.

The proposal would protect coral reefs and other sea life: James D. watt

But how well this “underwater laboratory” is protected will be key to the initiative’s success. Bush has the power to prohibit fishing, deep-sea mining and oil drilling in the area. Without such a ban, environmentalists say, the initiative would amount to a grand but meaningless gesture. For now, there’s almost no fishing, mining or drilling in the central Pacific—it’s too remote to be economically viable, says Joshua Reichert, managing director of the Pew Environment Group, which has been discussing protections with the Bush administration since 2006. But fisheries could target the tuna that migrate through the region or hunt sharks for the lucrative Asian shark-fin trade.

Although public opinion on the few inhabited islands leans in favor of the plan, the Northern Marianas House of Representatives voted against monument designation, citing fear over future fishing restrictions. A similar proposal for islands off North Carolina and in the Gulf of Mexico was dropped last year after vigorous opposition from industrial fishing interests.

Somewhat ironically, Bush’s best ally in this battle may be climate change. With warmer waters and spiking ocean acidity eroding coral reefs, and 90 percent of the world’s predatory fish—such as tuna, sharks and swordfish—eradicated, conservation takes on a new urgency. “It is imperative,” says Lance Morgan, vice president of the Marine Conservation Biology Institute, “to fully protect this monument.”

Previous Article: The Week in Wildlife

Next Article: Dance, Science, Dance

5 Comments

link to this comment

podboq

11/26/08 at 5:24 pm

"90 percent of the world’s predatory fish—such as tuna, sharks and swordfish—eradicated"

Is THAT true? 90% of sharks are gone??

link to this comment

Chipper Smoltz

11/26/08 at 8:23 pm

I believe this is a good step towards preserving marine life and marine species that are close to becoming extinct like the article says. It would be something positive as there are really diverse species in some parts of the ocean that are yet to be discovered and are all part of the fragile marine ecosystem.

Although, I didn't know as well that 90% of sharks have been eradicated. But 90% of tuna? I love tuna sashimi and sushi.
hahaha. No comment on the swordfish though but I hope that all these three will thrive soon although some part of me remembers the movie "Jaws". (~_~)

link to this comment

Chibi

from Seattle, Washington

11/26/08 at 10:46 pm

Ye gods! This is pitiful. I sincerely hope Bush's motive wasn't to make sure he is remembered for that action instead of his previous mistakes. It is an effective move towards conserving the ocean, but the apparent motives behind are sickening.

link to this comment

Simon1

11/27/08 at 6:21 am

In 2001, Scott Miller, wrote a report entitled "The Economic Assessment of the Domestic Fisheries Developmental Potential of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands." In this report, which was written for the National Marine Fisheries Service, he stated that commercial fishing was not a viable option for the CNMI. In addition, he recommended that the CNMI government should assist the local small pelagic fishermen, who take their small boats out to 15 to 20 miles out to catch skipjack tuna and currently have little opportunity to sell their catch because of existing fisheries import agreements with Guam. Commercial fishing (foreign or domestic)has never succeeded in the CNMI. He states that foreign commercial fisheries would compete to the detriment of the local fisherman. The CNMI government should assist the local fisherman in marketing their catch. Currently, the only fishing in the waters around the top three northern islands is by foreign fishing fleets illegally fishing for sharks, and finning them for sale in Asia.

link to this comment

John_Gourley

11/27/08 at 5:40 pm

The proposed national marine monument located in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) will encompass over 1/3 of the entire CNMI Exclusive Economic Zone (>115,000 square miles).

Its one thing to "protect" large expanses of ocean for valid, science-based conservation purposes, but quite another to establish large "no-take" MPA's under the guise of conservation and then to solicit the blind loyalty of enviro-extremist groups to bolster the credibility of the action. There was absolutely no science used in determining the boundaries of the proposed monument in the Northern Mariana Islands, nor has there been any biological justification for setting aside this much ocean as a ‘no-take’ MPA.

Additionally, the legal vehicle that would be used to designate the national monuments – the Antiquities Act of 1906 – is favored by the enviro-extremists because it completely bypasses the public involvement and review process – it is unilateral federal action.

Designation of a Mariana national monument is easily supported by those who live in the US mainland because it doesn’t directly affect you. However, those of us who live in the Marianas feel that we are being used to further the agenda of US mainland politics. If the Mariana monument is designated, the Pew Environmental Group will be closer to meeting their Ocean Legacy goal of establishing 3 to 5 large ‘no-take’ marine protected areas, President Bush will have his ‘blue legacy’, and the US Government will be able to show US sovereignty in the Western Pacific. In return, the people of the Marianas will ‘pay’ for everything.

As previously inferred, this issue has become highly controversial in the CNMI with the Pew Environment Group pushing the national monument issue on the people. Most of us are offended by the arrogant and culturally insensitive monument campaign being run by Pew, and do not support their monument proposal. Even the majority of the CNMI and Guam Government officials DO NOT SUPPORT the monument proposal. See www.marianasconservation.org for the level of opposition to this monumental travesty.

The monument proposal is nothing more than US mainland politics directed at a member of the US family that has no political clout in order to permanently take away over 115,000 square miles of our oceans to create a “blue legacy” for President Bush and further the anti-fishing agenda of Pew. Pew dressed it up as a conservation project in an attempt to deceive the people of the CNMI in giving up their CHOICE for the responsible and sustainable use of the natural resources found in their EEZ. The proposed monument issue is an example of political environmentalism at its worse.

John Gourley, Saipan, Northern Mariana Islands