The Nature Conservancy and WCGA Renewable Energy ACT

Jena CarterMarch 3, 2010Sacramento, CA

TNC Interest in Offshore Energy

Reduce development-conservation conflictsProactive planning; understand potential impacts

Follow “mitigation hierarchy” Avoid, minimize, and offsetPlace mitigation in seascape/regional

contextCompensation for losses?

Adaptive management

Action 4.2:Explore the feasibility for offshore alternative ocean energy development and evaluate the potential environmental impacts of these technologies.

West Coast Governors Agreement

Renewable Energy ACT

Paul Klarin: Co-chair – Oregon Department of Land Conservation Development Maurice Hill: Co-chair – Minerals Management Service Jennifer Hennessey: WCGA Point of Contact, Washington Department of Ecology Alejandro Moreno: US Department of Energy Barry Thom: NOAA Fisheries Northwest Region Daryl Williams: Tulalip Tribe Ryland Bowechop: Makah Tribe Cathy Tortorici: NOAA Fisheries Estyn Mead: US Fish and Wildlife Service James Hastreiter: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Jena Carter: The Nature Conservancy Laura Engeman: California Coastal Conservancy Mark Enkenrode: Minerals Management Service Tim Stearns: Washington Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development Steve Kopf: Pacific Energy Ventures Rob Cozens, Resighini Rancheria Environmental Protection Authority

Renewable Energy ACT Work Plan

High Priority: Coastal Siting Guidebook Conducted at California Current Large Marine

Ecosystem scale (proactive, cumulative effects) Address governance, baseline data, siting, energy

technology and infrastructure Develop multi-purpose, spatial maps to support

decision-making

October 2009 ~ Seattle Workshop

Organized by TNC, CA, OR, WA, MMS, and NOAA 120 practitioners – energy industry, government,

tribes, academia, and NGOs 13 expert presentations plus breakout sessions

analyzed three topics:• Organization and content of the Coastal Siting report• Baseline data needs• Spatial planning and decision-support tools and policies

Many Recommendations!!

Revising Plan

TNC Ecoregional Assessment

Cape Flattery, WA

Cape Mendocino, CA

Area: 97,925 km2

From the estuaries to the toe of the continental shelf (0-3,000 m).Cape Flattery, WA to Cape Mendocino, CA

Pacific Northwest Marine Ecoregional Assessment

375 Conservation TargetsFine filter

Fish KelpSeabirdsMammalsPlants Corals/sponges Other Invertebrates

Coarse filterBenthic habitatsEstuarine habitatsShoreline habitatsChlorophyll & UpwellingCanyon walls

11

HabitatNOAA Bathymetry +Substrate +Geomorphology

= Benthic HabitatWashington

12

NOAA hydrographic surveyGary Greene, MLMLChris Goldfinger, OSUActive Tectonics and Seafloor Mapping Lab

Fish distributions from NOAA Trawl Surveys

Bocaccio Dover sole

Darkblotched

rockfish

Pacific cod

1977 – 2004:

5,489 trawls1 – 5 km long47 Species

Seabird colonies

Breeding populations

© Ian Jones

Rookeries

14

DeepwaterCorals and

SpongesPresence & catch per unit effort

Chlorophyll (nutrients)

1998-2005June-Sept

High concentration2+ standard deviations

Low concentration1 to 2 standard deviations

• Fishing effort• Ports• Shoreline armoring• Coastal development• Roads• Boat ramps, marinas• Aquaculture leases• Dredging and dumping• Marine reserves/protected

areas• Fishery closures

Coastal /Offshore Uses & Designations

Federal grid = 4.8 km (2,300 ha)

State grid = 1.6 km (256 ha)

9,481 Assessment units:5,924 State 3,917 Federal

Minerals Management Service Outer Continental Shelf grid system

Attribute Data to Assessment Units

18

ReportsMaps*

Data

The Outputs

Looking Forward

Work with WCGA and the states to utilize Ecoregional Assessment data

Proactively work with renewable industry to help with siting decisions (decision support tools)

Serve as pilot project with MMS and NOAA to incorporate data into the federal Multipurpose Marine Cadastre

QUESTIONS?