Final Environmental Assessment and FONSI for the Coral Reef Conservation Grant Program2. PROPOSED ACTIONS AND ALTERNATIVES

The Federal actions being reviewed include the CRCGP, its guidelines, and approval of annual financial awards for all types of CRCGP proposals submitted by various applicants. The CRCGP is mandated by law and funded on an annual basis for the purposes authorized by the law. Reasonable alternatives consist of: (1) awarding grant funds to a variety of groups for the purposes authorized by the law based on competition, priority of need and compliance with guidance identified in the Federal Register; (2) no-action; and (3) conditional approval of awards that do not immediately meet all of the requirements.

2.1 Proposed Action/Preferred Alternative - Approve CRCGP financial assistance awards that include a mix activities that meet national program goals and requirements.

NOAA’s preferred alternative is to award grant funds to various groups involving one or more of the following categories of activities: 1) State and territory management; 2) State and territory monitoring; 3) Ecosystem research; 4) General coral reef conservation; 5) Projects to develop, improve or amend FMPs; and 6) international coral reef conservation. Each of these activities is described in more detail below. Under this alternative, several project types could be implemented under one local project. For example, a project to improve or amend FMPs could include reef fish monitoring, characterization of habitat utilization patterns, mapping benthic environments, stakeholder meetings and workshops, and developing outreach materials. The six categories are complementary in nature, and the preferred alternative would allow different groups to carry out work under each category as part of a comprehensive reef management plan. These projects are designed to complement ongoing state and territorial activities. They have been identified as a priority by the local and national resource management agencies in the jurisdiction where the work will occur. By supporting multiple partners from multidisciplinary fields of work, the preferred alternative taps into expertise that may not be readily available within the respective government agency. Some of the activities between the different categories are similar, such as monitoring, and the specifics are described in Table 5. For example, monitoring may be conducted through a state and territorial monitoring grant as well as a General Coral Reef Conservation grant, but the activities will fill specific gaps (e.g., each involves a different aspect of the community or occur in other locations than ongoing monitoring programs). The various project types described in Table 5 would be combined in various manners to best serve the needs of the resource management agencies, local communities and user groups, and coral reef ecosystems.

2.1.1 State and Territory Management

The State and Territory Coral Reef Management grants will support comprehensive programs for the conservation and management of coral reefs and associated fisheries in the U.S. jurisdictions of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Florida, Hawaii, Guam, CNMI, and American Samoa. NOAA and DOI’s OIA jointly administer the grants made under this program to the CNMI, Guam, and American Samoa.

Projects supported under this Program must address the following nine key threat management categories, which are based on threat and management analyses that were completed by the States and Territories:

1. Climate change, coral bleaching, diseases and extreme biotic and storm events;
2. Overfishing, destructive fishing, and the harvest and collection of marine ornamentals;
3. Increasing development pressure, unmanaged land use, and population growth;
4. Tourism and recreational overuse, and vessel groundings and anchorings;
5. Alien and invasive species;
6. Marine pollution, sedimentation, runoff, non-point source pollution, and marine debris;
7. Lack of public awareness;
8. National security activities; and
9. Activities that address other threats.

2.1.2 State and Territory Monitoring

NOAA and its partners designed and are implementing a nationally coordinated, comprehensive, long-term program to monitor and predict the condition of U.S. coral reef ecosystems. The objective of the projects is to achieve the capability to effectively monitor coral reefs and associated communities under its jurisdiction utilizing appropriate and comprehensive methodologies. This long-term monitoring program was requested by the USCRTF, which, along with the nation's coral reef program managers and the public, endorsed and called for implementation of “A National Program to Assess, Inventory, and Monitor U.S. Coral Reef Ecosystems." NOAA began implementing the Monitoring Program in 2000 and continues to administer it through Congressional appropriations for coral reef conservation. This program is administered by NOAA's NCCOS, as part of the NOAA CRCP.

The Monitoring Program includes the collection, analysis, and reporting of long-term coral reef ecosystem monitoring data pursuant to scientifically valid methodologies and protocols and is a key priority of the National Coral Reef Action Strategy. The implementation plan calls for integrating now-disparate monitoring sites into a coordinated national network, sharing monitoring information among U.S. coral reef resource managers and scientists, and filling gaps in monitoring coverage nationwide. Through this program, U.S. Federal, state, commonwealth, and territorial agencies support a variety of local and regional assessments, inventories, and monitoring of U.S. coral reef resources. Additionally, grantees are encouraged to collaborate with Federal, State/Territory, and academic partners to develop a biennial report describing the status of ecosystems in their region. Regional reports are then combined into a comprehensive assessment of the state of coral reef ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States. The report is available at www.nccos.noaa.gov/publications/notables.html.

The authorized agencies are responsible for the management of near shore and coral reef areas within state as well as international waters. Projects are awarded to:

Conduct benthic and fish monitoring at coral sites in and around coastal waters by small motorboats or kayaks;

• Initiate or complete benthic characterizations of monitoring sites;
• Conduct fish and invertebrate surveys at all sites;
• Incorporate coral disease and bleaching components into monitoring protocol;
• Evaluate impacts associated with the collection of aquarium fishes and invertebrates; and
• Evaluate effectiveness of protected areas (Fish Replenishment Areas) in increasing fishery stocks.

2.1.3 Ecosystem Research

The Coral Reef Ecosystem Research grants program addresses priority information needs as identified by coral reef ecosystem managers and scientists. Coral reef research priorities supported through this program include research to help address overfishing, pollution, coral disease and bleaching, invasive species, and the impact of these stressors on coral reef ecosystems; fisheries population dynamics and ecology, coral reef restoration and mitigation approaches, effects of anthropogenic stressors on benthic invertebrates, impacts and spread of invasive species, and evaluation of management actions and strategies. Research activities supported under this program are divided into three geographic regions: (1) the Southeastern U.S., Florida, and the Gulf of Mexico; (2) the U.S. Caribbean; and (3) Hawaii and the Western Pacific. In fiscal year 2002, this program was administered by NOAA’s NCCOS. Since fiscal year 2003, this program has been administered by NOAA’s NURP, as part of the NOAA CRCP.

Projects supported under this program are conducted by institutions of higher education, non-profit organizations, and state, local, and Indian tribal governments. Types of projects have included:

1. Identifying the ecological impact of invasive species.
2. Evaluating the effectiveness of management techniques, such as marine protected areas, on abundance and distribution of marine organisms.
3. Identifying the factors affecting recruitment and survival of marine species.
4. Identifying triggering mechanisms and causative agents, and/or processes that result in declines of coral abundance, coverage, and species richness.
5. Efforts to address overfishing, pollution, invasive species, coral disease and bleaching, and the impacts of these stressors on coral reef ecosystems.
6. Identifying genetic connections between different coral populations.

2.1.4 General Coral Reef Conservation

The General CRCGP supports projects in the U.S. states and territories and Freely Associated States that are conducted by institutions of higher education, non-profit organizations, commercial organizations, state, local and Native American tribal governments, and natural resource management authorities. The grantee must demonstrate expertise in coral reef ecosystems, jurisdiction over coral reefs, or their activities must directly or indirectly affect coral reefs. NOAA Fisheries Office of Habitat Conservation manages the program.

The objective of the program is to support efforts to:

1. Preserve, sustain and restore the condition of coral reef ecosystems;
2. Promote wise management and sustainable use of coral reef resources;
3. Develop sound scientific information on the condition of coral reef ecosystems and the threats to such ecosystems; and
4. Increase public knowledge and awareness of coral reef ecosystems and issues regarding their conservation.

Projects funded to date include tasks in eight categories based on the priorities identified in the National Action Plan to Conserve Coral Reefs and the National Coral Reef Action Strategy. These include:

1. Monitoring and assessment activities by community and non-government groups that complement state and territorial coral reef monitoring;
2. Studies that improve the understanding of coral reef resources, their ecology and processes, and that are necessary to improve management of these ecosystems;
3. Socio-economic and resource valuation studies;
4. Marine protected areas (MPAs) and associated management activities;
5. Coral reef fisheries management needs;
6. Pollution reduction;
7. Coral reef restoration; and
8. Education and outreach.

2.1.5 Projects to Approve or Amend Coral Reef Fishery Management Plans

This program supports activities by the four Regional FMCs (Western Pacific, Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean) with responsibility for FMPs that include shallow water coral reefs or fishery resources that depend on these reef ecosystems. The funded activities are coordinated with ongoing NOAA efforts and fishery management initiatives, and State and Territorial coral reef conservation initiatives. Projects are developed through a consultative process with NOAA and State and Territorial agencies and all other relevant local governmental and non-governmental entities involved in coral reef activities.

Specific activities that have been supported through this program include:

Identifying, mapping and characterizing EFH, habitat areas of particular concern (HAPC), and spawning populations, especially in areas that are closed to fishing or that merit inclusion in an expanded network of no-take ecological reserves;

1. Monitoring reef fish stocks inside and outside MPAs to evaluate effectiveness of management measures;
2. Developing proposals to reduce overfishing;
3. Identifying adverse effects of fishing and fishing gear;
4. Eliminating destructive and habitat-damaging fishing practices;
5. Assessing adequacy of current fishing regulations;
6. Providing enhanced education and outreach to fishermen;
7. Incorporating ecosystem-scale considerations in FMPs;
8. Conducting targeted research to understand ecosystem effects of fishing; and
9. Reducing the overexploitation of reef organisms for the aquarium trade.

The implementation of FMPs may ultimately result in some social or economic impacts as they are used to help regulate fishing practices to reduce overfishing or the use of improper/damaging practices. Further decisions may be made once a FMP is developed on whether or not to conduct an assessment on the future implementation of the FMP by FMCs. The purpose of these grants is to improve the information base of sound science upon which better management decisions may be made. However, these grants are not to be used to fund the implementation of the FMPs.

2.1.6 International Coral Reef Conservation

The NOAA International Coral Grants Program addresses national priorities in international coral reef conservation. For the past two years, the International Coral Grants Program has focused on building international capacity in the areas of: monitoring reef condition; implementing coral reef protected areas; and implementing effective watershed management in coral reef areas. For example, it has:

1. Supported biophysical monitoring projects that contributed to the understanding of coral reef status, promoted public awareness, and contributed to local management objectives with emphasis placed on community participation in monitoring programs and communication of results to policy makers;
2. Provided opportunities to develop best management practices for watershed management that could be shared through the White Water to Blue Water Initiative in the Caribbean meeting in 2004;
3. Supported development of highly protected marine reserves in the Wider Caribbean and Southeast Asia to conserve marine biodiversity and support sustainable use, contributing to implementation of regional action plans as identified in the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA)-Marine Caribbean Regional Enhancement Plan and the WCPA-Marine Southeast Asia Regional Action Plan;
4. Promoted implementation of socio-economic assessments of MPAs in the Caribbean and South East Asia as part of regional initiatives to develop methodologies to enhance understanding of the impacts of management on coastal communities and enhance public participation; and
5. Supported assessments of MPA management effectiveness at MPA sites as part of a larger global initiative to improve MPA management performance through the testing and implementation of a methodology for conducting management effectiveness evaluations.

Under this alternative, several project types could be implemented under one local project. For example, a project to improve or amend FMPs could include reef fish monitoring, characterization of habitat utilization patterns, mapping benthic environments, stakeholder meetings and workshops, and developing outreach materials.

The six categories are complementary in nature, and the preferred alternative would allow different groups to carry out work under each category as part of a comprehensive reef management plan. These projects are designed to complement ongoing state and territorial activities. They have been identified as a priority by the local and national resource management agencies in the jurisdiction where the work will occur. By supporting multiple partners from multidisciplinary fields of work, the preferred alternative taps into expertise that may not be readily available within the respective government agency. Some of the activities between the different categories are similar, such as monitoring, and the specifics are described in Table 5. For example, monitoring may be conducted through a state and territorial monitoring grant as well as a General Coral Reef Conservation grant, but the activities will fill specific gaps (e.g., each involves a different aspect of the community or occur in other locations than ongoing monitoring programs). The various project types described in Table 5 would be combined in various manners to best serve the needs of the resource management agencies, local communities and user groups, and coral reef ecosystems.

2.2 No Action Alternative

2.2.1 General

The no action alternative, i.e., not providing funds to eligible grant recipients to conduct approved coral reef activities, is possible, especially if there are no annual appropriations. However, since the CRCGP has been developed, and funds are available to implement and support the program, selecting the no action alternative would put NOAA in non-compliance with a Congressionally mandated and supported program, and deny numerous grant recipients (Federal, State, territorial, local governmental entities and foreign governments and important NGOs) the financial, scientific and technical resources needed to protect fragile coral reef ecosystem resources. Impacts of the no action alternative would include:

1. Failure to advance understanding of the problems and challenges facing the increasingly deteriorating reef ecosystems from natural and anthropomorphic impacts;
2. Curtailed application of improved management principles, coordination and communications, education and outreach on coral reefs, leading to increased degradation;
3. Inability to respond to the commitments made by the U.S. under the ICRI or to the USCRI; and
4. Lack of funding for the specially-designated USCRTF, making it difficult to achieve many of the objectives and actions identified in the National Action Plan to Conserve Coral Reef.

One of the more detrimental impacts of the no action alternative would be the lack of a cross-cutting funding program that comprehensively addresses several coral reef restoration and monitoring initiatives. It is unlikely that NOAA would select the no action alternative since the program has been designed through legislation and is supported by Congressional appropriations.

2.2.2 Other Programs

If CRCGP funds are not made available through this program, it is likely that grant recipients would have to continue to search for funding from other sources to carry out this important work as the needs and tasks will remain as necessary actions.

2.3 Conditional Recommendation of Specific Projects

2.3.1 General

Projects that do not meet all the requirements as determined by the NOAA Federal Program Officer according to established criteria identified in this PEA will not be approved unless appropriately modified. If, for some reason, a proposal would have exceptionally negative environmental impacts or not meet certain requirements, the project would not be approved or funded. Such occasions would be expected to be rare as they go through a selection process to prevent such possibilities.

In some situations a project that offers significant conservation benefits but does not have all of the information on the purpose, scope and environmental requirements, may be tentatively recommended for funding, pending further review and completion of a CE, EA or EIS. This could include projects with authorities under certain environmental provisions, or projects with methodologies that have not been previously used or discussed in this PEA. For these projects, conditions will be applied to plans and proposals that do not meet approved guidelines or the purposes of the CRCGP, with final approval deferred until all requirements are met or the action is disapproved.

Conditional approval is a mechanism whereby an applicant is provided an opportunity to make necessary changes to a plan, a grant application, or to satisfy additional NEPA or other environmental requirements before an action can occur. The award or expenditure under the award may be delayed via a Special Award Condition until the NEPA requirements are satisfied. In these cases, the Federal Program Officer will work with the applicant to complete the appropriate review, and will consult with the appropriate line office (e.g., Office of Protected Species for activities that may impact endangered species) to 1) determine whether the activities have minor non-significant impacts that are allowable; and/or 2) to determine how the project should be modified in order to comply with NEPA requirements. This alternative action is frequently used as both a resource management and a grants management tool. While this may result in delays in the expenditure of funds, the end result is usually full approval after corrections or additional information is provided or actions taken such as acquiring appropriate permits.

The consequences of implementing this alternative action are mostly administrative but can be meaningful if environmental changes are made because of review requirements and conditions required for full compliance.

Return to Table of Contents.