ÿþ<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" > <head> <title>JCAA Fisheries Management &amp; Legislative Report - JCAA News February 2011</title> <!--#include virtual="/includes/includes.ssi" --> </head> <body background="/images/fishbkd2.gif"> <!--#include virtual="/includes/headerMenu.ssi" --> <div align="center"> <a name="top"></a> <table border="0" cellpadding="15" style="border-collapse: collapse" width="730" id="table2"> <tr> <td align="left" style="text-align: center; width: 703px;"> <h1 style="text-align: center; font-family: Verdana;"> Fisheries Management &amp; Legislative Report </h1> <div style="text-align: center; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 12pt; font-style: italic;"> by Tom Fote </div> <p style="text-align: center; font-style: italic; font-size: 10pt; font-family: Verdana"> (from Jersey Coast Anglers Association <a href="Mainpage.htm">February 2011 Newsletter</a>) </p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align: left; font-family: Verdana;"> Contents: </p> <ul> <li style="text-align: left"><font size="2"><a href="#Together"> <span style="text-decoration: underline">WORKING TOGETHER: An Editorial by Tom Fote</span></a></font></li> <li style="text-align: left"><font size="2"><a href="#Funding"> <span style="text-decoration: underline">New Jersey Continues to Fail to Fund the Bureau of Marine Fisheries</span></a></font></li> <li style="text-align: left"><font size="2"><a href="#Excerpt"> <span style="text-decoration: underline">Excerpt from White Paper on Funding for the Bureau of Marine Fisheries, 2007</span></a></font></li> <li style="text-align: left"><font size="2"><a href="#Transition"> <span style="text-decoration: underline">On the Transition from MRFSS to MRIP for Black Sea Bass</span></a></font></li> <li style="text-align: left"><font size="2"><a href="#PressRelease"> <span style="text-decoration: underline">JCAA Press Release on NOAA Fisheries Service Report to Congress</span></a></font></li> <li style="text-align: left"><font size="2"><a href="#BarnegatBay"> <span style="text-decoration: underline">Good News for Barnegat Bay and New Jersey</span></a></font></li> <li style="text-align: left"><font size="2"><a href="#Update"> <span style="text-decoration: underline">Barnegat Bay Legislative Update</span></a></font></li> <li style="text-align: left"><font size="2"><a href="#Fertilizer"> <span style="text-decoration: underline">New Jersey Enacts Toughest US Rules on Fertilizer</span></a></font></li> <li style="text-align: left"><font size="2"><a href="#SandyHook"> <span style="text-decoration: underline">Federal Grant to Sandy Hook Consortium Helps Pay for Coastal Research</span></a></font></li> </ul> <p>&nbsp;</p> <a name="Together" /> <font size="2"> <span style="font-size: 14pt"> <strong>WORKING TOGETHER: An Editorial by Tom Fote</strong> </span> </font> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> If you read the JCAA Newspaper Archives, you will find several articles about working together. Almost every year we seem to have this conversation. I am disappointed that these articles do not seem to have the intended impact. To my dismay, the in-fighting and general lack of civility continues in the interactions of many groups. I work with both the environmental and fisheries communities and I find individuals and organizations in each community that view their role as competitive rather than collaborative. There is this feeling that the only way to be successful is to succeed at the expense of someone else. There are those who think they should be the only organization representing recreational anglers. They believe their solutions are the only solutions to the problems we face. While we may disagree, we need to recognize there are multiple reasonable points of view around an issue. There are very diverse members to the recreational community and each member has a unique point of view. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> When I first began working with JCAA, I realized we were unique in our commitment to a democratic process. Member clubs vote to establish JCAA positions. Although we work for consensus, sometimes it is majority rule. Controversial issues may be debated over a number of meetings before a final position is adopted. Once a position is adopted, JCAA speaks in one voice. Everyone has ample opportunity to make their point and provide as much evidence as possible. The wonderful thing about JCAA is that most often the dissenters respect the majority and remain active in JCAA to discuss the next issue that confronts us. Everyone realizes that there are many issues that require our attention. We will agree on most, compromise on some and agree to disagree on others. That s how a democracy works. There was never a  gag order in place. Even though a position was adopted, member clubs retained the right to speak in opposition publicly. Because of that history, JCAA has always maintained that democratic commitment when we collaborate with other organizations. We will not be a member of a group or coalition that refuses to have an open democratic process for developing positions. JCAA belongs to New Jersey State Federation of Sportsmens Clubs, New Jersey Outdoor Alliance, Marine Fish Conservation Network and American Sportfishing Association. Each of these organizations respects the democratic process and allows for discussion, presentations and disagreement before a position is reached. In every organization we have, at times, disagreed, stated our disagreement passionately and then respected the majority vote with the understanding that JCAA retained the right to develop its own position and move forward. We never resigned because we didn t win a vote. We never personally attacked members of these organizations because we didn t win a vote. And we stayed so we could participate in the next discussion, continue to make our points, and over time, revisit areas of disagreement. Democracy is a messy process but that is where our commitment lies. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> In the late 80 s to early 90 s we reached out to groups throughout the coast trying to build consensus on many issues including making striped bass a gamefish. We were able to bring groups with different agendas to the table to work on important issues. The strength of our numbers really gave us more clout. JCAA realized that our role was mainly in New Jersey and we needed to network across a wider area. We helped other states organize their recreational associations and clubs because we saw them as partners not competitors. This worked for many years but began to deteriorate when some people began resorting to personal attacks on individuals and other organizations as a way to enhance their own standing, at least in their own eyes. Initially we kept our meeting discussion private to encourage an honest exchange of ideas. When people began to take advantage of that privilege and use information in a negative way, particularly in the press, the trust began to erode. No longer could we honestly share opinions and respectfully disagree if our words would be used against us once the meeting was over. That open dialogue produced many wonderful ideas and I learned a great deal about the issues. I truly miss that free flow discussion. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The first thing we need to do is to respect the right of each organization to exist. We need to argue the positions and stay away from personal attacks. This is not a war. These organizations have similar goals and we are generally on the same side of issues. The goal cannot be to destroy other organizations or people with whom you disagree. The discussion may continue endlessly but we need to respect the right to disagree. We need to stop thinking that any one of us knows the exact right thing to do in any situation. That level of arrogance is not productive and keeps us from considering other alternatives that may well have merit. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> In my younger and feistier days, I was known to occasionally cross the line and go to war over issues. It hurt some relationships and I regret that to this day. I also regret the loss of information and counseling and sometimes friendship from these individuals. One of New Jersey s outstanding legislators gave me some good advice. This former state senator and I had been in a heated argument about Menhaden at the Council meeting. After the meeting, he took me aside, put his hand on my shoulder and said,  Young man, we had a real heated argument in there. You got a little hot. So you know what we are going to do now, young man? I said no. He said  We re going to go have a drink and talk. Mark my words, Tom, we will be on the same side of an issue down the road and need to work together. My older and wiser self realizes every day how true those words were and how valuable that advice has been. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> JCAA will continue to work with everyone who wants to work with us. However, our commitment to the democratic process is not negotiable. </p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <a name="Funding" /> <font size="2"> <span style="font-size: 14pt"> <strong>New Jersey Continues to Fail to Fund the Bureau of Marine Fisheries</strong> </span> </font> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Approximately four years ago I wrote a white paper on alternative funding for the Division of Fish and Wildlife. I am including an excerpt from that paper that deals with the funding problem. The entire document is available on the JCAA website under recent news (archives). Since this paper was written, things have gotten worse. Higher gas prices, tougher regulations and the economic recession have combined to have a negative impact on the recreational fishing industry. The funding problems have gotten worse as Governors have attempted to balance the budget. There has been a continued decrease in staff and the overall funding from the general fund has decreased to less than $750,000. There are those in leadership positions in the recreational community who think worrying about funding the Bureau of Marine Fisheries is not our job. I can t agree. Without appropriate funding, there is not enough personnel to actively participate on committees for stock assessment and technical issues at ASMFC. We risk being shortchanged in plans when we are unable to participate. When plans are developed we are unable to provide the technical information that supports our point of view. We can t do regional breakdowns for species like tautog because we can t accumulate the data to support decision making. As we review many of these plans in the upcoming years, this problem will be even worse. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Please read the information below so you have a good sense of the gravity of the problem. We need to prove to the Governor and the legislature that they cannot continue to make these draconian budget cuts for marine fisheries. You need to write the Governor and your legislators. Use the information below to prove your point and insist on increased funding for the Bureau of Marine Fisheries. JCAA hopes every recreational and commercial organization in New Jersey will join together to work on this issue during the budget process. The entire legislature is up for reelection in 2011. Now is the time to let them know how important this is to you and that you will be watching and voting. There are about 800,000 New Jersey saltwater anglers. We have the power of the vote. We need to use it to protect our marine resources and the recreational and commercial fishing industries. </p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <a name="Excerpt" /> <font size="2"> <span style="font-size: 14pt"> <strong>Excerpt from White Paper on Funding for the Bureau of Marine Fisheries, 2007</strong> </span> </font> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> From 1990 to the present I have served in a variety of positions including the Governor s Appointee to ASMFC, Legislative proxy to ASMFC, member of the New Jersey Marine Fisheries Council, and numerous advisory committees to the Division of Fish and Wildlife and the Bureau of Marine Fisheries. I have worked with all the DEP commissioners and Division of Fish and Wildlife directors since the 1980 s and have discussed this issue with every one of them. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> In the last 25 years I have seen a complete disregard by the state for adequate funding for the Division of Fish and Wildlife s Marine Fisheries Administration, Bureau of Marine Fisheries. The New Jersey treasury has only contributed a little over 1 million dollars per year from the general fund since the mid 80 s. The other 2 million dollars per year comes from Wallop-Breaux funds and interstate grants. Both of these funding sources come from the excise tax on saltwater tackle drawing money directly from user groups. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> I have served on the Board of Directors for the American Sportfishing Association which is the tackle manufacturers trade association. The manufacturers of hunting and fishing supplies are the only group I know which actually went to Congress and asked to be taxed to provide funds for conservation. Because of the great job these funds have done supporting and paying for these conservation and fisheries programs, the manufactures continue to support the reauthorization of Wallop-Breaux Act. That means that every angler who buys a piece of fishing tackle is already paying for the management of freshwater and saltwater fish in New Jersey. Without Wallop-Breaux and Dingle-Johnson (excise tax on hunting equipment) and the license fees for freshwater fishing and hunting, the Division of Fish and Wildlife would be unable to operate. If we use the funding in other states as a guideline, the Bureau of Marine Fisheries should be funded at about 11 million dollars. A slightly higher figure was included in the 2003 White Paper done for the Division of Fish and Wildlife. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> In this same period of time I have seen a huge reduction in staff in the Division of Fish and Wildlife, most seriously in the Bureau of Marine Fisheries. Even in the years where money was not tight and other agencies of state government were seeing increases in funding and staff, the Bureau of Marine Fisheries has seen no increase. This has significantly hampered their ability to manage the resource and meet the escalating responsibilities placed on them by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC) and state mandates. When I first became the Governor s Appointee to ASMFC in 1990 on the recreational side, we were dealing with a fisheries management plan for striped bass, a 13 inch size limit on summer flounder and some bluefin tuna regulations. This required only minimal staff time. On the commercial side we were dealing with shell fish regulations and some fin fish fisheries but these responsibilities were very limited. There were no commercial quotas to monitor on any of the fin fish and there were few size restrictions. Most of the commercial responsibilities were monitoring surf clams, oysters, hard clams and soft clams. There was only insignificant monitoring of commercial fin fish by the state. Without the required monitoring for fin fish, there was more emphasis on the science of marine fisheries and the environmental connections. The Division of Fish and Wildlife had its own economist who could provide information about the economic impact of hunting and fishing in New Jersey. This has all changed. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> In 2007, the Bureau of Marine Fisheries was responsible for implementing over 20 Fisheries Management Plans (FMP) put in place by either the ASMFC or NMFS. Most of the plans require a monitoring of size, recreational bag limits, seasons, commercial quotas and biological information for stock assessment. To meet these additional responsibilities there has been no increase in total staff. In fact, the staff has continued to decrease to a level about 30% less. The Bureau of Marine Fisheries has been in crisis mode and unable to meet minimum requirements for the last 15 years. We have been voted out of compliance by ASMFC since we are unable to do the biological research required in some of the FMP s. I am not blaming the Division. Everyone who works there does a fantastic job with way too few people. The fault is not theirs. What I have seen is the impact this understaffing has on morale, sometimes resulting in early retirements of valued staff. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> This lack of increased funding has occurred despite the contribution of recreational fishing to New Jersey s economy. Recreational fishing alone contributes 1.3 billion dollars annually to New Jersey s economy. It accounts for over 500,000 visitors to New Jersey each year with fishing as the goal. The boating industry is a 2 billion dollar industry, tied to fishing, a clean environment and a well-managed resource. The most recent figures I have seen suggests the commercial industry contributes 4  5 hundred million dollars annually. The fin fish component is more than 50 million dollars. The NJ sales tax generated by recreational fishing is over 100 million dollars. This is separate from the federal excise tax that funds Wallop-Breaux. Boat registration generates about 5 million dollars. To buy a vehicle fishing permit to drive a vehicle on the beach at Island Beach State Park costs $195 annually. With approximately 6,000 permits sold each year, this generated 1,170,000 dollars. Just the vehicle fishing permits at Island Beach exceed the state of New Jersey s annual contribution to the Division of Fish and Wildlife. New Jersey ranks #2 in the country in the number of trips made for recreational saltwater fishing. We rank #2 or #3 in the number of anglers. We rank #3 in the commercial landings. However, we are outspent for a state Bureau of Marine Fisheries by every state. We are at the bottom of the list for funding despite being at the top of the list for income generated. To add insult to injury, the state is now going to spend 4½ million dollars to study the effects of the proposed wind mills off New Jersey s coast and none of that money is going to study fish. That is more than four times what the state contributes to the Bureau of Marine Fisheries annually! </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Right now the income generated at the Bureau of Marine Fisheries comes from surf clamming licenses, commercial lobster and fish pot permits, permits for the striped bass bonus tag program, recreational and commercial crab pot licenses, some netting license fees, and assorted bait permits. There is no license to sell commercial fish and no recreational saltwater fishing license. There are strong feelings in the recreational and commercial fishing communities that the state of New Jersey has not been contributing its fair share to the Bureau of Marine Fisheries. If 10% of the sales tax that is generated by recreational fishing was allocated to the budget of the Bureau of Marine Fisheries, the current budget would quadruple. </p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <a name="Transition" /> <font size="2"> <span style="font-size: 14pt"> <strong>On the Transition from MRFSS to MRIP for Black Sea Bass</strong> </span> </font> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> I have gained some insight on the transition from Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS) to the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) for future Black Sea Bass (BSB) stock assessment that I am happy to be able to share. As you are likely aware, we have been waiting for some time for NMFS to rectify problems with MRFSS regarding recreational catch figures on black sea bass, problems that were well-documented by the National Research Council. The responses I have received to several questions on this topic are informative and somewhat reassuring that improved catch data is on the immediate horizon. I will discuss the issue further at the next ASMFC meeting. I suggest a JCAA Black Sea Bass Committee take a look at these responses. If you want to share your thoughts on this, please send me an email. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> <em><b>Question:</b> Will NOAA Fisheries still rely on the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS) framework for stock assessments in 2011, 2012, and in future years? How does MRFSS data play into the Black Sea Bass stock assessment and management?</em> </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> <b>NMFS Response:</b> NOAA Fisheries develops recreational catch estimates for black sea bass via three current ongoing surveys. The coastal household telephone survey generates information on angler trips. The access point angler intercept survey provides data on catch per trip. The results of the two surveys are combined to generate catch estimates for shore and private boat angling modes. The for-hire survey and access point angler intercept survey provide estimates for the for-hire (charter and head boat) mode. The Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) is developing revised methods (consistent with the National Research Council recommendations) that will be phased in over the next two years to substantially improve the accuracy of effort and catch estimates based on a combination of telephone, mail and access point surveys. In 2011, the MRIP will implement a new design-unbiased method to calculate catch estimates from MRFSS data. Later in 2011, the Program will implement an improved sampling design for access point surveys that will further resolve potential bias issues. These changes address the highest priority findings of the National Research Council s 2006 review of our current survey methods. In addition, NOAA Fisheries implemented the National Saltwater Angler Registry Program in 2010 and will begin implementing new survey designs for estimating fishing effort that are based primarily on direct sampling from lists of registered anglers who fish from shore or private boats or from lists of registered for-hire boats and their operators. The new registry-based approach will replace the coastal household telephone survey and upgrade the for-hire survey. We expect that full implementation of the new fishing effort surveys will occur by the beginning of 2012. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The historical data from MRFSS will continue to be used in the black sea bass assessments in future years. Stock assessment models rely on a long-term time series of catch as a primary measure of population size. The transition from MRFSS to MRIP will result in improved estimates of recreational catch in future years, but the full implications of the MRIP for the historical record of landings from MRFSS have not been identified. However, the scientific and statistical advances associated with the development of MRIP should allow NOAA Fisheries to improve the historical estimates from MRFSS. This is possible because historical data can be re-estimated using alternative newly-developed statistical models. This is not a simple task and the process of revising the historical estimates has only just begun. To date, provisional re-estimates for 2003 to 2010 are being examined and revised catch estimates for this time period will be complete by mid-2011. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> <em><b>Question:</b> When will MRIP be fully implemented so that stock assessments will no longer be based on MRFSS data? In particular, when will the Black Sea Bass stock assessment be based on MRIP?</em> </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> <b>NMFS response:</b> The transition from the MRFSS sampling design and assessment methodologies will take several years to implement. Catch estimates incorporate the improvements noted above. It should be recognized that the importance of historical information diminishes over time, so that the existing MRFSS estimates will become less influential as contemporary measures of recreational catch are obtained through MRIP. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The MRIP has established a process for developing and implementing improvements to survey methods that is expected to be continuous over time. NOAA Fisheries will phase in these improvements as they are developed via the MRIP process, working with our partners in each region to address priority data needs and areas of survey improvement. Please refer to the MRIP Implementation Plan at www.countmyfish.noaa.gov for more detailed information on the MRIP. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> By mid-2011, NOAA Fisheries will complete revising catch estimates for the period of 2003 to 2010, applying the new design-unbiased estimation method referred to in the response to the first question. Also, we expect the new access point angler intercept survey and registry-based effort survey methods to be used to support production of catch estimates for the full calendar year 2012. NOAA Fisheries will continue to phase in additional MRIP-developed survey design improvements over time as they are developed, tested and peer reviewed. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Once the initial, high-priority survey improvements referenced above have been implemented, NOAA Fisheries intends to use available funds to increase the amount of sampling in order to improve the statistical precision and to improve the spatial and temporal resolution of the catch estimates, beginning in 2012. Also, contingent on receiving increased funding, NOAA Fisheries is planning to implement changes that will enable catch estimates to be made more quickly in order to facilitate in-season tracking of catch and to implement electronic logbook reporting by the for-hire vessels in those regions where this method is preferred by the Councils and our state partners. These improvements could begin in 2013, if funding becomes available. </p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <a name="PressRelease" /> <font size="2"> <span style="font-size: 14pt"> <strong>JCAA Press Release on NOAA Fisheries Service Report to Congress</strong> </span> </font> <p style="text-align: center"> <span style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 11pt;"><strong>Contact</strong>: Tom Fote, <a href="mailto:tfote@jcaa.org">tfote@jcaa.org</a>, 732-270-9102<br /> <strong>Date</strong>: 1/17/2011</span> </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Today Jersey Coast Anglers Association received a copy of the <a target="_blank" href="http://www.jcaa.org/news/NMFS_FutureOfRecreationFishing.pdf">National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Fisheries Service Report to Congress on the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP)</a>. This discusses and reports the new way NOAA's Fisheries Service is counting and reporting marine recreational catch and effort. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> In the letter that accompanied the report, the author includes:  NOAA states that it is a customer-driven initiative that will not only produce better estimates, but will do so through a process grounded in the principles of transparency, accountability and engagement. MRIP replaces the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey, or MRFSS, which has been in place since the 1970s. MRIP is designed to meet two critical needs: 1) Provide the detailed, timely, scientifically sound estimates that fisheries managers, stock assessors and marine scientists need to ensure the sustainability of ocean resources; and 2) Address head-on stakeholder concerns about the reliability and credibility of recreational fishing catch and effort estimates. In early 2011, you can expect to see the use of data from the National Saltwater Anger Register in recreational fishing studies, and a major re-estimation of MRFSS estimates based on the new MRIP method for counting and reporting catch and effort. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The recreational community has long awaited a system that will better report the recreational landings and in a timely manner. The entire report will be posted on the JCAA webpage. JCAA will be reviewing the report in depth and responding to the information. You can share any comments or concerns by emailing me at <a href="mailto:tfote@jcaa.org">tfote@jcaa.org</a>. </p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <a name="BarnegatBay" /> <font size="2"> <span style="font-size: 14pt"> <strong>Good News for Barnegat Bay and New Jersey</strong> </span> </font> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> In the last newspaper, I talked about the good things going on with Barnegat Bay. Three of the bills discussed in that article were passed by the legislature and signed by the Governor. We would like to thank Governor Christie and the Legislature for taking these vital first steps. Combined with the Governor s announcement of his commitment to the bay, we have a new focus on the health of the bay. The Barnegat Bay Partnership played a major role in gathering the necessary data and fostering a public awareness of the problems faced by the bay. Without the perseverance of Senator Bob Smith and Assemblyman John McKeon, this legislation would never have happened. They have been working on this for years and never gave up in the face of controversy or apathy. They continued to build the consensus necessary to get this legislation passed. I know they remain committed to the additional legislation that is necessary. There are some hard things yet to do and in a time of economic problems, funding the work will be a challenge. Below are the three bills that are now law: The office for Senator Bob Smith provided us with a legislative update that is included in this edition. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The  Fertilizer Bill (A2290) codifies best management processes for fertilizer for use on lawns throughout the State of NJ by regulating the content and application of fertilizer. This bill was initially conceptualized as a model local ordinance by Save Barnegat Bay before it gained momentum at the State level. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The  Soil Health (A2501) addresses the need for comprehensive soil care practices at a Statewide level. This new law will use a common sense approach to soil management and sets best management processes for soil care throughout the State. [Editor's Note: The legislation requires the development of standards for restoration of soil affected during construction projects, aiming to eliminate unnecessary soil compaction or removal] </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The  NJDOT Stormwater Basin Bill (A3606) speaks to a hidden need in our communities that of our stormwater basins. This last piece of legislation will provide dedicated funding for the restoration and repair of DOT managed stormwater basins and mandates that the Department of Transportation annually review their stormwater basins and address any problems that are found." </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> These three bills represent models for other bays and estuaries throughout the state and throughout the country. As usual, New Jersey is at the forefront in working on environmental issues. We will be tracking the progress of the remaining bills and keep you updated. You need to continue letting your legislators know that these bills are the highest priority and their  Yes votes are expected. </p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <a name="Update" /> <font size="2"> <span style="font-size: 14pt"> <strong>Barnegat Bay Legislative Update</strong> </span> </font> <p style="text-align: center"> <span style="font-size: 10pt">from the Office of Senator Bob Smith<br /></span> <br /> </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> This past summer, at a joint meeting of the Senate Environment and Energy Committee and the Assembly Environment and Solid Waste Committee, a package of bills was moved that will help restore the Barnegat Bay from years of misuse and pollution. Barnegat Bay generates $3.3 billion of revenue every year in recreation and tourism for the State of New Jersey, while employing tens of thousands of New Jersey residents. It is critical that we work together to clean up this national treasure for both economic and environmental reasons. While each bill is a measure to revive the ecology of the bay, they address the underlying problem of storm water runoff in the surrounding areas of Ocean County. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The first bill requires the soil conservation service to issue regulations requiring that soil be restored after construction has occurred at a site. Heavy construction equipment causes soil compaction, which then acts as if the soil was concrete or asphalt, increasing storm water runoff into the bay. The most important bill in this package is designed to restrict the use of fertilizer and to limit the nitrogen content in a bag of fertilizer. The increased amount of run-off containing fertilizer is causing the Barnegat Bay to undergo a process called eutrophication. Eutrophication results in the stimulation of algae growth and adversely changes the environment to the detriment of the clams, fish and other species and finally to the ultimate filling in of the bay. The Barnegat Bay is now classified as the second worst bay in America because of the extensive eutrophication occurring here. By setting regulations that will require soil to be restored after construction projects to reduce soil compaction and instituting the toughest fertilizer legislation in the country, we are working to revitalize the bay and improve its classification. Sponsors of the legislation, Senator Bob Smith, Chairman of the Senate Environment and Energy Committee and Assemblyman John McKeon, Chairman of the Assembly Environment and Solid Waste Committee were pleased that this past December these bills passed both the New Jersey State Senate and the New Jersey Assembly and were signed into law in the beginning of 2011. One bill also requires the State of New Jersey to clean up any state owned storm water basins which impact Barnegat Bay. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Critically important to the future health of the Bay will be adoption of TMDLS (Total Maximum Daily Loads) like the ones that have been adopted by the Chesapeake Bay jurisdictions and which reduce pollution into the bay. Finally, one bill permits, but does not require the Ocean County Board of Freeholders to set up a Stormwater Utility to fund the cleanup and restoration of the more than 2,000 malfunctioning stormwater basins which are killing Barnegat bay. The major advantages of a stormwater Utility is that the large property owners with large impervious surfaces pay for the stormwater pollution that they are causing rather than the average taxpayer paying for these improvements. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The first step toward the clean up of the bay has begun! </p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <a name="Fertilizer" /> <font size="2"> <span style="font-size: 14pt"> <strong>New Jersey Enacts Toughest US Rules on Fertilizer</strong> </span> </font> <p style="text-align: center"> <span style="font-size: 10pt">by Wayne Parry, Associated Press, 1/5/2010<br /></span> <br /> </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> WARETOWN  New Jersey adopted the nation's toughest restrictions on fertilizer Wednesday as part of a package of bills signed into law by Gov. Chris Christie to protect the fragile Barnegat Bay from further pollution. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Runoff from fertilizer applied to lawns and farms eventually makes its way into waterways and contributes to water pollution and fish-killing algae blooms. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The bills require upgrades to malfunctioning storm drains, force contractors to loosen soil that becomes hard-packed. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> A key provision requires that at least 20 percent of nitrogen in fertilizer sold in New Jersey be the slow-release type to prevent it from easily washing into waterways. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Christie signed the bills in Waretown, a Barnegat Bay boating and crabbing community. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> "Over the years there have been studies and talks and conversations about taking the necessary steps to save Barnegat Bay, but very little action," Christie said in the clubhouse of a bayfront beach club after signing the bills. "Today you saw action." </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Dena Mottola Jaborska, executive director of Environment New Jersey, said the bills are a good first step in a long process to undo decades of pollution and neglect. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> "This is a big day for the Barnegat Bay and the state's waterways," she said. "Fertilizer pollution is the invisible scourge that has been slowly polluting our bays, rivers and streams." </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Jeff Tittel, director of New Jersey Sierra Club, called the bills "a victory for the environment." "Without these bills especially, the fertilizer bill, the bay will die," he said.  These bills are each a piece of the puzzle to protect the bay and our environment." </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Christie said he was signing  the toughest fertilizer standards in America," and noted the fertilizer industry gave significant opposition to the proposed standards before both sides agreed on the 20 percent nitrogen requirement. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Nitrogen is a major component of water pollution. It leads to algae blooms that deprive water of oxygen and kill fish and other marine life. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> It also encourages the growth of stinging jellyfish, which have overrun the bay and rivers near it, including the Manasquan and Metedeconk, making them virtually unswimmable at times and clogging the engines of some boats. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> "How people and towns manage their lawns, soil and stormwater affects the health of NJ's waters--especially Barnegat Bay," said Heather Saffert, a staff scientist for the Clean Ocean Action environmental group. "These laws help reduce pollution and increase the public's awareness of these problems and importance of our natural resources." </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Another essential part of the state's plan to protect the bay is an agreement negotiated last month with the owners of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station to shut down the nation's oldest nuclear power plant in 2019, 10 years earlier than expected. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> It is located next door to Waretown in the Forked River section of Lacey Township. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The plant sucks 1.4 billion gallons a day from the bay into its pipes, and discharges warmer water back into the bay, which hurts water quality. The plant agreed to shut down early in return for New Jersey backing off its demand that it build costly cooling towers to replace the massive water intake to cool the plant. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> A fourth Barnegat Bay bill that passed the state legislature was not part of the package signed into law Wednesday. It would establish a "total daily maximum load" for nutrients like nitrogen that can be allowed to enter the bay each day. Christie said that bill is still in legal review. </p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <a name="SandyHook" /> <font size="2"> <span style="font-size: 14pt"> <strong>Federal Grant to Sandy Hook Consortium Helps Pay for Coastal Research</strong> </span> </font> <p style="text-align: center"> <span style="font-size: 10pt">by Jennifer Bradshaw, Staff Writer, 12/31/2010<br /></span> <br /> </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> SANDY HOOK  A $471,500 installment awarded to the New Jersey Sea Grant Consortium from the federal Department of Commerce will benefit research projects that are collecting data around the Shore in the hope of improvement and better understanding of local beaches and coastlines. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> Claire Antonucci, executive director of the consortium said the money is the second half of a $943,000 grant that the consortium submitted a proposal for last year. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> "That money goes toward funding our education research and extension program," she said. "Almost half of that money does go to research." </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> There are four research projects currently under way within the consortium, three of which are at Rutgers and one at William Paterson University. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The Rutgers projects are examining the movement of water particles from the Raritan Bay out into the ocean, collecting data on the ratios of male and female summer flounder in commercial and recreational fisheries in the state, and measuring the amount of mature adult fish to the surviving offspring in fish populations, according to the consortium website. </p><p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> The experiment at William Paterson examines different kinds of beach grass to determine if planting different species of the grass makes for a stronger dune, Antonucci said. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> "These are two-year projects and the researchers are three-quarters of the way through the first year," Antonucci said. </p> <p style="text-indent: 0.5in; text-align: justify"> After the projects are completed, the findings are shared with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and other interested agencies, such as the Department of Environmental Protection and local government, she said. </p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <font face="Verdana" color="#008080" size="1"> <br /> <br /> <a title="Back to Table of Contents for this month's issue" href="Mainpage.htm">[News Contents]</a> <strong> <a href="#top">[Top]</a> </strong> </font><br/> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" style="width: 699px"> </td> </tr> </table> </div> </body> </html>