Politics Tuesday: Marine Sanctuaries--Are They Enough?

Posted by Traci Reid, traci@oceanchampions.org

On Nov. 7 more than 58,000 gallons of oil spilled into the San Francisco Bay, killing coastal birds, closing fisheries, and making lots of 5:00 news programs. Over the last two weeks the spill has spread beyond the Bay and into coastal waters designated as National Marine Sanctuaries.

33728387.jpgSo what does it mean to have areas designated as Marine Sanctuaries if they aren't protected from disasters like this? Admittedly, I've made more than one presentation extolling the virtues of designation as a Marine Sanctuary. Unfortunately, if you strip the National Marine Sanctuaries Act down to its essentials, there's simply not enough behind it to offer significant protection.

In 2003 Ocean Champion Rep. Lois Capps (D- CA 23) introduced the Stop Oil Spills Act (HR 880), which would have accelerated the replacement of single hulled oil tankers with double hulled vessels - a move that could have protected our coastal communities from the mess happening right now in the San Francisco Bay.

But the politics du jour is to operate in crisis mode. Something horrible happens, the media makes a big stink, people point fingers, and maybe a law comes out of it. So as much as I hate that crisis mode, maybe we can take advantage of it (yet again) to do something good for the oceans.

The National Marine Sanctuaries Act is up for reauthorization this year, and we should use this spill to push for a strong reauthorization, as well as some version of Rep. Capps' bill that would apply to all vessels, not just tankers.

This oil spill, and the fact that it could have been avoided, just illustrates the need to elect members of Congress who will be Ocean Champions - who will fight for forward-thinking legislation on behalf of the oceans, and who will take action before, not after, crises occur.

More like this

The authors found that the frequencies of allergic and IgE-associated allergic disease and sensitization were similar in the children who had received probiotic and those whoâd gotten placebo. Although there appeared to be a preventive effect at age 2, there was none noted at age 5. Interestingly, in babies born by cesarean section, the researchers found less IgE-associated allergic disease in those who had received the probiotic.

The authors found that the frequencies of allergic and IgE-associated allergic disease and sensitization were similar in the children who had received probiotic and those whoâd gotten placebo. Although there appeared to be a preventive effect at age 2, there was none noted at age 5. Interestingly, in babies born by cesarean section, the researchers found less IgE-associated allergic disease in those who had received the probiotic.

The authors found that the frequencies of allergic and IgE-associated allergic disease and sensitization were similar in the children who had received probiotic and those whoâd gotten placebo. Although there appeared to be a preventive effect at age 2, there was none noted at age 5. Interestingly, in babies born by cesarean section, the researchers found less IgE-associated allergic disease in those who had received the probiotic.