OC 333

Redefining “Best Available Science”

Recently a major NGO and TV station ran a story covering our most recent report which covered costal futures of the US west coast county. Our report was made using some of the best available science, but in fact we have fallen short. While the science we used included was well supported and noteworthy, we failed to include knowledge that takes on a more transdisciplinary approach.

Expanding Knowledge

According to Robinson (2020), ocean sociotechnical imageries emerged new images of the ocean frontier in the mid-20^th century. It helps to think further ahead about what technology may be available in the future as opposed to what is available at that moment. Levin et al. (2023), displays an example for us explaining how meetings with both contracting parties and experts of the Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection (GESAMP), can allow for better coordination as there will be more familiarity with technologies at hand. The “best available science” is not always what is readily available, sometimes it takes tracking down more information to be better educated.

Importance of Expansion

Transdisciplinary approaches provide great benefits for helping ocean and costal sciences. Kiatkoski Kim et al., (2022) explains how transdisciplinary research has proved to be successful at providing solution to environment problems as it brings science closer to society by bridging the gap of implementation. Another way in which this approach can prove to be beneficial beyond conducting research is through identifying needs or objectives. Stated by Proulx et al., (2021), through understanding the needs of indigenous communities by having an open mind, can lead to finding and acknowledging that both the scientific and indigenous communities may share similar objectives.

Challenges

Now while transdisciplinary approaches provide many benefits, there are challenges that come with it. One pointed out by Franke et al. (2021), is that prevailing disciplinary mindset within scientific communities challenge the transdisciplinary and socio-political environments where the research takes place. To overcome these challenges scientists must work transparently and professionally in order for this type of approach to work.

Closing Remarks

We view our past mistake as not so much of a mistake, but an opportunity to bring forth a better way of working within science. Moving forward our work will be sure to incorporate indigenous and local knowledge into our reports and all future work.

References:

Franke, A., Peters, K., Hinkel, J., Hornige, A.-K., Schlüter, A., Zielinski, O., Wiltshire, K. H., Jacob, U., Krause, G., and Hillebrand, H. (2021). Making the UN Ocean Decade Work? the potential for, and challenges of, Transdisciplinary Research & real-world laboratories for building towards Ocean Solutions.

Kiatkoski Kim, M., Douglas, M. M., Pannell, D., Setterfield, S. A., Hill, R., Laborde, S., Perrott, L., Álvarez-Romero, J. G., Beesley, L., Canham, C., and Brecknell, A. (2022). “When to use transdisciplinary approaches for environmental research.” Frontiers in Environmental Science, 10.

Levin, L. A., Alfaro-Lucas, J. M., Colaço, A., Cordes, E. E., Craik, N., Danovaro, R., Hoving, H.-J., Ingels, J., Mestre, N. C., Seabrook, S., Thurber, A. R., Vivian, C., and Yasuhara, M. (2023). “Deep-sea impacts of climate interventions.” Science, 379(6636), 978–981.

Proulx, M., Ross, L., Macdonald, C., Fitzsimmons, S., and Smit, M. (2021). “Indigenous traditional ecological knowledge and ocean observing: A review of successful partnerships.” Frontiers in Marine Science, 8.

Robinson, S. (2020). “Scientific Imaginaries and science diplomacy: The case of ocean exploitation.” Centaurus, 63(1), 150–170.

Our Stance

Here at Maersk, we understand that sustainability and environmental safety is just as important underwater, as it is above. More specifically, underwater noise pollution has become an increased threat to marine life. We believe it is our duty here at Maersk, to lead by example and make conscious efforts to reduce noise pollution within the industry of maritime transportation.

Latest Information

Durate et al. (2021), explains that the soundscape of the Anthropocene Ocean has changed from that of what it was during preindustrial times, and noise pollution has since begun to negatively impact marine life. Activities such as pile driving, sonar, maritime traffic, mining, and many more have shown to cause great disturbances to underwater ecosystems and life. Below is figure 1 showing projects that have been conducted to research underwater sound.

Figure 1: International projects that have conducted research on underwater noise (Rako-Gospic & Picciulin, 2023).

Evidence

Moretti and Affatati (2023), go on to explain how acoustic environment is cemented in the marine adaptations and ecological connections that have become vital for the health of the planet and the ecosystem itself. Problems such as reproduction, feeding, navigation, stress, and communication disruption have directly affected marine life from noise pollution. According to El-Dairi et al. (2024), Anthropogenic noise has also caused behavioral changes that have been seen to disrupt normal marine life activities or displace them from their natural habitats.

Taking Action

Maersk has investigated ways that we can help lower noise pollution, and we hope that our steps will be followed by others. Where we plan to start aligns with research from Chou et al. (2021), where it is discussed to reroute vessels and limit noise-generating activity in specific areas and during times in which there are large populations of animals (such as breeding and feeding areas). According to Rako-Gospic & Picciulin, (2023), as we move forward, although noise management has not become a mandate throughout the world, many of the necessary steps are in place.

It Starts Now

Maersk has a mission to do whatever is necessary to mitigate underwater noise pollution in maritime transportation. We look to do our part knowing that it is the right thing to do, and in the process we hope to encourage others to look out and draw considerations on to marine life in the Anthropocene World.

References:

Chou, E., Southall, B. L., Robards, M., and Rosenbaum, H. C. (2021). “International policy, recommendations, actions and mitigation efforts of Anthropogenic Underwater Noise.” Ocean & Coastal Management, 202, 105427.

Duarte, C. M., Chapuis, L., Collin, S. P., Costa, D. P., Devassy, R. P., Eguiluz, V. M., Erbe, C., Gordon, T. A., Halpern, B. S., Harding, H. R., Havlik, M. N., Meekan, M., Merchant, N. D., Miksis-Olds, J. L., Parsons, M., Predragovic, M., Radford, A. N., Radford, C. A., Simpson, S. D., Slabbekoorn, H., Staaterman, E., Van Opzeeland, I. C., Winderen, J., Zhang, X., and Juanes, F. (2021). “The soundscape of the Anthropocene Ocean.” Science, 371(6529).

El-Dairi, R., Outinen, O., and Kankaanpää, H. (2024). “Anthropogenic underwater noise: A review on physiological and molecular responses of Marine Biota.” Marine Pollution Bulletin, 199, 115978.

Moretti, P. F., and Affatati, A. (2023). “Understanding the impact of underwater noise to preserve marine ecosystems and manage anthropogenic activities.” Sustainability, 15(13), 10178.

Rako-Gospic, N., and Picciulin, M. (2023). “Addressing underwater noise: Joint efforts and progress on its Global Governance.” Advances in Marine Biology, 201–232.

HABs

Oceans, coasts, and the people who live there are more and more at risk from HABs or harmful algal blooms. HABs are toxins, such as domoic acid, that originate from specific algae such as Pseudo-nitzschia. As these toxins are projected to only increase in both intensity and frequency due to climate change, stated by Jin et al. (2024), it is necessary to implement proactive management.

Cause

Fisheries (2025), an article by NOAA explains that, Pseudo-nitzschia produces the harmful toxin domoic acid that can be found in fish and shellfish. These harmful toxins prosper under conditions consisting of warm ocean temperatures, saltier freshwater, and nutrient pollution which correlates with HAB spikes as written by Oh et al. (2023). With the increasing climate, these conditions will only continue to intensify, and Oregon is sure to see HAB breakouts in the summer.

Effect

Breakouts of HABs affect not only the fish, but the industries and the communities around them. Stated by Anderson et al. (2021), in 2005 Maine had loss revenues of 2.4 million dollars and Massachusetts had a loss revenue of 16-18 million dollars because of HABs affecting commercial fisheries. Breakouts can cause fisheries to close, and people end up losing their jobs. The effects of eating fish and shellfish that include domoic acid can leave people with nausea and sometimes even seizures.

Mitigation

To keep communities from falling ill due to marine HABs, people can monitor informational sites such as Oregon Health Authority (link down below) that give out current cyanobacteria advisories. It is also important to educate and regularly engage in conversations to keep the issue relevant to the public. As shown in figure 1, Moore et al. (2024) used publications in order to analyze the effects of humans and in doing so helps to educate others.

Link to Oregon Health Authority: Oregon Health Authority : Current Cyanobacteria Advisories : Cyanobacteria Blooms : State of Oregon

Figure 1: Publications included in the analysis of HAB effects on the well-being of Human on the US West Coast fishing communities.

Together

Coastal Oregon communities are increasingly at risk of HABs. With monitoring and community involvement, we can help limit and preserve the public health and protect fisheries from the damage that comes from these breakouts. As Henry Ford once said, “Coming together is a beginning, keeping together is progress, working together is success”.

References:

Anderson, D. M., Fensin, E., Gobler, C. J., Hoeglund, A. E., Hubbard, K. A., Kulis, D. M., Landsberg, J. H., Lefebvre, K. A., Provoost, P., Richlen, M. L., Smith, J. L., Solow, A. R., and Trainer, V. L. (2021). “Marine harmful algal blooms (habs) in the United States: History, current status and future trends.” Harmful Algae, 102, 101975.

Fisheries, N. (2025). “Effects of harmful algal blooms on West Coast fishing communities.” NOAA, <https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/west-coast/science-data/effects-harmful-algal-blooms-west-coast-fishing-communities> (Aug. 10, 2025).

Jin, D., Kourantidou, M., Weir, M. J., and Horstmann, I. (2024). “Assessing the value of harmful algal bloom forecasts in the Pacific Northwest.” ICES Journal of Marine Science, 81(9), 1796–1816.

Oh, J.-W., Pushparaj, S. S., Muthu, M., and Gopal, J. (2023). “Review of harmful algal blooms (habs) causing marine fish kills: Toxicity and mitigation.” Plants, 12(23), 3936.

Moore, S. K., Broadwater, M., Cha, C., Dortch, Q., Harvey, C. J., Norman, K. C., Pearce, J., Pomeroy, C., and Samhouri, J. F. (2024). “Exploring the human dimensions of harmful algal blooms through a well-being framework to increase resilience in a Changing World.” PLOS Climate, 3(5).

Anthropocene

Anthropocene is the term used to refer to the current time in geology in which humans have had a dominating influence on the climate and the environment. The big question we look at during this time is how ecology is affected. More specifically today we ask the question whether coral reefs can survive during this time and what their future looks like.

Can They Survive?

It is known that coral reefs have underwent rapid degeneration over the years from both humans and climate change. According to Edwards eat al. (2024), coral reef ecosystems will continue to decline unless greenhouse gases are reduced and strategies are put into place to assist with adaptation. In addition, Jury et al. (2024) supports these claims stating that if climate change is limited to Paris Climate Agreement targets, coral reefs do have the chance of surviving. Coral reefs can survive in the Anthropocene, but what does this future look like under these claims?

How do They Survive?

It starts with being realistic about where society is at and how to go about helping. Stated by Quigley et al. (2022), not all areas can and should be restored. Quigley goes on to state in the article that focuses should be directed towards protecting existing reefs, using resilient coral species, and boosting biodiversity. There is no time to wait. Acting promptly and intentionally is key for coral reef survival. Bowden-Kerby (2022) claims that in the next 25 years the time for action and persistent effort is closing and by 2050, it will be too late. The time to start was long before, but we can still see a future with coral reefs if we act accordingly. Charo, B (2023) explains that through simulation they have found the two 2 key takeaways to help ensure survival include, genetic variability among coral reefs and the urgency to reduce human emissions. Complementary to this, Paxton et al. (2024) explains how dialogue with affected communities is needed to help imagine the building of ecosystem resilience.

Ready, Set, Go!

Coral reefs can be part of our future for years to come, but it all starts with the amount of time and effort we put in starting now. “How you do anything is how you do everything” -unknown.

References:

Bowden-Kerby, A. (2022). “Coral-focused climate change adaptation and restoration based on accelerating natural processes: Launching the ‘Reefs of hope’ paradigm.” Oceans, 4(1), 13–26.

Charo, B. (2023). “Coral reefs can adapt to climate change – here’s how .” Coral Reef Alliance, <https://coral.org/en/blog/coral-reefs-can-adapt-to-climate-change-heres-how/> (Aug. 3, 2025).

Edwards, A., Guest, J., and Humanes, A. (2024). “Rehabilitating coral reefs in the anthropocene.” Current Biology, 34(9).

Jury, C. P., Bahr, K. D., Cros, A., Dobson, K. L., Freel, E. B., Graham, A. T., McLachlan, R. H., Nelson, C. E., Price, J. T., Rocha de Souza, M., Shizuru, L., Smith, C. M., Sparagon, W. J., Squair, C. A., Timmers, M. A., Vicente, J., Webb, M. K., Yamase, N. H., Grottoli, A. G., and Toonen, R. J. (2024). “Experimental coral reef communities transform yet persist under mitigated future ocean warming and acidification.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(45).

Paxton, G., Lockie, S., and Backhaus, V. (2024). “Articulating futures: Community storylines and assisted ecosystem adaptation in the Great Barrier Reef.” Environmental Science &amp; Policy, 162, 103944.

Quigley, K. M., Hein, M., and Suggett, D. J. (2022). “Translating the 10 golden rules of reforestation for Coral Reef Restoration.” Conservation Biology, 36(4).

Un-recognized

There is currently a lack of recognition when looking at the contribution that is made from women in field of small-scale fisheries along coastal regions. According to Haper et al. (2020) Gender considerations continue to be understated in fishery policies and management worldwide. With women being an essential component to this field of work, the money from donors should go to help support women in these roles.

Women Deserve Investment

Gender inequalities are prevalent in small scale fisheries, as men tend to hold positions that are linked with decision making, according to Lawless et al (2022). Lawless et al (2022) also goes on to explain, that when small scale fisheries priorities are positioned towards ecology, gender is instrumental. With the help of donor funding, initiatives that foster agency and dispute systematic bias will help encourage women in the fishery industry. Stated by Aurthur et al. (2021) more than 50 percent of fish caught in thew world is being caught by small scale fisheries, and from that around 90 percent is consumed locally. Within these fisheries, women play a critical role in assisting with needed nutrition and the effects and adaptations stemming from climate change.

How do the Funds Help

Galappaththi et al. (2022) states that women make up roughly 40 percent of the small-scale fishery workforce and depend on coastal and marine resources for their livelihood. So how can donor funds truly help women? Donor funds can be to run and teach gender inclusive training and leadership programs; they can be used to help provide women with needed technology and infrastructure and can even be used to collect more data to showcase women’s contribution within the industry. Lastly, these funds can aide women establish a voice in management and policies.

Future of Fish

Buck S. (2024) writes about how many women in costal fishing communities often start their day before sunrise and end them much after sundown. Their labor comes at a cost that is not being recognized. By helping to strengthen the voice of women and their opportunity to be in decision-making roles, will help to promise healthy fish for generation to come.

References

Arthur, R. I., Skerritt, D. J., Schuhbauer, A., Ebrahim, N., Friend, R. M., and Sumaila, U. R. (2021). “Small‐scale fisheries and local food systems: Transformations, threats and opportunities.” Fish and Fisheries, 23(1), 109–124.

Buck, S. (2024). “Strengthening women’s voices in small-scale fisheries.” Rare, <https://rare.org/stories-articles/the-unseen-women-of-small-scale-fisheries> (Aug. 3, 2025).

Galappaththi, M., Armitage, D., and Collins, A. M. (2022). “Women’s experiences in influencing and shaping small‐scale fisheries governance.” Fish and Fisheries, 23(5), 1099–1120.

Harper, S., Adshade, M., Lam, V. W., Pauly, D., and Sumaila, U. R. (2020). “Valuing invisible catches: Estimating the global contribution by women to small-scale marine capture fisheries production.” PLOS ONE, 15(3).

Lawless, S., Cohen, P. J., McDougall, C., Mangubhai, S., Song, A. M., and Morrison, T. H. (2022). “Tinker, tailor or transform: Gender equality amidst social-ecological change.” Global Environmental Change, 72, 102434.

To Serve or Not to Serve

Does serving wild-caught seafood on Oregon State University’s campus align with their sustainability values and should they start? When seeking an answer to this question it can be very easy to suggest that it should not be served as there are worries about overfishing and the damage it may cause to the environment. I believe that OSU should serve wild-caught seafood under specific conditions that will help monitor sustainability.

How to Serve

Overfishing is when too many fish or a stock are caught, leaving short the number of adult fish need to sustain healthy populations. The MSC international (2025) reports that this year’s report estimates nearly 36% of fish stock are fished unsustainably.

Image 1: Fishery stocks from 2021 showing the sustainable and unsustainable percentage status, Sharma et al. (2025).

If managed properly, serving wild-caught seafood would not only benefit students but would look to help create sustainability amongst fishers. According to Giron-Nava et al. (2021), even if fisheries achieved Maximum Sustainable Yield most fishers would make less than the minimum living wages. It is important to maintain sustainability amongst fish, but those who fish for our food also need to be looked at in this light.  OSU can help by sourcing fisheries that support their fishers while also meeting sustainability standards. It is said that in regions where fisheries are exceptionally managed, stock abundance is improving Hilborn et al. (2020). Oremus et al. explains that a report from 2014 showed 77% of the fish stock was underfished or under-utilized. Oregon state can do its part by looking at which underfished stock and determining which stock could be utilized and served at their dining halls. The sustainable serving of seafood at OSU would also bring awareness to the fact of how important seafood is to global food security. Stated by Stetkiewicz et al. (2022), an estimated 60 million people are dependent fisheries and aquaculture for food and nutrition. Seafood is important for low-income regions of the world, and while Corvallis is not a low-income region, they can still stand to be an example for providing sustainable seafood to their community.

Served

The idea of serving wild-caught seafood in Oregon State University’s dining halls is not only possible but would be a great opportunity to show others responsible consumption. OSU can take specific measures to ensure they serve sustainable fish, sourced from sustainable fisheries, to serve an eco-friendly community.

References:

Giron‐Nava, A., Lam, V. W., Aburto‐Oropeza, O., Cheung, W. W., Halpern, B. S., Sumaila, U. R., and Cisneros‐Montemayor, A. M. (2021). “Sustainable fisheries are essential but not enough to ensure well‐being for the world’s fishers.” Fish and Fisheries, 22(4), 812–821.

Hilborn, R., Amoroso, R. O., Anderson, C. M., Baum, J. K., Branch, T. A., Costello, C., de Moor, C. L., Faraj, A., Hively, D., Jensen, O. P., Kurota, H., Little, L. R., Mace, P., McClanahan, T., Melnychuk, M. C., Minto, C., Osio, G. C., Parma, A. M., Pons, M., Segurado, S., Szuwalski, C. S., Wilson, J. R., and Ye, Y. (2020). “Effective fisheries management instrumental in improving fish stock status.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(4), 2218–2224.

Oremus, K. L., Frank, E. G., Adelman, J. J., Cruz, S., Herndon, J., Sewell, B., and Suatoni, L. (2023). “Underfished or unwanted?” Science, 380(6645), 585–588.

Sharma, R., Barange, M., Agostini, V., Barros, P., Gutierrez, N.L., Vasconcellos, M., Fernandez Reguera, D., Tiffay, C., & Levontin, P.,
eds. 2025. Review of the state of world marine fishery resources – 2025. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper, No. 721.
Rome. FAO.

Stetkiewicz, S., Norman, R. A., Allison, E. H., Andrew, N. L., Ara, G., Banner-Stevens, G., Belton, B., Beveridge, M., Bogard, J. R., Bush, S. R., Coffee, P., Crumlish, M., Edwards, P., Eltholth, M., Falconer, L., Ferreira, J. G., Garrett, A., Gatward, I., Islam, F. U., Kaminski, A. M., Kjellevold, M., Kruijssen, F., Leschen, W., Mamun, A.-A., McAdam, B., Newton, R., Krogh-Poulsen, B., Pounds, A., Richardson, B., Roos, N., Röös, E., Schapper, A., Spence-McConnell, T., Suri, S. K., Thilsted, S. H., Thompson, K. D., Tlusty, M. F., Troell, M. F., Vignola, R., Young, J. A., Zhang, W., and Little, D. C. (2022). “Seafood in food security: A call for bridging the terrestrial-aquatic divide.” Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 5.

“What is overfishing.” (n.d.). MSC International, <https://www.msc.org/what-we-are-doing/oceans-at-risk/overfishing> (Jul. 20, 2025).

To: Grant County Council

From: Chief of Watershed Restoration

Re: 150 Million Dollar Salmon Restoration Offer

Adress

Dear Council,

I, Chief of Watershed Restoration, reach out to you today to offer my personal recommendation of the proposed offer of $150 million to restore the salmon population. Although this offer comes with a catch, I believe we should accept this offer as it is more than just a large amount of money, it is an opportunity to reverse ecological decline, bring forth hope to restoration communities, while also helping our economy.

Key Reasons

By accepting this money, Watershed can begin the task of bringing back an ecological that is currently in decline. Compton et al. (2006) speaks on how the reduced inputs or organic matter and nutrients need by salmon has limited freshwater production in the Pacific Northwest for generation to come. By applying a priority threat management framework, much like Chalifour et al. (2022), we can identify strategies that may not have been within our budgets prior to this offer while also reducing risks. Another way to help mitigate risk would be implementing panel regression models and assess the return on quarterly investment much like Jaeger (2023). Not only does this offer help the decline of salmon population in Grant County, but it will help to bring forth a thriving economy while doing so. Restoration investments have proven to have localized benefits which have helped to employ local labor and materials according to BenDor et al. (2014). A restoration plan that would help bring local jobs to the county not only brings forth money driven incentives but also gives residents incentives to support the community they love and live in. When successfully completed this project would then in turn help to bring awareness and hope to the restoration community.

Ecological Impacts

According to Timothy et al. (2023), studies have shown that mechanisms such as improving habitat capacity and productivity may improve salmon resilience. The acceptance of this offer can help this county restore spawning ground, improve water quality and biodiversity, and much more.

Conclusion

I leave the council with this; this offer may be a once and a lifetime kind of offer that is bigger than imaginable. If we act appropriately, we can end up not only restoring the salmon community, but restoring pride, resilience, and help the economy of Grant County.

Best Regards,

Anthony Barkley

References:

Beechie, T. J., Fogel, C., Nicol, C., Jorgensen, J., Timpane‐Padgham, B., and Kiffney, P. (2023). “How does habitat restoration influence resilience of salmon populations to climate change?” Ecosphere, 14(2).

BenDor, T. K., Lester, T. W., and Livengood, A. (2014). Exploring and understanding the restoration economy, <https://www.endangered.org/assets/uploads/2020/06/BenDor-and-Lester-Exploring-and-Understanding-the-Restoration-Economy.pdf> (Jul. 14, 2025).

Chalifour, L., Holt, C., Camaclang, A. E., Bradford, M. J., Dixon, R., Finn, R. J., Hemming, V., Hinch, S. G., Levings, C. D., MacDuffee, M., Nishimura, D. J., Pearson, M., Reynolds, J. D., Scott, D. C., Spremberg, U., Stark, S., Stevens, J., Baum, J. K., and Martin, T. G. (2022). “Identifying a pathway towards recovery for depleted Wild Pacific salmon populations in a large watershed under multiple stressors.” Journal of Applied Ecology, 59(9), 2212–2226.

Compton, J. E., Andersen, C. P., Phillips, D. L., Brooks, J. R., Johnson, M. G., Church, M. R., Hogsett, W. E., Cairns, M. A., Rygiewicz, P. T., McComb, B. C., and Shaff, C. D. (2006). “Ecological and water quality consequences of nutrient addition for salmon restoration in the Pacific Northwest.” Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 4(1), 18–26.

Jaeger, W. K., and Scheuerell, M. D. (2023). “Return(s) on investment: Restoration spending in the Columbia River basin and increased abundance of salmon and steelhead.” PLOS ONE, 18(7).

Introduction: Advocacy Both In and Out of the High Seas

The high seas are home to hundreds of thousands of different species that can be found 200 nautical miles off the shore. By looking at different mediums of science-based articles and videos, we can begin to look at the effects of science advocacy. It is important for those who look to create scientific change within this world to communicate findings effectively.

Discussion

Sala’s Scientific Ted Talk

Sala’s Ted Talk on turning the high seas into the world’s largest nature reserve is a perfect example of good communication in the field of science. He compiles scientific data, using imagery and comparison to advocate for economic and ecological change. With reference to both Sala’s Ted Talk and his paper “The economics of fishing in the high seas, Sala’s does a good job in constituting normative science (science advocacy this is free of policy bias) as described by Lackey. Although Sala may bring up policy within his findings, he does not push the audience towards specific policies, instead giving them information from his findings to make their own considerations.

Advocacy and Objectivity

Presented by Scott et al. (2007) scientists have found it tough as through the presentation of science they risk either being labeled as policy advocates or they are seen as failing to contribute. Cardou and Vellend (2023) identify how scientists can end up presenting information and data in a way that leads to unintentional stealth advocacy. Stealth advocacy is when scientists vocalize objective science findings but, in reality, are pushing biased policy promotion. In an article titled “Inadvertent Advocacy”, Wilhere (2012) describes ways scientists inadvertently engage in policy advocacy. One being a scientist expresses what they believe to be a scientific judgment but is truly an ethical judgement or personal policy preference. I do believe that objective researchers can be science advocates so long as they do their best to express themselves free of bias or vocalize their bias to their audience. My recommendations for oceans, coasts, and people have very little consequence when it comes to the scientific field and my field of expertise revolves around science and engineering in construction.

Conclusion: Bias or Not

To continue protecting our oceans, coasts, and the people around them, scientists must embrace science advocacy. Scientists should continue to share and educate others on their findings as objectively as possible, and if unable to do some objectively, then focus on being open to what it is they are advocating for.

References

Cardou, F., and Vellend, M. (2023). “Stealth advocacy in ecology and Conservation Biology.” Biological Conservation, 280, 109968.

Lackey, R., and Lackey, R. (2022). “Darwin was right: A scientist needs a heart of stone.” Robert T. Lackey, <https://blogs.oregonstate.edu/lackey/2020/03/23/darwin-was-right-a-scientist-needs-a-heart-of-stone/> (Jul. 13, 2025).

Sala, E., Mayoraga, J., Costello, C., Kroodsma, D., Palomares, M. L. D., Pauly, D., Sumaila, U. R., and Zeller, D. (2018). The economics of fishing the high seas | science advances, <https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aat2504> (Jul. 14, 2025).

Sala, E. (n.d.). “Let’s turn the high seas into the world’s largest nature reserve.” TED, <https://www.ted.com/talks/enric_sala_let_s_turn_the_high_seas_into_the_world_s_largest_nature_reserve> (Jul. 13, 2025).

SCOTT, J. M., RACHLOW, J. L., LACKEY, R. T., PIDGORNA, A. B., AYCRIGG, J. L., FELDMAN, G. R., SVANCARA, L. K., RUPP, D. A., STANISH, D. I., and STEINHORST, R. K. (2007). “Policy advocacy in science: Prevalence, Perspectives, and implications for conservation biologists.” Conservation Biology, 21(1), 29–35.

WILHERE, G. F. (2012). “Inadvertent advocacy.” Conservation Biology, 26(1), 39–46.

Prompt: What do you think are the three most important issues facing our coasts and oceans globally and the people and communities that depend on them?

Introduction: Pursuing Calmer Waters

Our oceans and coasts, including the people who reside there, are now dealing with new obstacles as climate change continuously worsens. In the pursuit to bring restoration to our damaged oceans and coasts, we must look at how to mitigate the effects of climate change deteriorating the ecosystems, our access to marine resources is limited, and the decline of the coasts’ durability.  

Discussion: Securing Smooth Seas for the Future

Deterioration due to Climate Change

Sea levels are rising, oceans are warmer, and ocean life is in danger. The scariest part is we are no longer trying to prevent the loss of habitats and marine life from happening. It is already happening, and we need to stop it from getting any worse if we hope to work on rehabilitating it back to life. Nancy Knowlton comforts us by explaining that despite the consistent talk of humanity being doomed, conservation efforts have proved to be successful on small scales, (Knowlton, 2021). Sara Maxwell explains how dynamic management tools could be the key to helping restore numbers of temperature dependent species while also needing significantly less area to manage them, (Maxwell et al., 2015).

Limited Resources

When it comes to the need for resources to help the problem our coasts and oceans face, those who are most impacted are most underrepresented. When it comes to fisheries, women make up almost half of the workforce. The participation of these women in the decision making of resources management can prove to help the situation due to ecological and traditional knowledge, (Friedman et al., 2020). Additionally, when it comes to coastal policies, the policies need to be co-produced with community residents and stakeholders to ensure principles are upheld, (Fox et al., 2023).

Figure 1: A proposed model for better coastal futures (Fox et al., 2023)

Declining Durability

The loss of costal habitats and the erosion of the coastline is only partially due to increasing climate temperatures and natural extreme whether hazards. Coral reefs have undergone significant population losses from the adverse effects of development, overfishing, mining, ect, (Beck et al., 2018). These coral reefs help to break waves and restore durability to our coastline, but conservation and restoration of coastal habitats are essential to begin rebuilding.

Conclusion: Land Ho!

Researchers must work diligently and must come together to ensure the protection of our oceans. If we act with purpose, we can take the challenges we face today to slow the deterioration of ecosystems, utilize all available resources, and restore durability to our coast.

References:

Beck, M. W., Losada, I. J., Menéndez, P., Reguero, B. G., Díaz-Simal, P., and Fernández, F. (2018). “The Global Flood Protection Savings provided by coral reefs.” Nature News, Nature Publishing Group, <https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04568-z> (Jun. 29, 2025).

Fox, N., Tilt, J. H., Ruggiero, P., Stanton, K., and Bolte, J. (2023). “Toward equitable coastal community resilience: Incorporating principles of equity and justice in coastal hazard adaptation: Cambridge Prisms: Coastal futures.” Cambridge Core, Cambridge University Press, <https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cambridge-prisms-coastal-futures/article/toward-equitable-coastal-community-resilience-incorporating-principles-of-equity-and-justice-in-coastal-hazard-adaptation/98240660EEB60AED482553068D5753DD> (Jun. 29, 2025).

Friedman, W. R., Halpern, B. S., McLeod, E., Beck, M. W., Duarte, C. M., Kappel, C. V., … & Sterling, E. J. (2020). Research Priorities for Achieving Healthy Marine Ecosystems and Human Communities in a Changing Climate

Knowlton, N. (2021). Ocean optimism: Moving beyond the obituaries in marine conservation.   Annual Review of Marine Science, 13, 479-499

Maxwell, S. M. (2015). “Dynamic Ocean Management: Defining and conceptualizing real-time management of the Ocean.” Marine Policy, Pergamon, <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X15000639> (Jun. 29, 2025).