Mass Ocean Campaign: Interview

MA Ocean Coalition Interview: Jo-Ann Taylor

Martha's Vineyard Commission, Coastal Planner
By: Matthew Boger

Jo-Ann Taylor has been the Coastal Planner at the Martha's Vineyard Commission since 1991. Her experience includes planning, oceanographic research (marine geophysics), small engineering projects, and government administration. She is interested in stewardship and appropriate utilization of coastal resources. Jo-Ann studied at Smith College and Boston University, and holds BA and MA degrees in Geology.

Q.) With the passage of the MA Ocean Act, Massachusetts becomes the first state in the nation to legislate an ocean plan. Please discuss the importance of this legislation and the influence it can have on policies developed by other states?

A.) I think it is great that Massachusetts is leading the way. Throughout history, this Commonwealth has been a leader in ocean efforts, and we on Martha's Vineyard keep close focus on any issues relating to the oceans, for it is our back yard. There is a reason that people live and visit our island and that is an appreciation of the ocean.

The meetings we have held as a Commission has been productive and I am encouraged that we will be able to develop a plan that can be used as a foundation for other states, and indeed perhaps the federal level, to use as a guide. Each state's coastal waters face different challenges, but the overriding issues of habitat protection, the viability of renewable energy, the migration patterns of fish and other aquatic wildlife, shipping and fishing routes are all issues that states face, up and down the coast line, on both the east and west coasts. Developing a policy to take all these issues and more, into consideration to determine areas for different uses and areas to protect is going to be very viable to other states.

As the first in the nation, there will be a lot of focus on us as we develop the Ocean Management Plan. I think two critical things that we have embraced is that the plan needs to be based on sound science and that it will also be adaptive as we collect the most current scientific information and better understand how a variety of factors, such as human use, climate, change, fishing regulations, influence the ocean.

Q.) You have been appointed to serve on the seventeen-member Ocean Advisory Commission, representing the Martha's Vineyard Commission. Please discuss what you will be focusing on as the ocean plan is developed and discuss the process and timeline the Commission will undertake to create the plan by the deadline of December 31, 2009?

A.) The timeline is ambitious, and it will be important not to cut any corners, particularly with respect to soliciting and reviewing public input. So far, the Ocean Advisory Commission has been diligent in that regard and the need to involve the public will continue right through to the end.

From the perspective of the Martha's Vineyard Commission, it will be important to focus on appropriateness of scale and of public benefit. Our community has already been involved in similar discussions regarding land-based energy facilities, and it is a natural progression to take the discussion out to the nearshore waters. The Vineyard community recognizes the need to reduce dependence on non-renewable energy resources as well as the need to protect resources from inappropriate development. Living on an island tends to imbue the inhabitants with insight and respect for the finite nature of our resources.

Q.) Please discuss the importance of addressing the ocean's natural resources and balancing all the uses of the ocean with marine wildlife and natural habitat protection. The legislation specifically states that it will, "identify and protect special, sensitive or unique estuarine and marine life habitats".

A.) The Ocean Sanctuaries Act identified all the nearshore waters surrounding the Vineyard as in need of protection. The Ocean Management Plan will, hopefully, refine that identification to focus in on the areas with the most need of protection, and should set out parameters for protecting those resources. The fifteen issues outlined in the Oceans Act, which we refer to as the Ocean 15, specifically highlights this importance, stating the need to "identify and protect special, sensitive or unique estuarine and marine life habitats". The Ocean 15 reiterates this importance by stating that we must, "preserve and protect the ocean trust" and "value biodiversity and ecosystem health". These are important issues that must be addressed in the Ocean Management. Once again, living on the Vineyard myself, the protection of basically our backyard it critical.

Q.) What will this plan mean for Martha's Vineyard, a community that is so connected to the ocean?

A.) The plan could be a blessing or a threat, depending on how it all turns out. Prior to the plan, Martha's Vineyard enjoyed strict control and protection of the nearshore resources. The Ocean Sanctuaries Act prohibited structures in the area, and the Martha's Vineyard Commission's legislation endowed it with the authority to review and approve or deny any developments within the towns' limits, including their three-mile out boundaries, as Developments of Regional Impact.

With the passage of the Act, structures are no longer prohibited in the Cape and Islands Ocean Sanctuary. The Act acknowledges the authority of the Martha's Vineyard Commission to the review developments, but also provides for appeal to an energy facilities siting board. In keeping with the Martha's Vineyard Commission legislation, there is no appeal other than through the Court system. So, the Act introduces ambiguity as to who has the final say over a development. That very ambiguity could hinder the progress of developments in this area, the opposite effect of what was intended.

The Ocean Management Plan could alleviate some of the ambiguity by properly setting out what is expected of developers. The relaxation of protection previously afforded by the Ocean Sanctuaries Act will similarly necessitate identification of preferred locations and means of development and clearly defined limits, in order to allow appropriate development to proceed without damaging the resources.

Q.) Over the years, there have been a number projects proposed in Massachusetts' coastal waters. The term "appropriate scale" has been used regarding the siting of renewable energy facilities such as wind farms. What is your definition of "appropriate scale" and how do you think the Commission will address this issue?

A.) It is difficult to imagine a concise definition for appropriate scale. It may be more likely that site plan review on a case-by-case basis will determine appropriateness, just as decisions of that nature are now made on land. It will be important to set out criteria and guidelines, but it may be necessary to withhold final judgment for case-by-case review. Numerical standards are the easiest to understand and most cordially applied, but it is not always possible or advisable to rely on strict dimensional requirements.

Q.) Massachusetts has a rich history of commercial fishing. Please discuss the importance of developing an ocean plan and what are the main areas that the fishing industry is looking to be included in the plan.

A.) Massachusetts has not only a rich history, but hopefully a rich future filled with the bounties provided by commercial fishing. It is important not only to protect the present fishing grounds from inappropriate developments, but also to consider the historic fishing grounds that may yet again yield bountiful harvests. The habitats remain, and there is no reason to believe that the fish will never return. There are many in the fishing industry who believe that the future is in aquaculture, and it is important for the plan to allow for development of offshore aquaculture facilities, and to not allow inappropriate developments or restrictions to compromise the future of fishing and aquaculture.

Q.) The legislation discusses the use of mitigation funds. How do you foresee those funds being used?

A.) The distribution of mitigation funds should be directly linked to the area that is being used or developed. The purpose of mitigation funds is to help alleviate any disruption or damages that may be caused, and it is important that those funds be used to assist the resources in that region. What that will look like, I just don't know at this time, but I am sure we on the Commission will look at it. I think in the past there were some interested parties that felt left out and that disruption in an aquatic area was not appropriately managed or addressed, and I think that is what this provision in the Oceans Act tries to address.

Q.) Several coastal communities have express concerns over erosion, and specifically the loss of sand from their beaches. Does Martha's Vineyard share this concern?

A.) While erosion of our coastal land on Martha's Vineyard is a great concern, and one that the Vineyard expends considerable resources addressing, our solution to loss of our beach sand is not to look out to sea, but inward to our coastal ponds. Many of our coastal ponds and harbors have inlets fixed with jetties. The jetties serve their purpose of keeping the waterways open to navigation, but also cause sand to build up in the ponds; sand which belongs on the beaches. Our beach nourishment projects tend to move clean sand from the ponds back onto the beaches, where it came from. The process is fairly uncomplicated, but expensive.

For areas that do not have a readily available source of clean sand for beach re-nourishment, I have heard that sand mining has been considered. That use is among many that we on the Commission are reviewing and have to determine where the most suitable location would be, along with where re-nourishment of sand is needed.