Chairman of the Committee on Environment, Natural Resources, and Agriculture
Member of the Ocean Advisory Commission
By: Matthew Boger
Elected in 2000, State Representative Frank Smizik represents the Town of Brookline and serves as Chairman of the Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources, and Agriculture. He completed his undergraduate work at the University of Pittsburgh and received his law degree from Duquesne University. Chairman Smizik is one of six members of the state legislature appointed to serve on the seventeen-member Ocean Advisory Commission.
Q.) Thank you for all your hard work to pass the first-in-the-nation Massachusetts Oceans Act. Please discuss the importance of this legislation.
A.) I give a lot of credit to Senator Robert O'Leary who introduced this bill and spent a lot of time with legislators in the House and Senate to get it passed. At first, I wasn't sure that this legislation was necessary, because much of the authority was already established in the various agencies such as CZM, DEP, EEA, etc. After careful consideration, I came to the conclusion that the value of this legislation was organizing all of the authority and policy making into one area, so that everyone would be working in conjunction with each other. Uniform regulation and making sure everyone is looking at the same criteria to issue permits or determine appropriate uses is critical, and that is what this legislation accomplishes - one stop shopping for all uses of the ocean.
This bill went through many drafts and was reviewed by many different interested parties. In the end, I think we came out with an excellent first step to establish an all encompassing plan for our coastal waters. I also have to give a lot of credit to my staff, specifically Lisa Conley and Zach Crowley. They reviewed the many drafts of this bill and the myriad of comments, and identified several of the legal issues that the bill brought up. Needless to say, there were a number of people involved in crafting this legislation and my gratitude goes out to all of them.
This legislation creates a broad plan to deal with the need to protect the ocean's natural habitat, address renewable energy siting issues, and basically all the uses of the ocean. The ocean is in our public trust and it is critically important to protect and preserve it. By developing a set of criteria on how to use this public resource, we will be prepared to address any issues that may come up. In the past, I think we were playing a little catch up, reacting to proposed projects, and now we will have a plan and a set of criteria to measure what is and is not an appropriate use.
When I think about the origins of the legislation, I think, in part, it was due to the issues involving the development of Cape Wind. Clean energy and the use of renewable energy is something that I believe Massachusetts and New England needs, so I was not going to support any kind of anti Cape Wind legislation. I do understand that there was a great deal of concern regarding the permitting of such a facility, along with the lack of participation by the general public. At that time, the planning process to deal with the utilization of the ocean was not in place, and that is exactly what this legislation will do - give guidance on what the appropriate uses of the ocean are and how to permit for them.
Q.) Coastal states throughout the nation have also been looking at ways to balance the protection of the ocean's natural environment with other uses, such as renewable energy. Can you talk about the importance of this ocean plan becoming the first of its kind?
A.) The importance of this legislation, and why it is the first of its kind, is because it is dealing with complex issues. We are not talking about one area in the ocean to put up a wind turbine - we are talking about creating an all encompassing policy on how to protect, utilize, and mange all the waters off our coastline. That is not a easy task, because a great deal of time needs to be put into understanding where there are critical areas of habitat for aquatic plant and animal species and where there are existing human uses of the ocean. Further, it will be critical to identify appropriate places to site much needed renewable energy facilities. That is one of the reasons that we decided to create the Ocean Science Advisory Council. It is essential that our decisions are based on scientific data, because that is a cornerstone of this Act.
How do you protect habitat, how do you protect the fish, how do you protect the water for other recreational uses - these are the important questions we need to address. These are questions that are not unique to Massachusetts. Other states up and down the eastern coastline are dealing with very similar issues. I have little doubt that these other states will be traveling down this same path and asking the same questions we are, so hopefully they can look at what we have done and apply our decisions to their needs.
Q.) Massachusetts has a rich history of commercial fishing. Please discuss how the development of the ocean plan will benefit the fishing industry?
A.) The legislation went through many drafts, and I think both Senators Rob O'Leary and Bruce Tarr should be congratulated for getting the fishing community on board with this legislation. As the legislation specifically states, the Division of Marine Fisheries will have authority over fishing related issues. I think the fishing industry realizes the importance of managing our waters and the effect that climate change is having on the ocean and the fish within it. If we do not address these issues now, the long term effects will be dire, and will most likely lead to less productive fishing, due to the depletion of the fishing stock.
Like any industry, the fishing community wants reasonable regulation and not layers and layers of rules that are hard to comply with. It was important to include the fishing community in the development of this ocean plan, for this is an area that they know a great deal about and is their livelihood. As this legislation was developed, our intent was to get everyone's input so that we could create a policy that truly represented the best interests of everyone involved.
The very fact that our oceans are becoming warmer will hurt the fishing industry by affecting what kinds and the quantity of fish they can catch. Just look at the lobster industry. As a result of climate change, the warmer water temperature is causing lobsters to migrate up north to the colder waters.
Q.) Over the years, there have been a number of projects proposed in Massachusetts' coastal waters such as wind farms and tidal energy. How will the MA ocean plan address these proposals?
A.) What this Act does is clarify that appropriate scale renewable energy facilities are appropriate uses for our ocean waters. The ocean plan will identify where renewable energy facilities should be located and at what scale. If you take Buzzards Bay as an example of an area that is being considered for the use of renewable energy, in this case a wind farm, their proposal has already been modified because of the impact that the wind farm will have on the ocean, wildlife, and shipping. We know that because of studies done in the Buzzards Bay area and by looking at that specific region to determine how the environment would be impacted by different sizes of wind farms. Those are the kind of discussions that the ocean management plan will require us to do - look at specific regions, and determine what are good uses and not good uses for that specific area.
I am one of those people who think that windmills are a lot prettier than smoke stacks. I know there has been a lot of talk about larger renewable energy facilities in deeper water and I think that is a good idea. Even projects like this, in federal waters, will need to refer to the MA ocean plan because of the need for underwater cables to carry the energy back to the grid on land.
Q.) The term "appropriate scale" has been used regarding the siting of renewable energy facilities. What is your definition of "appropriate scale" and how do you think the Commission will address this issue?
A.) I think global warming is both an environmental and energy issue. As Chairman of the Environment, Natural Resources, and Agriculture Committee, my concern is what is going to happen to the ocean if global warming is not addressed, not only here in Massachusetts but the nation and world as a whole. This is not an issue that affects just one place - we all feel the pressures of climate change, because global warming is something that we as a global community need to address. That being said, it is important to act locally, and I was insistent on including the climate change language in this legislation.
I support the need to address our energy needs, and I think that the solution is renewable energy. The ocean is one of many great places to look at to place things like wind farms, and things like tidal and wave energy can only function in the ocean. When we talk about "appropriate scale", we will be creating a standard that we can use which will be "appropriate" for the public, "appropriate" for climate change, and "appropriate" for the ocean itself. I am not discounting the esthetic issues of renewable energy facilities such as windmills, but I think that is less important than protecting the marine wildlife, plants, and natural aspects of the ocean. The simple answer is that we need new, cleaner sources of energy. Wind, tidal, and wave projects are three very valid options that we must use and embrace. The question becomes where, and at what scale. Determining what "appropriate scale" is to different areas in our ocean waters will be critical to addressing our energy needs.
Q.) The legislation discusses the use of mitigation funds. How do you foresee those funds being used?
A.) What we are talking about with the creation of this ocean plan is preserving the public trust of the ocean. I believe that these mitigation funds should be used for the benefit and preservation of the ocean. For instance, if there is a renewable energy facility being constructed, those funds should be used to address any hardship experienced in that region of the ocean. Once again, referring back to the term "public trust", we need to make sure that if we do harm or alter the ocean habitat for future generations then these mitigation funds can be used to rectify any issues that may arise.
Q.) The legislation requires the plan to be formulated by December 31, 2009. Please discuss this short time period which you must comply with and all that needs to be accomplished before that date.
A.) I don't think that it is a bad thing to have a deadline and a short period of time to accomplish our goal. I think the issue of addressing renewable energy and climate change are things that we need to rush to do. We have the opportunity to be the first in the nation to develop an ocean plan, and be at the forefront of balancing the need to protect and preserve the ocean with the realization that we need to tap into the renewable energy opportunities that the ocean has to offer - wind, tidal, and wave. This will not only help improve the environment, but also create much needed green jobs.
I see this plan as a multi-phase process. Phase one is gathering the information needed to make decisions. This is critical stage, for this will gather the scientific data that we need to make decisions. The one downside of a short period of time is that we will not be able to gather and review the vast amount of data out there regarding our ocean region. The plan will include a provision to continuously update our scientific data, and that is important to note, because we want to continuously review how the ocean is changing and reacting.
Phase two will be reviewing the scientific data and crafting a draft plan. We will rely on the Ocean Science Advisory Council and the Ocean Advisory Commission to vet the information we have. Phase three will be the plan and the hearings to receive comments on the plan. I also have to note that throughout the development of the ocean plan, we have encouraged public participation. EEA has held eighteen public listening sessions throughout the state, and after a draft plan is developed they will once again seek public comment on it.
© 2008 Massachusetts Ocean Action Coalition
Conservation Law Foundation | Mass Audubon