Item O03
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: December 17. 2003
Division:
BOCC
Bulk Item: Yes
No --X-
Department: DISTRICT 5
AGENDA ITEM WORDING:
Discussion of Monroe County requesting a letter from the National Marine Fisheries Service to
designate Monroe County as the primary respondent for marine mammals in distress in the Florida
Keys and further to consider Monroe County to transfer and designate this responsibility to Marine
Mammal Conservancy (MMC).
ITEM BACKGROUND:
Since 1988 members ofMMC have and will continue to provide at no cost to Monroe County:
Leadership n rescue, rehabilitation and release of marine mammals in distress.
Nearly $300.000 worth of donated equipment, property and infrastructure necessary for long-
term care
Education, public relations and research afforded by the best rescue/release record in the
country (31 of 59 dolphins/whales rescued and release).
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS:
TOTAL COST:
BUDGETED: Yes
No
COST TO COUNTY:
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes
No
AMOUNTPERMONTH_ Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty _ OMBlPurchasing _ Risk Management_
DIVISION DIRECTOR APPROVAL: ~ C ~
MAY . URRAYE.NELSON
DOCUMENTATION:
Included x
To Follow_
Not Required_
DISPOSITION:
AGENDA ITEM #05
Revised 1/03
l~/~l/~~~j 14:~~
j~tl~~tlb/~tl
C~lKI::.YSI::.A~CH
f-JAt:it. ~Il
~lItIfl:jlltJe'l'WII'\'l~...._-
._..._~em.""".."..
M__"~"::~~ _..
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
","",I~...:r.n.."":"'_-.:_"::':'::..",:,:,:,:",_-_":,,_-...,,=--_":..~_~__-::.,,=,,_-=-=:-____..::"____..:\,::,,_,,,::-,.., .II"...:.""I':or:r.,':''''_"'____.___.
~.__..._.:.~~\"...~':.&f~,";';T=:':':~__:_=._':.-_"';"_"':;.:_":'.-==:':..'":.:C ,..~:~.., ":.,',~. ~.-:"':...'!;.'::!"~\~ '.
TO: MA YOR MURRAY NELSON IN ell RR 0[0' DONNi\
FROM: RICK TRou'r, MARINE M M'JMAJ, CONS.l:illVANCY
SUBJECt: AGEN])A WORDING FOR 12/17/03
DATE: 12/2/2003
Request designation of Msrine Mammal ConsetVancy a.s Monroe County'!; pdmary
respondex for dolphins and whales in disUess.
Request lette.t to National Marine Fisheries Service to improve Montoe County
rescue progt:am by fottnally designating Marine Manunal Conservancy as ptUnau:y lE:$ponder
in Monroc County.
BllCkgtound:
Since 1988 tnembers of MMC have and will continue to provide at no COgt (Q
Monroe (:ounfJr.
Lea.dersbip in rescue, rehabilitation and release of marine manttnals in disttc 55.
Nearly $300,000 worth of donated equipttJ.ent, property, and intt:\sttucbi1:'C tlCCessary
for long-tenn ca.re.
Education, public relations an.d tesea1;Ch 'fforded by the best rescue/release record
in the country (31 of 59 dolphina/whales rescued an.d relea.scd).
These su.ccess stones could be even mot'c historic with i1nproved support fr J:tIJ
National Marine Fisheries Service. We request and call for the BOCC to acknowledge,
endorse, and designate Marine Mamttlal C~nset:Vancy as the best pO$sibL~ solution t j achieve
itnpt"ovcd marine mammaltescuc:: response in MOOJ:oe: County. Thank: you in a.dva.ncc for
yout serious consideration..
Rick Trout, V olunteer/YP'/Director of HusbandJ:y Marine Ma.mrnsJ Conse.tv1l1cy
305-853-0675, 305-522~0534 .'
./~
. .' . . ~
C.__..J'-.~.., -.'"
"
tr 3058530675 M..*C
IMMEDIATE RELEASE OR EDITORIAL PAGE
Nov. 12,2003
Dolp,",ins: Dead or Alive
ltem: Sept. 2000 Myrtle Beach SC - Mother and calf PYgmy sperm stranded Ofl
beach. City wor\{er5 load both. stilt alive, into front end loader and onto a f1et bed
truck deStined for city dumP.
Item: Sept 2001 Kev west FL - do1phln strands and is trucked to city dump
bec8uselocal responder does not respond.
Item: 1999 Los Angeles and Orange County California - Local bead'!
communities move to avoid such publiC relation ntghtrneres by wri'Litlg a single
letter to National Marine Fisheries Service deSigneling the votunteers of the
Whale Rescue Team as responderS to marine mammals in distresS ins&de county
lines since no federal agency or capttve dolphin facirdy can or wiH respond.
South Cardina is in the ..me region as the Keys and is overseen by feden:1I
stranding CXJOrCIinators in offices in Miami. St. Pete FL. and SilVer Spring, 11.40 of
the National Marine Fisheries Service. NMFS is a taxPayer supported divisiOn of
the Department of Commerce. NMFS' coordinators have beftn monkey
wrenching one the countrYs most successful marine mammal rescue teamS
while doing litUe to coordinate improved rescue response in other parts of tl,e
region or country.
If you need any more realOn to memorialize the young pilot whalEI whose ch8l"109
for survival was taken ffWSY by NMFS' intet18rence In the recenl: Big Pine Key
pilot whale rescue, remember NMFS appro'lled the Navy's sonar weapon
bOmbardment of marine mammals until scientists and lawyers sued to stop 'them
after over 50 wheIe deaths. NMFS is presently entert8inin9 giving Sea WQf1d 8 5
year worldwide permit to colleCl sex organs from any dotphin. wham, seal or sea
lion to enhance Sea Wond's artificial insemination project and to create a better
marine mammal freak show'
NMFS is an agency that caters to the greed and nonsense of businesS and
mi"t~ry, not the proteetion of manne mammals.
For thOse who care, please contact Monroe County Commissioners and ask:
them to, Uke Los Angeles. deSignate the Marine Mammal conservancy wi1.h one
of the co~ry's best recordS (31 of 59 rescued/reteased dolphinlwhales) at. this
county's primary responder (at no cost to county taxpayers sim::e MMC has. can
and wil. raise f\n:IS privately). If that is too much for Monroe County
Commissioners to do then ask them to write our elected congressional and
Senate offidals to demand that NMFS stop wasting tax dollars and start
protecting marine mammals especially those who MMC can helP in MonrOl:t
county and stop neglecting and destroying them elSeWhere.
Memorandum
Department of Marine Resources
2798 Overseas Highway, Suite 420
Marathon, Florida 33050
Voice: (305) 2892507
FAX: (305) 289 2536
Email: garrett-george:ll.nlonrOeColll1lv-ll.gm
Board of Co un tv Commissioners
Mayor Murray Nelson, Dist. 5
Mayor Pro Tern David Rice, Dist. 4
Commissionerr Dixie Spehar, Dist. I
Commissioner George Neugent, Dist. 2
Commissioner Charles "Sonny" McCoy, Dist. 3
DATE:
17 December, 2003
TO:
Monroe County Board of Commissioners
FROM:
George Garrett, DireGtor of Marine Resources
SUBJECT:
Discussion of December BOCC Agenda item 03,
Request to designate Monroe County as the primary
respondent for marine mammals stranded in the Florida
Keys
A Board member of the Marine Mammal Conservancy has requested that the
Board of County Commissioners write a letter to NOAA, National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS) seeking sole responsibility for the disposition of
stranded marine mammals in the Florida Keys. Similarly, it has been suggested
that this responsibility be transferred to the Marine Mammal Conservancy.
Staff indicates that this request represents a substantial liability for the County and
recommends no action be taken on this request.
Background
Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMP A), according to NMFS General
Council, there are essentially two ways that marine mammals may be "taken"
under the law; (1) through a stranding response agreement (commonly know as an
LOA or Letter of Agreement) between an individual or group capable of marine
mammal protection or conservation andNMFS, or
(2) as part of the lawful duties undertaken by a Federal, State or local government
whose logical responsibilities would include,
(a) protection of the mammal for its own welfare;
(b) protection of the public health and welfare; or
BC0312 Staff Response OJ.doc
12/17/038:08 AM
Q]
The first approach can be visualized as a permit to "take" manne mammals
authorized by NMFS to a subordinate entity.
The second approach can be visualized as another governmental agency (Federal,
State, or local) retaining a parallel and co-equal authority to manage marine
mammals for the purposes stated above.
The essential difference between the approaches to "taking" marine mammals
under the MMP A is the level of authority relative to NMFS.
Analysis
Should the Board of County Commissioners elect to exercise authority for the
protection of marine mammals, several issues must be considered.
Whether as a subordinate to NMFS or as a co-equal with NMFS in the protection
and conservation of marine mammals, NMFS retains ultimate authority and
responsibility for these animals. Thus, if the County chose to acquire a "take"
permit from NMFS (an LOA), NMFS would clearly define the terms for that LOA.
On the other hand, if the County chose to exercise authority that it arguably has to
protect and conserve marine mammals under its own authority and jurisdiction,
NMFS would still play a role in how that new County responsibility would be
carried out. As NMFS would retain authority and responsibility in the area, they as
the principal agency responsible for the protection and conservation of marine
mammals, would be obligated to coordinate their activities with those of the
County. In their estimation, this would involve the development of a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) spelling out the individual agency
responsibilities. Thus in the same way that permit conditions would be spelled out
in an LOA, they would be similarly spelled out in aMOA. The only conclusion
that one can have is that NMFS would retain control of marine mammal protection
and conservation in the Florida Keys, contrary to the concept contemplated in the
MMC request to the Commission.
In either case noted above, the County would become responsible for most if not
all aspects of the requirements and process involved in the protection and
conservation of marine mammals in the Florida Keys. Although this responsibility
could be delegated, it would not be diminished in the County. As a permit holder,
the County would have to be responsive toNMFS. As a co-equal authority to that
of NMFS, the County would be obligated to meet the intent and direction of the
Marine Mammal Protection Act, asNMFS is now.
2
The Marine Mammal Conservancy indicates that there would be no cost to the
County once the authority was delegated toMMC. In large part this might be true,
but it should be underscored that the County would become the responsible
authority as opposed to the forum for discussion about marine mammal issues. In
simple terms, the County would be responsible. At a minimum this would involve
some staff time to oversee the County's interests in this authority. In more
consequential terms, after the release of the pilot whales from Big Pine Key earlier
this summer, it was NMFS that bore the cost of tracking the animals. This required
a substantial expense.
Then there is the simple politics of being involved in the marine mammal
protection and conservation business in Monroe County. The Commission has
heard this issue on numerous occasions and the Florida Keys National Marine
Sanctuary Advisory Council (FKNMS SAC) has heard it and taken a position on a
similar number of occasions. The FKNMS SAC has recommended that three
LOAs exist in Monroe County (for the lower, middle, and upper Keys). The
NMFS has currently issued two LOAs. They do not plan to reduce the number of
LOAs at this time. The immediate consequences of fulfilling the MMC request
would be to eliminate one LOA, currently held by Becky Arnold.
The second immediate consequence of taking his action would be to become the
legally responsible arbiter of any issue related to the protection and conservation of
marine mammals in Monroe County. This is a much more consequential position
than the one currently held by the Commission, that of a friendly ear and forum for
discussion.
The third consequence of an action to accept an LOA or to become the authority in
Monroe County, would be to accept absolute liability for any actions under that
authority and responsibility and to potentially accept substantial costs as well.
Though the volunteer groups currently involved in marine mammal protection do a
laudable job in their trade, we again currently view that effort holding absolutely
no responsibility for any outcome. However, as other recent activities within our
responsibilities have shown, it does not pay to relinquish responsibility in the face
of delegated authority.
In the recent past, we have seen requests for marine mammal facilities. Would the
responsibility for such a facility increase if the County assumed authority? Would
we need multiple facilities in each area of the Keys? Then there would be other
attendant responsibilities if for any reason, MMC could not fulfill its obligations
3
under a delegated responsibility; funding for equipment and vessels, finding and
retaining volunteers, maintaining available qualified staff able to handle a
stranding event, and funding such efforts as tracking animals once released. If the
responsibility for a stranding similar to the on that occurred with the pilot whales
last spring and early summer fell solely to the County, would we currently be
prepared to handle it or do we want to have to be prepared to handle it?
Based on the information provided staff it appears that the potential liability of
assuming the responsibility for marine mammal protection and conservation in the
Keys is beyond the County's capability at this time.
Recommendations
Staff indicates that the request made by the Marine Mammal Conservancy to
assume authority for the protection and conservation of marine mammals in the
Florida Keys represents a substantial liability and beyond the County's capability
at this time. Staff further recommends that no action be taken on this request.
4