Proposed St. Thomas national marine sanctuary United States Department of Commerce draft environmental impact statement

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

!~~~~~~~~~~~~V

L.. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
2234 SOUTH HOBSON AVENUE
CHARLESTON , SC 29405-2413

United States

Department of Commerce

Draft Environmental Impact Statement

_As 'i :~ ~~~~April 1981

?~~ i~ ~ PROPOSED ST. THOMAS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

Prepared by:

Office of Coastal Zone Management
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20235

and
V13s~~~~ ck~ 6 �Virgin Islands Government
Department of Conservation and
_QQ~ ah At-- ~~~Cultural Affairs
St. Thomas, Virgin Islands

Property of {'2O Library

a_ v

DESIGNATION: Draft Environmental Impact Statement

Title: Proposed St. Thomas National Marine Sanctuary

Abstract: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
proposes the designation of the waters immediately off
southeast St. Thomas, United States Virgin Islands, as a
marine sanctuary. The proposed sanctuary consists of 9.27
square nautical miles of waters under territorial juris-
diction.

The designation of a marine sanctuary would establish a
program of comprehensive management, including research,
assessment, monitoring, resource interpretive programs,
coordination and regulation. The preferred alternative
includes sanctuary management goals and objectives which
will serve as a framework around which sanctuary activities
will he structured.
The Virgin Islands would promulgate specific regulations
pursuant to the Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Act
of 1978 (12VIC�901) which would apply only within the
sanctuary boundary. NOAA will also adopt these regulations
as its sanctuary regulations. The proposed regulations
prohibit the taking or damaging of any living natural
resource; permit traditional fishing methods except at
designated dive areas; prohibit disturbance of cultural
resources; prohibit anchoring in a matter damaging to
coral; prohibits the discharge of substances except cooling
waters from vessels, fish, fish parts or chumming materials,
and discharges from marine sanitation devices. In addition,
the proposed regulations limit alteration of the seabed to
the area outside of the Mangrove Lagoon and only allow
such activites in the public interest.

Alternatives to the proposed action include the no action
or status quo alternative, and modification of the sanctuary
boundari es.

LEAD AGENCY: U. S. Department of Commerce
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Office of Coastal Zone Management

CONTACT: Dr. Nancy Foster, Deputy Director
Sanctuary Programs Office
OCZM
3300 Whitehaven Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20235

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter One Introduction and Summary 1

Chapter Two Purpose and Need 11

Chapter Three Analysis of Alternatives Including the 13
Proposed Action

A. Introduction 13

B. No Action Alternative 13

C. The Preferred Aternative 15

D. Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 24

E. Aternative Three: Establishment of a Smaller 26
Marine Sanctuary

Chapter Four Description of the Affected Environment 29

I. Natural Environment 29

A. Geology 29
B. Climate and Current 29
C. Offshore Islands and Cays 32
D. Biological Zones 33

11. Endangered Species 38

III. Cultural and Historic Resources 38

IV. Socio-Economic Setting 42

List of Preparers 57

Bi bl i ography 59

APPENDIX A: Draft Designation and Regulations

APPENDIX B: Analysis of Existing Federal and Territorial
Statutes

APPENDIX C: Animal and Plant Species List

APPENDIX D: Distribution List

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter One Introduction and Summary 1

Chapter Two Purpose and Need 11

Chapter Three Analysis of Alternatives Including the 13
Proposed Action

A. Introduction 13

B. No Action Alternative 13

C. The Preferred Aternative 15

D. Impacts of the Preferred Alternative 24

E. Aternative Three: Establishment of a Smaller 26
Marine Sanctuary

Chapter Four Description of the Affected Environment 29

I. Natural Environment 29

A. Geology 29
B. Climate and Current 29
C. Offshore Islands and Cays 32
D. Biological Zones 33

II. Endangered Species 38

III. Cultural and Historic Resources 38

IV. Socio-Economic Setting 42

List of Preparers 57

Bi bl i ography 59

APPENDIX A: Draft Designation and Regulations

APPENDIX B: Analysis of Existing Federal and Territorial
Statutes

APPENDIX C: Animal and Plant Species List

APPENDIX D: Distribution List

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1: Offshore Islands and Cays in Waters of the Proposed 32
Sanctuary

TABLE 2: Summary of Documented Shipwrecks in the Proposed 41
St. Thomas Marine Sanctuary

TABLE 3: Dive Sites Within the Proposed Sanctuary Frequency 46
of Trips/Dive Visits

TABLE 4: Annual Recreational and Commercial Fishery Landings 50

TABLE 5: Use of the Major St. Thomas Anchorages 52

TABLE 6: Charter Boat Activity in 1978 and 1979 in the 53
Virgin Islands
TABLE 7: Existing V.I. Commercial Fishing Regulations and Proposed App. B
V.I. Fishery Advisory Committee Recommended Changes

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

APC Area of Particular Concern

CFA Commercial Fisheries Act

CFMC Caribbean Fisheries Management Council

CWA Clean Water Act

CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act

DCCA Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs

DEIS Draft Environmental Impact Statement

ESA Endangered Species Act

FAC Fishery Advisory Committee

FCMA Fishery Conservation and Management Act

FEIS Final Environmental Impact Statememt

MMPA Marine Mammal Protection Act

MPRSA Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act

MSAB Marine Sanctuary Advisory Board

NMSP National Marine Sanctuary Program

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

OCZM Office of Coastal Zone Management

VICZMA Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Act

VICZMP Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Program

WPCA Water Pollution Control Act

CHAPTER I -- INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

I. Background

The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (MPRSA),
16 U.S.C. 1431-1434, authorizes the Secretary of Commerce, after consulta-
tion with appropriate Federal agencies and the affected State, and with
Presidential approval, to designate ocean areas having distinctive conser-
vation, recreational, ecological , or aesthetic values as marine sanctuaries.

In 1978 the Virgin Islands Departi~ent of Conservation and Cultural
Affairs (DCCA) initiated the development of a Marine Parks and Reserves
System for the Virgin Islands under the auspices of the emerging Territorial
Park System. After a number of potential sites were inventoried and ana-
lyzed, DCCA decided to establish the first marine park off the eastern
and southeastern coast of St. Thomas. A public hearing held in 1978 to
discuss this proposal revealed that many user groups had serious reservations
about the desirability of the Marine Park and Reserve System being proposed.
In early 1979, while DCCA was reformulating its marine park plan, several
sites off St. Thomas were assessed by DCCA for suitability as possible
national marine sanctuaries. In April 1979, the Commissioner of DOCA
appointed a Marine Sanctuary Advisory Board (MSAB) to provide public advice
on the selection of a sanctuary site and the development of a management
plan.

In May 1979, DCCA recommended an area off southeast St. Thomas to be
designated as a national marine sanctuary (see Figures 1 and 2). As part
of the scoping process, in July 1979 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOWA and DCCA distributed an Issue Paper exploring the
possibility of marine sanctuary designation at the site. On August 8, 1979,
NOAA and DCCA held a public workshop to obtain comments on the Issue Paper.
The proposal received support from local fishermen, divers, conservation
groups, and the Virgin Islands Government. No opposition was voiced regarding
the proposed sanctuary.

Following the workshop, DCCA and NOAA under a cooperative agreement
began preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). On
November 8, 1979, NOAA printed a Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environ-
mental Impact Statement in the Federal Register and held a scoping meeting
in Washington. NOAA and DCCA have gathered and analyzed information and
consulted with Federal agencies, territorial government agencies, the
4 ~~Caribbean Fishery Management Council (CFMC), and local interest groups and
i ndi vi dual s.

Following the publication of the DEIS, NOAA and DCCA will hold joint
public hearings to receive comments on the proposal to designate the St.
Thomas National Marine Sanctuary. Written comments will be accepted for
sixty (60) days. If NOAA AND DCCA decide to proceed, a Final Environmental
Impact Statement will be issued and will include the final proposal. At
that time the Secretary of Commerce will initiate final consultation with
other Federal agencies and the CFMC. Finally, if NOAA decides to proceed
with the proposal, Presidential approval of the designation must be obtained.

90. 85, 80, 75' 70'

40' Hans Loihik Is TORTOIA

NORTH AMERICA Thatch Ca y <
Op, ~ST
35' N
UNITED STATES

30( PROPOSED SAINT THOMAS, U.S. V.I.
MARINE SANCTUARY

NN Frenehcap Cay
6500,' 64'45'
25' -� Ul "
0-re ~ ~~~~~~ .S~4j

See inset
-36 IUB~A~7~zt ~ Z~V~l~p 20-
20'o~~rs
t r.
IIISPANIOLA VIRGIN Xa

15,
( S

1o" V-' PROPOSED SAINT THOMAS, U.S. V.I.,

SOUTH AMERICA MARINE SANCTUARY
S A SITE LOCATION

9(. 85, W. 75, 70' 65, 606 55,

Figure 1

54s54,� $4' 54 5? 5!' 50 4!~l~l 64*48mO

T H o iA A S .\ !.5V!4 4!!

S A V N T ISLANDS - - 4!

+ UNITED SAN
+ + + v+

+ +

19~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1

++ +

,c--- 4! --" 4

~~~~~~A-
A + + + + +

+ �~

+ A

� UNITED STATES ISLANDS
jANOERT CONFORMAL tONIC PROJCTI'ON
3.0 DI~mzED POINT ON BOUNDARY AITERN~liVE LEGEND 4,!! PUERTO ROOD AND VIRVIN ISLANDS SAINT THOMAS
2-:0 DIGITIZED POINT ON BOUNDARY ALTERNATIVE I 4 4! STATE PLANE iODRDINATE SYSTEM PIISIIRY SOUND
DIG OITIZED POINT ON BOUNDARY ALTERNATIVE 3 i A-~ PUERTO RIO DATIJM
SCALE IlIAQ. PROPOSED SAINT THOMAS. U.S.V.I.
2ARINE SAN ATIARY
BOUNDARY ALTERNATIVES

Figure 2

11. National Marine Sanctuary Program

The National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) provides comprehensive
management of marine ecosystems for the long-term protection of natural
resources and the enjoyment and benefit of society. The program is responsible
for establishing and maintaining a national system of marine sanctuaries for
the purpose of protecting or restoring special marine areas for their
conservation, recreational, ecological, or aesthetic values. The program
focuses attention on sites of national interest and concern.

The following goals present a framework for the national sanctuary system:
o Enhance resource protection through implementation of a
comprehensive long-term management plan tailored to the specific
resources;
o Promote and coordinate research to expand scientific knowledge
of significant marine resources and improve management
decision making;
o Enhance public awareness, understanding, and wise use of the
marine environment through public educational, interpretive,
and recreational programs; and
o Provide for maximum compatible use of special marine areas and
ecosystems.

III. Proposed St. Thomas National Marine Sanctuary

The Office of Coastal Zone Management (OCZM), which is responsible for the
Marine Sanctuary Program within NOAA, proposes the designation of a marine
sanctuary in waters off southeast St. Thomas, U.S. V.I., under Title III of the
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. Sanctuary designation
will provide long-term protection through a program of comprehensive management
which provides for public use, scientific research, assessment, monitoring,
surveillance and enforcement and resource interpretation including public
education.

A. Proposed Boundary

The proposed Sanctuary consists of 9.27 square nautical miles of
Virgin Islands' territorial waters immediately southeast of St. Thomas. The
coordinates of the points that define the proposed sanctuary boundary are as
follows (Figure 2):

Beginning at the shoreline of Stalley Bay at Latitude 18018'2911
Longitude 64052'4911 to a point southwest of Packet Rock at Latitude
18018'0311 Longitude 64053'3611, to a point southwest of Buck Island at
Latidude 18'16'26", Longitude 64054'1111 thence northeast to a point
off Dog Rocks at Latitude 18017'4511 Longitude 64048'3011, north to a
point off Cabrita Point at Latitude 180191361 Longitude 64049'4211 then to
the shoreline of Cabrita Point at Latitude 1801913611 Longitude 6404915611.

The proposal area comprises the entire Mangrove Lagoon, Jersey and Cowpet
Bays, the waters surrounding Great and Little St. James, Dog Island, Buck
Island and Capella Island. The preferred boundary alternative encompasses
diverse tropical marine ecosystems, including numerous habitat types and a
variety of marine species. The comprehensive management approach provided
by sanctuary designation would assist maintenance and enhancement of long-
term productivity of the entire system.

With the exception of the Benner Bay area, where extensive marina
development has already occurred, the remainder of the proposal area is
pristine. The Mangrove Lagoon area, which comprises Bovoni Gay, Cas Cay,
and Patricia Cay, is the most extensive red mangrove system remaining in
the Virgin Islands. The area is a major nursery for several species of
reef fish and the spiny lobster (Panulirus argus). The remainder of the
proposal area is dominated by fine sandy ar~eas with transitional marine
meadows of algae (Halimeda) and turtle grass (Thalassia testudineum) and
15 different biotic associations of calcareous algal plains and zones of
rock and rubble and open ocean waters. A series of shallow fore reefs,
deep reefs, and back reefs have been identified within the proposal area.
Elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata) dominates the shallow fore reef along
with a variety of other species of corals including massive formations of
star corals (Siderastrea and Montastrea) and brain coral (Diplora). The
reef communities surrounding the offshore islands and cays are variable
and include several species of sponges and soft coral assemblages in the
shallIower waters.

St. Thomas' economy is based on tourism, and most tourist attractions
are water-related. The waters of the proposal area are the locus for as much
as 20 percent of all Virgin Islands boating activity, including considerabl e
use of the area for both private diving and commercial diving tours. The
resources are such that the area provides spectacular coral reef diving exper-
iences, most notably, the coral cave formations at Cow and Calf Rocks, and the
coral reefs at Buck Island, Capella Island and Nazareth Bay. Several shipwrecks
are located within the waters of the proposed Sanctuary. The most notable is
the Royal Mail steamship, HMS WYE, which sank on the south shore of Buck Island.
Much of the rigging, ribs, sides and engine can still be seen. Other wrecks
include the recently relocated World War I freighter, the Cortensar Senior,
now located in the West Bay, Buck Island; an unidentified wreck at Whelk Rocks;
and a Caribbean trading schooner.

B. PROPOSED MANAGEMENT

1. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Management of the St. Thomas National Marine Sanctuary will focus on the
attainment of several goals and objectives (Chapter Three, Analysis of Alterna-
tives Including the Preferred Alternative). The goals and objectives for the
St. Thomas Sanctuary reflect (1) use capacity of the proposed Sanctuary; (2)
anticipated needs and demands to be placed on the resources; (3) potential
threats to resource quality; (4) the need to conserve and protect Sanctuary
resources; (5) the need to encourage both management-related and general research;
and (6) the need to increase, through interpretive programs public awareness
of the proposed St. Thomas National Marine Sanctuary as a nationally valuable
resource. The goals and objectives provide the foundation for management

policies in the proposed Sanctuary and promote conservation, coordinated
research, public education and information exchange. (See Chapter Three
for a complete description of the management plan.) All management planning
and decision making will be conducted within the framework of this plan and
be directed towards fulfilling the program goals and objectives. Objectives
for each goal will represent short-term, measurable steps towards achieving
the long-term, unquantifiable goals and will be similar to those listed
bel ow,

Goal 1: To conserve Sanctuary resources in a manner compatible with
the MSP goals and objectives in order to maintain, protect, and enhance the
quality of the area's biological, aesthetic, and cultural resources.

Tentative objectives include development of specific activities and
mechanisms designed to maintain the overall integrity of the area. Priorities
would be given to upgrading the Mangrove Lagoon area and monitoring fishery
resources. Coordination of all agencies with managerial responsibilities
in the area would be provided.

G oal 2: To encourage scientific research within the Sanctuary focused
on improvement of decision making and increasing the level ef knowledge of
the area's natural system.

Tentative objectives would include activities to encourage and cooperate
with interested parties in research and marine science education and to provide
a mechanism to exchange and disseminate research data.

Goal 3: To enhance national and local awareness of the significance
of the marine resources within the proposed Sanctuary in order to encourge wise
use of these resources.

Tentative objectives would include establishing a Sanctuary Information
Center in addition to developing and promoting marine education and resource
interpretative programs focused on ecological relationships for school curricula
and the general public.

Goal 4: To optimize compatible public uses within the Sanctuary in a
manner which respects traditional uses of the area while conserving the
resources.

Tentative objectives would include establishment of a Marine Sanctuary
Advisory Board, designating dive areas and other special management areas, and
managing fishery resources.

2. SANCTUARY MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES

In order to provide an efficient system for management of the proposed
St. Thomas National Marine Sanctuary, a cooperative arrangement between NOAA
and the Virgin Islands Government is planned. The Virgin Islands Department
of Conservation and Cultural Affairs will be the onsite manager and will
be charged with daily management of the Sanctuary. Management will include
such activities as:

Surveillance and Enforcement

Surveillance and enforcement are an integral part of the management
and protection of the proposed Sanctuary. DCCA's Bureau of Enforcement will
be charged with the responsibility of enforcement operations. The management
plan will describe in detail the surveillance and enforcement system necessary
to meet the goals and objectives of the proposed Sanctuary and will indicate
how the natural and cultural resources, existing and potential human activities,
and environmental constraints will be considered in surveillance and enforcement
of the Sanctuary regulations.

Environmental Analysis and Planning

Research, resource assessment, and monitoring are basic to effective
management. Research in the proposal area has been ongoing; however, it has
not been focused on overall management of the area nor is there an established
clearinghouse for research specific to the proposal area. Detailed quantitative
and qualitative data will be gathered on the area's cultural and marine resources
and will form a sound data base for management strategies. Where appropriate,
based on knowledge of the resources, their significance, their carrying capacity
and the extent of public uses, specific management activities will be recommended.
Provision for periodic monitoring will be made to ensure that future management
requirements are obtained.

Consideration is being given for selecting areas for dive sites. Areas
currently under consideration for dive areas include: Great Bay, the Cortensar
Senior, the southwest point of Little St. James, Packet Rock, and Nazareth Bay.
Cultural resources will be surveyed and assessed.

Public Education and Information Exchange

Public education and information exchange are mechanisms that assure
public appreciation and participation in sanctuary management. Public education
programs will be developed to encourage recreation in the sanctuary that is com-
patible with resource conservation and wise management. Interpretive programs
will be developed to promote public understanding and appreciation for the
resources of the sanctuary. The plan will provide a range of management stra-
tegies for interpretive programs. A clearinghouse will be established for all
research conducted in the proposal area and a mechanism for information exchange
will be developed. In addition, a Marine Sanctuary Advisory Board (MSAB),
with membership from user groups directly impacted by actions in the sanctuary
will be established to advise DCCA with respect to sanctuary management.

3. PROPOSED SANCTUARY REGULATIONS

� ~~~The preferred alternative proposes a Sanctuary with rules and regulations
developed and promulgated by NOAA and the Virgin Islands. The Virgin Islands
will implement the regulations under the Virgin Island Coastal Zone Management
Act (VICZMA). This approach relies on the Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management
Program (VICZMP) for permitting activities and establishes a mechanism whereby
NOAA will monitor the Virgin Islands' implementation of sanctuary regulations.
It also provides a procedure that allows for NOAA to intervene if the Virgin
Islands fails to enforce the sanctuary regulations and provide adequate management.

The following activities would be subject to regulations (see Appendix A).

(1) Removing, breaking or otherwise harming coral, other bottom
formations or plants, except as incidental to other fishing
operati ons.

(2) Operations of vessels except fishing vessels, and anchoring by
all vessels.

(3) Construction on, dredging of, or altering of the seabed.

(4) Discharging or depositing certain substances or objects.

(5) Using poisons, electric charges or explosives.

(6) All activities, including fishing, along designated underwater
trails.

(7) Removing or harming cultural and historical resources.

(8) Removing or damaging navigation aids, markers, and fishing
traps or gear.
(9) Activities affecting or likely to affect marine mammals,
turtles, or other endangered species.

C. The Status Quo

A variety of Federal and Territorial statutes apply to activities occurring
within the proposal area. One alternative to marine sanctuary designation is
the no action alternative. Existing Federal statutes (Endangered Species Act,
and Fisheries Conservation and Management Act) and Territorial statutes
(Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Act, Commercial Fisheries Act, Water
Pollution Control Act) would continue to provide the legal framework for protec-
ting the area's resources under the no action alternative.

However, despite the adequacy of the legal authorities, additional
funding is necessary to provide comprehensive management to the area. In
addition, under the status quo alternative no consideration is envisioned for
protection of specific resources such as coral, marine meadows, or shipwrecks
without the additional management and support impetus of the sanctuary.

The marine sanctuary designation would augment existing legal authority
and funding capabilities in order to provide a comprehensive mechanism for long-
term management. This designation would also serve to protect the integrity of
the area and those coordinated activities occurring within it.

D. Other Alternatives to the Proposed Action

NOAA and OCCA reviewed two smaller boundary alternatives for the proposed
Sanctuary (see Figure 2). One alternative to the preferred boundary option
(Boundary Alternative 2) would include much of the same area as the preferred
alternative but would exclude areas such as Benner Bay, Cowpet Bay, and the
intertidal areas from Cowpet Point to Deck Point. This option would focus on

the Mangrove Lagoon and open water areas. Another boundary alternative
considered (Boundary Alternative 3) would include only the Mangrove Lagoon
and Benner Bay complex; dive areas located at Packet Rocks, Buck and Capella
Islands would not be included. NOAA and DCCA jointly determined that these
boundary alternatives would not assure representation of all the diverse
resources in the area. Sanctuary regulations would be difficult to enforce
in an area of this size and violators would have sufficient time to escape.
Furthermore, sanctuary goals and objectives could not be adequately implemented
because the entire ecological system would not be protected.

An alternative sanctuary proposal eliminated from consideration is the
establishment of a marine sanctuary without substantial Virgin Islands involve-
ment. The entire proposal area is within territorial waters and subject to
the jurisdiction of the Government of the Virgin Islands. DCCA and the V.I.
Government would not support a sanctuary in territorial waters without substan-
tial territorial government participation. Since the Act provides the Governor
with the right to prevent designation of a sanctuary in territorial waters,
further consideration of this alternative would not be fruitful.

Chapter II -- PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE ACTION

The Office of Coastal Zone Management (OCZM) of the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOWA and the Virgin Islands Government,
Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs (DCCA), have identified an
area consisting of approximately 9.27 square nautical miles within the
Virgin Islands territorial waters off southeastern St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin
Islands to be a marine area of national significance that is deserving of
marine sanctuary designation. In terms of ecological, cultural, recreational,
and aesthetic importance, the site is significant from both a local and
national perspective. The waters off southeast St. Thomas contain the most
significant stand of mangroves in the Virgin Islands; extensive coral reef
communities, coral caves, and several shipwrecks that are important recrea-
tional dive sites. The area also supports juvenile and adult conch, lobster,
numerous fish habitats, plus nesting and feeding areas for endangered turtle
and fish species. Given the distinguishing nature of the resources and prox-
imity to St. Thomas, the area is particularly inviting to public users.

The goals of the proposed St. Thomas National Marine Sanctuary are:

o To conserve sanctuary resources in a manner compatible
with the National Marine Sanctuary Program goals and
objectives in order to maintain, protect and enhance
the quality of the area's biological, aesthetic, and
cultural resources.

o To encourage scientific research within the Sanctuary that is
focused on management-related questions and directed toward
enhancement of knowledge of the area's natural systems.
o To enhance national and local awareness of the significance
of the marine resources within the proposed sanctuary; to
encourage wise use of these resources; and to promote under-
standing of the role of the National Marine Sanctuary Program
in marine conservation.

The diverse, but inter-related ecosystems of the area are delicately
balanced. The coral reefs are extremely fragile and the Mangrove Lagoon area
is currently under severe stress. Increasing pressures on these unique natural
and cultural resources from boaters, fishermen, divers and other users coupled
with the absence of a well coordinated, protective management framework, demon-
strates the need for marine sanctuary designation.

Without sanctuary designation the entire proposal area will not receive
comprehensive and coordinated management attention. Presently, the Virgin
Islands Coastal Zone Management Program is developing regulations and a manage-
ment plan for one fifth of the proposal area (the Mangrove Lagoon/Benner Bay
complex) as an Area of Particular Concern (APC). However, the APC does not
include the shipwrecks, coral reef formations, rock outcroppings and endangered
turtle nesting areas which also require additional management protection.

I I

It is highly unlikely that the Virgin Islands would be able to provide
the necessary funding to adequately enforce regulations and to protect the
overall integrity of the proposal area. In addition, funds would not be
allocated to design and conduct research or to develop educational and
interpretative programs as part of a management program for the area. The
present deterioration of the Mangrove Lagoon complex will not be reversed
under the status quo.

Marine sanctuary designation will provide a comprehensive management
mechanism to insure long-term protection of the area and together with the
existing Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Program will provide for
balanced use of the resources, well defined research and educational programs,
and an enforcement mechanism to protect and preserve the recreational,
ecological, and aesthetic values that make this area so unique.

OCZM, therefore, proposes to designate an area immediately southeast
of St. Thomas as a National Marine Sanctuary under Title III of the Marine
Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972.

Chapter III -- ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION

A. Introduction

NOAA proposes to designate coastal waters off southeast St. Thomas as a
marine sanctuary in order to provide for management and long-term protection
of an ecosystem that is rich in habitat diversity and recreational value.
This designation will also serve to promote scientific understanding, public
appreciation, and wise use of the area's resources. Various management,
boundary, and regulatory alternatives have been considered in the evaluation
of the proposed action.

This chapter presents analyses of the three viable alternatives, a no
action (status quo) alternative, the proposed action (a marine sanctuary with
management responsibility shared by NOAA and the Virgin Islands), and a
similar cooperative sanctuary with a smaller boundary.

B. No Action Alternative: Rely on the Status Quo

The proposed sanctuary would be located off southeast St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands, in waters under territorial jurisdiction. A variety of Federal
and territorial laws, management programs and regulations apply to activities
taking place in the general area. An alternative to the proposed action, the
no action (status quo) alternative, is to rely on existing programs to provide
management while relying on the existing regulatory system to control damaging
activities. Under this alternative, no sanctuary would be designated. The
following discussion briefly summarizes existing laws and programs and analyses
their impacts.

RELEVANT VIRGIN ISLANDS AND FEDERAL STATUTES

General Resource Management

Under the Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Act, (VICZMA) develop-
ment activities in the entire Virgin Islands' Coastal Zone, including the area
under consideration as a marine sanctuary are subject to a permit review to
ensure consistency with resource protection policies established by this Act.
However, these policies are relatively broad and further regulations are needed
to provide additional definition. Under the VICZMA, the focus of rulemaking is
special area management, including regulation of established Areas of Particular
Concern (APC). The Virgin Islands would promulgate such regulations for the
1/5 of the proposed sanctuary that is included within the Benner Bay/Mangrove
Lagoon APC, but the remainder of the area would not be subject to special man-
agement regulations. Regulations to protect and manage specific resources
such as coral, marine meadows, or shipwrecks would not be promulgated without
additional funds and the impetus of the Sanctuary. Therefore, their protection
would continue to depend upon the issuance of permits based on the broad policies
and goals of the VICZMA. A Harbor and Water Use Study is pending, but will not
address management of resources, or act as an overall water use plan. It is
specifically limited to existing near shore anchorages and is designed to assist
the territory in collection of fees for the mooring of vessels. The VICZMA and
the other relevant authorities including current enforcement procedures summar-
ized in this section, are discussed in more detail in Appendix B.

Water Pollution Control

Federal and territorial statutes that control the discharges of wastes and
waste water into the proposed sanctuary are adequate for insuring satisfactory
water quality. Title I of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act,
and the Virgin Islands Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Acts provide
sufficient regulation of disposal of hazardous wastes. Discharges from point
sources are covered by the Virgin Islands Water Pollution Control Act (WPCA).
Under the WPCA, the waters of the proposed sanctuary are designated class "B"
which are coastal waters intended for marine life and primary contact recreation,
such as swimming. Disposal of vessel waste is regulated by the Federal Clean
Water Act and enforced by the Coast Guard.

Fishing

Fishery resources are managed and regulated primarily by the Virgin Islands
Commercial Fishing Act (CFA). The Caribbean Fishery Management Council (CFMC) and
the Virgin Islands are coordinating regulations for fishery resources and
enforcement (Olsen, 1980, personal communication). The spiny lobster, mollusk
and shallow water reef fish Fishery Management Plans being developed by the
CFMC will address the protection and management of those resources. The Virgin
Islands has agreed to revise its fishing regulations under the Virgin Islands
CFA to implement the CFMC regulations.

Regulations under the CFA will provide management for the fishery resource
that is consistent with proposed goals for the Sanctuary. Currently, the CFA
specifies size limits of fish traps and mandates that they be partially construc-
ted of "biodegradable" material. The Act also specifies regulations governing
the taking of lobster. These regulations are aimed at conserving this resource
by restricting the taking of immature and female lobsters. Proposed changes in
the CFA regulations will provide additional protection and conservation measures
for fishing resources that are consistent with anticipated FMPs.

Endangered Species and Marine Mammals

The Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA) provide specific protection from the "harming" or "taki'ng" of all species
of marine mammals and listed endangered species. In addition, for such listed
species, the ESA authorizes the designation of critical habitat areas. Such a
designation, however, provides protection from only Federal or Federally funded
or licensed actions. It would not protect critical habitats from actions by the
territorial government or private individuals and there is no authority under
the MMPA to protect localized marine habitats of exceptional importance.

Impacts of the Status Quo

Despite the authority of the Virgin Islands government to promulgate
protective regulations, long-term protection for the site cannot be assured
under the status quo alternative. As discussed in Chapter IV, recreational
and commercial fishing and boating, and recreational diving are important
activities occurring within the proposed sanctuary waters and increases in
these activities are anticipated. More than 26,400 diver visits were
made to the proposal area in 1979. Approximately 44 percent of the

St. Thomas recreational boating fleet are located in sanctuary waters.
Overcrowding can be expected as carrying capacity is reached. In addition,
approximately 57 of the 161 St. Thomas fishermen use sanctuary waters.
Under the status quo alternative a long-term comprehensive management scheme
would not be implemented that address these activities and their anticipated
future increases. Changes in political administrations and philosophies
could result in a change in status for the area and a lessening of resource
protection. As an example, the status of an APC could be changed or regulations
significantly altered. Analysis indicates that in light of present and antici-
pated future use, the diversity of resources within the area warrants additional
long-term protection, national attention, and focus in terms of comprehensive
management beyond that provided by the present institutional structure.

As discussed in Chapter 1I, and in more detail in Chapter IV, the proposal
area is a complex ecosystem containing valuable marine and cultural resources.
It is also an area subject to substantial and increasing recreational use.
Human activities that either singularly or in combination may place stress on
the resources include: anchoring, tampering with or removing historical and
cultural resources, fishing, seabed alteration and construction activities.
Given the unique resources, their particular vulnerability due to increasing
human pressures, and the complex nature of information and management require-
ments, assurance of long-term preservation of the area requires: (a) a
comprehensive management approach that will monitor, assess and act on informa-
tion about the cumulative effects of human uses; (b) funding to ensure all
necessary requirements of the area are met, (c) a mechanism to coordinate and
encourage research that will lead to effective management decisions; (d) efforts
to enhance public awareness of the significance and the need for wise use of
the resources in the area.

It is unlikely that substantial progress in these areas will be made under
the status quo. For example, many needed management activities would not likely
be undertaken. Such activities include habitat restoration projects for the
Mangrove Lagoon; designation of dive areas; design and implementation of a
systematic monitoring program to track ecological conditions and fluctuations
in population levels; and specialized study and monitoring efforts focused on
the potential use of mooring buoys.

In addition, under the status quo a coordinated educational and interpre-
tive program focused on the specific Sanctuary area would not be implemented.
Consequently, user guides to the area and public awareness and educational
information would not be developed. In conclusion, despite the adequacy of
existing legal authority to protect the area, the lack of funding for compre-
hensive management could lead to inadequate long-term protection. By augmenting
existing statues and programs, NOAA can bolster this framework and build long-
term protection and management into a significant site worthy of national
attention.

C. The Preferred Alternative: The St. Thomas National Marine Sanctuary

NOAA proposes to designate the waters off southeast St. Thomas as a marine
sanctuary to better assure the long-term protection of an ecosystem that is
rich in habitat diversity and recreational value. The precise boundaries are:

Beginning at the shoreline of Stalley Bay at Latitude 1801812911
Longitude 6405214911 to a point southwest of Packet Rock at Latitude
1801810311 Longitude 64053'3611, to a point southwest of Buck Island at
Latitude 18016'2611 Longitude 64054'1111, thence northeast to a point off
Dog Rocks at Latitude 18017'4511 Longitude 6404813011, north to a point
off Cabrita Point at Latitude 18019'361 Longitude 6404914211, then to the
shoreline of Cabrita Point at Latitude 1801913611 Longitude 6404915611.

1. Sanctuary Administration

The proposal would establish a national marine sanctuary administered in
partnership between NOAA and the Virgin Islands. The Draft Designation Document
(Appendix A), which serves as a constitution for the Sanctuary, sets forth the
elements of this relationship. It establishes a series of checks and balances
which ensure protection of the national interest in this important area and at
the same time allows the Virgin Islands government adequate flexibility for
controlling it's own waters.
The basic regulations for the Sanctuary will be the special management
regulations promulgated by the Virgin Islands, pursuant to its Coastal Zone
Management Act (12VICS901) to ensure specific protection of all the resources
throughout the Sanctuary. NOAA will adopt these regulations as its Sanctuary
regulations but will not issue additional regulations unless it is to control
an activity over which the Virgin Islands has no authority. Neither party can
change the regulations without the consent of the other.

The Virgin Islands will have the primary enforcement responsibility and can
elect to prosecute any violation under its law or turn the matter over to NOAA
for prosecution in order to take advantage of the simplified civil penalty pro-
cedure established under the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act.
NOAA will monitor implementation and could assert enforcement authority in the
event that there was a significant failure by the Virgin Islands to do so.

The Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs (OCCA) would serve as
on-site manager for the Sanctuary. DCCA is the environmental protection arm of
the Virgin Islands government and administers territorial environmental laws
(See Appendix B Federal and Territorial Authority).

2. St. Thomas National Marine Sanctuary Management Plan

The National Marine Sanctuary Program provides long-term comprehensive
management for special marine areas and focuses on protection; resource inter-
pretation/public education; research/assessment aimed at improving marine
resource management decisions; and encouraging maximum public use consistent
with resource protection.

The first step in effectively addressing the resource issues within a
marine sanctuary is the preparation of a formal Management Plan (MP). The Plan
will address administration, surveillance/enforcement, research and assessment,
public education/interpretation and visitor use. It will propose actions and
programs to be implemented within a specific timeframe, provide the rationale
for such actions, and relate them to other activities in the sanctuary and its
vi ci nity.

The heart of the Management Plan is comprised of goals and objectives for
the proposed Sanctuary. They will provide a framework around which management
activities will be structured. Mechanisms for conserving resources and integra-
ting sound public uses into broader national marine sanctuary program purposes
will be elaborated. Objectives for each goal will represent short-term quanti-
fied steps towards achieving the long-term goals.

a. Goals and Objectives for Sanctuary Management

The goals and objectives identified for the proposed St. Thomas National
Marine Sanctuary are responsive to (1) the resource use capacity of the
proposal area; (2) anticipated needs and demands to be placed on the resources;
(3) potential threats to resource quality; (4) the need to conserve and
protect sanctuary resources; (5) the desire to encourage both management-related
and generic research; and (6) the desire to enhance, through interpretive
program efforts, public awareness of the significance of the marine resources
within the proposed sanctuary and to convey information on their wise use.

GOAL 1: To conserve Sanctuary resources in a manner compatible with the National
Marine Sanctuary Program goals and objectives in order to maintain,
protect and enhance the quality of the area's biological, esthetic,
and cultural resources.

Objectives

o Emphasize reliance on existing Virgin Islands and Federal authorities.

o Identify and implement an enforcement and surveillance system to
protect sanctuary resources.

o Enhance fishery resources through activities such as habitat restor-
ation and mariculture projects; and
o Establish a coordinating mechanism to insure cooperation among all
agencies with management responsibilities within the Sanctuary.

GOAL 2: To encourage scientific research within the Sanctuary that focuses on
both improvement of management decision making and increasing the
level of knowledge of the area's natural systems.

Objectives

o Systematically identify and synthesize existing data useful in
,characterizing the Sanctuary. A clearinghouse will be established
to disseminate and exchange Sanctuary research data.
o Design a long-term research and assessment plan focused on information
gaps and management needs; establish short-term priorities.
o Establish competitive funding mechanisms encouraging a wide range of
scientific expertise to focus attention on ecological interrelationships
within the Sanctuary.
1.7

GOAL 3: To enhance national and local awareness Of the significance of the
marine resources within the proposed Sanctuary, to encourage wise use
of these resources; and to promote understanding of the role of the
National Marine Sanctuary Program in marine conservation.

Objectives
Establish a Sanctuary Information Center to introduce the public
directly to the beauty and significance of the Sanctuary resources as
a national asset through interpretive programs. The Center will, in
accordance with the Management Plan, provide interpretation of
the Sanctuary resources to the public.
o Develop materials such as educational packages for public school
curricula and for adult education programs, to increase public
knowledge of the marine resources within the Sanctuary.
o Develop appropriate educational tools, such as brochures, slides,
and films, to effectively communicate the significance of the
sanctuary resources to the public.

GOAL 4: To optimize compatible public uses within the sanctuary in a manner
which respects traditional resource uses and conserves the values
for which the Sanctuary was established.

Objectives

o Provide advice to the onsite manager on matters relating to Sanctuary
public use. This will be accomplished through the existing Marine
Sanctuary Advisory Board consisting of representatives from various
user groups.
o Designate dive areas and other special management zones.

o Manage fishery resources for the benefit of all users.

In order to provide an efficient administrative mechanism for the achieve-
ment of the above objectives and for day-to-day management of the proposed
St. Thomas National Marine Sanctuary, the following basic strategies are
proposed. The management priorities will include provisions for enforcing
and administering the proposed Sanctuary and for research and assessment.

b. Onsite Manager

Virgin Islands-Federal cooperation will form the basis for Sanctuary
management. Under a cooperative agreement with NOAA, the Virgin Island's OCCA
will serve as onsite manager, and will have the responsibility for enforcement
and surveillance activities within the proposed Sanctuary. The Virgin Islands
will be responsible for administering the Sanctuary and providing reports
including, but not limited to the following items:

o environmental analysis;
o visitor use and resource capacity studies, user-related impacts, and
such other information as necessary;
o enforcement analysis, that includes a summary of activities, notices
of violations, case dispositions, including statistical information
on number of visitors, points of entry and areas and types of use,
plus conclusions and recommended ways to improve management.

C. Anchoring Study
To explore methods of lessening the effects of improper anchoring and to
assess the effectiveness of existing controls NOAA and DCCA will undertake a
study to determine the feasibility and design of a mooring buoy system for the
Sanctuary or a suitable alternative. Proper anchoring information will be
disseminated to users.

d. Public Education and Information

The "living laboratory" aspects of the proposed Sanctuary can be fully
developed to provide opportunities for the public to experience the interrela-
tionship between man and the environment, in addition to understanding the
significance of the resources and the implications of marine management. This
educational aspect will be developed through field activities and media mater-
ials. A sanctuary user's guide will be a product that will enable the public
and educators to better understand and more wisely utilize the resources. In
conjunction with DCCA's Environmental Studies Program, other public education
programs and the V.I. Department of Education, a coordinated sanctuary education
program for both children and adults could be developed. Interpretative
activities could be designated, possibly centering around a Sanctuary museum.
The public will be encouraged to participate in organized tours and other
"hands on" learning experiences. This use activity has been recommended for
areas within the proposed sanctuary such as the Mangrove Lagoon, by the Coastal
Zone Management Program of the Virgin Islands and by a number of other studies
(Bellar et.al., 1970; Adams, et.al., 1975; Nichols and Towle, 1977). The
Sanctuary In-formation Center will-distribute information on regulations and
on-going activities and research within the Sanctuary.
e. Research

In an effort to provide baseline data upon which future change can be
evaluated and future management decisions based, priority will be given to
completing a biological inventory, reef health and water quality assessments.
The diversity of habitat types, uses and biota within the proposed sanctuary
offers extensive possibilities for research which will be encouraged. A
long-term research and assessment program will be developed as a part of the
Management Plan.

f. Fishery Improvement

The role of the Mangrove Lagoon and the remainder of the proposed Sanctuary
waters in local fisheries has been documented in a continuing series of research
efforts. These studies point out the importance of stemming the deteriorative

trends within the Mangrove Lagoon in order to insure a continuing supply of
juvenile fish, lobsters and crabs. To combat the continued degradation of the
fishery, plans for its' improvement will be developed as a part of the Sanctuary
Management Plan.

g. Establishment of an Advisory Committee

In May of 1979 the Marine Sanctuary Advisory Board (MSAB) was established
to assist OCCA in developing the marine sanctuary proposal. The MSAB is a ten
(10) person board attached to DCCA and consists of representatives of user groups
that would be impacted by the proposed Sanctuary. The following groups were
represented: Power Boat Racing Association, dive tour operators, St. Thomas-
St. John Fisherman's Cooperative, St. Thomas Underwater Sports Club, Frenchtown
Community Association, and the V.I. Conservation Society.

The MSAB initiated policy review of actions related to the proposed Sanc-
tuary such as the development of rules and regulations. If a sanctuary is
designated, the Board will remain in existence and continue to function in
this policy review and advisory capacity to DCCA.

h. Habitat Restoration

Habitat restoration will focus on the Mangrove Lagoon. It will
center upon the control of factors contributing to environmental degradation
and upon increasing water circulation throughout the Mangrove Lagoon. Habitat
restoration will be conducted by reopening major circulatory channels through
dredging, by mangrove reforestation, stricter control over pollutants, and
increased circulation for the lagoon.

i. Designated Dive Areas

To protect and enchance popular dive spots of particular value and to
increase the capacity of sanctuary resources to cope with anticipated demands,
certain areas may be set aside as special management zones. Associated activ-
ities would include the placement of instructive markers and signs, regular
maintenance of the reef areas and the establishment of mooring buoys. Areas
currently under consideration as special management zones are several diving
areas know as Great Bay, the southwest point of Little St. James, the Cortensar
Senior located off Buck Island, Packet Rock, Cow and Calf Rocks, and Nazareth
Bay.

j. Cultural Resources

The proposed Sanctuary has a diversity of cultural resources. To more
fully understand their history and to provide a mechanism that will ensure
their survival, NOAA will fund an inventory and assessment of submerged cul-
tural resources. NOAA will work closely with DCCA and the Virgin Islands
State Historic Preservation Officer in developing that portion of the Man-
agement Plan dealing with protection of cultural resources. Properties
eligible for inclusion onto the National Register of Historic Places will be
identified.

k. Proposed Regulations
Through the Virgin Islands CZMA, regulations will be promulgated to pro-
vide protection to the proposal area, in addition to that already provided by
the Virgin Islands and Federal law (e.g., the Marine Mammal Protection Act).
DCCA has analyzed the activities affecting the area and has proposed draft
regulations which have been approved by both the St. Thomas Coastal Commission
and the Virgin Islands Coastal Commission (See Appendix A). NOAA has reviewed
the controls imposed and concluded that they are adequate to protect the
resources of the Sanctuary. Therefore, it does not propose any additional
measures, but will adopt the measures as Federal regulations; thus making
available Federal remedies for violations should the Virgin Islands wish to
utilize them. The regulations are open for review and comments both under
the Virgin Islands and Federal procedures. These reviews will be conducted
concurrently and in connection with the EIS process. Final Virgin Islands
regulations will be adopted by the St. Thomas Coastal Committee and the
Virgin Islands Coastal Commission. If approved, the substantive provisions
will be adopted by NOAA.

a. SUBSTANTATIVE PROVISIONS

1. Taking and Damaging Natural Resources

a. No person shall break, cut, or similarly damage or destroy any
coral, bottom formation or any marine plant, except dead shells. There shall
be a presumption that any items listed in this paragraph found in the possession
of a person within the sanctuary have been collected or removed from the sanc-
tua ry.
b. Only traditional fishing methods shall be permitted within the
sanctuary. No person shall use poisons, electrical charges, explosives or
similar methods to take any marine animal or plant.

2. Operation of Vessels

a. No person shall anchor on coral reefs or in any manner that
damages coral or other natural or cultural resources. All practicable efforts
shall be taken to drop anchors on sand flats, rock and rubble bottoms, and
other areas without extensive coral formations. When anchoring dive boats,
the first diver down shall inspect the anchor to ensure that it is placed off
the corals and will not shift in such a way as to damage corals. No further
diving is permitted until the anchor is placed in accordance with these require-
* ~~ments.

b. No person shall anchor in areas where mooring buoys have been
placed by the Government of the Virgin Islands or NOAA.

C. No vessel under power shall approach closer than 200 feet to a
fishing vessel or a vessel displaying a diving flag except at a maximum speed
of three knots.

d. No vessel or person shall interfere with any fishing activity.

e. All vessels from which diving operations are being conducted
shall fly, in a conspicuous manner, the international code flag alpha "A."
3. Alteration of the Seabed and Construction

a. No person shall dredge, fill or otherwise alter the seabed in
any manner nor construct any structure other than a navigation aid except as
permitted by this section.
b. The following activities are allowed subject to the limitations
and conditions imposed by the applicable permits and licenses issued under the
Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Act, V.I.C. Chapter 21, Title 12, (VICZMA):

i) Construction of piers, docks, moorings, and similar struc-
tures, except in the Mangrove Lagoon (defined as an area from Bovoni Cay west
to the shoreline of St. Thomas);
ii) Dredge and fill activities necessary for public service
purposes, including but not limited to the burying and maintenance of cables
and pipes; and
iii) Channel dredging within the area of Benner Bay and Bovoni
Passage (defined as an area from the northwest point of Bovoni Cay, northeast
to Benner Bay and in Benner Bay from a line. drawn from the northeast corner
of Bovoni Cay south to the northwest point of Grotto Cay, north to Compass
Point) provided such activity can be clearly demonstrated to be in the public
interest.

4. Discharging of Polluting Substances

No person shall litter, deposit or discharge any materials or
substances of any kind except:
a. Indigenous fish or fish parts.

b. Effluent from marine sanitation devices allowable under Coast
Guard standards.
C. Municipal sewage from the existing outfall consistent with
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards.
5. Underwater Trails

a. No person shall spearfish or fish at the underwater trails,
except bait fishing.
b. No person shall mark, deface, or injure in anyway, or displace,
remove, or tamper with underwater trails signs, markers or bouys.

6. Removing or Damaging Cultural Resources

No person shall remove, damage, or tamper with, any historical or
cultural feature, including archaeological sites, historic structures, shipwrecks,
and artifacts.

7. Marine Mammals and Endangered Species

No person shall harass, disturb, harm or in any way injure any
marine mammal or other species classified as endangered by the Federal or
Virgin Islands Government.

8. Damage to Fish Traps

No person shall disturb, harm, or tamper with any legal fish gear,
nets, traps, or pots.
b. PERMIT PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA

1. Permits for those activities allowed under section a.3.b. shall be
issued in accordance with the procedures and criteria set forth in section
910 of the VICZMA.

2. Permits for those activities prohibited by section A may be issued
by the Commissioner of the Virgin Islands Department of Conservation and
Cultural Affairs in accordance with the Virgin Islands (VICZMA) and with this
section provided such activity is either (1) research related to the resources
of the sanctuary or (2) to preserve and protect the recreational and educational
value of the sanctuary or (3) for salvage or recovery operations.

a. In addition to any other requirements under Section 912 in considering
whether to grant a permit, the Commissioner shall evaluate such matters as (1)
the general professional and financial responsibility of the applicant; (2) the
appropriateness of the methods envisoned to the purpose(s) of the activity; (3)
the extent to which the conduct of any permitted activity may diminish or enhance
the value of the Sanctuary as an ecological , recreational, educational or scien-
tific resource; and (4) the end value of the activity satisfies the criteria of
this section; (5) such other matters as deemed appropriate.

b. At least 30 days prior to issuing~any permit under this section,
the Commissioner shall notify the Assistant Administrator for Coastal Zone Man-
agement, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 3300 Whitehaven Street,
Washington, D.C. of the application and shall include a description of all
proposed, activities equipment, methods and personnel involved (particularly
describing relevant experience) and a timetable for completion of the proposed
activity.

C. The Commissioner may seek and consider the views of any other
person or entity, within or outside of the Federal Government.

d. NDAA Assistant Administrator for Coastal Zone Management or
designated representative may observe any permitted activity and/or require the
submission of one or more reports of the status or progress of such activity.

e. All information obtained pursuant to a permit issued under this
section shall be available to the public.

D. Impacts of the Preferred Alternative

1. Impacts of the Preferred Boundary Alternative

This boundary alternative would provide a basis for achieving sanctuary
goals. The preferred boundary option would create a sanctuary containing
significant portions of the coastal environment off southeast St. Thomas,
and would protect and manage a system rather than any one component. The
"systematic" scope would provide for maintenance and enhancement of long-term
productivity of the entire ecosystem.

This alternative includes the full component of resources necessary to
protect and maintain the area as a viable marine system. It contains the most
significant stand of fringing red mangroves on St. Thomas, habitats for endangered
species and for important recreational and commercial fishing species, extensive
coral reefs, open ocean areas and several shipwrecks.

Included within the alternative is the Mangrove Lagoon and several mangrove
cays, the largest of which is Bovoni Cay (14 acres). Patricia Cay has extensive
fringing mangrove growth on the north and west. The brown pelican (Pelecanus
occidentalis), green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas), and hawksbill sea turtle
(Eretmochelys imbricata) have been sighted within the area. Habitat for numerous
kinds of birds which roost, feed and nest in and around the mangroves (such as
doves, pigeons, the osprey and cattle egret), would be protected and managed.
Habitat for some rare reptiles which are found in the mangrove, particularly the
local snake (Alsophis) and the ground lizard (Amevia) would be included.

The alternative also contains large expanses of turtle grass flats which
act as a juvenile habitat for many species of fish and mollusks such as small
labinids, wrasses, latjanids and the spiny lobsters. The most popular dive
sites off St. Thomas are located within the proposal area. Most of the signi-
ficant coral assemblages reefs and wrecks are heavily used for snorkeling and
SCUBA diving. Wrecks include the Cortanser Senior, Caridad, and HMS Wye. In
addition, remains of an unidentified wreck are located at Packet Rocks. The
most notable collection of corals and most spectacular reef development exists
at Cow and Calf Rocks, in Christmas Cove off Great St. James, at Straggler
Rocks, off south and west Little St. James, Dog Island in addition to portions
of Buck and Capella Islands.

The area between Patricia and Cas Cay is interspersed with a back
reef community of Porites. Coral reefs containing hard corals such Sidastrea,
Acropora, Diploria, Millipora and Reontastrea exist throughout this boundary
alternative. The reef assemblages also contain soft corals such as Pterogonia,
Psecidopterogoria, Eunicia, and Plexamella as well as sponges.

The ocean areas within the alternative are pristine, contain coral reefs,
and fine sand areas with Halimeda, marine meadows of Thalassia and Syringoduim,
calcareous algal plains and zones of rock and rubble where over 300 species of
fish have been observed (Randal, 1968). The areas of low relief are frequented
by a variety of crustaceans that includes a recently discovered crab resource
(Olsen, Damann and La Place, 1978), mollusks including three species of conchs
(stromibidae) plus a range of fish species dominated by porgies (Calamus sp.),
pat snappers (Lutjanus synagris), and small grunts(Haemulon sp.). The algal
plain is the extensive association areally, as it covers most of the sea floor

deeper than 50 feet. The most obvious components are the spermatophyte Halophila
baillonis, the green algae (Caulerpa, Halimeda, Udotera and Peniculus, and the
phaeophytes (Lobophora, Dictyota, Anadynome, Valonia, and Avranivillea). The
faunal component is dominated by sponges of which there is a large and colorful
variety, particularly of Hasliclona sp. Other obvious animals whose habitat
would be included are fighting conch -Strombus pugilis), carrier shell (Xenphora
conchlopora), hermit crabs (Dardanus venuous and Clibanarious tricolor) and
several species of burrowing polchaetes.

The area also contains Benner Bay, one of the most intensively developed
marine areas of St. Thomas. Approximately 142 boats are moored or anchored
within the Bay. Cowpet Bay includes the area containing the St. Thomas Yacht
Club and where approximately 70 boats are moored or anchored at any one time.

2. Impacts of Sanctuary Management

The proposal creates a cooperative approach to establishment of the
proposed sanctuary that recognizes unique local circumstances. It builds upon
existing special area management and provides "undergirding" by NOAA to insure
long-term protection.

The severe and imminent threats to the resources (identified in
Chapter Four, Description of Affected Environment) will be mitigated by the
promulgation of cooperatively developed protective rules and regulations by
the V.I. which will be subsequently adopted by NOAA. Other impacts of designa-
tion would relate to the maintenance of a high degree of environmental quality
and resource protection related to NOAA funding for management and enforcement.
Sanctuary funding would augment territorial and other Federal monies to undertake
a series of management tasks. There would be no adverse environmental impacts
of designation. The proposal would not limit most existing local short term
uses of the area but would result in long term enhancement of resource produc-
tivity. Designation will result in long term protection of the resources, with
no irreversible or irretrivable commitment.

Data useful for management of both the sanctuary and other marine areas
will be generated. The proposed anchoring study will assess the effects of
stress on corals and benthic communities and the information will be utilized
to develop and employ an anchoring system that will minimize damage and protect
the resources. Monitoring wirefish trapping will supply data to determine
future management needs. Research funding will provide data upon which future
changes can be evaluated and management decisions based.

The proposed "living laboratory" approach to public education and infor-
mation will result in greater public awareness of marine ecological concepts.
Such awareness will decrease the incidence of illegal coral collecting, anchor
damage to coral or pilfering of wrecks.

The proposed habitat restoration project for the lagoon would involve
improving channel circulation and mangrove reforestation. The lagoon area is
the most extensive in the Virgin Islands and the only one remaining on
St. Thomas. Presently, the area is in need of corrective action to ameliorate
existing degradation and to restore the habitat. In the past the lagoon was the
most significant breeding and juvenile habitat for fish and conch off the coast
of St. Thomas. Habitat restoration would enhance the fishery productivity and

result in the revival of the area as a habitat for the spiny lobster (Panularius
argus) and red snapper (Lujanus synognis), two economically important species.

Management strategies for cultural resources such as shipwrecks would be
developed. The sites would be inventoried and assessed enabling NOAA and DCCA
to make effective management decisions for protecting these resources. The
Cortensar Senior which is extensively used by dive boat operators would receive
management consideration that would review safety requirements needed for the
anticipated increases in diving activities. The HMS WYE is a shipwreck also
under consideration for special management. It is anticipated that a systematic
excavation of the wreck will reveal artifacts such as anchors, cannons and other
objects of cultural and historic value. Setting aside areas 1:or use and data
recovery will prevent degradation and maintain and enhance the resources.

Enforcement funds will enhance the efforts of the DCCA Bureau of Environ-
mental Enforcement in policing the area and thereby better assure compliance
with the Sanctuary regulations. This increased level of enforcement will
result in a concomitant increase in protection of the resources.

The preferred alternative is consistent with and complementary to the
goals and objectives of the National Program (see Chapter I, Introduction and
Summary). A designation of these waters as a sanctuary would enhance the
diversity of resources included within the national marine sanctuary system.
The preferred alternative would also provide a site with great diversity in
recreational and commercial fishing. Relatedly, the Sanctuary would provide
an opportunity to study the effects of these managed uses under controlled
condi tions.

E. Alternative Three: Establishment Of A Smaller Marine Sanctuary

As an alternative to the Status Quo and the Preferred Alternative
(boundary altenative 1), NOAA and the Virgin Islands Government could establish
a marine sanctuary of a smaller size. Under the smaller boundary option the
cooperative administrative arrangement between the Virgin Islands and NOAA
would remain the same as the preferred alternative (for a discussion of the
preferred alternative and impacts please see Section C of this Chapter).
There are two reasonable alternatives; boundary alternatives 1, the preferred
alternative and 3 (see Figure 2).

1. Boundary Alternative 2

Boundary alternative 2 would include much of the same area as
Boundary Alternative 1, but would exclude areas such as Benner Bay and Cowpet
Bay and the intertidal areas from Cowpet Point to Deck Point. This option
would focus on the Mangrove Lagoon and open water areas.

Enforcement and management of Alternative 2 would be difficult.
Separating a narrow intertidal zone surrounded by the proposed sanctuary
would present problems in terms of enforcing regulations and expending manage-
ment funds. In addition, the large number of recreational vessels that
anchor, moor and discharge wastes within the area have been identified as an
issue requiring management (see Chapter IV, Affected Environment). Exclusion

of Benner Bay, Cowpet Bay and the intertidal zone will impair the ability of
NOAA and DCCA to address impacts affecting the resources and to comprehen-
sively manage and protect the proposed sanctuary.

2. Boundary Alternative 3

Boundary Alternative 3 would include many of the significant resources and
exclude others. The Mangrove Lagoon/Benner Bay complex would be included.
Hence, the extensive stands of mangroves, juvenile fishing habitat and grass
bed areas would be included but the reef and dive area at Packet Rocks and the
wrecks and dive spots off Buck and Capella Islands would not. The developed
Benner and Cowpet Bays would also be included.

Boundary Alternative 3 would deny sanctuary status to the stretches of
open water between the St. James Islands and Buck Island. The pelagic zone
and extensive algal plains that are biologically important would not be
included. These open water areas which also serve as migratory paths and
feeding grounds for sea turtles and whales would not be protected and managed
as part of the Sanctuary.

The smaller boundary alternatives would produce a sanctuary that includes
a different configuration of resources than the preferred alternative (Alternative
I figure 2). Neither of these alternatives would focus management attention
on an area that functions as a ecological unit. As indicated in Chapter IV,
Description of the Affected Environment, there is a direct biological interrel-
ationship between the intertidal and marine portions of the area under conside-
ration. The area off southeast St. Thomas also functions as a recreational
unit. Developing and implementing management strategies for certain dive
sites and recreational spots within the proposal area, but not others, might
inappropriately encourage use in some areas and discourage recreational use in
others.

Chapter IV -- DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

I. Natural Environment

A. Geology

The proposed Sanctuary represents a former Pleistocene back-reef lagoon
type environment, as does ninety percent of the St. Thomas bank shelf. Drowned
Pleistocene reefs are present in three narrow (300-400m) banks along widely
separated zones offshore. They have slightly different mean depths and cor-
respond to time intervals when the rising sea level was at a temporary stand
4k ~still. These reefs are best defined east of longitude 64'55'W.

The sedimentary geology was investigated in the proposed sanctuary by
A ~ Hubbard (1979). The Hubbard report outlined the oceanography and sedimentol-
ogy of the area and included a synopsis of available information on currents,
sediment transport, and sediment control. The report identified three major
sedimentary regions. The first of these occurred in the region of the major
passes where heavy tidal currents may transport as much as a million cubic
meters of sediment into St. James Bay annually. West of this area in St. James
and Jersey Bays, slower wind driven currents may create conditions of onshore
transport of sediments. The report stated that within Benner Bay and the
Mangrove Lagoon, the major factor explaining sedimentary deposition was
transport of terrestrial sediments from runoff caused by the steep slope of
the island and the erodable nature of St. Thomas soils.

B. Climate and Current

The climate of the area is subtropical and semi-arid. Temperatures vary
between 70 and 85+'-F with the mean annual temperature about 790F. Air circu-
lation is dominated by the trade winds. Wind speed range from eleven to twenty-
one knots. Winds from the east dominate March to October and winds from the
northeast dominate from November to February. Periods of strong (20knots)
northerly winds are common from December to February. Rainfall averages about
41 inches per year, most of which falls between August and December (VI Planning
Office & Coastal Zone Management Program, Technical Supplement No. 1, 1977).

Sea and swell are predominantly from the eastern quandrant throughout
the year; those locations which are sheltered from this quandrant experience
little or no swell and predominately low seas (VanEepol, et. a]. 1971). Tidal
ranges on the southern Virgin Islands platform vary from -an a`verage of 12 cm
to a maximum of 24 cm at the time of spring tide (Holmes, 1978).

The offshore currents are dominated by a branch of the equatorial cur-
rent and come from the east during most of the year with a slight shift to
the south during the summer months. Velocity is consistently around 27 cm/sec
(0.5 Wt. This wind and current relationship dominates the central and off-
shore portions of the proposed sanctuary including Jersey Bay and the areas
between the St. James Islands and Buck/Capella Islands. The inshore area is
dominated by tidal currents in the narrow passes and to the east of the St.
James Islands. Hubbard (1979) noted that current flow continued after peak
tides and suggested that there were hydraulic differentials which persisted

the phenomenon. Currents in this region were observed up to 75 cm/sec (1.5
kt). These current patterns are shown in Figure 3 .
In the open areas of St. James Bay and Jersey Bay the prevailing
current is a slow wind driven drift around 10 cm/sec in a northwesterly
direction. Most sediment transport in this region is affected by wave
generated currents.

The currents of the inner portions of Benner Bay and the Mangrove Lagoon
are also dominated by wind driven movements. Water flows over the passages
between St. Thomas and Patricia Cay and between Patricia and Cas Cays. Addi-
tional wind driven waters also enter Benner Bays. These current velocities
are generally very low (less than 10 cm/sec).

64054' 53' 52' 51' 50, 64'49'

Cbrita Pt

SNINT 1

C3-F

Cayt Cculu RkkClfR
ls�19 ~~~~~~~~~~~Cy GreaRL,
JERSRY BA Y Deck Pt STJMF AYIt ae
Coculus L2
Stnlluu Bay ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Welk Rocks

CRk Calf Rk C1\n�
Long Pt
Little
PACKET ROCK e
Cd ~~~ ~~+ aes s
18' + f''N. U Dog Is

0 Rks

LEGEND

2 Ref. No. Velocity
1 greater than .5 r/sec
2 .3-.5 m/sec
3 .2-.3 m/sec Oceanic Currents
4 .1-2 r/sec
5 less than .1 m/sec S&AZ
18017 18"17'
18"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~817'

Buck Is
Capella la PROPOSED SAINT THOMAS, U.S. V.I.
MARINE SANCTUARY

SANCTUARY CURRENT OBSERVATIONS

64,54' 53' 52' 51, 50' 64'49'

Figure 3

C. Offshore Islands and Cays

Nine offshore islands and cays listed in Table 1 are located within the
proposed sanctuary.

TABLE 1. OFFSHORE ISLANDS AND CAYS IN SANCTUARY AREAS

Island/Cay Size Ownership

1. Bovoni Cay 50 acres Private

2. Buck Island 42 acres Federal

3. Capella Island 22 acres Virgin Islands Govt.

4. Cas Cay 14 acres Private *

5. Dog Island 12 acres Virgin Islands Govt.

6. Patricia Cay 33 acres Private

7. Rotto Cay 2 acres Private

8. Great St. James 157 acres Private

9. Little St. James 69 acres Private

* This may become V.I. Goverment property.

The offshore islands are uninhabited and similar in ecology and appear-
ance. They are aesthetically spectacular, with windward rocky shorelines,
sheer cliffs, and massive boulders. The leeward bays, coves and rocky points
offer many of the finest dive sites and anchorages in the Virgin Islands.
The islands are volcanic in origin, dry in character, and covered with thin
stoney soil.

The beach ridges of the offshore islands and cays mark where the substrate
consists of coral fragments from the high tide to the inland limits. Shells
support a hardy community of growth forms able to withstand the salt stress and
mechanical forces common to beach areas. Sea grape (Coccoloba uvifera), cactus
(Cephalocereus and Opuntia), saltwort (Batis maritima), bay bean (Ipomoea
pes-caprae), and sea spinach (Sesuvium portulacastrum) are prevalent. Behind
this initial zone of beach vegetation may be found white frangi pani (Plumeria
alba), palms (Cocos nucifera and Coccothrinax alta), Agave sp. and casha
(Acacia farnesiana).

The cays of the Mangrove Lagoon (Rotto Cay, Manglar Cay, Cas Cay, Patricia
Cay and Bovoni Cay) support a unique and simple vegetative cover of red, white
and black mangrove trees representing one of the few remaining mangrove
stands in the Virgin Islands. The prop roots provide protection for marine
species, particularly juvenile fish and lobster; tree branches support a
host of waterfowl. Few other plant species with the exception, of buttonwoods
32

(Conocarpus erectus) and saltwort are associated with the mangroves.
(See Appendix C for a list of plant species found in the sanctuary.)

D. Biological Zones

1. Mangrove Lagoon/Benner Bay

The lagoon area of Jersey Bay is the only significant mangrove system
in the Virgin Islands. Several cays (Bovoni, Patricia and Cas Cays) and a
number of manglars (mangrove hummocks) are located there. Cas and Patricia
Cays, are both interspersed with spectacular reefs, and form the southern
barrier of the lagoon. They both consist of precipitous windward sides facing
south and east, and have headlands with long mangrove flats dominated by
white cedar and buttonwoods leeward (north and west of the cliffs).

The entire area within the Jersey Bay (Mangrove Lagoon Benner Bay Com-
plex) is bordered by an extensive red mangrove stand (Rhizophora mangle)
which supplies much structual shelter for a rich and diverse root community,
fish forms, and an extensive bird community. The Island Resources Foundation
reported 79 species of fish, in addition to the spiny lobster in the Jersey
Bay Mangrove system. The population of fish supported by the Mangrove Lagoon
was estimated at more than 50,000 individuals (V.I. Sand Dredging Study:
Preliminary Synthesis Available Data). Prior to the stresses from development,
there were extensive populations of juvenile lobsters and crabs.

Three basic biotic associations occur in the Mangrove Lagoon and Benner
Bay: (1) turtle grass flats, (2) sand filled channels, and (3) reef flats.
In parts of the area, conditions of extreme turbidity, eutrophication, boat-
related turbulence and siltation have favored certain species from these
associations over others. Therefore, at present there are at least eight
recognizable communities which will be discussed (See Figure 4).

The most widespread community in the past has been that community domi-
nated by the turtle grass (Thalassia testudineum). This extremely productive
association is generally over 80 per cent turtle grass with regular appearances
of another spermatophyte, Syringodium filiforme and the Chlorophytes, Halimeda,
Penicillus, Avrainvillea, and Udotea (Figure 4). The turtle grass community
serves as a juvenile habitat for many species of fishes and spiny lobsters
and is important to the nearshore fish resource. Over the past decade, it
is this community that has shown the most change.

Survey work in the late sixties (McNulty, Robertson and Horton, 1968;
Tabb & Michel, 1968) revealed that turtle grass dominated the area of Jersey
and Benner Bays and the Mangrove Lagoon until the early part of the decade
when Olsen and Dammann (1971) noted large areas of mud bottom. In many
cases the turtle grass community has been replaced or survived by an algal
dominated community, the predominant forms being Halimeda and Penicillus.
Other common components are the chlorophyte Acetabularia crenulata and vari-
ous Caulerpa species, the rhodophytes Gelidium sp., Acanthophora spicifera,
the phaeophyte Dictyota divaricata,and the spermatophytes Halodule and Halo-
phila baillonis.

84'54W LEGEND sd 53W W ewsdv E5'51W exedw 6441 E60

Fr ThIa.sua*TIJRTLE GRADE - -
flIHod.u* MARINE GRABS

EZZI nAAPAdO.P.A...... CALCIFIE D [REEN ALGAE St Thomas -
MaloIphI.M. EASZRABS
HARD CORAL REEF a -
G~~~~Rcla.Acopo, ED ALGAE fAUI

CARBONATE BANC .

iSN [1] :ZZ;JZATIEB GRASIR __-

I,,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- '- a /, ] / sand -~~~~~~--

-- - 7 t c Q%-4

'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3~~DgPiketk A!I�
Carib boa Be a
N~-- -' -
~~~~~~~..c. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r'.. Bt

8-d 5,.W- 4 .133.VV - e x 81/vv rs-I 5,vv 8w adw 6.4 4 -
- - - - -A

- - - - - - -~~aYar. 04 SOTHA S 13 TH MS VIGI - - - L
0-#A-A M-ARC lg o
- -A -A -A -A' � -A -A -A -A -A -A -A A F g u e
-~~~~.~ - - - - - A - . -. A, - - - - -
-A 3> - ,. - - - - - - (41- - - i-� -

v'A c'\ - -.. - . -S~-

-A 1- - - - -

"~"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~AC 1550"
Figure��� 4

~~~;"~~~
4b 1"""~ ~

The ichthyofaunal component is very similar to the small labrids, wrasses
and lutjanids that one finds commonly over the turtle grass flats. The algal
species are all found in the deeper sublittoral zone, evidence that they may
be preadapted for the lower light intensities encountered in the high turbidity
waters that resulted from increased development in the surrounding watershed
and from eutrophication. The benthic jelly fish Cassiopea has also increased
greatly in population density over the recent years. Individuals are frequently
found on the bottom within the Penicillus - Halimeda community. Presently,
they cover almost all of the bottom in the Mangrove Lagoon, Bovoni Passage
and much of Benner Bay in a zone extending roughly 15 m from the mangroves.

In certain parts of the lagoonal complex, deteriorating water quality
has resulted in the formation of an area of loose semi-liquid sediment
which is covered by the spermatophyte Halophila baillonis. This species
has been shown to be tolerant of unstable substrates (Olsen and Sheen, 1974).
It is a superior competitor in stressed situations but is easily displaced
by other algal species when conditions permit their growth. Ninety percent
of the inner lagoon is covered with this community in addition to an occasional
growth of Caulerpa cupressoides, Udotea flabellum and Avrainvillea nigricans.
This community extends through Bovoni Passage and is found in deeper parts
of Benner Bay. The Halophila community appears to be the successor to the
algal Halimeda-Penicillus community.

In the extreme eastern portion of Benner Bay, two well defined zones of
sabellid worms exist. The first consists of scattered large individuals in
the sediments themselves. The second zone is covered by a matrix of smaller
sabellid tubes above the sediments. Algal cover does not begin until about
10 meters east of the channel itself. This strong zonation would seem to
indicate that there is an intense gradient or change in the south-east sector
of Benner Bay.

Several other biotic groups were observed in association with the reefs
in entrances and connecting channels of Patricia Cay. McNulty, et al (1968)
showed that the back reef community of Porites extended through both entrance
channels into the lagoon. The Porites segment in the Patricia entrance was
alive in 1971 but is now almost completely dead.

There is an area of fine sediment covered by rhodophycean algae Gracilaria
Cyclindrica and Acanthophora spicifera immediately to the south of Middle
Island in the Mangrove Lagoon. McNulty, et. al., 1968 reported this area as
one of the first where the black mud became covered by Halophila. Both of
these algae are commonly found in quiet back waters and may well be favored
by conditions of heavy nutrient input.

Cas Entrance reach was initially filled with Porites rubble and living
corals (McNulty, et al 1968). Subsequent surveys have shown it to be covered
with the Halimeda-Penicillus community (Grigg, et. al., 1971), turtle grass
(Tabb and Michel, 1968) and a fine calcium carbonate sand (Olsen, 1979).
Presently, the fine sand covers part of the area while turtle grass and
scattered algae cover the eastern portion. The major change in this area
is a large and expanding area dominated by the spermatophyte Halodule that
contains many small rhodophycean algae which cover the eastern portion.
Aerial photos and field observations of the past 5 years also indicate
that the Halodule area is expanding. Possible factors responsible for this
change need further investigation.

Benner Bay and the Mangrove Lagoon area has been demonstrated by Olsen
(1979) to be a major nursery ground for fishes. He also found that over 80
percent of the reef fish specimens noted in the area were juveniles. Addi-
tionally, a resident fauna characterizes the area, as well as a number of
species which use the area for breeding purposes.

2. Ocean areas

With the exception of Jersey Bay (Mangrove Lagoon, Benner Bay) the
waters within the proposed sanctuary area are pristine. The benthic habitat
is characterized by coral reef, fine sandy areas with transitional algae
(Halimeda), marine meadows of turtle grass (Thalassia) and manatee grass
(Syringodium), calcareous algal plains, and zones of rocks and rubble.
There are over 300 species of fish which have been observed in the coral,
grass beds, and sandy areas of the sanctuary (Randal, 1968).

Most of the offshore areas (Figure 4) within the proposed boundaries
are covered by a rich and diverse algal plain. This area of low relief
is frequented by a variety of crustaceans including a recently discovered
crab resource (Olsen, Dammann and La Place, 1978), mollusks, including three
species of conchs (Strombidae) and a range of fish species dominated by
porgies (Calamus sp.), pat snappers (Lutjanus synagris), and small grunts
(Haemulon sp.). This community is extremely productive under )rmnl condi-
tions, but is sensitive to light reduction (Wells and Olsen, 1_74'. The
algal plain is the most extensive association areally, as it covers most of
the sea floor below 50 feet. The most obvious components are the spermato-
phyte Halophila baillonis, green algae (Caulerpa, Halimeda, Udotea and
Penicullus, Anadyonome, Valonia, and Avranvillea) and pheaophyte 'Lobo-
phora and Dictyota). The faunal component is dominated by sponges including
a particularly large and colorful variety, Haliclona sp. Other obvio.,
animals are the fighting conch (Strombus pugilis), carrier shell (Xen(yi)ord
conchylophora), hermit crabs (Dardanus venosus and Clibanarius tricolorj and
several species of burrowing polchaetes.

Between Great and Little St. James is an extensive juvenile conch bed
[Haines and Brownell (1978) and Sigma Environmental (1979)]. This area is
under heavy recreational fishing pressure. Colonies of the West Indian
fighting conch are located in Great Bay and in the St. James Passage.

3. 3enthic Communities

Inshore from the algal plain, a number of deep reefs have been located
[Adey (in Buros, 1979)] (Figure 4). Since hermatypic corals contain algae
which are phototrophic producers, the distribution of species is in part
dependent on depth (light penetration) as well as water clarity. The maximum
diversity of forms occurs in the range between 40 and 60 feet (Jaap and Olsen
in progress) where conditions are optimal for the growth of the massive corals
like Siderastrea. There are also large numbers of alcyonarians, gorgonians
and many species of fish. Randall (1968) has described the diversity of
forms which make up the local fishery valued at nearly 2.5 million dollars
(Olsen, 1974). This habitat also includes many crustaceans such as the
spiny lobster (Panulirus argus).

The reef community is quite variable. It includes a range of assemblages
including gorgonian (soft coral) forests characterized by Pterogorgia, Pseudo-
pterogoria, Eunicea, Plexaurella and sponges. In shallower water the reef
is dominated by hard corals, principally, Acropora palmata (elkhorn), A.
cerviconis (staghorn), Diploria (brain), Agaricia (rose), Millipora (fTre)
and Montastrea. The condition of these reefs within the sanctuary is generally
very good.

Offshore from the reef community is the characteristic sand zone which
typically separates the reefs in the Caribbean area from the deep water algal
association. It has limited infauna and is generally devoid of benthic flora
as a result of grazing by reef fishes and the black urchin (Diadema antillarum).
The spermatophyte Halophila baillonis frequently dominates an early succes-
sional association at the deeper edge of the sand zone as it grades into
the algal plain.

The shallower edges of the deep reef association and its associated
communities are generally occupied by a plant-dominated marine meadow or algal
plain community which is characterized by Syringodium filiforme, Penicillus
capitatus, Avranvillea nigricans, and a variety of brown and green algae.
This algal plain community covers much of the Virgin Islands shelf. Much
of the life in this area is adapted for reattachment after transport. This
community generally grades into a shallow water turtle grass community which
is 50 to 80 percent Thalassia testudinum. These turtle grass beds are an
important nursery ground for spiny lobsters (Olsen, Hernkind, and Cooper;
1975).

II. Endangered Species

There are several endangered species in the proposal area including sea
turtles, brown pelican, and the humpback whale. Sea turtles in the St. Thomas
area are no longer common, and only two or three sites still serve for nesting
purposes. Sea turtles have been known to nest on the beaches of Great St. James,
Dog Island and Great Bay (Towle, et al., 1978) and are frequently sighted at
the ledges of St. James and in other areas of the proposed sanctuary. They
include: the green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas), hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmo-
chelys imbricata), leatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea), olive
ridley turtle (Lepidochelys olivacae) and the loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta
caretta).

A variety of sea birds, including the endangered brown pelican (Pele-
canus occidentalis), use the waters and surrounding mangrove areas for both
nesting, feeding and roosting. These birds feed in large part on the same
resource utilized by the many fishermen who capture bait from these waters.

The waters to the north and east of the sanctuary area serve as one of
the many migrational paths for the humpback whale (Megaptera novaengliae) as
it enters the Caribbean from the Atlantic.

III. Cultural and Historic Resources

DCCA undertook an inventory of cultural and historic resources in the
proposed sanctuary. The report described known shipwrecks and historic mari-
time use in the proposal area.

The proposed sanctuary is known to contain several cultural and historic
resources (see figure 5). During the eighteenth and ninetenth century St.
Thomas harbor was a commercial center of regional importance. The volume
of maritime traffic was considerable. Much of this maritime traffic passed
through the proposed sanctuary as ships headed to and from Charlotte Amalie
Harbor. A 1775 chart by the English cartographer Thomas Jeffreys shows the
Current Hole Passage (referred to as the "St. James Passage") as a major

4 I

64'54' 53' 52' 51' 50' 64'49'

rl1O I'A S tCn1 )Cahrata Pt C

SAINT R4pA,,

18,19, 18,19,
Rovoni Dot I
Cy JERSEY RA Y Deck Pt ST.JAMES BA Y
^ Coculus Pt ('lp h avCJ ~els kDe L S.\MSB ) Great St James Is

~ B~ ~ ~~~Cay Welk Rocks
Cay
Co. Rk Calf Rk
Long Pt C
Little
PACKET ROCK St James Is

LEGEND Dog

Wreck Sites 0Rks
A Historic Site
CARIBBEAN
I Cannon

Ballast Rock SEA
# ,S~~uSite of undetermined
resource value
18'17' --181 17'

PROPOSED SAINT THOMAS, U.S. V.I.
MARINE SANCTUARY

HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES

64r54' 53' 52' 51' 50' 64"49'

Figure 5

navigational channel of the time, and a survey of subsequent navigational
guides indicates that a significant percentage of St. Thomas' trade with
Europe and the islands of the Eastern Caribbean transected proposed sanctuary
waters at one time or another. Moreover, during the frequent periods of
intercolonial warfare, privateers of all nations anchored off Buck Island
in the proposal area, hoping to surprise and capture trading vessels (Tyson,
1977). Given the volume of trade, the shallow reefs, natural hazards like
Packet Rock, shifting wind conditions and often unpredictable currents, the
area of the proposed St. Thomas Sanctuary was the site of many shipwrecks,
some of which are as of yet undiscovered.

Although a systematic survey has not been undertaken, preliminary inves-
tigations have revealed six shipwreck sites within proposed sanctuary waters.
These wrecks are: 1) the HMS WYE, a Royal Mail Company Packet Steamer, which
sank off Buck Island durin-gthe hurricane of 1867; 2) the Cortenser Senior,
an early twentieth century freighter of Panamanian registry-,whi~ch san~k off
Water Island in 1973 and was recently relocated in the calm waters of West
Cove, Buck Island; 3) a barge of unknown origin 4) the Juba] Cain, a British
vessel which stranded on Packet Rock in February, 1880; 5) nuietfe
vessel, possibly the Warwick dating from the early nineteenth century which
sank on Packet Rock; 6) the Caridad, an inter-island trading schooner, which
sank off the Great St. James with a cargo of cement in 1971. Collectively,
these wreck sites reflect much of the maritime history of St. Thomas and most
provide fascinating diving opportunities.

All of the known wreck sites appear to have been excavated to some
extent, either by professional salvagers or recreational divers. However,
it is likely that systematic excavation of the wreck site of the HMS Wye and
the-~unidentified, early nineteenth century wreck on Packet Rock will- aide in
data recovery and reveal previously unrecovered artifacts.

In addition to the known wreck sites, objects of cultural and histori-
cal value, such as anchors, cannons, ballast rock and other items suggestive
of unknown wrecks have been found at several places throughout the proposed
sanctuary. At least one other early nineteenth century ship is known to have
sunk off Packet Rock, but has not been located to date.

TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF DOCUMENTED SHIPWRECKS IN THE
ST. THOMAS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

Location Vessel Date of Site
Number Name T ype Cause Sinking Located

Buck Island

I HMS Wye Steamer hurricane Oct. 1867 Yes

2 Cortenser Senior Freighter deliberate 1973/1979 Yes
3 unknown Barge? unknown unknown Yes

Packet Rock

4 Jubal Cain Iron hull hit rock Feb. 1880 Yes
5 Warwick Brig hit rock 1816
6 unknown Brig hit rock 1813

Great St. James

7 Caridad Schooner engine failed 1971 Yes

There are no known Indian settlement sites within the boundaries of the
proposed sanctuary, however, such sites may well exist underwater. Field
surveys of Buck Island, Great St. James, and the St. Thomas shoreline have
found no evidence of aboriginal habitation. The earliest circum-Caribbean date
for the presence of man thus far is about 17,000 B.C., at which time the
eustatic sea-level was approximately 300 feet lower than at present (Nicholson,
1976). It is possible, therefore, that submerged Indian sites could be
found anywhere within proposed sanctuary waters, particularly in certain
shallow water areas, such as Great Bay or the stretch of water between
Little and Great St. James.

4 1

IV. Socio-Economic Setting

A. Overview

The Virgin Islands has experienced tremendous growth over the past
twenty years and that growth is expected to continue. In the last sixteen
years the population has tripled from about 32,000 in 1960 to an estima-
ted 95,000 inhabitants in 1976 (Virgin Islands Department of Health estimates).
The majority of this population increase can be attributed to the influx of
immigrants from nearby islands, and to a lesser extent, immigration from the
continental United States. The Virgin Islands Planning Office has estimated
that 60 percent of the population growth for the 1960-1979 period was attrib-
uted to immigration rather than natural increases.

The impetus for this rapid growth has been largely the result of increased
employment opportunities associated with the expanding tourist industry, and
numerous territorial governmental policies which have encouraged economic
development (VICZMP, 1978). Employment opportunities have brought the stand-
ard of living in the Virgin Islands to the highest in the Caribbean. Estimated
personal income per capita was $3,200 in 1972.

Tourism is important to the economic base of the territory, and in 1973
it was estimated that the industry was directly responsible for 20 percent
of all employment (VICZMP 1978). St. Thomas is the center of the majority of
tourism activities conducted in the territory. More than three-fourths of all
air visitors to the islands spend their time in St. Thomas. In addition, the
vast majority of cruise ship calls are made to St. Thomas. In 1973, tourist
expenditures in St. Thomas accounted for 70 percent of the total tourist
spending in the Territory.

While in the Virgin Islands most tourists involve themselves in water-
oriented activities. Of the 353,000 tourists in the Virgin Islands for
overnight stays in 1977, 52 percent snorkeled and SCUBA dived, 85 percent swam,
31 percent sailed and 7 percent fished (Davidson-Peterson, Exit Survey 1976-77
for the VI Department of Commerce). The Virgin Islands has received extensive
coverage in major skin diving magazines regarding the excellent opportunities
for diving. It is likely that the number and percentage of tourists interested
in water-oriented activities will continue to increase.

St. Thomas is the center for all boating activity in the U.S. Virgin
Islands. While the water sports industries and related facilities are pri-
marily tourist oriented, they also serve many island residents. The proposed
sanctuary is adjacent to the mainland of St. Thomas. The popular Buck and
Capella Islands, also within the proposal area, are 15 minutes by boat from
downtown Charlotte Amalia. These areas, along with the other offshore islands
and cays within the proposed sanctuary boundary receive approximately 1 ,000
visits by boats yearly.

In 1979, a survey of recreational boating and fishing was undertaken.
The study, Socio-Economic Survey of Recreational Boating and Fishing in the
U.S. Virgin Islands (Socio-Economic Survey) (Olsen, 1979), polled 1,789
registered boaters in the Virgin Islands during 1978, of which 987 were
registered in St. Thomas. The survey assumed a fleet size of 2,000 for the

entire Virgin Islands and of that two-thirds were based in St. Thomas. The
survey revealed the average size of registered boats in St. Thomas to be
25.1 feet as compared to the United States average of 29.8 feet.

In determining the geographic distribution of Virgin Islands recreational
boating in the territory, the study divided the area into various reporting
areas designated as Tins. The T-2 reporting area includes the waters to the
south of St. Thomas -St. John (see Figure 6) and encompasses the area of
the proposed sanctuary. The northern boundary is an imaginary line running
from Red Point, St. Thomas to Lind Point, St. John. The western boundary is
an imaginary line extending from Signal Hill, St. Thomas, to the eastern
edge of Frenchcap Cay. The eastern boundary consists of an imaginary line
running from Camelberg Peak, St. John, through Rams Head Point, St. John,
and out to the territorial sea boundary.

More than 19 percent of all recreational boating activities around
St. Thomas - St. John take place within reporting area T-2. Of these
activities, 59.5 percent is boating, 9.5 percent snorkeling, 5.3 percent
SCUBA diving, 5.3 percent recreational line fishing, and the remaining 20
percent is spearfishing, skiing, and other activities.

DCCA undertook several small scale studies in order to obtain data
for the DEIS. The following studies were prepared and incorporated into
the drafting of the DEIS. The studies include:
o Recreational Diving Inventory -- This report gathered information
on diving activities within the preferred boundary alternative and included
a description of the geographic features affecting its use, special features,
typical biological features encountered, as well as a description of comumer-
cial diving activity, with estimates of dive days by both commercial and
recreational divers.
o Commercial Fishing Industry -- This report quantitatively describes
the commercial fishing activities, including person days spent fishing and
species caught, number of commercial boats using the area, traps currently
within the proposed sanctuary boundary, and catch estimates.
o Recreational Boating Inventory -- This report details the use of
the proposal area by recreational boaters, including charter and racing boats.

The following discussion provides information on human activities
within the proposed sanctuary and their socio-economic impacts.

B. Human Activities

1. Diving and Spearfishing

Recreational diving is an important activity occurring within the pro-
posed Sanctuary. The numerous offshore islands, cays and reef outcroppings
lying in the relatively shallow protected waters have made this area of St.
Thomas a diver's paradise.

To rto la

T-1

Figure 6: Map of the Virgin Islands Showing the DCCA Reporting Area Designations
Which Were Used to Assess the Geographical Distribution of Recreational Boating
and Fishing Activity.

Eleven watersports companies in the St. Thomas-St. John area were
surveyed as part of the Recreational Diving Inventory. Together they have a
fleet of 15 boats and employ 68 people as diving guides and instructors for
snorkling, SCUBA, and photography. Seven of the eleven companies have been
in operation for more than 5 years. They serviced more than 30,647 divers
in 1978 and approximately 28,876 divers in the first nine months of 1979.
The projected total for 1979 was 38,500 divers. SCUBA divers and snorklers
are taken to the offshore islands and cays in boats ranging in length from 18
feet or less carrying fewer than six passengers to custom-built dive vessels,
40 feet in length or longer, able to accommodate larger groups.

There are sixteen dive sites within the proposed sanctuary which are
frequented by the tour operators surveyed. They make more than 4,256 trips
per year to these sites (Table 3). Some of these tour operations do as much
as 80-90 percent of their diving within the proposed sanctuary boundary.
Many SCUBA divers conduct more than one dive during their stay. Two tank
dives and multi-dive packages are becoming increasingly popular. More than
26,400 diver visits were made to dive sites located within the proposed
sanctuary in 1978.

The ledges at Little St. James Island, Cow and Calf Rocks and the West
Cove of Buck Island are the three most popular sites visited, with more than
1,028 combined diver visits each year (Table 3). These reefal communities
provide excellent coral sea scapes for a variety of underwater activities.
They are lush coral formations and include many species of corals. Common
to the area are the following corals: elkhorn (Acropora palmata), staghorn
(Acropora cervicornis), brain (Diploria), finger coral (Porites porites),
and a variety of gorgonians and sponges. These coral communities provide an
excellent habitat for many reef fish including: angel fish, butterfly fish,
gobies, wrasses, parrotfishes, puffers, porcupine fish, baracuda, basslets,
snappers, and damsel fish (see Appendix C for a complete listing of reef
fish found in the proposed sanctuary.)

The ledges at St. James are precipitous cliffs that drop to 35 feet.
Sea turtles have often been sited in the area. The ledges serve as refuges
and resting places for many of the turtle species found in the area. Westend
Bay on the south side of Buck Island has very large boulders which vary in
heights from 10 to 15 feet. These boulders create an exciting underwater
experience for divers and snorklers. The West Cove of Buck Island contains
the recently relocated Cortensar Senior. The engine room, crew quarters,
galley and the wheel house are intact making the ship an interesting dive
experience in clear waters. The cove itself contains an extensive coral com-
munity and the bare rocks are encrusted with limpet mollusks and encrusting
calcareous algae. A few large elkhorn coral grow on or near the rock substra-
tes. Cow and Calf Rocks, located in the open waters of the proposal area,
are coral caves that form corridors that allow the diver to go through several
enclosed areas. A varitey of cave dwelling marine animals can be seen in
this area. The popularity of these areas is increasing, Table 3 provides
information on the number of visits by tour operators.

The Socio-Economic Survey reported that nearly 20 percent of the 52,000
diver days spent in all the Virgin Islands were involved in non-consumptive
activities within T-2. The total recreational diving use of sanctuary waters

TABLE 3

DIVE SITES WITHIN THE PROPOSED SANCTUARY
FREQUENCY OF TRIPS/DIVER VISITS

NUMBER OF TRIPS NUMBER OF DIVER VISITS
SITE YEAR YEAR

Buck Island

1. West Cove 660 4,104

2. C. North 168 1,344

3. D. Capella Island 384 2,136

4. Cabrita Point 24 96

5. Cow & Calf 792 4,032

6. Dog Island-Dog Rocks 552 2,520

Great St. James

7. Christmas Cove 48 144

8. Fish Cay 252 768

9. C. Caridad 24 96

10. East Cove 72 288

11. Great Bay 24 96

Little St. James

12. Ledges 912 4,200

13. South 132 720

14. Nazareth Bay 780 3,096

15. Packet Rocks 420 2,532

16. Scott Beach 12 240

TOTAL: 5,256 26,412

could be as high as 60,000 diver days annually. Less than 2 percent of this
activity involved harvesting of sanctuary resources.

Spearfishing is no longer widely practiced in the proposed sanctuary
area. Areas like Cabrita Point and Packet Rock, which were popular spearfish-
ing grounds less than a decade ago, are seldom visited today because other
areas are more desirous. Currently, spearfishing occurs off Dog Island, Cow
and Calf and Little St. James (V.I. Underwater Sports Association).

2. Commercial Fishing

The Virgin Islands commercial fishery is a small scale artisinal fishery
using boats that are generally less than 25 feet in length. Nearly 90 per-
cent of the 161 St. Thomas - St. ~John fishermen utilize West Indian fish
traps to catch a variety of species (Sylvester and Damman, 1976).

West Indian fish traps are the basic fishing gear used in the Virgin
Islands and their use is considered a traditional fishing method in the Carib-
bean. The use of fish traps in the Caribbean is unlike that experienced in
the Florida Keys where their general acceptance started in 1976-1977. Research
in the history of fishing technology (Richard Price, Carribean Fishing and
Fishermen: A Historical Sketch) reveals that fish traps (fish pots) were
first used by the Carib Indians in the seventeenth century and used by African
slaves during the eighteenth century. The method has undergone little change.
Fish traps today reflect the basic design of those used by the African slave.
Traps are made of wire mesh enclosures (chicken wire) supported by a frame of
mangrove or other local galvanized wire mesh. The two-entrance rectangular
wire and mangrove trap is very popular in the Virgin Islands. The traps used
in Florida are constructed of vinyl-covered welded wire mesh, usually have
opennings of I" X 2", or larger and typically have overall dimensions of
3' X 6' X 3'. The typical fish trap has a base area of 18 square feet. The
typical commercial fisherman sets 20-100 traps and only selected species of
fish are taken for commercial use. The rest are considered incidental by
catch (Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Looe Key National
Marine Sanctuary, April 1980). The situation in the Florida Keys, with regard
to wire fish traps, is significantly different from that which is experienced
in the Virgin Islands, and adverse impacts associated with their use in
Florida waters may not apply in the Caribbean.

The Virgin Islands Commercial Fisheries Act requires the 1.5 inch mesh
size. Olsen, et. al.(1978) in a study of mesh selectivity of West Indian fish
traps showed th-at Trap mesh size can be used to regulate incidental small fish
mortality. It was found that the I inch hexagonal mesh caught 18 times more
small fish. The I inch by 2 inch mesh caught 10 times more small fish than
the 1.5 inch mesh. The 1.5 inch mesh size, currently the minimum legal size
used in the Virgin Islands, is above the mesh size used in the study which
causes unnecessary mortality of small fish. In addition, the Caribbean Regional
Fishery Management Council (CFMC) after surveying the available scientific
information, is recommending a regulation requiring the 1.5 inch mesh minimum
with escape panels.

Olsen (Personal communication, 1980) stated that the number of fishermien
in St. Thomas has remained relatively stable. In 1917 there were 65, 1935--102,
1968--134, 1974 and 1975--165, 1976-1977--172, 1977-1978 --162, and 1978-1979--
161. During the years 1977-1979 the average landings to commercial fishermen
were as follows in the T-2 area:

Hook-line 37.3%
Net Fishing 5.5%
Lobster Trapping 11.9%
Lobster Diving 23.1%
Fish Trapping 17.2%
Other 5.0%

Total landings for the years 1978-1979 were 1.7 million lbs. of fish and
122,000 lbs. of lobster. This fishery has evolved into an equilibrium with
the resource in which Olsen et.al.(1975) estimates a total annual landing
of around 1.6 million pounds. These landings approach the substainable
yield levels for the shelf in general (CFMC, 1979).

The Commercial Fishing Industry report conducted for the preparation of
the DEIS revealed that commercial fishing within the proposed sanctuary bound-
ary involved about 57 fishermen. Nearly 30 percent of their effort is directed
towards harvesting the considerable bait resources (Harengula sp. and Anchoa
sp.). Another 28 percent of the commercial fishery effort is based on the
use of West Indian fish traps. Fish traps yield about five pounds of fish
for each three day set. There are approximately 15 trap fishermen setting
an average of 13 traps each (185 total traps each 3-day) in the proposed
sanctuary waters. Handlining for bottom fish comprises about 23 percent of
the effort and harvests 26,000 pounds annually. Lobster and other shellfish
harvested by both traps (11,520 lbs) and diving (27,700 lbs) represents the
other major harvest of the resources. The total commercial harvest from
sanctuary waters is about 71,000 pounds and has a current value of around
$330,000 (Table 4).

Table 4.

Annual recreational and commercial fishery landings from within the waters
of the proposed St. Thomas marine sanctuary. Recreational figures are from
Olsen (1979) and include the entire DCCA reporting area T-2. Commercial
landings were estimated from a survey of 36 of the 50 commercial fishermen
who utilize the sanctuary. Landings were adjusted to a population of 50
fishermen.

METHOD Species Group Commercial 2 Recreational 3 Total Value Total
Landings Landings (lbs) ($/lb) Value ($)
(lbs) (lbs)

Trolling Pelagic Fish 2,340 z3,180 25,520 $1.85 $47,212

Bottom
Fishing Reef Fish 26,300 13,820
111,320 $1.85 $205,942

Traps Reef Fish 71,200

Spear Pelagic and 26,790 26,790 $1.85 $49,561
Fishing Reef Fish

Lobsters Panul i rus
Diving argus 22,700 15,580 49,800 $4.00 $199,200
Traps 11,520

Conch Strombus 6,000 2,603 8,603 $1.50 $12,904
gigas
Whelks 1 Cittarium 600 3,211 3,811 $4.00
pica

Total Value 330,600 $184,200 $514,800

1. Whelk landings reported totals have been deleted from tables.

2. Data from 1979 survey of 36 out of the 50 fishermen using sanctuary waters.
Data adjusted to landings from all 50.

3. Data from Olsen (1979) recreational survey (and includes all of Virgin Islands
catch reported in area T-2.)

3. Recreational Fishery

The magnitude of the recreational effort was preliminarily documented
in the 'Economic Survey. The information gathered indicated that over 110,000
person-days annually are spent in recreational activity in the Virgin Islands,
with nearly 20 percent of that activity (22,000 person-days) being spent in
the T-2 reporting area (Figure 6), which includes the proposed marine sanc-
tuary. Approximately one-half of the effort is spent in fishing activities,
and the remainder comprises such activities as snorkeling, underwater photo-
graphy and other non-consumptive uses.

4. Recreational Boating

Recreational and charter boaters are major users of the waters of the
proposed sanctuary as 987 boats (over 55 percent of the Virgin Islands recre-
ational boating fleet) are located in St. Thomas. This includes a crewed
charter boat fleet around 235 boats (Virgin Islands Charterboat League,
personal communication). Nearly 44 percent of the 987 St. Thomas boats are
based within sanctuary waters and another 15 percent are based in nearby
Red Hook (Olsen, 1979). Nearly 20 percent of the entire Virgin Islands
fleet utilizes the Benner Bay Mangrove Lagoon area as a hurricane anchorage.
Additionally, much of the Virgin Islands sailboat racing is based at St.
Thomas Yacht Club facilities in Cowpet Bay. The race courses are generally
located in the smooth waters of St. James Bay and throughout the sanctuary
waters.

There is a limited amount of time series data available for the growth
of boating in the Virgin Islands which can be used as a basis for an analysis
of future boating use potential in sanctuary waters. Boats which were
anchored, moored and tied up at the docks were counted from a series of ariel
photographs taken during the years 1947 to 1979. The counts were taken for
the anchorages of the sanctuary. The growth in fleet size in these anchorages
was then statistically fit to a curve to obtain the projections shown in
Table 5. The carrying capacity of the various anchorages was estimated from
the aerial photographs to be around 1700 boats (Table 5). Carrying capacity
was defined simply as the number of additional boats which could be anchored
or moored at the existing anchorages and areas containing additional develop-
ment possibilities. This is not necessarily the desired carrying capacity for
the sanctuary.

Table 5 Use of the major St. Thomas anchorages as counted from areal
photographs from 1947 to 1979. Carrying capacities have also been
estimated from these photographs.

ANCHORAGE 1947 1954 1965 1971 1972 1979 Capacity1

Red Hook/Vessup Bay i 10 22 55 72 171 300

Cowpet Bay I 0 4 29 35 54 100

Benner Bay 0 0 25 73 145 175 200

False Entrance 0 0 0 1 2 11 20

Christmas Cove 0 0 0 9 0 2 50

Charlotte Amalie 18 31 120 197 205 367 700

Total 20 41 171 364 387 780 1670

1. Estimated from available space in 1979.

The expanding demand can be estimated from an analysis of information
furnished by various sources which was projected by time series analysis
until the year 2000. A significant element in the analysis is missing in
that no estimate of transient yachts is available. Basically the calculations
involve several assumptions. These assumptions are:

1. The crewed charter fleet will continue to grow at the rate indicated
by the period from 1970 until 1979.

2. The number of boats registered in the Virgin Islands will continue
to grow at the observed rate based on the period from 1963 to the
present, and that proportion of the fleet registered in St. Thomas
(55 from Olsen, 1979) will remain constant, as well as the proportion
of the fleet which is either moored, anchored out, or at dockside
(Olsen 1979).

3. The bareboat fleet will increase at a rate of 5 percent per year.

The projections shown in Table 5 indicate the projected growth in each
of the components (excluding transient yachts). Additionally, the analysis
indicates that demand for mooring and other boat storage facilities in these
anchorages can be expected to exceed the estimated carrying capacity of 1700
boats in the period between 1980 and 1985. Since there are a substantial
number of transient boats already present, there is reason to suspect that
overcrowding will occur very early in the period.

The need for management action can clearly be seen given the growth
in fleet size from the period 1947 until 1979. The data indicates that the
current increases in fleet size, if allowed to continue unchecked, could
bring the fleet size to over 10,000 boats within 20 years. This degree of
over utilization could significantly impact the resources of the area.

Additional evidence of this expanding use can be seen in Table 6 which
shows the results of a survey conducted of a number of crewed, bareboat, and
day charter enterprises regarding their activities in 1978 and 1979. The
1979 results were adjusted for an entire year since the data included only 9
months at the time of the survey. The increases between these two years are
apparent. Both crewed and bareboat operations doubled their volume in the
period while the day charter companies experienced nearly a 30 percent increase.
Nearly all of these operations utilize sanctuary water resources.

Table 6. Charter boat activity in 1978 and 1979 in the Virgin Islands.

1978 1979
TYPE #Surveyed #Boats Trips # Persons #Trips #Person

BAREBOAT 7 142 1,028 5,020 2,688 11,400
DAY CHARTER 7 98 5,250 26,294 6,747 36,280
CREWED CHARTER 1 206 2,060 8,240 4,120 16,480

5. Commercial Navigation

Sanctuary waters are transited by few vessels involved in commercial
navigation. Ships using the primary trade route among Charlotte Amalie,
Puerto Rico, and the mainland United States have no occasion to enter sanctuary
waters. Of the more than 700 cruise ships which annually visit St. Thomas,
only about I percent (7-10 smaller vessels) enter or leave through the passage
between Buck Island/Capella Island and St. Thomas. The primary commercial vessel
users of sanctuary waters are small, inter-island cargo vessels; passenger-
carrying ferry boats; and barges.

Cargo Vessels - The small, inter-island cargo vessels trade between
St. Thomas and the other islands of the eastern Caribbean. These ships, which
are powered by a combination of engine and sail, carry loads of tropical pro-
duce, construction material, personal effects, and other freight. Approximately
10 to 12 vessels are regularly engaged in this trade (estimate from the U.S.
Customs), each making one round-trip per week, for a total of 502-624 round-
trips per year.

Although statistics are unavailable, observations indicate that much of
this commercial traffic avoids using sanctuary waters, which are considered
somewhat dangerous due to shallow reefs, rocks, and proximity to land. Of
those vessels which do transit the waters, almost all use the passage
between Buck Island and St. Thomas. Those vessels going directly to the
eastern Caribbean then exit sanctuary boundaries on an east or southeast

course, passing south of Dog Rocks. The remainder, approximately 5-7 vessels
per week, head northeast for St. John and/or the British Virgin Islands,
transiting the waters between Jersey Bay and Great St. James and entering
Pillsbury Sound through Current Cut.

Passenger Ferries -- Two ferries, the Native Son and the Bomba Charger,
each with a carrying capacity of about 100 people, operate reguarly between
Charlotte Amalie Harbor and the British island of Tortola. Together the two
ferries make 38 scheduled round trips per week (2,184 round trips annually),
using a route that takes them directly through sanctuary waters from an entry
point between Buck Island and Packet Rock through Current Cut and exiting the
sanctuary at Cabrite Point. Two ferry boat operators on St. John occasionally
schedule special charters between that island and St. Thomas using the same
route.

Barge Traffic -- Barge traffic through sanctuary waters is infrequent.
The V.I. Department of Public Works operates a water barge, making about 40
round trips annually between Charlotte Amalie and St. John. A private
barge hauling sand from the British Virgin Islands to St. Thomas makes the
same number of trips. These barges enter and leave Pillsbury Sound by a
route south of Dog Rocks.

6. Research

Given the rich variety of marine resources found in sanctuary waters,
their importance to the overall resource base of the Virgin Islands, and
their close proximity to land, it is hardly surprising that a considerable
amount of marine research has been carried out in the proposed sanctuary
area.

The first survey of the shoreline and water depths was done in 1851
by the British Admiralty. Offshore reefs were charted in 1924 by the U.S.
Coast and Geodetic Survey and again in 1972-1973 by the National Ocean
Survey.

Scientific research increased in the late 1960's when several environ-
mental impact studies (McNulty, Robertson and Horton, 1968; Tabb and Michael,
1968; Michel, 1970) were carried out in consequence of a proposal to con-
struct a jet port in the Mangrove Lagoon. Since then the Government of the
Virgin Islands has sponsored a number of studies of the dynamics of the
Mangrove Lagoon ecosystem, fisheries, lobsters, wildlife, and the flora and
fauna of offshore islands and cays.

In addition, research stations have been located in the area of the
sanctuary. Dr. John Lilly conducted his first experiments on dolphin com-
munication at a specially constructed laboratory at Nazareth Bay. This
laboratory was later used for research on sharks and turtles by staff mem-
bers of the Caribbean Research Institute (CRI). CRI also established a
small field station laboratory at Benner Bay, from which it carried out
research on the Mangrove Lagoon, fisheries, lobster, and ciguatera. Part
of this station was later taken over by DCCA and now serves as headquarters
for the research, monitoring, and enforcement activities of its Bureau of
Fish and Wildlife. In the 1960's, a small lab facility was established on
5 4

Buck Island by General Electric for the purpose of studying human physi-
ology under weightless conditions for NASA.

The following research and monitoring activities are currently
underway in sanctuary waters;
o Bureau of Fish and Wildlife (DCCA) -- West Indian topshell (whelk
and conch) study under a National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
grant; a catch-per-unit effort fishery study under a NMFS grant;
dove breeding, migration and feeding study under a U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service grant;
o Division of Natural Resources Management (DCCA)-- Water quality
monitoring (9 field stations) under an Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) grant;
o Caribbean Research Institute (College of the Virgin Islands) -
study of the movements of whales and sea turtles under funding
by CRI; completion of an environmental impact assessment for
Long Point under a private contract.

7. Dredge and Fill

The sanctuary has not been the site of any major dredge or fill activity.
In the Mangrove Lagoon, the area between the mainland and Patricia Cay was
dredged to make a small beach on the northside of Long Point. Artificial
beaches were also created at Cowpet using sand from Cowpet Bay and at Secret
Harbor using sand taken from Nazareth Bay. Some illegal small scale dredging
has taken place in and around Benner Bay. All of this dredge and fill activity
took place in the 1960s or early 1970s. A small pier is also being considered
for the west coast of Great St. James.

8. Adjacent Land Use

Shoreline development and use is rather extensive in certain areas such
as Benner Bay because of the recreational and aesthetic values of the area.
Shoreline use falls into the following categories:

�Resort and residential development

�Commercial and private docks and ancillary uses

� Government operations

Secret Harbor hotel, a small unit beach club hotel is located at Nazareth
Bay by Cabrite Point. Condominiums are located at Secret Harbor and Cowpet
Bay. A condominium complex is also under construction at Cabrite Hill, which
borders the sanctuary on the north side of Great Bay. A few private residences
are found on the western side of Benner Bay and on the cliffs between Compass
Point and Cowpet Bay.

Commercial docks are concentrated east of the Mangrove Lagoon area between
Turpentine Run and Benner Bay. There are five major operations for small

power and sailing vessels and several smaller concerns with approximately
142 docks spaces.

A number of privately-owned small docks are located between Turpentine
Run and Benner Bay. Private docks can also be found at Secret Harbor, Cowpet
Bay, and Great Bay. For the most part, one or two vessels tie up at these
docks at a time. In addition the St. Thomas Yacht Club, located at Cowpet Bay
maintains 70 moorings.

The local government owns nearly all the land from Long Point to Turpen-
tine Run, which borders on the Mangrove Lagoon. Most of this land is currently
not in use and is designated as an area of particular concern under the Virgin
Islands Coastal Zone Program. However, the Virgin Islands Government operates
a municipal sanctuary landfill in the area adjacent to the sanctuary. Plans
by the Virgin Islands Government, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to construct a high temperature inciner-
ator/solid waste recovering operation nearby on Long Point will phase down and
eventually eliminate the landfill operation.

List of Preparers

Many persons participated in the preparation of this document. A major
portion of the environmental analysis was performed under cooperative agree-
ment with the Virgin Islands Government, Department of Conservation & Cultural
Affairs. A Marine Sanctuary Advisory Board was established by the Department
to assist in the preparation of this document. NOAA would like to express
gratitude to the Marine Sanctuary Advisory Board and Dick Avery for their
technical assistance and the many others who have been interested in the
proposal.

Members of the St. Thomas Marine Sanctuary Advisory Board

Dave Friendenbaugh Dive Tour Operator

Dusty Pearsall Power Boat Association

John Jouett Member, St. Thomas Yacht Club

Mark Marin St. Thomas V.I. Underwater Sports Association

Peter LaPlace Commercial Fisherman

John T. Olive Commercial Fisherman

Danny Garces Commercial Fisherman

Shiela Ross Sailing

Rosemary Gailiber President, V.I. Conservation Society

Mary Innis Legislative Assistant

Virgin Islands Department of Conservation Cultural Affairs

Darlan Brin Commissioner

Dr. David Olson Director, Division of Fish and Wildlife

Jerry McCrain Environmental Specialist

Cheryl Coodley Attorney

Frank Gary Attorney

Office of Coastal Zone Management Sanctuary Program Office

Dallas Miner Director

Dr. Nancy Foster Deputy Director

Edward Lindelof Gulf & Caribbean Project Manaqer

Annie Hillary Program Specialist

John Milholland Attorney

BIBL IOGRAPHY

Adams, John B., L. Gerhard, J. Ogden and Jan Bowden. 1975. Potential
National Landmarks - United States Virgin Islands. West Indies
Laboratory. Fairleigh Dickenson University, St. Croix, U.S. Virgin
Isl ands.

Beller, William. 1970. The United States Virgin Islands and the Sea.
Office of the Lieutenant Governor, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands

Bowden, Martyn J. 1970. Climate, Water Balance and Climatic Change in
the Northwest Virgin Islands. Caribbean Research Institute, College
of the Virgin Islands, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.

Blake, Patricia. 1979. Native of Buck Island Returns to Birthplace.
Daily News, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands, January 2, 1979.

Caribbean Fisheries Management Council. 1979. Fisheries Management
Plan for Spiny Lobster Panulirus argus.

Coleman, S., J.A. La Place, J. Mudre and K. Turbe. 1979. Fishery
Statistics of the Virgin Islands, 1977-1978. DCCA report for
N.M.F.S. P.L. 88-309 Program, 38 pp., St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands.

De Booy, T. and J.T. Faris. 1918. The Virgin Islands, Our New
Posessions. J.B. Lippincott Co., Phil., Pa.

Grigg, D.I., R.P. Van Eepopel and R.W. Brody. 1971. Water Quality
and Environmental Status of Benner Bay - Mangrove Lagoon, St.
Thomas. Caribbean Research Institute, College of the Virgin
Islands. Water Pollution Report, No. 10.

Holmes, C.W. 1978. Virgin Islands Sand Resource Study. United States
U.S.G.S. Open File Report #78-919.

Hubbard, D.K. 1979. A Summary of Physical Factors Affecting Sediment
Transport in the Proposed St. Thomas Marine Sanctuary. A Report
to DCCA, Govenment of the Virgin Islands.

Jaap, W., and D.A. Olsen. 1979. (in progress) Depth Profile of
Scleratinian Coral Diversity in Lucaya, Grand Bahama.

Little, E.L., and F.H. Wadsworth. 1964. Common Trees of Puerto Rico
and the Virgin Islands Agriculture Handbook No. 249. Forest
Service, USDA.

Lopez, P.F. 1978. Outdoor Recreation in the Virgin Islands. Report
for the Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs, St. Thomas,
U.S. Virgin Islands.

MacLean, W.P. 1979. Cabrite Point Development: Impacts on Non-Marine
Communities. Environmental Impact Statement, St. Thomas, V.I.

Mc Crain, G.R. 1979. Cabrite Point Development: Effects of Potential
Construction Site Erosion on the Marine Environment. Environmental
Impact Assessment, St. Thomas, V.I.

Mc Nulty, J.K., W.B. Robertson, and B.F. Horton. 1968. Departmental
Study Team Report and Recommendation on Proposed New Jet Airport,
St. Thomas U.S. V.I., 34 pp.

Michel, John F. 1970. A Study of the Hydrodynamic Effects of the
Proposed Airport at Long Beach Point, St. Thomas, Virgin Islands.
A Report to the Virgin Islands Port Authority, St. Thomas, U.S. V.I.

Nichols, Mand and E. Towle. 1977. Water, Sediments and Ecology of
the Mangrove Lagoon and Benner Bay, St. Thomas. Island Resource
Foundation, St. Thomas V.I.

Olsen, D.A. 1977. The Ecology and Diversity of Fishes in Two Virgin
Islands Mangrove Lagoons. Island Resource Foundation, St. Thomas,
V.I. Occassional Paper #27.

Olsen, D.A., A.E. Dammann, and J.A. La Place. 1975. Analysis of Catch
Data for the Virgin Islands (1974-75) V.I. DCCA, PL 88-309 Report,
16 pp.

Olsen, D.A. and M.O. Sheen. 1975. A Comparison of the PRINUL and Hydrolab
Coral Reef Systems. Hydrolab Journal 3 (1) 108-113.

Olsen, D.A. 1979. Socio-Economic Survey of Recreational Boating and
Fishing in the U.S. Virgin Islands. National Marine Fisheries
Service, 76 pp.
Olsen, D.A., A.E. Dammann, and J.A. La Place. 1978. Portunus spinamanus
Latrielle, A Portunid Crab with Resource Potential in the U.S. Virgin
Islands. Marine Fisheries Review, Vol. 40, No. 7.

Tabb, D.C. and J.F. Michel. 1968. A Study of the Biological and Coastal
Engineering Aspects of the Proposed Jet Airport at Jersey Bay, St.
Thomas U.S. Virgin Islands. Institute of Marine Sciences University
of Miami.

Towle, E.L., D.A. Olsen, and A.R. Teytaud. 1978. Report on Sea Turtle
Nesting, Sighting, Eggs and Hatching for 1978 in the U.S. Virgin
Islands. Island Resources Foundation Report to NOAA/N.M.F.S.

Tyson, George F. Jr. 1977. Powder, Profits and Privateers: A Documentary
History of the Virgin Islands During the Era of the American Revolution.
Island Resources Foundation, St. Thomas UoS. V.I.

Van Eepoel, R.P., W. Owen, and A.E. Dammann. 1971. Notes on Some Oceanographic
Marine Factors in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Caribbean Research Institute.
St. Thomas, U.S. V.I.

Virgin Island Resource Conservation and Development Council. 1973.
U.S. Virgin Islands Resource Conservation and Development Project
Plan. V.I. Department of Agriculture.

Virgin Islands Planning Office. 1976. Virgin Islands Coastal Zone
Management: The Marine Environment, 190 pp., St. Thomas, U.S.
Virgin Islands.

Wells, J.M. and D.A. Olsen. 1973. Oxygen Balance in Tropical Benthic
Communities Proc X Ann. Conf. Is. Mar. Lab., Caribb. J. Sci.

Westergaard, W. 1917. The Danish West Indies: 1617-1917.

Willis, Jean L. 1967. The Trade Between North America and the Danish
West Indies, 1756-1807, with Special Reference to St. Croix.
Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Columbia, Univ.

Zube, E.H. 1968. The Virgin Islands: Selected Resources of the
United States Virgin Islands. U.S. Dept. of Interior.

APPENDIX A

Draft Designation Document

Designation of the St. Thomas National Marine Sanctuary

Preamble

Under the authority of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries
Act of 1972, P.L. 92-532, (the Act) certain waters off St. Thomas, U. S.
Virgin Islands, are hereby designated a Marine Sanctuary for the purposes
of preserving and protecting their unique and fragile ecological and recre-
ational resources.

Article 1. Effect of Designation

The designation of the St. Thomas National Marine Sanctuary (the Sanctuary),
described in Article 2, establishes the basis for cooperative management
of the area by the Virgin Islands and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA).

Within the area designated as the Sanctuary described in Article 2,
the Act authorizes the promulgation of such regulations as are reasonable
and necessary to protect the values of the Sanctuary.

On , 1981, the Virgin Islands issued regulations con-
trolling those activities which may threaten the values of the Sanctuary,
all of which are located within territorial waters. NOAA has determined
that these regulations are fully adequate to protect the values of the
Sanctuary. Therefore, this Designation only authorizes NOAA to adopt these
regulations as set forth in Article 5 and to issue additional regulations
only in the event that an activity is found not to be subject to the juris-
diction of the Virgin Islands.

Article 4 of the Designation lists those activities which may require
regulation, but the listing of an activity does not by itself prohibit or
restrict it. Restrictions or prohibitions may be accomplished only through
regulations, and activities not listed in Article 4 may be regulated only
after amending Article 4, or in cases of emergency, as specified in Article
4, Section 2.

Article 2. Description of the Area

The Sanctuary consists of an area of approximately 9.27 square nautical
miles of the waters of the territorial sea of the U. S. Virgin Islands located
off southeast St. Thomas. The precise boundaries are defined by regulation.

Article 3. Characteristics of the Area that Give it Particular Value

The Sanctuary contains hundreds of species of marine organisms, including
Caribbean corals, hawkbill and leatherback turtles, significant mangrove
stands, and diverse tropical faunal and floral communities. The area provides
exceptional recreational experiences and scientific research opportunities
and generally has unique value as an ecological, recreational, and esthetic
resource.

Article 4. Scope of Regulation

Section 1. Activities Subject to Regulation. In order to protect the
distinctive values of the Sanctuary, the following activities may be regu-
lated within the Sanctuary to the extent necessary to ensure the protection
and preservation of the coral and other marine features and the ecological,
recreational, and esthetic value of the area:

(a) Removing, breaking or otherwise harming coral or other
bottom formations or plants, except incidental to other
fishing operations.
(b) Operations of vessels except fishing vessels and anchoring
by all vessels.

(d) Discharging or depositing any substance or object.

Ce) Using poisons, electric charges or explosives.

(f All activities including fishing along designated underwater
trails.

Cg) Removing or harming cultural or historical resources.

(h) Removing or damaging navigation aids, markers, or fishing traps
or gear.

i)Activities affecting or likely to affect marine mammals,
turtles or other endangered species.

Section 2. Emergency Regulations. Where essential to prevent immediate,
serious and irreversible damage to the ecosystem of the Sanctuary, activities
other than those listed in Section I of this Article may be regulated within
the limits of the Act on an emergency basis for a period not to exceed 120
days, during which an appropriate amendment of this Article may be proposed
in accordance with the procedures specified in Article 6. In order to invoke
this section, the Secretary of Commerce must first make a finding of emergency,
which determination shall be transmitted in writing to the Virgin Islands.

Section 3. Consistency with International Law. The regulations governing the
activities listed in Section 4 of this Article will be applied to foreign flag
vessels and persons not citizens of the United States only to the extent consis-
tent with recognized principals of international law or as otherwise authorized
by international agreement.

Article 5. Relation to Other Regulatory Programs

Section 1. Virgin Islands Program

(a) The Virgin Islands'm regulations described in Article I effectively
protect the resources of the Sanctuary and shall constitute the primary
regulatory regime for it. NOAA may adopt the Virgin Islands' regulations
under the following conditions:

(1) No alteration or modification of any Sanctuary regulation shall
become effective without the written concurrence of both the Virgin Islands
and NOAA; and

(2) The Virgin Islands shall be responsibile for enforcing all of the
Sanctuary regulations to ensure protection for the values of the Sanctuary.
NOAA will engage in enforcement activities only if requested by the Virgin
Islands or if there has been a significant failure to provide adequate
enforcement as determined under this section.

(b) Where the Virgin Islands shall propose any alteration or modification
of the regulations described in Article 1, such alteration or modification
shall be submitted to NOAA for simultaneous proposal in the Federal Register.
Such alteration or modification shall be finally adopted unless, based on the
comments received on the Federal Register proposal and after consultation
with the Virgin Islands, NOAA cannot determine that the regulations with the
proposed amendments provide reasonable and necessary protection for the values
of the Sanctuary.

(c) Should NQAA preliminarily determine that there has been a significant
failure to provide adequate enforcement, it shall notify the Virgin Islands of
this deficiency and suggest appropriate remedial action. If, after consultation,
NOAA and the Virgin Islands are unable to agree either that a deficiency exists
or on appropriate remedial action, NOAA may issue a final determination in
writing specifying the deficiency and the appropriate action together with the
reasons therefore. No less than 60 days prior to issuing a final determination
that calls for NOAA to take enforcement action, NOAA shall submit the proposed
determination to the Governor of the Virgin Islands. If the Governor finds
that NOAA enforcement is unnecessary to protect the values of the Sanctuary
NOAA shall give such finding presumptive weight in making its final determina-
tion.

Section 2. Fishing, The regulation of fishing is not authorized under
Article 4 except with respect to the removal or damage of coral or other bottom
formations (paragraph (a)), the use of certain techniques (paragraph (e)) and
along underwater trails (paragraph (f). In addition, fishing vessels may be
regulated with respect to discharges (paragraph (d)) and anchoring (paragraph
(b)).

Section 3. Defense Activities. The regulation of those activities listed
in Article 4 shall not prohibit any activity conducted by the Department of
Defense that is essential for national defense or because of emergency. Such
* ~activities shall be conducted consistently with such regulations to the maximum
extent practicable. All other activities of the Department of Defense are
subject to Article 4.

Article 6. Alterations to this Designation.

This Designation can be altered only in accordance with the same pro-
cedures by which it has been made, including public hearings, consultation
with interested Federal and State agencies and approval by the Governor of
the Virgin Islands and by the President of the United States.

Article 7. Funding.

In the event that a reduction in the funds available to administer the
Sanctuary necessitates a reduction in the level of enforcement provided by
the Virgin Islands, the resulting reduced level of enforcement shall not,
by itself, constitute a basis for finding a deficiency under Article 5,
Section 1.

[END OF DESIGNATION]

DRAFT NOAA REGULATIONS FOR THE ST. THOMAS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

PART 937 - THE ST. THOMAS NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY REGULATIONS

937.1 Authority.
937.2 Purpose.
937.3 Boundaries.
937.4 Regulated Activities.
937.5 Penalties for Commission of Prohibited Acts.

937.1 Authority.

The sanctuary has been designated by the Secretary of Commerce
pursuant to the authority of section 302(a) of Title III of the Marine
Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C. 1431-1434
(the Act). The following regulations are issued pursuant to the author-
ities of sections 302(f), 302(g) and 303 of the Act.

937.2 Purpose.

The purpose of designating the Sanctuary is to protect and preserve
the diverse natural and cultural resources of the waters off southeast
St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands and to ensure the continued availability
of the area for public educational purposes and as an ecological, research
and recreational resource. This area contains the most significant stand
of mangroves in the Virgin Islands, extensive coral reef communities, coral
caves, and several shipwrecks that are important recreational dive sites.
The area also supports juvenile and adult conch, lobster, and fish habitats,
plus nesting and feeding areas for endangered turtle species. The area is
adjacent to St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands and is widely used by boaters,
charter boat operators, dive boats, and recreational and commercial fisher-
men. Consequently, both present and potential levels of use may result in
harm to the area in the absence of long term planning, research, monitoring
and adequate protection.

937.3 Boundaries.

The Sanctuary consists of an area of 9.27 square nautical miles of
the waters of the territorial sea of the U.S. Virgin Islands located off -
southeast St. Thomas. The precise boundaries are:

Beginning at the shoreline of Stalley Bay at Latitude 18018'2911
Longitude 6405214911 to a point southwest of Packet Rock at
Latitude 1801810311 Longitude 64053'3611, to a point southwest
of Buck Island at Latitude 1801612611 Longitude 64'54'11",
thence northeast to a point off Dog Rocks at Latitude 1801713611
Longitude 6404914211, then to the shoreline of Cabrita Point
at Latitude 18019'3611 Longitude 6404915611.

937.4. Regulated Activities

All activities carried on in the Sanctuary are subject to all prohi-
bitions, restrictions and conditions imposed by any other authority.

Any violation of the restrictions, prohibitions, or conditions imposed
by Section 912 of the Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Act and regulations
issued pursuant thereto shall constitute a violation of these Federal regulations
rendering the violator liable for the civil penalty described in section 937.5
in addition to any penalty perscribed by the Virgin Islands. The applicable
Virgin Islands regulations are as follows:

A. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES

Except as may be necessary for the national defense, in accordance
with Article 5, section 2 of the Designation, or as may be necessary to
respond to an emergency threatening life, property or the environment, the
following activities are prohibited within the Sanctuary unless permitted by
the Commissioner of the Virgin Islands Department of Conservation and Cultural
Affairs in accordance with section B (of the Virgin Islands regulations, not
reprinted here).

1. Taking and Damaging Natural Resources

b. Only traditional fishing methods shall be permitted within the
sanctuary. No person shall use poisons, electrical charges, explosives or
similar methods to take any marine animal or plant.

2. Operation of Vessels

a. No person shall anchor on coral reefs or in any manner that
damages coral or other natural or cultural resources. All practicable efforts
shall be taken to drop anchors on sand flats, rock and rubble bottoms, and
other areas without extensive coral formations. When anchoring dive boats,
the first diver down shall inspect the anchor to ensure that it is placed
off the corals and will not shift in such a way as to damage corals. No
further diving is permitted until the anchor is placed in accordance with
these requirements.

b. No person shall anchor in areas where mooring buoys have been
placed by the Government of the Virgin Islands or NOAA.

c. No vessel under power shall approach closer than 200 feet to
a fishing vessel or a vessel displaying a diving flag except at a maximum
speed of three knots.

d. No vessel or person shall interfere with any fishing activity.

e. All vessels from which diving operations are being conducted
shall fly, in a conspicuous manner, the international code flag alpha "A."

3. Alteration of the Seabed and Construction

a. No person shall dredge, fill or otherwise alter the seabed in
any manner nor construct any structure other than a navigation aid except as
permitted by this section.

b. The following activities are allowed subject to the limitations
and conditions imposed by the applicable permits and licenses issued under
the Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Act, V.I.C. Chapter 21, Title 12,
(VICZMA):
1) Construction of piers, docks, moorings, and similar struc-
tures, except in the Mangrove Lagoon (defined as an area from Bovoni Cay west
to the shoreline of St. Thomas);

2) Dredge and fill activities necessary for public service
purposes, including but not limited to the burying and maintenance of cables
and pipes; and

3 Channel dredging within the area of Benner Bay and
Bovoni Passage (defined as an area from the northwest point of Bovoni Cay,
northeast to Benner Bay and in Benner Bay from a line drawn from the north-
east corner of Bovoni Cay south to the northwest point of Grotto Cay, north
to Compass Point) provided such activity can be clearly demonstrated to be
in the public interest.

4. Discharging of Polluting Substances

No person shall litter, deposit or discharge any materials or sub-
stances of any kind except:

a. Indigenous fish or fish parts.

b. Effluent from marine sanitation devices allowable under Coast
Guard standards.
c. Municipal sewage from the existing outfall consistent with
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards.
5. Underwater Trails

6. Removing or Damaging Cultural Resources

No person shall remove, damage, or tamper with, any historical or
cultural feature, including archaeological sites, historic sturctures,
shipwrecks, and artifacts.

7. Marine Mammals and Endangered Species

No person shall harass, disturb, harm or in any way injure any marine
mammal or other species classified as endangered by the Federal or Virgin
Islands Government.

S. Damage to Fish Traps

No person shall disturb, harm, or tamper with any legal fish gear,
nets, traps, or pots.

937.5 Penalties for Commission of Prohibited Act

Section 303 of the Act authorizes the assessment of a civil penalty
of not more that $50,000 against any person subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States for each violation of any regulation issued pursuant to
the Act, and further authorizes a proceeding in rem Title 12 Virgin Islands
Code Chapter 12 against any vessel used in violation of any such regulation.
Procedures are outlined in Subpart D of Part 922 (15 CFR Part 922) of
this chapter. Subpart D is applicable to any instance of a violation of
these regul ations.

DRAFT REGULATIONS FOR ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE ST. THOMAS

NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

A. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES

Except as may be necessary for the national defense, in accordance with
Article 5, section 2 of the Designation, or as may be necessary to respond
to an emergency threatening life, property or the environment, the following
activities are prohibited within the Sanctuary unless permitted by the
Commissioner of the Virgin Islands Department of Conservation and Cultural
Affairs in accordance with section B.

1. Taking and Damaging Natural Resources

a. No person shall break, cut, or similarly damage or destroy any
coral, bottom formation or any marine plant except dead shells. There
shall be a presumption that any items listed in this paragraph found in
the possession of a person within the sanctuary have been collected or
removed from the sanctuary.

b. Only traditional fishing methods shall be permitted within the
sanctuary. No person shall use poisons, electrical charges, explosives or
similar methods to take any marine animal or plant.

2. Operation of Vessels

a. No person shall anchor on coral reefs or in any manner that
damages coral or other natural or cultural resources. All practicable
efforts shall be taken to drop anchors on sand flats, rock and rubble bottoms,
and other areas without extensive coral formations. When anchoring dive
boats, the first diver down shall inspect the anchor to ensure that it is
placed off the corals and will not shift in such a way as to damage corals.
No further diving is permitted until the anchor is placed in accordance
with these requirements.

b. No person shall anchor in areas where mooring buoys have been
placed by the Government of the Virgin Islands or NOAA.

c. No vessel under power shall approach closer than 200 feet to a
fishing vessel or a vessel displaying a diving flag except at a maximum
speed of three knots.

d. No vessel or person shall interfere with any fishing activity.

e. All vessels from which diving operations are being conducted
shall fly, in a conspicuous manner, the international code flag alpha "A."

3. Alteration of the Seabed and Construction

a. No person shall dredge, fill or otherwise alter the seabed in
any manner nor construct any structure other than a navigation aid except
as permitted by this section.

i) Construction of piers, docks, moorings, and similar
structures, except in the Mangroove Lagoon (defined as an area from Bovoni
Cay west to the shoreline of St. Thomas);

ii) Dredge and fill activities necessary for public service
purposes, including but not limited to the burying and maintenance of cables
and pipes; and

iii) Channel dredging within the area of Benner Bay and Bovoni
Passage (defined as an area from the northwest point of Bovoni Cay, northeast
to Benner Bay and in Benner Bay from a line drawn from the northeast corner
of Bovoni Cay south to the northwest point of Grotto Cay, north to Compass
Point) provided such activity can be clearly demonstrated to be in the
public interest.

4. Discharging of Polluting Substances

No person shall litter, deposit, or discharge any materials or substances
of any ki nd except:

a. Indigenous fish or fish parts.

b. Effluent from marine sanitation devices allowable under Coast
Guard standards.
c. Municipal sewage from the existing outfall consistent with U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency standards.
S. Underwater TrailIs

1. No person shall spearfish or fish at underwater trails, except bait
fishing.

2. No person shall mark, deface, or injure in anyway, or displace,
remove, or tamper with underwater trails signs, markers or bouys.

6. Removing or Damaging Cultural Resources

No person shall remove, damage, or tamper with, any historical or cultural
feature, including archeaological sites, historic structures, shipwrecks, and
arti facts.

7. Marine Mammals and Endangered Species

No person shall harass, disturb, harm or in any way injure any marine
mammal or other species classified as endangered by the Federal or Virgin
Islands Government.

8. Damage to Fish Traps

No person shall disturb, harm, or tamper with any legal fish gear, nets,
traps, or pots.

B. PERMIT PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA

1. Permits for those activities allowed under section A.3.b. shall be
issued in accordance with the procedures and criteria set forth in sections
910 of the VICZMA.

2. Permits for those activities prohibited by section A may be issued
by the Commissioner of the Virgin Islands Department of Conservation and
Cultural Affairs in accordance with the Virgin Islands (VICZMA) and with
this section provided such activity is either (1) research related to the
resources of the sanctuary or (2) to preserve and protect the recreational
and educational value of the sanctuary or (3) for salvage or recovery
operations.

a. In addition to any other requirements under Section 912 in consi-
dering whether to grant a permit, the Commissioner shall evaluate such
matters as (1) the general professional and financial responsibility of
the applicant; (2) the appropriateness of the methods envisioned to the
purpose(s) of the activity; (3) the extent to which the conduct of any
permitted activity may diminish of enhance the value of the Sanctuary as
an ecological, recreational , educational or scientific resource; and the
end value of the activity satifies the criteria of this section; (5) such
other matters as deemed appropriate.

b. At least 30 days prior to issuing any permit under this section,
the Commissioner shall notify the Assistant Administrator for Coastal Zone
Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 3300 Whitehaven
Street, Washington, D.C. 20035, of the application and shall include a
description of all activities proposed, the equipment, methods and personnel
involved (particulary describing relevant experience) and a timetable for
completion of the proposed activity.

c. The Commissioner may seek and consider the views of any other person or
entity, within or outside of the Federal Government.

d. NOAA Assistant Administrator for Coastal Zone Management or desig-
nated representative may observe any permitted activity and/or require the
submission of one or more reports of the status or progress of such activity.

e. All information obtained pursuant to a permit issued under this
section shall be made available to the public.

APPENDIX B -- Analysis of Existing Federal and Territorial Statutes

I. TERRITORIAL AUTHORITIES

A. Introduction

Pursuant to an act of 1974 (48 USC 1301 et. seq.) as recently amended by
P. L. 96-205, the Virgin Island's jurisdiction extends 3 nmi (5.6 kin) sea-
ward from near high tide and includes the entire area under consideration.
Its authorities range in scope from broad management programs such as the
Virgin Islands Coastal Zone Management Act to laws directed at controlling
more specific threats or protecting more specific resources.

B. Resource Protection

1. The Virgin Island Coastal Zone Management Act of 1978 (VICZMA) 12VIC� 901,
et. seg.

The VICZMA establishes a comprehensive set of policies to manage all
development activities and conserve and protect valuable natural resources
throughout the coastal zone. The coastal zone extends to the offshore
islands and cays and~to the limit of the territorial sea thus encompassing
the entire area of the proposed sanctuary.

Several of the management policies established by the VICZMA address
concerns relevant to the consideration of a marine sanctuary:

1) to conserve significant natural areas for their contribution
to marine productivity and value as habitats for endangered
species and other wildlife;

2) to protect complexes of marine resource systems of unique
productivity, including reef, marine meadows, salt ponds,
mangroves and other natural systems, and assure that
activities in or adjacent to such complexes are designed
and carried out so as to minimize adverse effects on the
marine productivity, habitat value, storm buffering
capabilities, and water quality of the entire complex;

3) to preserve and protect the environments of offshore islands
and cays;

4) to encourage fishing and carefully monitored mariculture and,
to the maximum extent feasible, to protect local fishing
activities from encroachment by non-related development;

5) to assure that dredging and filling of submerged lands is
clearly in the public interest... To these ends (such activity
may be permitted) only where there are no feasible, less
environmentally damaging alternatives...

6) to assure that development in areas adjacent to environmentally
sensitive areas is sited and designed to prevent impacts which
would significantly degrade such areas;

7) to protect and enhance the characteristics of the coastal

areas most valued as amenities; and
8) to protect and enhance public coastal recreational uses.
12 VIC �906.

The principal management mechanism is a permit system whereby any
significant development activity requires a permit from the appropriate
Coastal Committee (one is established for each island). To obtain a permit,
the applicant must conduct an investigation of the prevailing environmental
conditions of the site. The investigation must clearly indicate the probable
effects, including adverse effects, to the environment of the proposed
project. The Committee must then find that the development is consistent
with the goals and policies of the Act including the above and that the
development incorporates, to the maximum extent feasible, measures designed
to mitigate adverse environmental impacts.

In addition, if the proposed activity is on "Trustland," or involves
altering submerged or filled lands which are included within the sanctuary,
the governor and the legislature must approve the permit after making the
further findings that:

1) the grant of the permit will be in the public interest;

2) the development will enhance or result in minimal damage to the
envi ronment;

3) there is no reasonable feasible alternative to the comtemplated
use which would reduce any adverse envirommental impact; and

4) the project will be adequately supervised to avoid more than
minimum damage to the environment.

Section 910 of the VICZMA authorizes the promulgation of regulations
to further implement its broad, comprehensive goals, objectives and policies
and provide more specific protection for the marine resources of the Virgin
Islands. While issuance of these regulations could address more specifically
such concerns as coral collection and dive site management throughout the
proposed sanctuary area, the Virgin Islands necessarily has focussed on
developing regulations for the 18 Areas of Particular Concern (APC) estab-
lished by the VICZMA and are likely to continue to focus on these areas
given the basic level of finding available. Only the Benner Bay/ Mangrove
Lagoon area/ approximately 1/5 of the proposed sanctuary is an APC.

2. Commercial Fishing Act (12 VIC 301)

It is the purpose of the Commercial Fishing Act (CFA) to preserve,
manage and protect the fishery resources, to regulate fishing, and to secure
the development of fisheries in waters of the Virgin Islands.

The Act provides a scheme whereby any person engaging in fishing (commer-
cial or sport) must obtain a license, and all vessels or other fishing devices
must be registered or certified. The DCCA is authorized to issue rules and
regulations including: establishing closed seasons; regulating size or
quantity limits for any species of marine flora or fauna; regulating the mesh
size for nets and the design of traps, pots, nets, seines, and other devices

for fishing; and regulating and prohibiting fishing for such times as may be
necessary to protect the resource.

In addition to providing for regulation by DCCA, the CFA itself regulates
the taking of marine turtles and spiny lobsters, and the use of certain types
of gear and methods (See Table 7).

As part of the effort to make regulations governing fishery resources
consistent with regulations proposed by the Caribbean Fishery Management
Council (see Section 2, Federal Authorities, of this Appendix), the Virgin
Islands Fishery Advisory Committee (FAC) has recommended certain changes to
the CFA and regulations. Table 7 shows the existing regulations and those
proposed by FAC.

Table 7: Existing V.I. Commercial Fishing Regulations
and Proposed V.I. Fishery Advisory Committee
Recommended Changes

Existing V.I. Commercial Fishing Regulations I Proposed Regulations

Marine Turtles

1. Unlawful to take, kill, possess, mutilate, or 1. Capture, molestation or interferring with nesting
in anyway sea turtles destroy any sea turtle while and hatching activities is prohibited
on the beaches of the Virgin Islands

2. Unlawful to take or possess any sea turtle in
territorial waters during MayaSeptember
(inclusive)

3. Unlawful to take, possess disturb, mutilate,
destroy, cause to be destroyed, sell, offer for
sale, transfer, molest, or harass any sea turtles
nest or eggs at any time

Marine Mamals

No regulation I 1. Capture, molestation, or interferring with migration
] activities is prohibited

Spiny Lobster

Spiny Lobster Regulations

1. Unlawful to take or have in possession any 1. Corpace shall not be less than 3.5 inches measured
spiny lobster unless tail measures more than between the horns to back of the carpace.
5/12 inches

2. Lobster must remain in a whole condition at all 2. Tail weight shall not be less than 6 oz.
times while being transferred on, above, or below the
waters of the territory and practive of separating
the tail from the carapace is prohibited

Existing V.I. Commercial Fishing Regulations Proposed Regulation

3. Egg-bearing lobsters of any species shall not be I 3. "Berried female" shall not be taken except as other-
taken possessed or sold at any time I wise authorized

4. Stripping egg-bearing lobsters in order to I 4. Short or berried females may be retained in the
remove the eggs is prohibited I trap in which they were captured

5. Unlawful to spear, hook or otherwise impare any I 5. Lobster shall be transported to land
lobster in the process of its capture. Lobsters mayI
only be captured by hand, snare, pot or traps, so I 6. Lobster shall be transported to land
that short or egg-bearing lobster may be released Ionly
unharmed

Conch

No regulations I 1. No conch may be taken unless it possesses the flared
I shell lip indicating sexual maturity

I 2. All conch must be transported to shore in their
I shells
Whelks

No regulation I 1. No whelks may be taken with less than 2.0 inches
I shell diameter, measured across the greatest diameter

I 2. Recreational fisherman are limited to one bucket
whelks in shells (3 gallon size per person per day)

I 3. Whelks shall be transported to shore in their shells

Existing V.I. Commercial Fishing Regulation Proposed Regulation

Fishing Gear

1. Haul seenes must have meshes no smaller than I 1. Minimum stretched mesh shall not be less than 1.5
1 1/2 inches stretched, except seines used for catchingl inches stretch mesh unless used for ballyhoo, sprat
bait fish I or fry

2. One side of all fish pots, or the door or the I 2. All traps must have the door or another portion of
fastening must be constructed of some material I the trap constructed in such a manner that it is less
less durable than the material used for the pot I durable than the rest of the trap and will decay within
itself I 90 days and provide escape for entrapped fish and
I lobsters

3. No fish trap or pot or lobster pot constructed I 3. All traps must be marked with buoys bearing
of wire mesh, used within the inland or reef I identifying marks numbers and colors of the fisherman.
protected area of the territory may have a mesh of I
less than 1 1/9 inches I 4. Wooden, hand platisic or metal buoys are prohibited
I 5.7 traps cannot be greater than 10 feet along their
greatest dimension.

Fishing Methods

1. Use of explosives is prohibited except for a I 1. Only holders of valid commercial fishing licenses
"long stick" for use in taking sharks. I can use long lines.

2. Use of oils, acids, poisons or any other I 2. Haul seine shall not be hauled upon the beach
substance which destroys or injures fish is prohibited

3. Removal of haul seine or bait seine from water I 3. No dredging, bottom dragging or other fishing
or up to shore to withdraw fish is prohibited; fish I methods which damage the seabed, cause harvest of small
too small for human consumption or not suitable for I or non-saleable organisms
bait must be returned unharmed to the water

4. The use of explosives, chemicals, trawling, hooking
I and spearing lobsters is prohibited.

Catch Reporting

1. No regulations I 1. To retain a commercial fishing license, fisherman
I are required to submit an accurate summary of landings

2. All fishermen will be required to allow DCCA's

Port Sampling officers to weigh, measure, or otherwise
landi ngs.

C. Pollution Control

1. Water Pollution Control Act (12 VIC �181 et. seq.)

The Water Pollution Control Act (WPCA) is the territorial counterpart to
the federal statute and is intended to conserve, protect, maintain and improve
the quality of the waters of the Virgin Islands, including the territorial
seas (12 VIC �181). The DCCA is declared to be the Water Pollution Control
Agency of the Virgin Islands and is made responsible for developing comprehen-
sive programs for the prevention, control and abatement of all existing or
potential pollution of the waters of the Virgin Islands, including participa-
tion in the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) (12 VIC
�184). Under the WPCA, the waters of the proposed sanctuary are designated
class "B".

The Act prohibits the discharge of any pollutant without a permit (12 VIC
�185) and the DCCA is authorized to issue permits for pollutant disharges.
Permits must insure that the Federal discharge standards promulgated pursuant
to the Clean Water Act and any more stringent standards set by other territorial
of Federal law are complied with (12 VIC �185). In addition to the general
requirement that a permit be obtained for the discharge of any pollutant, the
following activities are explicitly subject to the permit requirement:

1) construction, installation, modification or operation of any
disposal system;

2) the increase in volume or strength of any pollutant in excess
of that specified in an existing permit;

3) the construction, installation, operation or modification of any
industrial, commercial or other establishment which would in-
crease the discharge of pollutants or would otherwise alter the
waters of the Virgin Islands. 12 VIC�185.

Pursuant to its responsibilities under the Act, DCCA has instituted a
Territorial Pollution Discharge Elimination System (TPDES). The TPDES regula-
tions provide a comprehensive scheme of water pollution control through the
issuance of permits by the Department. No person is permitted to discharge any
pollutant without a TPDES permit (12 VIR & R �184-11). However, permits issued
pursuant to the Federal Refuse Act or the NPDES are deemed to be issued under
the Act.

The regulations also adopt the water quality standards for the coastal
waters of the Virgin Islands, which generally require the waters to be free of
the following substances attributable to discharges:

a) materials which settle to form objectionable deposits;

b) floating debris, oil, scum, and other matter;

c) substances producing objectionable color, odor, taste or turbidity;

d) materials, including radionucleotides, in concentrations or
combinations which are toxic or produce undesirable physiological
responses in humans, fish or other animal life, and plants;

e) substances and conditions which produce undesirable aquatic life.
12 VIC 5186-1.

In addition to general standards the regulations establish specific
criteria to be used as the basis for setting effluent limitations and estab-
lishing conditions for individual permits.

The regulations create three classes of waters for Virgin Islands; A, B,
and C. They require that in Class A waters existing natural conditions not
be changed. Class B waters must be maintained so as to assure propagation of
desirable species of marine life for primary contact recreation (boating,
wading, etc.). Levels for the major water quality indicators are set for
Class B and Class C areas, with the criteria somewhat more lenient for Class
C areas. All waters within the boundaries of the proposed St. Thomas Marine
Sanctuary are Class B waters. (12 VIC �186-11).

The WPCA empowers the OCCA to exempt certain discharges from the permit
process. 12 VIC �185. Pursuant to this authority the OCCA does not require
a permit for the following:

a) any discharge of sewage from vessels, including effluents from
marine engines, laundry, shower, and galley sink wastes, or any
other discharge incidental to normal vessel operation; provided,
it is in compliance with applicable territorial or Federal law.
(The exception does not apply to rubbish, trash, garbage, or
other such materials discharged overboard;

b) dredged or fill materials discharged into navigable waters;

c) additions of pollutants into treatment works otherwise in
compliance if proper notice is given;

d) discharges conforming to the National Contingency Plan published
pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act;

e) and water, gas, or other material injected into a well to facil-
itate production of oil or gas, if approved by the DCCA and if
the OCCA has determined it will not result in degradation of
ground or surface water. (12 VIR & R �184-12).

While, the focus of the WCPA is to protect, conserve, maintain and
improve the quality of the waters of the Virgin Islands, the scope of the
Act is limited to the discharges of pollutants, primarily wastewater from
sewage treatment plants. The discharge of vessel wastes or dredged materials
are exempt, presumably leaving regulation of these activities to the permit
programs established under the VICZMA, and Federal statutes.

2. The Oil Spill Prevention and Pollution Control Act (12 VIC �701 et seq.)

The Oil Spill Prevention and Pollution Control Act (OSPPCA) is designed
to protect the waters and the shorelines of the Virgin Islands from the threat
of contamination resulting from the spillage or discharge of oil or other
pollutants (defined as oil of any kind and in any form, gasoline, pesticides,
ammonia, chloring and other hazardous materials) during their transfer,
storage and transport.

The OSPPCA also provides for cooperation with Federal oil spill response
efforts. The pilot and the master of a vessel casuing a discharge must
immediately report it to the U.S. Coast Guard, 12 VIC �708, and the DCCA,
in its planning and response efforts, is directed to act in accordance with
the national contingency plan for removal of oil and other pollutants dis-
charged into the navigable waters of the United States.

3. Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Act (19 VIC �1551 et seq).

The Solid and Hazardous Waste Management Act (SHWMA) provides for the
proper storage, transportation and disposal of wastes (19 VIC �1551). While
the Virgin Islands Department of Public Works has primary responsibility for
administering the Act, the DCAA is responsbile for enforcing the provisions
of the Act within territorial submerged lands and waters, issuing permits
for disposal sites, and inspecting disposal sites (19 VIC �1556). The Act
prohibits the dumping of any wastes except in a place designated for that
purpose, and the dumping of any material on an artificial reef without writ-
ten permission from the DCCA (19 VIC �1563).

D). Other

1. Executive Order No. 241-1980

On December 18, 1980 the Governor of the Virgin Islands issued Executive
Order No. 241-1981 to establish the Division of Fish and Wildlife within the
Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs. The effective date of the
Executive Order was January 1, 1981. The Executive Order establishes a
Division Director, a Bureau of Wildlife Programs headed by a Chief, and a
Fiscal Officer.

Among the functions and duties of the Division are those related to
activities concerning administration of Federal programs including the
National Marine Sanctuary Program. The Division also administers all Virgin
Islands or Federal programs pertaining to the Virgin Islands fishermen that
are not exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Virgin Islands' Department
of Commerce under IIV.I.C.��1401-1406. The Division also serves as liason
agency with the Carribbean Fisheries Management Council.

II. FEDERAL AUTHORITIES

The proposed sanctuary is entirely within the Virgin Islands territorial
waters and, therefore, the territorial authorities provides the primary basis
for resource management and protection. Federal regulatory authority is rel-
evant with respect to the protection of endangered species and marine mammals,
pollution control, and vessel safety and traffic.

A. Protection of Endangered Species and Marine Mammals

1. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (16 USC �1531 et. seq.)

The most significant protection provided by the ESA is the prohibition
on taking. The term "take" is defined broadly to mean "harass, harm, pursue,
hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect or to attempt to engage
in such conduct" (16 USC �1532 (14)). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
regulations interpret the term "harm" to include significant environmental
modification or degradation and acts which annoy listed species to such an
extent as to significantly disrupt essential behavior patterns (50 CFR 17.3).

The ESA also provides for the indirect protection of endangered species
and certain habitat. This is accomplished by means of a consultation process
design to insure that projects authorized, funded, or carried out by the
Federal agencies is not jeopardizing the continued existence of endangered
or threatened species or "result in the destruction or modification of habitat
of such species which is determined by the Secretary (of the Interior) to be
critical" (16 USC �1536). Critical habitats area for endangered species are
designated by the FWS and NMFS depending on the species. The 1978 amendments
to the ESA established a Cabinet level committee authorized to exempt Federal
agencies from compliance with their responsibility in regard to critical
habitats upon a finding that these are not reasonable alternatives to the
action, and that its benefits outweigh those of conserving species or their
critical habitat. State and private projects are not covered by these provi-
sions.

2. Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA) (16 USC SS1361 et seq.)

The MMPA applies to U. S. citizens and foreign nationals subject to U. S.
jurisdiction, and is designed to protect all species of marine mammals.
Provisions of the MMPA are implemented by the Department of Commerce, National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), which is responsible for whales, porpoises,
and pinnipeds other than the walrus, and the Department of the Interior, U. S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), which is responsible for all other marine
mammals. The Marine Mammal Commission advises these implementing agencies
and sponsors relevant scientific research. The primary management features of
the Act include: (1) a moratorium on the "taking" of marine mammals, (2) the
development of a management approach designed to achieve an "optimum sustainable
population" (OSP) for all species or population stocks of marine mammals, and
(3) additional protection of populations determined to be "depleted."

The term "take" is defined broadly to include "harass, hunt, capture,
or kill any marine mammal" (15 USC �1362(13)), emphasis added). The term
"harass" has been interpreted to encompass acts unintentionally adversely
affecting marine mammals. The MMPA allows certain exceptions to the mora-
torium.

The Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce can also waive the mora-
torium on taking of particular species or populations of marine mammals,
provided that the species or population is at or above its determined OSP.
No such waiver, however, has been granted for the study area.

Secondly, the MMPA directs officials to seek "an optimum sustainable
population (of marine mammals)" (16 usc �1361(6)). That OSP is defined to
mean "the number of animals which will result in the maximum productivity
of the population or species keeping in mind the carrying capacity of the
habitat and health of the ecosystem of which they form a constituent element"
(16 USC �1352(9)).

Marine mammal species whose population is determined to be depleted
receive additional protection (16 USC �1362). Except for scientific research
purposes, no permit may be issued for the taking of any marine mammal deter-
mined to be depleted.

B. Management of Commercial and Recreational Fisheries

The Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 (FCMA), (16 USC
�1801, et seq.)

The (FCMA) provides for the conservation and management of all fishery
resources in the zone between 3 and 200 nmi (5.6 - 370 kin) offshore. The
authority of the Caribbean Fishery Management Council (CFMC) of which the
Virgin Islands is a member is limited within the territorial sea and imple-
mentation of the CFMC plans are contingent upon coordination with the
Virgin Islands government. However, the Virgin Island has an informal
commitment to implement the FMPs and the Fishery Advisory Committee is
making recommendations for changes in the Virgin Island Commercial Fishery
Act to bring VI fishing regulations into compliance (see Section I., Terri-
torial Authorities). The CFMC is currently developing several FMP's.

C. Control of Pollution

1. The Clean Water Act, 33 USC �1251 et seq. (CWA)

It is the goal of the CWA to restore and maintain the chemical, physical,
and biological integrity of the Nation's waters. To varying degrees, waters
in the territorial sea, contiguous zone, and the ocean beyond are subject to
the requirements of the CWA, as outlined below.

Permits from the Army Corps of Engineers (COE), which are based on
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidelines, are required prior to
dredging or the discharging dredged materials within 3 nini (5.6 kin) offshore.
The Virgin Islands and the Corps have a joint application where both a
Corps and Territoral permit is required for dredging.

The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NDES), adminis-
tered by EPA requires a permit for the discharge of any pollutant from a
point source into the navigable waters of the United States The issuance of
a permit is based primarily on effluent guidelines but permits can be issued
for special circumstances on a case by case basis, EPA has delegated NPDES
permitting authority to the Virgin Island Department of Conservation and
Cultural Affairs (See Status Quo, Territorial Authority).

The CWA requires non-commercial craft to comply with marine sanitation
regulations issued by EPA and enforced by the United States Coast Guard (USCG)
(33 USC �1322). These regulations require that as of January 31, 1980, all
vessels operating within the territorial sea must have Coast Guard certified
sanitation devises or holding tanks (FR Volume 41, No. 20 1/29/76). The regu-
lations prohibit the discharge of untreated wastes within the 3 mile limit.

The National Contingency Plan establishes the organizational framework
whereby oil spills are to be cleaned up. To carry out the national plan,
regional contingency plans (RCP) have been established; the USCG has issued
such an RCP for Federal Region which includes the study area. Under the RCP,
USCG personnel investigate all reported offshore spills, notify the party

responsible (if known) of their obligation to clean up the spill, and supervise
the cleanup operation. The USCG retains final authority over the procedures
and equipment used in the cleanup. If the party responsible for the spill
does not promptly begin cleanup operations, the USCG can hire private organi-
zations and seek to recover costs from the party responsible.

2. Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (33 USC 1401-1444)

Title I of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972,
(33 USC S1401 et seq.). (MPRSA), also known as the Ocean Dumping Act, regu-
lates the dumping of materials into the territorial sea, the contiguous zone,
and the ocean beyond. EPA regulates through the issuance of permits, the
dumping of all materials except dredged materials over which COE exercises
authority. At the present time, there are no pre-selected dump sites in or
adjacent to the proposed sanctuary.

D. Regulation of Navigation and Vessel Safety

1. The River and Harbors Act (33 USG 401 et.'seq.)

Section 10 (33 USC 403) prohibits the unathorized obstruction of
navigable waters of the United States. The construction of any structure in
the territorial sea or on the outer continental shelf is prohibited without a
permit from the Army Corps of Engineers.

Section 13 (33 USC <407) prohibits the discharge of refuse and other
substances into navigable waters, but has been largely superseded by CWA.
In effect such discharges are regulated under this section only insofar as
they affect navigation or anchoring.

E. Historical and Cultural Resources

1. The National Historic Preservation Act (16 USC 5470 et. seq.)

The National Historic Preservation Act authorizes the Secretary of the
Interior to maintain a national register of "districts, sites, buildings,
structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, archae-
logy, and culture." Sites have been listed on the National Register which
include or are composed entirely of ocean waters and submerged lands within
state waters or on the Outer Continental Shelf (Lebovich, 1979, personal com-
munication). No sites in the waters of the proposed sanctuary are listed

on the National Register at the present time. However, the lighthouse on
Buck Island was listed in the National Register in 1977.

Any Federal agency conducting, licensing, or assisting an undertaking
which may affect a site listed on the National Register must provide the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment
on the action (16 USC �470). The criterion applied by the Council is used
to determine whether the undertaking will change the quality of the site's
historic architectural, archaeological or cultural character (36 CFR �800).

APPENDIX C
ANIMAL AND PLANT SPECIES LIST OF THE OF THE PROPOSED MARINE SANCTUARY
MARI NE-FLORA

Habitat Key: R - Reef M - Manatee Grass
AP -Algal Plain SB -Silt Bottom
T - Turtle Grass S - Sand

R AP T M SB S

PH. SPERMATOPHYTA

Thalassia testudinum X X
Halophila baillonis X X
Syri ngodiurn fi1i forme X X
Diplanthera wrightii X

PH. CHLOROPHYTA

Avrainvillea nigricans X X X X
Caulerpa sertularioides X X
C. miacrophysa X X
C. -mexicana X X
C. cupressoides
C. racemosa X X X
Anadyoneme stellata X X
Halimeda opuntia X X X
H. tuna X X
Hf. -monile X X
H. scabra X
Hf. di scoi dea X
H.simulans X
H.incrassata X X X
Neomeris annulata X X
Penicillus capitatus X X X
P. lamourouxii X
P. pyriformis X X
U~dotea flabellum X X X
U. verticillosa X X
U. cyarthiformes X X
'U. congl uti nata X
U. spinulosa X X
Rhipelia tomentosunm X
Chaetomnorpha crassa X X
C. linurn x
ffic-tyosphaeria cavernosa X X X
Valonia ventricosa X X
Valoniopsis Sp. X
Ernodesmis verticillata X

MARINE FLORA

R AP T M SB S

Dichtyosphaeria vanbosseae X X
Cladophora fuliginosa X X
Cladophoropsis membrancea X X

PH. PHAEOPHYTA

Dictyota linearis
D. dichotoma X X X X
D. bartayressio X
D. divaricata X
9. indica X
Lobophora variegata X X
Sargassum fillipendula X X X
Pandina vickersiae

PH. RHODOPHYTA

Byrothmanion triguetrum X
Calaxaura cylindrica X X X
Chrysymenia enteromorpha X X
Spyridia filamentosa X X X
Gracilaria sp. X X
Hildenbrandia sp. X X X
Laurencia sp. X
Polysiphonia sp.
Lithothamnion R.
Chondria polyrhiza X
Gelidium sp. X X
Asparigopsis sp. X
Digenia simplex X
Ralfsia sp.
Laurencia intricata X
Jania sp. X
Wrangelia verticillata X
Martensia pavonia X X
Amphiroa rigida X
A. fragilissima X
Corallina cubensis X
Junia pumila x
Hypnea musciformis X
Botryocladia pyriformis X
Coelothrix irregularis X
Champia parvula X
Crouania attenuata X X
Wrangelia argus X X
Callithamnion halliae X X
Acanthophora spicifera X X X
Geraminum fastigation X X X X X X

MARINE FAUNA

R AP T M SB S

PH. MOLLUSCA

Astraea longispina X X
Cerithium literaturn X X X
Spondylus americanus X X
Strombus pugilis X X
S. gigas
S. costatus
Cymati um vespaceum X
Colubaria testacea X X
Turitella exoleta X X
Chione sp.
Polinices sp.
Arca imbricata
Xenophora cochyliophora
Pinna carnea
Cymatium martinianum X X
C. poulseni X
Distorsio clathrat X
Murex chrysostoma X
M. pomum
M. brevifrons
Muri cidea hexagona X
Latiaxis deburghiae X
Coralliophila abrreviata X
Conus pygmaeus X
Fasciolaria tulipa X
Tellidora cristata X
Trachycardi um sp. X

INTERTIDAL MOLLUSCS

Nodolittorina tuberculata
Littorina angulifera
Tectarium muricatus
Littorina ziczac
Chiton tuberculatus
Acanthopleura granulata
Chiton marmoratus
Fissurella nodosa
Acmaea antillarum
Cittariur pica
Astrea tuber
Astrea tecta
Neritina pumtulata
Littorina meleagris
Nerita peloronta
Planaxis nucleus

MARINE FAUNA

R AP T M SB S

Thais deltoidea
Latirus brevicaudatus
Nerita versicolor

PH. PORIFERA

Callispongia vaginallis X X
Chondrilla riucula X X
Damyriela sp. X
lotrocota SP. X X
Tedamija ignis
Haliclono rubens X X X
-laliclona sp. X X
Microciona sp. X X X
Euryspongia roseae X X
Ulosa hispida X X
Iricina strobilina X
Neotibula s~p. X
lotrochota sp. X
Aplysilla sp. X
Verongia sp. X X

PH. ECHINPDERMATA

Oreaster reticulata
Tripneustes esculentus X X
Echinometr'a viridis X
E. lucunter
gia-de-ma antillarunm X X
Holothuria mexicana
Ophiocoma flaccida

PH. COELENTERATA

H YDR OZOA
Millipora alciocornis X X
M. complanata
M. squarrosa X X

ANTHOZOA

Agaricia agaridites X X
A. fragilis
Tstfra-ngjia sol itari a X X
Manicina aereolata X X
Isophyllia sinuosa X
Meandrina meandrites X X
Montastrea annularis X X
Mussa angulosa X X
Porites asteroides X
P. porites X X
Siderastrea siderea X

MARINE FAUNA

R AP T M SB S

S. radians X X
Favia frgu X
Oc-uTn a diff T7u sa X
Eusmilia fatiiata, X
Clado5cora absua X
Dichocenia stokesii X X
Diploria clivosa X
Solenastrea hyades X
Dend-rogyra ~.X
Cerianthus sp. X
Tp-tasia annulata X
Diploria labyrinthiformis X
Montast-rea cavernosa X
Dichocoenia stokesii X
S t e phanFocoe n-ia-m-i che-li ni X
Arpora cervicornis X
AcrpFra- -pr-olifTera X
Madracis decactis X

ALCYONARIA

Pseudoplexaura s~p. X X
Pseudopterogorgia X X
americanum
Unidentified gorgonian
Plexaura crassa X X
PT I iex 1 1-5 a s .X
Eunicea crassa X X
E. laxispica X X

SCYPHOZOA

Cassiopea frondosa

PH. ARTHROPOSA

Clibanarius tricolor X
Paguristes puncticeps X
Petrochirus ~baha~mensis X
Cal appa ' XP x X
Calcinus tibicen X
PH. ANNELIDA

Sabellastarte magnifica X
Hermodice _~p. X
Sabella SP X X X
Spirobr anchus giganteus X
Pomatostegus stellatus X
Eupolymania ne-bulosa X

Class Chondrichythyes
Order Squaliformes
Family Orectolobidae - Carpet sharks
Ginglymostoma cirratum - Nurse shark
Family Carcharhinidae - Requiem sharks
Carcharhinus limbatus - Blacktip shark
C. springeri - Reef shark
Galeocerdo cuvier - Tiger shark
Negraprion brevirostris - Lemon shark
Prionace glauca - Blue shark
Rhizopriondon porosus - Sharpnose shark
Family Sphyrnidae - Hammerhead sharks
Sphyrna mokarran - Great hammerhead
Order Rajiformes
Family Dasyatidae - Stingrays
Dasyatis americana - Southern stingray
Urolophus jamaicensis - Yellow stingray
Family Myliobatidae - Eagle rays
Aetobatus narinari - Spotted eagle ray
Class Osteichthyes
Order Elopiformes
Family Elopidae - Tarpons
Elops saurus - Ladyfish
Megalops atlanticus - Tarpon
Order Anguilliformes
Family Muraenidae - Morays
Echidna catenata - Chain moray
Enchelycore nigricans - Viper moray
Gymnothorax funebris - Green moray
G. moringa - Spotted moray
U. vicinus - Purplemouth moray
Muraena miliaris - Goldentail moray
Order Clupeiformes -
Family Clupeidae - Herrings
Harengula clupeola - False pilchard
H. humeralis - Redear sardine
Jenkinsia lamprotaenia - Dwarf herring
Family Engraulidae - Anchovies
Anchoa lyolepis - Dusky anchovy
Order Myctophiformes
Family Synodontidae - Lizardfishes
Synodus foetens - Inshore lizardfish
S. intermedius - Sand diver
S. synodus - Red lizardfish
Order Lophi iformes
Family Antennariidae - Frogfishes
Antennarius multiocellatus - Longlure frogfish
Family Orgcocephalidae - Batfishes
Ococephalus nasutus - Shortnose batfish
Order Atheriniformes
Family Exocoetidae - Flyingfishes and Halfbeaks

Hemiramphus balao - Balao
H. brasiliensis - Ballyhoo
Family Belonidae - Needlefishes
Platybelone argalus -Keeltail needlefish
Strongylura notata -Redf in needlefish
S. timucu - Timucu
Tylosurus crocodilus - Houndfish
Family Atherinidae - Silversides
Allanetta harringtonensis - Reef silverside
Atherinomorus stipes - Hardhead silverside
Order Bercyci formes
Family Holocentridae - Squirrelfishes
Holocentrus ascensionis - Squirrelfish
H. coruscus - Reef squirrelfish
Hf. marianus - Longjaw squirrelfish
H. rufus - Longspine squirrelfish
Hf. vexillarius - Dusky squirrelfish
Myripristis jacobus - Blackbar soldierfish
Plectrypops retrospinis - Cardinal soldierfish
Order Gasterosteiformes
Family Aulostomidae - Trumpetfishes
Aulustomus maculatus - Trumpetfish
Family Sygnathidae - Pipefishes and seahorses
Hippocampus reidi - Longsnout seahorse
Order Perciformes
Family Centropomidae - Snooks
Centropomus undecimalis - Snook
Family Serranidae - Sea Basses
Alphestes afer - Mutton hamlet
Cephalopholis fulva -Coney
Dermatolepis inermis -Marbled grouper
Ephinephelus adscensionis - Rock hind
E. guttatus - Red hind
E. itajara - Jewfish
E. striatus - Nassau grouper
Hypoplectrus indigo - Indigo hamlet
H. nircn - Black hamlet
H. puella - Barred hamlet
Liopropoma rubre - Peppermint bass
Mycteroperca bonaci - Black grouper
M. phenax - Scamp
M. tigris - Tiger grouper
M. venenosa - Yellowfin grouper
7aranthias furcifer - Creole fish
Petrometopon cruentatus - Graysby
Serranus tabacarius - Tobaccofish
S. tigrinus - Harlequin bass
S. tortugarum - Chalk bass
Family Grammidae - Fairy basslets
Gramma loreto - Fairy basslet

Haemulon chrysargyreum - Smallmouth grunt
H. flavolineatum - French grunt
H. macrostomum - Spanish grunt
H. melanurum - Cottonwick
H. parra - Sailors choice
H. plumieri - White grunt
H. sciurus - Bluestriped grunt
H. striatum - Striped grunt
Family Sparidae - Porgies
Archosargus rhomboidalis - Sea bream
Calamus bajonado - Jolthead porgy
C. calamus - Saucereye porgy
C. penna - Sheepshead porgy
C. pennatula - Pluma
Diplodus caudimacula - Roundspot porgy
Pagrus sedecim - Red porgy
Family Sciaenidae - Drums
Equetus lanceolatus - Jackknife-fish
E. punctatus - Spotted drum
E. umbrosus - Cubbyu
Family Mullidae - Goatfishes
Mulloidichthys martinicus - Yellow goatfish
Pseudupeneus maculatus - Spotted goatfish
Family Pempheridae - Sweepers
Pempheris poeyi - Shortfin sweeper
P. schomburgki - Glassy sweeper
Family Kyphosidae - Sea chubs
Kyphosus sectatrix - Bermuda chub
Family Ephippidae - Spadefishes
Chaetodipterus faber - Atlantic spadefish
Family Chaetodontidae - Butterflyfishes
Chaetodon capistratus - Foureye butterflyfish
C. ocellatus - Spotfish butterflyfish
C. sedentarius - Reef butterflyfish
C. striatus - Banded butterflyfish
Holacanthus bermudensis - Blue angelfish
H. ciliaris - Queen angelfish
H. tricolor - Rock beauty
Pomacanthus arcuatus - Gray angelfish
P. paru - French angelfish
Prognathodes aculeatus - Longsnout butterflyfish
Family Pomacentridae - Damselfishes
Abudefduf saxatilis - Sergeant major
A. taurus - Night sergeant
Chromis cyaneas - Blue chromis
C. multilineatas - Brown chromis
Microspathodon chrysurus - Yellowtail demselfish
Pomacentrus fuscus - Dusky damselfish
Pomacentrus leucostictus - Beaugregory
P. partitus - Bicolor damselfish
P. planifrons - Threespot damselfish
P. variabilis - Cocoa damselfish
Family Cirrhitidae - Hawkfishes
Amblycirrhitus pinos - Redspotted hawkfish

Family Labridae - Wrasses
Bodianus pulchellus - Spotfin hogfish
B. rufus - Spanish hogfish
Clepticus parrae - Creole wrasse
Doratonotus megalepis -Dwarf wrasse
Halichoeres bivittatus -Slippery dick
H. garnoti - Yellowhead wrasse
H. maculipinna - Clown wrasse
H. pictus -Rainbow wrasse
H. poeyi -Blackear wrasse
H. radiatus - Puddingwife
Hemipteronotus martinicensis - Rosy razorfish
H. novacula -Pearly razorfish
H. splendens -Green razorfish
Lachnolaimus maximus - Hogfish
Thalassoma bifa'sciatum - Bluehead
Family Scaridae - Parrotfishes
Cryptotomus roseus - Bluelip parrotfish
Scarus coelestinus - Midnight parrotfish
Scarus coeruleus - Blue parrotfish
S~. -croicensis -Striped parrotfish
S. guacamaia -Rainbow parrotfish
S. taeniopterus - Princess parrotfish
S. vetula - Queeen parrotfish
Sparisoma aurofrenatum - Redband parrotfish
S. chrysopterum - Redtail parrotfish
S. radians - Bucktooth parrotfish
~. rubripinne - Redfish parrotfish
S. viride - Spotlight parrotfish
Family Mugilidae -mullets
Mugil curema -White mullet
Family Sphyraenidae - Barracudas
Sphyraena barracuda - Great barracuda
S. picudilla -Southern sennet
Famil~ Polynemidae -Threadf ins
Polydactylus oligodon - Littlescale threadfin
P. virginicus - Barbu
Family Opistognathidae - Jawfishes
Opistognathus aurifrons - Yellowhead jawfish
0. cuvieri- - Phantom jawfish
0. macrognathus - Spotf in jawfish
U: maxillosus -Mottled jawfish
U. wh5itehu-rsti -Dusky jawfish
Family Clinidae - Clinids
Chaenopsis limbaughi -Yellowface pikeblenny
Emblemaria pandionsi's -Sailfin blenny
Malacoctenus triangulatus - Saddled blenny
Family Blennidae - Combtooth blennies
Blennius cristatus - Molly miller
Ophioblennius atlanticus - Redlip blenny
Family Callionymidae - Dragonets
Calli~onymus bairdi - Lancer dragonet

Family Acanthuridae - Surgeonfishes
Acanthurus bahianus - Ocean surgeon
A. chirurgus - Doctorfish
A. coeruleus - Blue tang
Family Scombridae - Mackerels and Tunas
Acanthocybium solanderi - Wahoo
Euthynnus alletteratus - Little tunny
E. pelamis - Skipjack tuna
Scomberomorus cavalla - King mackerel
S. maculatus - Spanish mackerel
S. regalis - Cero
Thunnus alalunga - Albacore
T. albacares - Yellowfin tuna
T. atlanticus - Blackfin tuna
Family Scorpaenidae - Scorpionfishes
Scorpaena plumieri - Spotted scopionfish
S. grandicornis - Grass scorpionfish
S. brasiliensis - Barbfish
Family Dactylopteridae - Flying gurnards
Dactylopterus volitans - Fling gurnard
Order P1 euronecti formes
Family Bothidae - Left-eye flounders
Bothus lunatus - Peacock flounder
B. ocellatus - Eyed flounder
Family Cynoglossidae - Tonguefishes
Symphurus arawak - Caribbean tonguefish
Order Tetraodontiformes
Family Balistidae - Triggerfishes & Filefishes
Alutera schoepfii - Orange filefish
A. scripta - Scrawled filefish
Balistes vetula - Queen triggerfish
Cantherhines macrocerus - Whitespotted filefish
C. pullus - Orangespotted filefish
Canthidermis sufflamen - Ocean triggerfish
Melichthys niger - Black durgon
Monacanthus ciliatus - Fringed filefish
M. tuckeri - Slender filefish
Xanthichthys ringens - Sargassum triggerfish
Family Ostraciontidae - Boxfishes
Lactophrys bicaudalis - Spotted trunkfish
L. polygonia - Honeycomb cowfish
L. quadricornis - Scrawled cowfish
L. trigonus - Trunkfish
L. triqueter - Smooth trunkfish
Family Tetraodontidae - Puffers
Canthigaster rostrata - Sharpnose puffer
Sphaeroides greeleyi - Caribbean puffer
S. spengleri - Bandtail puffer
Family Diodontidae - Porcupinefishes
Chilomcterus antennatus - Bridled burrfish
Diodon holocanthus - Balloonfish
D. hystrix - Porcupinefish

Family Grammistidae - Soapfishes
Rypticus saponaceus - Greater soapfish
Family Pariacanthidae - Bigeyes
Priacanthus arenatus - Bigeye
P. cruentatus -Glasseye snapper
Family Apogonidae -Cardinalifishes
Apogon binotatus - Barred cardinalfish
A. maculatus - Flamefish
A. stellatus - Conchfish
Family Branchiostegidae - Tilefishes
Malacanthus plumieri - Sand tilefish
Family Rachycentridae - Cobias
Rachycentron canadum - Cobia
Family Echeneidae - Remoras
Echeneis naucrates - Sharksucker
Remora remora -Remora
Family Carangidae -Jacks and pompanos
Alectis crinitus - African pompano
Caranx bartholomaei - Yellow jack
C. crysos - Blue runner
C. hippos - Crevalle jack
C. lugubris - Black jack
C. ruber - Bar jack
Decapterus macarellus - Mackerel scad
D. punctatus - Round scad
Elagatis bipinnulata - Rainbow runner
Oligoplites saurus - Leatherjacket
Selar crumenophthlmus - Bigeye scad
Seriola dumerili - Greater amberjack
S. rivoliana - Almaco jack
Trachinotu-sfalcatus - Permit
T. goodei - Palometa
Family Coryphaenidae - Dolphins
Coryphaena hippurus --Dolphins
Family Lutjanidae - Snappers
Lutjanus analis - Mutton snapper
L. apodus - Schoolmaster
L. campechanus - Red snapper
L. cyanopterus - Cubera snapper
L. griseus - Gray snapper
L. jocu - Dog snapper
L. mahogoni - Mahogany snapper
L. synagris - Lane snapper
Ocyurus chrysurus - Yellowtail snapper
Family Gereidae - Mojarras
Gerres cinereus -Yellowfin mojarra
Family Pomadasyidae -grunts
Anisotremus surinamensis - Black Margate
A. virginicus -Porkfish
Haemulon album -Margate
H. aurolineatum -Tomtate
Hf. bonariense -Black grunt
H. carbonarium -Caesar grunt

MARINE FAUNA

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME

Eretmochelys i mbri cata Hawksbill Turtle
Dermochelys coriacea Leatherback Turtle
Lepidochlys kempii Atlantic Ridley Turtle
Megaptera novaeanqcliae Humpback Whale
Physeter catodon Sperm Whale
Balaenoptera spp.R Rorqual Whale
Chelonia mydas Green Sea Turtle
Caretta caretta Loggerhead Sea Turtle

TERRESTRIAL FLORA

G - Groundcover
S - Shrub
T - Tree

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAMES

CACTACEA

Cephal ocereus rayeni i Pipe Cactus S
Opuntia rubescens Prickey Pear Cactus S
Cacus Inortus Barrel Cactus S

APOCYNACEAE

Plumeria alba White Frangi Pani T/S

VERBENACEAE

Lantana Involucrata Sage S
Avicennia nitiida Black Mangrove T

CONVOLVULACEAE

Ipomoea Pes - Caprae Baybean, Goatsfoot G

RUBIACEAE

Randia aculleata Box-Briar, Inkberry S
Geiaamericana Genip T

MALVACEAE

Thespesia popul nea Haiti - Haiti T/S
Hibiscus til iaceus Sea Hibiscus T/S

BOTIDACEAE

Batis Maritima Saltwort G

BORAGINACEAE

Bourreria succulenta Pigeon-Berry S

RUTACEAE

Triphasia trifolia Lime Berry S

AIZOACEAE

Sesuvium portulacastrum Sea Spinach G

ANACARDIACEAE

Comocladia dodonaea Christmas Bush S

BROMELIACEAE

Bromelia pinguin Ground Pinquin G
Tillandsia sp Bromeliad Epiphyte

LILIACEAE

Yucca aloifolia Spanish bayonet T/S

MAMMALS

Stenoderma rufum Red Fruit Bat
Molossus molossus Velvety Free-tailed Bat
Noctilio leporinus Fisherman Bat
Artibeus jamaicensis Fruit Bat
Rattus rattus Roof Rat
R. norvegicus Norway Rat
Mus musculus House Mouse
Herpestes auropunctatus Small Indian Mongoose
Odocoileus virginianus White-tailed Deer

REPTILES

Geochelone carbonaria Red-footed Tortoise
Ameiva exsul Common Ground Lizard
Anolis cristatellus Man Lizard
A. pulchellus Sharp-mouthed Lizard
A. stratulus Salmon Lizard
Hemidactylis mabovia Southern Woodslave
Iguana iguana Iguana
Mabuya mabouia Slippery back Skink
Sphaerodactylis macrolepis Common Dwarf Gecko
Amphisbaena fenestrata Virgin Islands Blind Snake
Alsophis portoricensis Ground Snake
Arrhyton exiguum Garden Snake
Epicrates monensis Mona Tree Boa
Typhlops richardi Common Worm Snake

AMPHIBIANS

Bufo marinus Giant Toad
Eleutherodactylus antillensis Antillean Frog
E. cochranae Whistling Frog
E. coqui Common Coqui
E. lentus Mute Frog
Leptodactylus albilabris White-lipped frog
Osteopilus septentrionalis Cuban Treefrog

AVIFAUNA

Podilymbus podiceps Pied-billed Grebe
Podiceps dominicus Lead-Grebe
Ardea herodias Great Blue Heron
Butorides virescens Green Heron
Casmerodias alba Great Egret
Egretta thula Snowy Egret
Hydranassa tricolor Louisiana Heron
Nycticrax nycticoras Black-crowned Night Heron
Nyctannassa violacea Yellow-crowned Night Heron
Anas acuta Pintail
A. bahamensis Bahama Duck
A. crecca Green-winged Teal
A. discors Blue-winged Teal
A. (mareca) americana American Wigeon
Aythya affinis Lesser Scaup
Oxyura jamaicensis Ruddy Duck
Phaethon actherus Red-billed Tropic Bird
P. lepturus White-tailed Tropic Bird
Pelecanus occidentalis Brown Pelican
Sula dactylatra Blue-faced Booby
S. sula Red-footed Booby'
S. leucogaster Brown Booby
Sterna hirundo Common Tern
S. dougallii Roseate Tern
S. albifrons Least Tern
S. maxima Royal Tern
S. fuscata Sooty Tern
S. anaethetus Bridled Tern
Anous stolidus Noddy Tern
Puffinus iherminieri Audubon's Shearwater
Fregata magnificens Frigate Bird
Larus atricilla Laughing Gull
Gelochelidon nilotica Gull-billed Tern
Pandion haliaetus Osprey
Falco peregrinus Peregrine Falcon
F. colubarius Merlin
F. sparverius American Kestrel
Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed Hawk

Porzana carolina Sora
Rallus longirostris Clapper Rail
Gallinula chloropus Common Gallinule
Fulica americana American Coot
F. caribea Caribbean Coot
Haematopus palliatus American Oystercatcher
Charadrius semipalmatus Semipalmated Plover
C. wilsonia Wilson's Plover
C. vociferus Killdeer
Pluvialis (Squatarola) squatarola Black-bellied Plover
Arenaria interpres Ruddy Turnstone'
Capella (Gallinago) gallinago Common (Wilson's) Snipe
Actitis macularia Spotted Sandpiper
Tringa (Totanus) melanol euca Greater Yellowlegs
T. (T.) flavipes Lesser Yellowlegs
Cataptrophorus semipalmatus Willet
Calidris (Erolia) melanotos Pectoral Sandpiper
C. (E.) fusciollis White-rumped Sandpiper
C. (E.) minutilla Least Sandpiper
C. (Ereunetes) pusilla Semipalmated Sandpiper
C. (E.) mauri Western Sandpiper
C. (Crocethia) alba Sanderling
Limnodromus griseus Short-billed Dowitcher
Micropalama himantopus Stilt Sandpiper
Himantopus mexicanus Black-necked Stilt
Columba leucocephala White-crowned Pigeon
C. squamosa Scaley-naped Pigeon
Zenaida aurita Zenaida Dove
Columbina passerina Common Ground Dove
Geotrygon mystacea Bridled Quail Dove
Coccyzus minor Mangrove Cuckoo
C. americanus Yellow-billed Cuckoo
Caprimulgus carolinensis Chuck-will's-widow
Chondeiles minor Common Nighthawk
Megaceryle (Ceryle) alcyon Belthed Kingfisher
Sphyrapicus varius Yellow-bellied Sapsucker
Hirundo rustica Barn Swallow
Mniotilta varia Black-and-white Warbler
Protonotaria citrea Prothonotary Warbler
Parula americana Northern Parula
Dendroica tigrina Cape May Warbler
D. petechia Yellow Warbler
D. coronata Yellow-rumped Warbler
D. virens Blackpoll Warbler
D. discolor Prairie Warbler
Seiurus aurocapillus Ovenbird
S. noveboracensis Northern Waterthrush
S. motacilla Louisiana Waterthrush
Geothlypis trichas Common Yellowthroat
Setophaga ruticilla American Redstart
Icterus g. galbula Northern (Baltimore) Oriole

I. icterus Troupial
Crotophage ani Smooth-billed Ani
Anthracothorax dominicus Antillean Mango
Sericotes holosericeus Green-throated Carib
Orthorhyncus cristatus Antillean Crested Hummingbird
Tyrannus dominicensis Gray Kingbird
Myiarchus stolidus Stolid Flycatcher
Elaenia martinica Caribbean Elaenia
Pronge dominicensis Caribbean Martin
fl-imus polyglottos Mockingbird
Margarops fuscatus Pearly-eyed Thrasher
Vireo altiloquus Black-whiskered Vireo
Coereba flaveola Bananaquit
Molothrus bonariensis Glossy Cowbird
Tiaris bicolor Black-faced Grassquit

APPENDIX D

DISTRIBUTION: Comments have been requested from the following
Federal, State, regional, and local agencies and interest groups:

Federal Agencies

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Department of Agriculture
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Energy
Department of Health, Education & Welfare
Department of Housing & Urban Development
Department of the Interior
Department of Justice
Department of Labor
Department of Transportation
U.S. Coast Guard
Environmental Protection Agency
Federal Emergency Management
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
General-Services Administration
Mari~ne Mammal Commission
Nuclear Regulatory Commission

National Interest Groups

A.M.E.R. I.C.A.N.
AFL-CIO
American Association of Port Authorities
American Bar Association
American Bureau of Shipping
American Farm Bureau Federation
American Fisheries Society
Ame:7ican Forest Institute
American Gas Association
American Hotel and Motel Association
American industrial Development Council
American Institute of Architects
American Institute of Merchant Shipping
4 ~~American Institute of Planners
American Littoral Society
American Mining Congress
American Oceanic Organization
American Petroleum Institute.
American Shore and Beach Preservation Association
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Society of Landscape Architects, Inc.
American Society of Planning Officials
American Water Resources Association
American Waterways Operators
Amoco Production Company
Ashland Oil, Inc.
Associated General Contractors of America

National Interest Groups (Continued)

Association of Oil Pipe Lines
Atlantic Richfield Company
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission
Atomic Industrial Forum
Barrier islands Coalition
Boating Industry Association
Center for Law and Social Policy
Center for Natural Areas
Center for Urban Affairs
Center for Urban & Regional Resources
Chamber of Commerce of the United States
Chevron U.S.A., Inc.
Cities Service Company
City Service Oil Company
Coastal State Organization
Conservation Foundation
Continental Oil Company
Council of State Governments
Council of State Planning Agencies
The Cousteau Society
Earth Metabolic Design Laboratories, Inc.
Edison Electric Institute
El Paso Natural Gas Co.
Environmental Policy Center
Environmental Defense Fund, Inc.
Environmental Law Institute
EXXON Company, U.S.A.
Friends of the Earth
Getty Oil Company
Great Lakes Basin Commission
Gulf Energy and Minerals, U.S.
Gulf Oil Company
Gulf Refining Company
Gulf South Atlantic Fisheries Development Foundation
Independent Petroleum Association of America
Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America
Institute for the Human Environment
Institute for Marine Studies
Interstate Natural Gas Association of America
Izaak Walton League
Lake Michigan Federation
League of Conservation Voters
League of Women Voters Education Fund
Marathon Oil Company
Marine Technology Society
Mobil Oil Corporation
Mobil Exploration & Producing, Inc.
Murphy Oil Company
National Academy of Engineering
National Association of Conservation Districts
National Association of Counties

National Interest Groups (Continued)

National Association of Dredging Contractors
National Association of Electric Companies
National Association of Engine and Boat Manufacturers
National Association of Home Builders
National Association of Realtors
National Association of Regional Councils
National Association of State Boating Law Administrators
National Association of State Park Directors
National Audubon Society
National Boating Federation
National Canners Association
National Coalition for Marine Conservation, Inc.
National Commission on Marine Policy
National Conference of State Legislators
National Environmental Development Association
National Farmers Union
National Federation of Fisherman
National Fisheries Institute
National Forest Products Association
National Governors Association
National League of Cities
National Ocean Industries Assocaition
National Parks and Conservation Association
National Petroleum Council
National Petroleum Refiners Assocaition
National Realty Committee
National Recreation and Park Association
National Research Council
National Science Foundation
National Science Teachers Association
National Shrimp Congress
National Society of Professional Engineers
National Wildlife Federation
National Waterways Conference
Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America
Natural Resources Defense Council
The Nature Conservancy
Nautilus Press
New England River Basin Commission
North Atlantic Ports Association
Outboard Marine Corporation
* ~~Resources for the Future
Rice University Center for Community Design and Development
Shell Oil Company
Shellfish Institute of North America
Shipbuilders Council of America
Sierra Club
Skelly Oil Company
Society of industrial Realtors
Society of Real Estate Appraisers
Soil Conservation Society of America
Southern California Gas Company

N~ational Interest Groups (Continued)

Sport Fishing Institute
Standard Oil Company of Ohio
Sun Company, Inc.
Tenneco Oil Company
Texaco, Inc.
Texas A & M University
United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America
Union Oil Company of California
Urban Research and Development Association, Inc.
U. S. Conference of Mayors.
U. S. Power Squadrons
Virginia Marine Resources Commission
Water Pollution Control Federation
Water Transport Association
Wildlife Management Institute
The Wildlife Society
World Dredging Association

Virgin Islands Government Agencies

Administrators Office - St. Thomas, St. John, and St. Croix
Budget Office
College of the Virgin Islands
Department of Commerce
Department of Conservation and Cultural Affairs
Department of Education
Department of Health
Department of Public Safety
Department of Public Works
Department of Social Welfare
Office of the Governor
Office of the Lieutenant Governor
Virgin Islands Legislature
Virgin Islands Planning Office

Local Interest Groups

Amateur Sports Organization
Boy Scouts of America
Carribbean Athropological Foundation, Inc.
Girl Scouts of Americal
Harmonic Lodge #356 E.C.
Island Resources Foundation
Lions Club
Past Search
Rotary Club
St. Croix Landmarks Society
St. Croix Sports Club
St. John Yacht Club
St. Thomas Historical Society

Local Interest Groups (Continued)

St. Thomas - St. John Swimming Association
St. Thomas Underwater Sports Association
St. Thomas Yacht Club
Tennants United for Fairness
Underwater Sports Club
Virgin Islands Game Fishing Club
Virgin Islands Historical Society
Virgin Islands League of Women Voters
Virgin Islands Conservation Society
Virgin Islands Sailing Association
Virgin Islands Yacht Club

Business Organizations

Chamber of Commerce
Fi shermen Cooperative
Taxi Drivers Association - St. Thomas
Tropic Tours
United Tours, Inc.
Varlack Adventures

U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1981 344-967