Nets are sorted at an Alaskan harbor for recycling. 



beach cleanups a cure-all — at best 

 they are a temporary fix to a complex 

 and persistent problem. 



Clearly, we need a new strategy. 

 Monitoring must change to aggres- 

 sively track sources and identify trends. 

 It should tell us whether our pollution- 

 control policies — education and regu- 

 lations — are working. Are ships com- 

 plying with MARPOL Annex V, the 

 international pact that prohibits over- 

 board dumping of plastics and regulates 

 at-sea disposal of other garbage? Are 

 land-based sources of debris changing? 



In 1988, the United States ratified 

 MARPOL Annex V. Since then, how- 

 ever, surveys and studies have been 

 unable to measure the force of this leg- 

 islation on U.S. shores. No consistent 

 decline in the abundance of trash has 

 been observed; nor have any nation- 

 wide trends emerged for plastic debris. 



Likewise, there is little data on 

 land-based sources. 



Studies have found, however, that 

 plastics account for most debris (48 to 

 99 percent) on U.S. beaches and har- 

 bors. Marine litter was examined from 

 1989 to 1993 by the Center for Marine 

 Conservation annual cleanups, National 

 Park Service quarterly beach surveys at 

 eight parks, a National Marine Fisheries 



Marine debris darkens 

 all of the world's oceans, 

 but the problem hardly starts there. 

 Close to 80 percent is washed, 

 blown or dumped from shore. 

 In the entire marine debris debate, 

 no other point 

 is so straightforward. 



Service debris study in Alaska and 

 Environmental Protection Agency sur- 

 veys of 10 U.S. harbors. 



In most locations, these studies 

 found that plastics were dominated by 

 packaging (bottles, bags and lids) or 

 miscellaneous debris (fragments and 

 pellets). Alaska was the exception with 

 derelict fishing gear (floats, trawl web, 

 rope) appearing as 53 percent of the 

 litter. Beaches on the Gulf of Mexico 



were most trashed, followed by those on 

 the West and East coasts. Among the 

 park studies, Padre Island National Sea- 

 shore on the Gulf of Mexico had the 

 most debris; Assateague Island National 

 Seashore on the East Coast, the least. 



All locations harbored debris that 

 could harm wildlife or human health. 

 Rope was the most abundant entangling 

 threat to wildlife, while plastic fragments 

 (beaches) and pellets (harbors) were the 

 greatest ingestible threat. Human health 

 hazards were most commonly found on 

 the East Coast, where sewage and medi- 

 cal debris turned up on beaches. The 

 West Coast was relatively clean of these 

 types of debris. 



Countries that contributed debris to 

 U.S. shores included Mexico, Canada, 

 Japan, Taiwan, Korea and Russia. Much 

 of the fishing gear (gill nets and gill net 

 floats) on Alaska beaches originated 

 from foreign (Japan, Taiwan, Korea) 

 fisheries. 



Impacts of Marine Debris 



Marine debris is like the flu. It af- 

 fects everybody at one time or another. 

 But it creates the worst problems for 

 those who are already unhealthy — 

 particularly endangered species. 

 Waterborne litter is yet another form of 

 pollution that damages the carrying 

 capacity of certain species. 



And like the flu, there is no quick 

 cure for marine debris. The impacts are 

 very difficult to measure; the sources, 

 hard to trace. Researchers often find that 

 sources and impacts are separated by 

 hundreds or thousands of miles since 

 debris can travel great distances. 



Scattered records of interactions 

 between marine debris and wildlife date 

 back several decades before the 1970s. 

 Entangled northern fur seals were spot- 

 ted as early as the 1930s. By the 1960s, 

 various seabirds were found to have 

 plastic in their stomachs. But not until a 



Continued 



COASTWATCH 5 



