DESIGNATION OF THE SOUTHWEST NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE COMPLEX AS WETLANDS OF INTERNATIONAL IMPORTANCE UNDER RAMSAR, CONVENTION ON WETLANDS OF INTERNATIONAL IMPORTANCE



A Thesis
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of
the Louisiana State University and
Agricultural and Mechanical College
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Master of Science

in

The Department of Environmental Studies



by
Mitchell Ward Coffman
B.A. Louisiana State University 1987
M.L.A. Louisiana State University 2004
August 2005
















©Copyright 2005
Mitchell Ward Coffman
All Rights Reserved

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thank you to my committee chair and major professor, Michael Wascom, for his guidance, patience, support and sponsorship. Professor Wascom’s instruction, counseling and encouragement remain the foundation of my education in environmental landscape planning, management, policy, regulation, law and use. Thank you also to committee members, Dr. Margaret Reams of the Environmental Studies Department and Charles Fryling of the Department of Landscape Architecture for their unending support, advice enthusiasm and instruction.
Thanks also to Charlotte St. Romain of the Department of Environmental Studies for working so diligently on my behalf and encouraging me through every step of my dual degree pursuits. The entire Environmental Studies Department, including students, is an asset to Louisiana State University and an invaluable source of knowledge and commitment to wetlands planning and management issues. Thanks also to Assistant Dean of the LSU Graduate School, Marie Hamilton for her support and friendship.
Thank you also to my family, who continue to support and encourage me in every way possible. Again, I am forever grateful to each family member for keeping me alive and motivated to continue my pursuit of two separate graduate degrees and for making their individual contributions (and sacrifices) to this thesis project.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
ABSTRACT vi
INTRODUCTION 1
LITERATURE REVIEW 3
Wetland Research 3
View of Wetlands Over Time 5
Wetland Functions 10
U.S. Management of Wetlands 11
International Management of Wetlands 13
Wetlands Physical Situation 15
Wetland Commercial Values 18
Louisiana Coastal Wetland Restoration Management 20
Louisiana Wildlife Habitat Management 21
Ramsar History 21
Mission and Procedures 22
Benefits of Ramsar 23
Criticism of Ramsar 27
Implementation of the Wise Use Concept 28
Criteria for Qualification 29
U.S. Listing Procedures 29
Ramsar Guidelines for Implementing the Nominating Criteria 30
Ramsar Coastal Zone Wetland Management 31
METHODOLOGY 35
Ramsar Information Sheet 35
Nomination of the Complex to the Ramsar 36
Regional Geography of the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge 41
FINDINGS 43
The Complex is a Unique Example of Natural Wetlands 43
The Complex Supports Endangered and Threatened Species. 50
The Complex Supports Species Important for Maintaining Biological Diversity. 52
The Complex Supports Fish, Mollusk and Shrimp at Critical Stages. 53
The Complex Supports More Than 20,000 Waterbirds. 54
CONCLUSION 60
Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex Satisfies Ramsar Criteria 60
Catahoula National Wildlife Refuge is on the Ramsar List 61

RECOMMENDATIONS 63
Complete Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex RIS 63
Begin Lobbying at State and National Level 63
Apply Ramsar to Louisiana Wetland Cluster Sites 63
REFERENCES 65
APPENDIX: RAMSAR PROPOSAL 76
VITA 91


ABSTRACT
The historical loss and continued threat of loss of Louisiana wetlands is a major environmental concern for the United States and the world. In 1971, the Ramsar Convention, an international environmental treaty was ratified to specifically address conservation planning and land use management issues involving wetlands of the world. Ramsar provides an international designation award called, the Wetlands of International Importance List, which formally acknowledges globally important wetland landscapes. Ramsar outlines specific criterion nominated wetland sites must possess for consideration of this listing.
The Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex is an excellent candidate for nomination to the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance List. The Complex is comprised of Cameron Prairie National Wildlife Refuge, Lacassine National Wildlife Refuge and Sabine National Wildlife Refuge located within the coastal zone of Cameron Parish, Louisiana. The area, some of the world’s most valuable salt, brackish and freshwater wetlands meets the criterion required to be listed with Ramsar.
The Complex contains a biologically diverse population of waterfowl, migratory birds, anadromous and endemic fish, shrimp, crabs and native plants, trees and wetland grasses. These landscapes also offer spawning and nesting habitat and protection to endangered and threatened birds, fish, tortoise, mammals and reptiles. As excellent representations of natural wetland ecosystems, this cluster of coastal landscapes merit special attention in order to further protect, manage, conserve and use wisely the rich natural resources associated with the region.
Recently, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced plans to formulate a 15 year Comprehensive Management Plan for the Complex. Nomination of the Complex to the Ramsar list would not only augment this management plan, but also complement both the use mission of Ramsar and the state’s policy of economic development marketing of territorial wetland landscapes for ecotourism opportunities. Justification of this nomination is demonstrated in this thesis project by listing and meeting the criterion set forth by the Ramsar Convention.


INTRODUCTION
Wetland landscapes within the Louisiana coastal zone merit investigation as possible candidates for Ramsar listing. Specifically, the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex of Cameron Prairie, Lacassine, and Sabine refuges are justifiable nominations for consideration as a cluster site candidate as a Wetland of International Importance. Justification of this nomination will be demonstrated in this thesis project by listing and meeting the criterion set forth by the Ramsar Convention.
Additionally, the promotion of the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex as a Ramsar site will be shown to be harmonious with federal and state natural resources management and planning programs, as well as an asset to the economic development policies involving eco-tourism within Louisiana wetland landscapes. Furthermore, in this thesis submission, the plausibility of extending the cluster site nomination concept to additional national wildlife refuges located along the Gulf Coast of Louisiana, where most fulfill similar if not identical criterion for nomination, is advocated.
Louisiana’s diverse wetland landscapes are candidates for Ramsar recognition. In fact, Louisiana supports one Ramsar site-Catahoula Lake National Wildlife Refuge located in the central portion of the state, but hosts none in some of the most valuable coastal wetlands in existence, the Louisiana Coastal Zone.
The Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex of wetlands and associated natural habitat is host to endangered and threatened animal and plant species as well as habitat and nesting grounds to thousands of migratory birds, waterfowl, fish, reptiles, mollusks and mammals. The Complex in the coastal zone territory is one of the largest naturally and commercially productive estuaries in the world. The entire coastal zone, over 440 million acres produces 20% of the nation’s commercial seafood harvest. Crab, shrimp, fish and oysters as well as migratory fish stocks depend upon the unpolluted nutrient rich wetlands of south Louisiana during critical periods in their life cycle.
The coastal zone of Louisiana has diverse wetlands, including freshwater swamps, hardwood and bottomland swamps, freshwater marshes, brackish marshes and saltwater marshes. The Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex contains unique representative examples of these landscapes that meet the criterion set forth by the Convention. Ramsar encourages nomination of these diverse wetland categories. Ramsar also permits clustering of these diverse sites, especially within a coastal zone, for a single listing as a Wetland of International Importance.
National wildlife refuges on the coast of Louisiana are recognized and in fact protected under current law as ecosystems of importance to the country. These refuges are also promoted as eco tourism opportunities that localities use as economic development tools. As such the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) Complex, an established public conservation entity and regionally promoted as a destination featuring waterfowl and migratory bird habitat, estuaries and wetlands landscape is appropriate for submission to Ramsar. The Federal government as well as the Louisiana state government supports international wetland designation and are established participants in the Ramsar Convention.
Designating the Louisiana coastal zone wetlands, in particular, Cameron Prairie, Lacassine, and Sabine National Wildlife Refuges-the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge as a cluster site of Wetlands of International Importance ensures a complete regulatory effort at conservation, protection, and management of the Louisiana coastal zone wetlands through wise use of wildlife habitat and the landscapes’ natural resources.
On February 2, 2005, eighty countries, including the U.S., observed World Wetlands Day. This day is a celebratory nod toward the historic ratification of the Ramsar Convention, treaty for the conservation and wise use of the world’s wetlands. On that February day past, Louisiana announced a formal agreement made with the United States Army Corps of Engineers, to formulate a multi-level task force charged with implementing the state’s coastal restoration mission in the hopes of slowing disappearance of coastal wetlands.
Louisiana and associated coastal wetland loss is a popular area of discussion. In fact, wetland education, loss research and restoration project promotion is underway at all levels of management. This focus is merited, as Louisiana is losing coastal wetlands at a very rapid pace.
Wetland planning and management is not limited to the boundaries of Louisiana. The significance of these natural landscapes has not escaped planners and scientists alike. In fact, the value of wetlands and associated habitat, including minerals, animals, fish and birds is awe-inspiring, thus the need for communities, nations and developing countries to seek guidance in their planning efforts in order to achieve best management practices.
State management programs and Ramsar complement each other in the primary mission to protect valuable wetland landscapes. Additionally, the documented propensity and advocacy to include tourism programs as a means of increasing economic development opportunities for people and localities of the proposed site is an agreeable management component of these wetland sites.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Wetland Research
The research topic wetlands, encompasses a broad area for scientific, political and cultural discussion. Various internet search engines, environmental law journals, planning documents, Library of Congress collections, congressional research services and other peer-reviewed resources reveal volumes and volumes of data, policy, law, commentary and opinion. For Example topics for discussion range from hydrological analysis of wetland habitats, to formulation of complex economic models for evaluation of wetland values, and even include research on the restoration of cultural wetlands to serve as educational landscapes. These few examples illustrate the breadth, depth and the complexity that can be associated with the term wetlands. The availability and abundance of wetland research is validation of the complexity and value of the wetland ecosystem and associated habitat.
Environmental law expert Michael Bowman comments, “…the concept of wetlands is often difficult to comprehend, much less define”. In this respect, he described wetlands, as “…a term of no great precision, either in popular or scientific parlance, and indeed in certain languages there is no single word which adequately reflects the concept”. He refers to the French language as an example of varying interpretations that cultures can assign to words. Bowman says “…the term wetlands in the French language text - ‘zones humides’ - conjures up a rather different image from its English counterpart.”
For the purposes of this study general information on wetland descriptions, characterizations, definitions, values, uses, policies and the like were topics for discovery. Additional topics in areas such as environmental law-domestic and international-were investigated, as was land and wildlife management policies or regulations employed by the Louisiana, United States and other nations. Scientific and peer reviewed publications were also used to document and calculate waterfowl, fish, shrimp and other animal and plant life occupying wetlands and the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex.
Personal attendance at USFWS policy meetings, public and private, offered real time research opportunities that yielded useful results. Multiple interviews and conversations with the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge staff and other agency personnel, retired and active, also contributed to the formulation of this thesis document. Personal tours, via automobile, boat, pirogue and foot were immeasurably helpful in the discovery process of this thesis. Additionally, personal interviews with associates and friends, offered a refreshing contribution to the research of the topic while providing anecdotal verification of many issues contained herein.
Government agency publications and non-governmental organizations’ presentations (books, brochures, policy statements, web sites, etc.) advocating their respective positions were readily available for study. The majority of these documents explain the geography and character of the wetlands, while providing information on historical approaches to wetlands management, past and current government laws, policies and regulations and programs involving wetlands use, preservation, wildlife management and even restoration efforts of the altered landscape.
In terms of international environmental management, literature review reveals similar approaches and attitudes among nations toward wetland planning. Australia, India, and even Iran value and manage wetland landscapes and associated natural resources much as do Canada, United States, and most of Europe and Asia. Differences in environmental management programs are tempered by multi-lateral agreements concerned with protecting, managing and even developing wetland areas and the associated natural resources in those wetland landscapes.
In 1971, the Ramsar Convention became the instrument of international agreement for land management policies that focused upon global wetland planning. Ramsar established the global mission to protect wet landscapes and habitat by providing a universal working definition of wetlands. Ramsar also established internationally accepted guidelines for interpreting the wetland landscapes’ defining characteristics. Essentially, the Convention adopted a definition addressing, “…every wet area, near wet or infrequently wet parcel of land, without particular regard to scientific nicety”.
At the time of the Convention, the environmental protection agenda was a newly emerging public and government regulatory movement. Ramsar’s early definition of wetlands was a significant achievement of agreement in the early era of environmental protection and management planning.
Ramsar’s influence upon established and developing nations’ planning policies continues. Much like the wetland landscape, the Ramsar Convention is a dynamic management tool. Through regular meetings of the Contracting Parties to the Convention (COP), the world’s leading authorities on wetlands are continually reviewing, evaluating, educating, assisting and encouraging national wetland planning measures.
The Convention has a stated mission that “is the conservation and wise use of all wetlands through local, regional and national actions and international cooperation, as a contribution towards achieving sustainable development throughout the world”. In this mission statement, an underlying endorsement for use of wetlands exists simultaneously with stated conservation edict.
The dual-purpose mission seems contradictory in that one typically limits use of a resource that one views as necessitating conservation. However, in the case of the state of Louisiana, application of the Ramsar criteria is an appropriate exercise because it is harmonious with the geography of the state, established wetland conservation measures and even economic development programs that use the state’s wetlands as eco-tourism opportunities. In this sense, Ramsar conserves and acknowledges wetlands as environmental treasures, while candidly acting as an economic development tool for nations.
This Convention, despite language barriers, geopolitical differences and even geographical borders, provided a working base definition for the contracting parties to use in the establishment of national ecological management programs of territorial and transboundary wetlands. The Ramsar definition and accompanying framework for the protection of wetlands provided governments a common base of policy with which to work, while allowing for individual determination of a personal regulatory definition of wetlands. The Convention did not replace nor amend any national law or sovereign state policy.
Finding agreement among nations on management policies can be a difficult task. Defining wetlands across global landscapes and culture must have been as difficult a task. Not only must one consider the scientific definitions including soil makeup, water quality, flora types and other quantifiable and identifiable components, one must consider the cultural, social and economic value of wetlands to varying cultures. Despite these challenges, the 1971 Ramsar Convention successfully provided this working definition for contracting parties of the Convention to use in formulation of environmental programs.
View of Wetlands Over Time
Wetlands planning complexity is addressed in the article, Wetland Conservation: a Review of Current Issues and Required Action, “…fifty or more different definitions of wetlands are currently in use. Author P.J. Dugan notes that the International Wildlife Law journal has the broadest definition.
One of the earliest wetland definitions used in the United States comes from an 1890 federal government report on wetlands, General Account of the Freshwater Morasses of the United States. Following that, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as part of a wetland classification system for categorizing waterfowl habitat, developed a working definition commonly referred to as Circular 39. The USFWS uses this definition to differentiate among various wetland types for wildlife habitat categorization.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's definition and the federal regulatory wetland definition used to identify wetlands under the Clean Water Act are the two major definitions used in the United States. The USFWS’s concept of wetlands is based upon L.M. Cowardin’s research classifying wetlands into categories and sub categories.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) uses the definition of wetlands for developing the field method to analyze jurisdictional boundaries; commonly called wetland delineation. The Corps’ regulatory management policy utilizes a three-parameter test incorporated into the definition. The Corps considers an area a wetland only if all three conditions set forth are present. According to the Corps’ regulations, wetlands must possess the following three attributes; “at least periodically, the land supports hydrophytes and the substrate is predominantly undrained hydric soil and the substrate is non-soil and is saturated with water or covered by shallow water at some time during the growing season of each year.”
The need to establish parameters exists mainly because wetlands vary widely from region to region. Difference in soils, topography, climate, hydrology, water chemistry, existing vegetation, and other factors, especially in relation to the amount of human disturbance incurred affect the character and composition of a wetland landscape. Wetlands occur in diverse settings ranging from coastal margins and tidal/river discharge areas, to high mountain valleys.
Natural and near natural wetlands can occur within constructed hydrological impoundments, drainage ditches, dredged canals and manufactured spoil areas. Every continent in the world except Antarctica has wetlands within its borders; in fact, wetlands occupy about 6% of the land surface of the world, 2.2 billion acres. The United States contains about 274 million acres or 12% of the world's total wetlands, while 36% of Louisiana is comprised of wetland landscapes. In Louisiana alone, 48% of the United States’ coastal wetlands exist.

Figure 1. Wetlands Global Extent 1990, Elsevier Science Publishers

Figure 2. Wetland Distribution 1991, USFWS
Coastal zone and wetland protection management programs, regulations, laws and treaties are firmly established throughout the world. Similar programs are established in Louisiana. However, the state has only one Ramsar listing, despite the abundance of wetland landscapes. Many thousands of additional acres of wetlands in Louisiana may qualify for Ramsar designation as wetlands of International Importance.
Most assuredly, the state’s geographic position relative to the Gulf of Mexico qualifies the coastal zone for Ramsar consideration. To that extent, this thesis explores Ramsar Convention criteria application to the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex.
More than 220 million acres of wetlands existed in the coterminous U.S. (lower 48 states) in colonial times. Today, less than half remain (about 100 million acres), (Tables 1, 2, 3 ).
The National Wetlands Policy Forum of the U.S. Government recommended a program of no net loss of wetlands in 1988. This policy advocated replacement of lost wetland acreage through restoration of degraded or destroyed wetlands while calling for curbs on agricultural use and/or development’s destruction of wetlands.
From the mid-1950s to the mid-1970s, the coterminous U.S. lost an average of 458,000 acres of wetland per year. Between the mid-1970s to the mid-1980s, the loss rate dropped to about 290,000 acres/year. Today, the annual loss rate is about 60,000 acres.

Table 1. States 20% + wetlands
Alaska (48%)
Louisiana (36%)
Florida (33%)
Maine (26%)
Minnesota (21%)
South Carolina (21%)

Table 2. States 10-20% wetlands
New Jersey (19%)
Delaware (18%)
Georgia (18%)
North Carolina (16%)
Wisconsin (15%)
Michigan (15%)
Mississippi (14%)
Massachusetts (12%)
Arkansas (10%).

Table 3. States -1% wetlands
Montana (0.9%)
Arizona (0.8%)
Kansas (0.8%)
Idaho (0.7%)
Nevada (0.6%)
New Mexico (0.6%)
California (0.5%)
West Virginia (0.4%)



Figure 3. U.S. Wetland Loss, USGS


Figure 4. U.S. Wetlands Loss by State
Wetland loss in the U.S. continues. Greatest losses in the U.S. occur in the Southeast in states including Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina, (see Table 4). Most of these states are losing forested wetlands to agriculture, yet recent agricultural policies may be reducing this type of wetland conversion, resulting in coastal wetland loss figures increase.
More than 1900 square miles of Louisiana’s coastal wetlands have disappeared. According to LSU’s Greg Stone of the Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences, Louisiana is experiencing the highest rate of coastal erosion in America, losing about 100 yards of land every 30 minutes. “That is a football field every half-hour.”
In the past 250 years, 2.5 million acres of coastal prairie of southwest Louisiana have dwindled to just 200 in scattered parcels. Coastal Louisiana has lost over 900,000 acres since the 1930s. In the 1970s, the loss rate for Louisiana’s coastal wetlands was as high as 25,600 acres per year. The current rate of loss is about 16,000 acres per year, forewarning a 320,000-acre net loss by the year 2050.
Wetland Functions
Wetlands provide many functions critical to survival of humans and wildlife. These functions include providing habitat for wildlife, fish and birds, as well as protecting humans from natural disasters. The wetlands also provide humans with food sources and act as hosts to many food stocks. Healthy wetlands can absorb unusually high flood peaks for rivers, streams and bayous while providing water during drought periods.
The wetland landscape also sustains more wildlife and habitat with better available surface water quality than comparable watersheds with fewer wetlands. Wetlands also provide economically and socially important recreation areas for sport fishing, crabbing, netting, boating, eco-tourism, and birding.
These activities as well as hunting, trapping and camping are all popular activities in Louisiana, as well as lucrative for area businesses and economies. Areas adjacent to wetlands also provide important wildlife corridors and urban buffers within the landscape.
The wetlands protect coastlines, including the Louisiana Gulf coast, from the destructive power of storms and hurricanes. Wetlands reduce coastal erosion by stabilizing sediments disturbed through natural or human interference and by absorbing or dissipating natural and storm wave motion. Large barges, boats and ships can produce significant amounts of energy that can rapidly erode riverbanks and wetlands near rivers, channels, lakes, bays, and basins.
Wetlands can also serve as sources of community pride or representations of culture for localities and individuals. “The mere existence of wetlands may be of great significance to some people. Those who have grown up in wetlands, but have moved away to a town, may have placed a high value on the wetland because it is part of their cultural heritage, even though they may never visit the wetland.”

Figure 5. Wetland Functions, wetlands.org
U.S. Management of Wetlands
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers oversees wetland management in the United States. EPA administers regulations established by federal law for wetland conservation, restoration, and monitoring. EPA establishes environmental standards for associated agencies to review, including the United States Army Corps of Engineers (COE/CORPS/Corps).
The Corps reviews permits for projects involving discharges of spoil and/or projects that affect wetlands in government projects and others such as residential development involving wetlands, oil production in wetland areas or coastal zones, road building, and levee construction. The Corps also coordinates its regulatory processes with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and associated state authorities.
The first law the Corps uses to regulate wetland areas is the Rivers and Harbors Act. Under this regulation, a permit is required from the Corps for any project that involves work in, over or under navigable waters of the United States. Navigable waters of the United States are defined as those waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide and/or are presently used or have been used in the past, or may in the future be used to transport interstate or foreign commerce.
A second law the Corps’s use in regulation of wetlands is Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. “Recognizing the potential for continued or accelerated degradation of the Nation's waters, the U.S. Congress enacted the Clean Water Act formerly known as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1344).”
Through the authority of the Act, the Corps administers a permitting program for projects that involve the discharge of dredged or fill material into any water of the United States, including and especially wetlands. The program requires permit seekers to conduct environmental impact studies and explore alternative approaches to the proposed project if damage to the wetland area is suspect. When applying for a permit, one must show that the proposed project has,
1. taken steps to avoid wetland impacts where practicable
2. minimized potential impacts to wetlands
3. provided compensation for any remaining, unavoidable impacts through activities to restore or create wetlands
Projects with potentially significant impacts usually require an individual permit. For most discharges that anticipate minimal adverse effects, the Corps often grants general permits. Minor road crossings, utility line backfill, and bedding projects are categorized under general permit regulations. Section 404(f) exempts some activities from regulation and the permitting process. These activities include farming, ranching, silviculture and other agricultural activities.
In 1972, the U.S. Congress enacted the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA). The CZMA encourages states to preserve, protect, develop, and, where possible, restore or enhance valuable natural coastal resources such as wetlands, floodplains, estuaries, beaches, dunes, barrier islands, and coral reefs, as well as the fish and wildlife using those habitats. In the CZMA, Congress declared it best for the national interest to maintain a program for the effective management, beneficial use, protection, and development of the coastal zone.
The CZMA makes federal financial assistance available to any coastal state or territory, willing to develop and implement a comprehensive coastal management program. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is the appointed managing agency for the CZMA.
The Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM) within NOAA administers individual state coastal zone management programs. Currently, the OCRM oversees programs in all coastal states except Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, Texas, and Ohio. All of these non-participating states are currently developing coastal programs except for Illinois and Indiana.

Figure 6. U.S. Coastal Zone Management, USGS
In addition to resource protection, the CZMA specifies that coastal states may manage coastal development objectives and projects at a regional and local level. A state with an approved program can review, comment, deny or restrict proposals not harmonious with the regional coastal zone management program. The CZMA does not apply to states that are not CZMA participants or have not yet received OCRM approval.
International Management of Wetlands
In 1972, international awareness of environmental issues reached a peak at the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm, Sweden. The Stockholm agreement established the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), designed to manage and administer the global network of environmental treaties.
From 1972 to 2000 and beyond, hundreds of nations signed on to dozens of international treaties to globally preserve natural and cultural heritage, control the trade in endangered species, protect wildlife habitat, protect migratory stocks and reduce air and ocean pollution, for example. These agreements led to others to protect the ozone layer, to regulate the use of ocean resources and to control transboundary movements of hazardous waste and limit indiscriminate whaling. Since the 1970s, the world community has developed an extensive body of international environmental laws addressing a wide range of topics. To date more than 1000 treaties exist.
Sovereign governments enter into international environmental agreements, treaties, and protocols for the conservation of national interests but also for the protection and conservation of cross boundary and global resources. These intergovernmental agreements are bilateral and multilateral, requiring broad acceptance to be effective.


Some examples of familiar international environmental treaties include,
• Montreal Protocol, to reduce and terminate the consumption of chemical compounds that destroy ozone in the stratosphere.
• Convention on the International Trade of Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES)
• Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal
The Ramsar treaty is officially known as, “The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat, adopted in Ramsar, Iran, in 1971”. The treaty is familiar as the Ramsar Convention , or Ramsar. The treaty has 145 Contracting Parties, all having ratified the international treaty. One thousand four hundred thirty five (1435) wetland sites totaling 125.1 million hectares are designated in the Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance List.
The Ramsar Convention provides guidance and shares research information with developing countries and among established nations working to manage and plan for wetland areas within their territories. Ramsar also helps educate governments and assists regulatory personnel with management decisions. The Convention also maintains a role of distinguished wetland landscapes that signatories to the Convention nominate as representations of wetlands meeting Ramsar criterion for submission to the Wetlands of International Importance List enacted though the treaty. Through these nominations, Ramsar Convention member countries regularly designate candidate sites intended for inclusion on the Wetlands of International Importance List (Ramsar List). “The inclusion of a site in the Ramsar List confers upon it the prestige of international recognition and obliges the government to take all steps necessary to ensure the maintenance of the ecological character of the site. Inscription on the Ramsar List acknowledges the international importance of the site.”
Georgetown law student, Beth Kruchek says, “The United States has an obligation under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (Ramsar Convention) to promote the protection of wetland habitats within its borders.” “Wetlands are dynamic areas, open to influence from natural and human factors. In order to maintain their biological diversity and productivity (i.e., their ecological character as defined by the Convention and to permit the wise use of their resources by people, an overall agreement is essential between the various managers, owners, occupiers and other stakeholders. The management planning process provides the mechanism to achieve this agreement (Ramsar).”
Agreement upon management approaches is can be an obstacle to multi-nation, international environmental management consortiums. Mostly, these networks succeed at maintaining support for the treaty or convention of which they administer and do well “…considering the broad scope of problems/issues and diverse interests among governments, international organizations, and private sector groups.” Criticism of multi-lateral international environmental organizations does exist. Daniel Esty of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy believes, “…the global environmental governance structure is inadequate for the pollution and resource challenges the world faces today.”
Esty said, the entire body is “weak and performing poorly, and concludes, that “…the growing recognition that a number of serious pollution control and resource management issues are inherently transboundary in their scope makes the status quo unacceptable and the need for improved global environmental governance urgent.”
Wetlands Physical Situation
Louisiana is comprised of two primary geographic regions, the lowlands and the uplands. The landscape of south Louisiana is part of the Mississippi River Basin formed during the Holocene (0.01 mya to present) epoch. The lowlands of Louisiana subdivide into three major areas, the Mississippi and Red River alluvial plain, the Deltaic plain and the Chenier plain .
The Mississippi River Basin drains 41% of the contiguous United States and a portion of Canada, transporting water and sediment over an area of 1.2 million square miles, carrying alluvial sediments of the Mississippi, Red, Ouachita, and other rivers and smaller tributaries into the marshes of the coastal zone. These organically rich deposits occupy about 55% of Louisiana’s surface.

Figure 7 Louisiana River Basins, USGS
The Mississippi River originally deposited sediment along the Louisiana coast, naturally restoring wetlands and coastal marshes, building up land and constructing natural levees, all the wile replenishing coastal fisheries with nutrients and food sources. Today the river is confined within a levee system and water flow is managed through locks and control structures, which ultimately forces the overextended course of the river to deposit sediment over the edge of the continental shelf. Control of the Mississippi River’s path and associated dredging of access canals has also led to salt-water intrusion into ecologically fragile environments.
Since the turn of the last century, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has held the Mississippi River in its present course. This containment contributes to the current dilemma of erosion in the coastal regions. As far back as 1976, Don Moser satirically commented on the Corps’ historical planning of the Mississippi River in a Smithsonian Magazine article saying, “By now it has become clear that the Corps is more likely to be a restorer than a developer of fragile lands” .
Coastal erosion affects all regions of the United States. Average coastline recession rates of 25 feet per year are common on some barrier islands in the Southeast, and rates of 50 feet per year have occurred along the Great Lakes. Louisiana is losing coastal wetlands at an estimated at 50 square miles per year.

Figure 8 Projected Wetland Loss Louisiana, Coast 2050
Without the marsh and wetlands as a buffer, some experts predict a 20-foot storm surge that might swamp New Orleans. LSU researchers believe a 1965 Hurricane Betsy-type storm hit New Orleans today, the damage would be far worse without the coast’s wetlands and barrier islands deflecting the storm surge. The barrier islands protect the coastline by breaking down waves and storm surges before they hit the coast.
Palustrine wetlands include scrub shrub, non-tidal and tidal marshes and ponds. These types of wetlands are the most common type in Louisiana. The most common palustrine wetland is the swamp or forested wetlands, which make up 59% of the wetlands in Louisiana. Coastal wetlands or estuarine wetlands consist mostly of salt water or brackish water marshes and act as estuarine emergent wetlands.
Saltwater marshes, nearest to the coast and subject to regular tidal inundation, have average salinities near 16 parts per thousand (ppt). They are typically dominated by hardy salt-tolerant plant species. Freshwater marshes typically never exceed salinities greater than 2 ppt. The freshwater marsh type sustains high densities of wildlife, including migrating waterfowl.
Forested wetlands of Louisiana exist in two vegetation zones, bald cypress/tupelo swamps and bottomland hardwood forests. The near year round presence of standing water allows for the growth of aquatic plants. Forested wetlands are some of the only wooded areas untouched by agriculture, industry, and urban use.
The cheniers of coastal Louisiana are areas where coastal ridges act as the landmasses with the highest elevation along the coast. As a result, these ridges are historically known for supporting maritime forests dominated by live oaks trees. Live oak (Quericus virginianus) hammocks fill the landscape of the coastal cheniers in Cameron and Calcasieu parishes. Chenier is the French word for oak.
These landmasses have an important ecological role as a temporary habitat for many migrating species. The cheniers become stopping points for migrating birds heading north crossing the Gulf of Mexico as well as the last available ground before crossing the Gulf for those heading south. These special chenier habitats for mammals and birds in coastal Louisiana are extremely important shelters for animals seeking refuge from coastal storms.
Wetland Commercial Values
Wetlands provide a variety of goods and services to humanity in direct and indirect ways. Our global natural ecosystem has been estimated at US$33 trillion, of which the value of wetland ecosystem is estimated at US$14.9 trillion (45 percent of the total).
Almost one-third of the nation's oil and gas production and the largest seafood harvest in the lower 48 states originate in the Louisiana wetlands. Additionally, Louisiana’s coastline protects one of the largest shipping and fuel production corridors in the U.S. from hurricanes and open water conditions. “Just one of Louisiana's major ports receives about a million barrels of oil every day, roughly 13 percent of the nation's foreign oil supply.”
Approximately 70% of the commercial fisheries in the United States depend upon estuaries and salt marshes for nursery or spawning grounds. In 1995, the commercial fish catch totaled 4.5 million metric tons and was valued at a record $3.8 billion. Seafood production, harvest, and associated businesses are a major sector of the U.S. economy. In 1995, Americans consumed an average of 15 pounds of seafood per person, and spent a total of $38.6 billion on seafood products. In 1991, Louisiana’s coastal marshes produced a commercial fish and shellfish harvest amounting to 1.2 billion pounds valued at $244 million. Currently, the dockside value of Louisiana's commercial seafood harvest is more than $342.7 million, not including the recreational fishing industry valued at $944 million. The waters of Louisiana support deep-water offshore, coastal bay, lake, bayou and marsh fishing and aquaculture industries. The shrimp fishery is Louisiana’s largest commercial fishery, accounting for over 85% of the value of the state’s edible fisheries production. The shrimp industry is based on the brown and white shrimp (Penaeus aztecus and Penaeus setiferus), harvested inshore in the spring and fall respectively, accounting for 93 to 96% of all Louisiana landings.
From 1976 to 1990, 40% of Louisiana shrimp landings were in inshore state waters, 43% were in coastal boundary offshore waters, and 17% were in federal waters off Louisiana’s coast. White shrimp landings for the year 2000 totaled 75,864,278 pounds (34,411.8 metric tons) for a value of $152,374,346. The total take of brown shrimp for the year 2000 was 62,115,422 pounds (28,175.4 metric tons) for a value of $96,514,340. The state’s shrimp industry lands about 70% of the Gulf production of small shrimp. Both absolute landings and the share of Gulf landings have increased during that period. Some scientists have hypothesized that this rise is attributable to an increase in shrimp habitat resulting from deterioration of the wetlands along coastal Louisiana. If this is the case, Louisiana catch may begin to decline within the next 15-20 years.
Oyster production in Louisiana is a $30 million dockside industry. Louisiana’s coastal waters produce an average of 13 million pounds of oysters annually, of which 60% ships to other states and countries. Eastern oyster (Crassostrea virginica) landings for the year 2000 totaled 11,513,438 pounds (5,222.5 metric tons) for a value of $24,614,159. Blue crab (Callinectes sapidus) landings for the year 2000 totaled 51,430,385 pounds (23,328.7 metric tons) valued at $36,770,381.
Wetlands are habitats for fur-bearers like muskrat, beaver, and mink as well as reptiles such as alligators. The nation’s harvest of muskrat pelts alone is worth over $70 million annually. The Louisiana Nutria pelt industry is the largest producer of Nutria pelts and meat in the U.S., which at this time is providing over one million pelts per year. In 1945, trappers took 8,500 pelts.

Louisiana Coastal Wetland Restoration Management
The Coastal Wetland Planning, Protection Restoration Act of 1990, (PL-101-646, Title 111, CWPPRA), locally referred to as the Breaux Act provides authorization and funding of multi-level, federal, state and local as well as non-governmental organizations for formation of a task force to investigate ways to mitigate wetland losses. In 1998, the State of Louisiana and the CORPS, the EPA and other federal agencies charged with restoring and protecting Louisiana coastal wetlands adopted a new coastal restoration plan.
That strategic plan, Coast 2050: Toward a Sustainable Coastal Louisiana, was developed by federal, state, and local governments (Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force and Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Authority 1998). The plan focuses wetland protection on restoring and mimicking the natural processes that originally formed coastal Louisiana.
The plan sub-divides Louisiana’s coastal zone into four regions of nine hydrologic basins proposing ecosystem restoration strategies for each. Coast 2050 seeks to implement the most complex wetland program in Louisiana history.

Figure 9. Coast 2050, LaCoast.gov.
In January 2005, Louisiana Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco and Lt. Gen. Carl A. Strock, Chief of Engineers with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, signed a partnership agreement dedicating the “…combined efforts (of government entities) towards a common goal of reversing the current trend of degradation of Louisiana’s coastal ecosystem”. In addition, Strock signed the Chief of Engineer’s report; compiled for submission to the Congress in consideration for funding of the Louisiana Coastal Area Ecosystem Restoration Study and associated projects. A January 2005 Louisiana Coastal Area (LCA) news release called the document signing, “…a historic step in the advancement of the coastal restoration blueprint toward authorization.”
Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) restoration funds administered through the Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force of the LCA totaled $334 million of federal and matching state funds in 1995. These funds are committed for coastal wetlands restoration projects in Louisiana where 34 of the 91 projects that the task force approved for construction are completed, with 15 more under construction.
In May 2005, Louisiana enrolled the state’s 200,000th acre (80937.5 hectares) of land into the federal Wetlands Reserve Program. This program is part of the 2002 U.S. Farm Bill. The Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) administer conservation programs targeted at farmers and agricultural operations. This voluntary program provides technical and financial assistance to eligible landowners to address wetland, wildlife habitat, soil, water, and related natural resource concerns on their properties.
Louisiana Wildlife Habitat Management
The Louisiana Division of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) manages 48 Wildlife Management Areas (WMA) in the state. The agency is responsible for overseeing property totaling more than 1.2 million acres. Five state refuges exist in the Louisiana Coastal Zone, totaling over 428,000 acres. The state manages the wildlife areas with the assistance of the federal government.
The LDWF manages policy, enforces laws and conducts research into coastal marsh management practices for fur, estuarine fisheries, and wildlife resources. “Properties currently administered by the Fur and Refuge Division are open for various forms of public recreation,” such as hunting, fishing, hiking, camping, birding and botanizing.
Ramsar History
The Convention on Wetlands, signed in Ramsar, Iran, in 1971, is an intergovernmental treaty providing the framework for national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources. The Convention entered into force in 1975 and as of May 2005 has 145 Contracting Parties.
Ramsar is the first of the modern global intergovernmental treaty on conservation and wise use of natural resources. Although examples of multilateral nature conservation agreements can be traced back to the turn of the century and beyond, not until the late 1960’s did the international environmentally concerned communities begin to perceive the true seriousness of the threat posed by the continuing degradation of the natural environment and the urgent need for a concerted global response.

Figure 10. Ramsar Logo
The international environmental community adopted a substantial number of international environmental treaties from 1972 onwards. The framework for the Ramsar Wetlands Convention formed the year before Stockholm and thus “stood astride the very threshold of modern environmental law, its founding fathers unquestionably appraised of many of the key tenets of contemporary conservation philosophy”.
M.J. Bowman calls the Ramsar Convention in its original form, “…an extraordinarily simple, almost simplistic, legal instrument”. He explains that the treaty consists of twelve articles, four of which were devoted to the articulation of substantive obligations, four to institutional arrangements and other mechanisms for implementation, and four to the final clauses governing participation and the exercise of depositary functions.”
Mission and Procedures
The Convention's mission is “…the conservation and wise use of all wetlands through local, regional and national actions and international cooperation, as a contribution towards achieving sustainable development throughout the world”. The United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is the official depositary agency for the Convention.
The Ramsar Bureau administers the convention and is housed in the headquarters of The World Conservation Union (IUCN) in Gland, Switzerland, under the authority of the Conference of the Parties and the Standing Committee of the Convention.

Benefits of Ramsar
According to Ramsar when a country joins the Convention the commitment represents:
• an endorsement of the principles that the Convention represents, facilitating the development at national level of policies and actions, including legislation that helps nations to make the best possible use of their wetland resources in their quest for sustainable development;
• an opportunity for a country to make its voice heard in the principal intergovernmental forum on the conservation and wise use of wetlands;
• increased publicity and prestige for the wetlands designated for the List of Wetlands of International Importance, and hence increased possibility of support for conservation and wise use measures;
• access to the latest information and advice on application of the Convention’s internationally-accepted standards, such as criteria for identifying wetlands of international importance, guidelines on application of the wise use concept, and guidelines on management planning in wetlands;
• access to expert advice on national and site-related problems of wetland conservation and management through contacts with Ramsar Bureau personnel and consultants and through application of the Ramsar Advisory Mission mechanism when appropriate; and
• international cooperation on wetland issues and brings the possibility of support for wetland projects, either through the Convention’s own Small Grants Fund or through the Convention’s contacts with multilateral and bilateral external support agencies.
The United States ratified the Ramsar Convention on April 18, 1987. U.S. support of Ramsar has remained strong since the Convention’s inception. In 1997 testimony before the U.S. Senate, head of the U.S. Ramsar Committee called funding Ramsar projects, “Prudent investments in the protection of natural ecosystems and human welfare are in the economic interest of the United States.”
That same testimony stated that “…making these investments now can yield dividends for our children's future; dividends in the form of more bountiful harvests, life-saving drugs, a stable climate, and a clean environment. The Ramsar Convention funding will be particularly critical to assure the global supply of seafood and the abundance of waterfowl and other bird species. Wetland conservation through the Convention provides other, crucial ecosystem services such as carbon sequestration, which counteracts global warming, water quality enhancement, and flood damage reduction.”

Figure 11. U.S. Ramsar Sites
Ramsar also provides opportunities for actions to increase knowledge and awareness of wetlands and their values, including:
• interchange of experience and information on wetland policy, conservation and wise use between countries preparing and/or implementing national wetland policies, or pursuing wetland conservation;
• increasing the awareness and understanding of decision-makers and the public of the full benefits and values, within the terms of wise use, of wetlands. Among these benefits and values, which can occur on or off the wetland are:, sediment and erosion control policies flood control maintenance of water quality and abatement of pollution, maintenance of surface and underground water supply, support for fisheries, grazing and agriculture, outdoor recreation and education for human society, provision of habitat for wildlife, especially waterfowl, and contribution to climatic stability
Costs of Ramsar listing are minimal. In established wetland research zones, collection and organization of data such as wetland inventories, value matrixes, habitat numbers and wildlife conditions are necessary elements in the application process. Minimal costs include time spent negotiating, commenting upon and accepting management plans, and costs associated with ongoing monitoring from an oversight agency.
The most obvious and beneficial result of listing for countries, nations, landowners, public and private, is the gained assurances about the future uses of the wetland, these being determined through the agreed management plan. Ramsar listing also places the burden on the governments of member states for ensuring the continued health of the wetland now and into the future. Additionally, Ramsar listing provides an advantage in securing funding and other assistance with management physical plant issues or administrative planning duties.
The Convention promotes the sustainable use of aquatic ecosystems, allowing communities to gain economic benefits from these areas while maintaining the ecosystems’ viability. Ramsar designations bring benefits to sites in the form of improved water quality, enhanced wildlife habitat, and increased tourism. In many developing nations, the Ramsar Convention is the only policy tool available for protecting aquatic ecosystems.
The Austrailan Govenrment considers the broad aim of the Convention an “enriching” management tool. The Department of the Environment and Heritage, posits that one of greatest benefits of Ramsar comes through international networking and sharing of resources and reasearchers who work toward common goals.
Conservation and wise use of wetlands, by national action and international cooperation as a means to achieving sustainable development throughout the world is the mission of the Convention. “This means ensuring that activities which might affect wetlands will not lead to the loss of biodiversity or diminish the many ecological, hydrological, cultural or social values of wetlands.”
Noting this lofty terminology and accounting for Ramsar’s wise use policy, one might mistakenly view Ramsar as a naturalist/protectionist treaty representing a uni-lateral approach or one dimensional approach to managing land. However, Ramsar overtly acknowledges the importance of a wetland region to the locality by promoting the use of the area. In other words, Ramsar encourages the marketing and promotion of the site for tourism opportunities and even goes so far as to require specific design and signage decisions for onsite location.
Taking the above into consideration, one might view Ramsar as an economic development tool in addition to its role as an environmental management tool. For example, once a site is listed Ramsar awards copyright permission for the use of logos, signage and associated promotional material, to the authorizing authority making the nomination so that a media awareness and promotional campaign be scheduled for the designation’s announcement. Often times, countries declare Ramsar designation on World Wetlands Day, February 2 of that particular year, furthering the concept of marketing a site while supporting the underlying economic development mission of Ramsar.
Ramsar addresses this issue overtly, saying, “Public access and tourism are taken in their widest meaning and include anyone who visits the site for any reason other than official purposes. Access and tourism can make a significant contribution towards the costs of managing Ramsar sites.” The Convention proactively encourages, “…a positive presumption in favor of providing access and appropriate facilities for visitors”.
This management approach is harmonious with the Louisiana approach to economic development and wetland management in that both promote a site’s natural resources as a tourism attractant. This duality is noted in the Louisiana Tourism Commissioner’s words boasting that, “For the third year in a row (2004), Louisiana's State Parks attracted over two million visitors”. Additional support for this thesis is demonstrated through the active marketing and promotion of the 180-mile Creole Nature Trail that traverses the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge (proposed Ramsar candidate), as the first National Scenic Byway in the Gulf South.
Over 280,000 people visit the Sabine National Wildlife refuge annually, where exhibits in the visitor center and the Wetland Walkway are considered two of the principal tourist attractions in southwest Louisiana. The refuge is an integral part of the Creole Nature Trail All American Road, where promotional materials encourage visitors to, “Come relax with us! Drive the Creole Nature Trail & enjoy beaches, shelling, crabbing, hunting, fishing, birding, wildlife refuges & the Jetty Fishing Pier.” Approximately 30,000 people visit the refuge annually. The visitor center, exhibits, and auto-tour route are primary attractions.
According to the Louisiana Coastal Area 2050 Report, almost 900,000 fishing licenses are sold annually in Louisiana. Sport fishing expenditures total $13 billion annually and waterfowl hunting spending $430 million. More than 1.4 million people participated in non-consumptive fish and wildlife activities spending more than $220 million in 1991.
One must note that eco-tourism encompasses value beyond monetary measures normally associated with the tourist market. For example, the Louisiana Ornithological Society (LOS) sponsors and conducts two bird counts at the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex. The fall and spring meetings take place in the last weekends of October and April in Cameron, Louisiana. These volunteer outings are often included in official state bird counts, and at the very least serve as significant contributions to avian and waterfowl research. Louisiana’s willingness to embrace these eco-tourism objectives as well as the state’s regulatory and scientific dedication to wetland management supports my position that Ramsar designation is indeed an appropriate course of action to pursue.
Criticism of Ramsar
Calestous Juma, a Harvard professor and former United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) official, argues global environmental organization is unnecessary and may get entangled in bureaucracy. Saying that a global environmental agency would be “too cumbersome to work”. Juma notes that centralized, hierarchical UN agencies are widely regarded as inefficient agencies relying upon a network of bureaucracies rather than interested parties. “The strength of the treaties lies in the fact that they give more power and authority to governments and citizens, not to centralized UN agencies, Juma wrote to the Financial Times of London.”
Rather than existing solely as passive “protected” or “preservation” areas, Ramsar sites usually incorporate and advocate utility through management planning often referred to as wise use. Traditional preservationists associate stricter management of human activity in the management of wetland wildlife refuges. In a May 2005 interview, retired 31 year veteran of the USFWS and 23 year employee of the Lacassine National Wildlife Refuge, Mike Stewart says, “…refuges are just that—a refuge for the wildlife—which means minimizing the impact of humans, like that of duck hunters and the associated equipment they bring onto the refuges.”
Beth Kruchek of Georgetown law school believes a legal angle to this notion may be present. She says, “The limited federal definition (U.S.) of a wetland does not comply with Ramsar’s wise use obligation because it fails to protect the integrity of the wetland ecosystem.”

Implementation of the Wise Use Concept
Article 3.1 of the Convention requires contracting parties to formulate and implement wetland planning to promote the conservation of the wetlands included in the List of Wetlands of International Importance. Ramsar guidelines encourage the wise use of wetlands within the respective member’s authority while respecting transboundary consideration for complete conservation management techniques.
The 3rd Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties (COP) in Regina, Canada in 1987, adopted the following definition and associations with the concept of wise use,
“The wise use of wetlands is their sustainable utilization for the benefit of humankind in a way compatible with the maintenance of the natural properties of the ecosystem.”
The COP3 resolution noted that the concept of wise use “seeks both the formulation and implementation of general wetland policies, and wise use of specific wetlands.” COP3 advocated the use of policy tools for governments to use when promoting wise use practice. The Conference listed five mechanisms necessary to implement wise use in practice,
1) Periodical review of existing legislation to ensure that it is generally compatible with the wise use obligation, and make adjustments if necessary; this applies to particular legislation regarding mandatory wetland destruction or to that which encourages such destruction through tax benefits and subsidies.
2) General wise use legislation for wetlands should consider inclusion of wetlands in the zones of land-use plans that enjoy the highest degree of protection and the institution of a permit system for activities affecting wetlands.
3) Legislation for the conservation and wise use of specific wetland sites.
4) Review of division of jurisdiction among government agencies. Particular attention should be paid to the need to manage coastal wetlands as single units, irrespective of the usual division of jurisdiction between land and sea.
5) Development of cooperative arrangements for water systems shared between two or more countries to achieve wise use.
Ramsar’s Work Plan for 2000-2002 includes the specific objective of “developing the capacity of institutions in Contracting Parties, particularly in developing countries, to achieve conservation and wise use of wetlands”. Ramsar supporters claim the Convention is about finding ways to use wetlands sustainably. Article 2.4 of the Convention established that “The inclusion of a wetland in the List does not prejudice the exclusive sovereign rights of the Contracting Party in whose territory the wetland is situated.” The Convention is not anti-development, nor anti-preservation, but more about planning, management and enjoyment of diverse wetland ecosystems. The treaty does require the overall condition of the wetland remain the central focus of any management plan.
Criteria for Qualification
Selection for the Ramsar List is based on the wetland’s significance in terms of ecological diversity. Article 2(1) provides that each member party is to designate suitable wetlands within its territory for inclusion in the List of Wetlands of International Importance, while article 2(2) establishes the broad criteria to for application. The contracting parties adopted specific criteria and supplement those with application guidelines for identifying sites that qualify for inclusion in the List of Wetlands of International Importance. Article 2(1) dictates, that wetlands should be selected for the List because international significance in terms of ecology, botany, zoology, or hydrology.
U.S. Listing Procedures
The April 6, 1990 Federal Register, Vol. 55, established the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s policy, guidelines and procedures for nominating sites to the List of Wetlands of International Importance. The notice provided supplemental guidance to the Convention for determining site eligibility. The authority for establishment of these guidelines flows from the United States Senate ratification of the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat.
The National Wetlands Priority Conservation Plan ensures compliance with the articles of Ramsar. The USFWS reviews sites eligible for inclusion to the list.
The USFWS considers only sites complying with the following,
• “The ownership rights are free from encumbrances or dispute and the lands are in public or private management that is conductive to the conservation of wetland:
• Maintenance of the ecological and hydrological characteristics of the site(s) should be reasonable assured such that future actions would not result in delisting by the Conference of Parties; and
• Proposed sites will only be considered if there is concurrence from State, Commonwealth or territory where the site is located and a Congressional Representative.”
The USFWS publishes an annual action notice in the Federal Register soliciting appropriate nominations to the list of Wetlands of International Importance. This notice specifies the period for submissions and location for material submissions.
The USFWS requires submission from the administrative authority or the party holding the title to the nominated land. Local, state and federal support of the nomination is beneficial but required. Congressional submission of the nomination by an elected official is mandatory for any submission to garner acceptance from the USFWS. The USFWS administers review procedures for nominated sites with the assistance of state, federal and non-governmental organizations (NGO’S).
Generally, the USFWS openly accepts nominations for inclusion upon the list of Ramsar sites and solicits sites under the previously mentioned federal register notice. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service director presents nominations that meet USFWS criteria of the Convention to the Ramsar Bureau.
Ramsar Guidelines for Implementing the Nominating Criteria
Member countries meet in a Conference of the Contracting Parties or Conference of Parties (COP), where guidelines for the defining criteria are considered and updated to aid parties who assess the suitability of any potential nominee. The process of adopting specific criteria for the identification of Wetlands of International Importance began in 1974. In 1980, the first official Convention criteria emerged at the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
The original text of the Convention (Article 2.2) states that:
“Wetlands should be selected for the List on account of their international significance in terms of ecology, botany, zoology, limnology or hydrology, in the first instance, wetlands of international importance to waterfowl at any season should be included”.
In 1987 and 1990, the Conference of the Parties revised the criterion further, and in 1996, COP6 added new criterion based on fish. In 2002, the Conference of Parties (COP8) addressed an ongoing discussion of socio-economic and cultural importance of wetlands to communities as a potential criteria delimiter. COP8 added to the guidelines for management and planning of Ramsar sites consideration for the social importance of wetlands to the people of the region. The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands promotes the conducting of wetland inventories as a tool for identifying the functions and values of wetlands, including ecological, social and cultural values.
Wetland inventories serve as a baseline for measuring change in wetlands, for identifying functions and services, for locating wetlands and for identifying priority sites for conservation. Wetland inventory planning and management enables comparisons among wetlands management techniques at different levels of government. In 2001, at the Wetlands International 3rd Board of Members Meeting, in Wageningen, Netherlands, members declared, “…wetland inventory is not an end in itself, but rather an essential step in the decision-making process affecting land use, the conservation of natural resources and water allocation.”
Ramsar Coastal Zone Wetland Management
The need for including the coastal zone management in Ramsar’s guidelines for those states engaged in the national physical planning process was adopted by the Policy Conference on Integrated Coastal Zone Management at the Brisbane Australia 6th meeting of the Contracting Parties in 1996. The COP6 agreed that an estimated 60% of the world’s population concentrates along the coastal strip that extends from shoreline to less than 60 km., or 37.2 miles inland.
Recognizing this, COP6 adopted coastal zone guidelines for developing and established countries. The summary report said, “development…poses immense pressure on coastal wetlands in terms of depletion of living resources, pollution loads, reclamation, land fill, and other uncoordinated development, all of which impact on biological diversity.”
Coastal areas are popular landscapes and becoming more so every day. Increased population, coastal residence development, ecotourism growth and other such demands put upon the coast, jeopardized wetland resources and natural ecosystems. Coastal areas of the United States host more than 139 million people, about 53% of the national total population while only comprising 17% of the nation’s land area.
Coastal areas of the U.S. are the most developed in the world. Coastal population is increasing by 3,600 people per day, with projected totals rising above 28 million people between now and 2015. This rate of growth is faster than that for the nation as a whole.
Currently, over half of the human population in North America lives in coastal cities. In 1960, there were 80 million coastal residents, out of a total 180,671,158 people. Today, the coastal population density is approximately 340 people per square mile, more than four times the U.S. average for population density and by the year 2025, three out of every four Americans will live within an hour's drive of the shoreline.
Louisiana has 7,721 miles of shoreline, bays, tidal lakes, estuaries, sounds, lagoons, and brackish bayous with a coastal population of 2,044,880 residents and growing. In 1993, it was estimated that 60-75% of Louisiana's residents live within 50 miles of the coast.

Figure 12. Louisiana Coastal Zone, DNR
Predictions of increasing coastal zone population pressures resulted in the U.S. program to address coastal management issues. The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 authorized the Coastal Zone Management Program (CZMP) and the National Coastal Management Program, a federal-state partnership dedicated to management and protection of the nation’s coastal resources. The Coastal Programs Division (CPD) within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management (OCRM) administers the program at the federal level.
Thirty-four states and territories have federally approved coastal management programs overseeing 95,376 national shoreline miles (99.9%). State and federal coastal zone management operate under three guidelines; “sustain coastal communities, sustain coastal ecosystems, and improve government efficiency”.
The 1978 Louisiana State and Local Coastal Resources Management Act authorized the Louisiana Department of Natural Resource’s Coastal Program (LCRP) . The Act also authorized the development of Local Coastal Programs (LCPS) for implementation at the parish level. An approved LCP can establish coastal use permitting authority in the local parish. Ten coastal parishes, Calcasieu, Cameron, Lafourche, Jefferson, Orleans, Plaquemines, St. Bernard, St. James, St. Tammany and Terrebonne manage local coastal programs with St. Charles and St. John’s plan under development.

Figure 13. Louisiana Coastal Zone Management Plans
The Coastal Resources Management Act (CRMA) protects, develops, and, where feasible, restores or enhances the resources of the state’s coastal zone. According to the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources’ web site, “The law’s broad intent is to encourage multiple uses of resources and adequate economic growth while minimizing adverse effects of one resource use upon another without imposing undue restrictions on any user. Besides striving to balance conservation and resources, the guidelines and policies of the LCRP also help to resolve user conflicts, encourage coastal zone recreational values, and determine the future course of coastal development and conservation.”
A Coastal Use Permit (CUP) Program is a part of the Louisiana Coastal Resources Program. The state Coastal Management Division uses this coastal use, permitting program (CUP) for projects associated with the coastal territory. The CUP is a mechanism for granting permits dealing with the management, development and use projects affecting wetlands located within the state’s coastal zone. As part of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) of 1980/1986 and the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990, polluters are responsible for cleanup and restoration of affected resources in wetland areas.

METHODOLOGY
Ramsar Information Sheet
The Ramsar Information Sheet and nomination criterion as applied to the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex is a good measure of the empirical-qualitative and quantitative-value Ramsar demands in wetland landscapes. Reporting standards set forth and agreed upon by sovereign nations’, which the Complex may fulfill, are indications that Louisiana’s wetlands will be viewed and valued at the highest degree of scientific, cultural, recreational and cultural worth.
Essentially, the RIS reporting obligation tool is used as an assessment of adequacy for sites nominated to the Ramsar list. Recommendation 4.7 of the Conference of the Parties (COP) established this Ramsar Information Sheet, commonly referred to as an RIS, which acts as the standard form in a basic collection device that nominating parties use when submitting wetland sites for Ramsar list inclusion. A Ramsar Information Sheet (RIS) and site map complete the nomination requirements for properties to be considered for listing. Once completed, the RIS and accompanying maps of the nominated site or site cluster is submitted to the Ramsar Bureau in Gland, Switzerland.
In an effort to simply the nominating process, the Convention requests that compilers “fill in the blanks” on the form which often results in limiting the length of an RIS to 12 pages or less. Ramsar requests copies of the RIS in Microsoft© Word™ Format (a text editing application) and inclusion of digital maps outlining the candidate sites. Additional information on each site, such as taxonomic lists of species and representative status of land uses, management plans of the nominated site, regional management plans, copies of important published papers and other materials are attached to the RIS nomination dossier. Photographs, prints, transparencies and/or electronic image submissions of the wetland may also be included in the nominating package.
The Ramsar Information Sheet has expanded over the years and the order in which the items appear has changed more than once, resulting in many different formats. The Ramsar Convention Bureau maintains current forms at the Ramsar Convention web site on the internet world wide web address of http://www.ramsar.org.
Additional, conservation guidelines published in the African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement (AEWA) are often used in the preparation of an RIS. The AEWA guidelines say that one may save time and effort in the preparation of a preliminary site inventory for RIS completion by limiting the types of information to be gathered to a basic inventory of geographical and hydrological descriptions along with flora and fauna data, as well as explanation of management and land use regulations employed at the site.
The Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex is a candidate for nomination to the Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance list because is meets or exceeds the minimum criteria set forth by the Convention. The following information includes general descriptions of the proposed properties, details management regulation and/or programs, while offering justification for nomination of the aforementioned site to the Ramsar list. It should be noted that, no formal USFWS nomination is underway nor is a Ramsar site submission for the Complex planned. However, Complex personnel support this thesis nomination and encourage further exploration of the proposal beyond the mandatory justification-provided forthwith. Additionally, the “Findings” section of this document lists the criteria for which this nomination fulfills and provides the associated data for the respective criteria claim.
Nomination of the Complex to the Ramsar
The Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex was established in March of 2000. The Complex comprises Cameron Prairie National Wildlife Refuge, Lacassine National Wildlife Refuge and Sabine National Wildlife Refuge, all of south Louisiana in the United States. The Refuge Complex and federally employed staff of the USFWS, manage, protect and restore over 360,000 acres (145687.43 hectares ) of wetlands habitat in the Complex.
Cameron Prairie National Wildlife Refuge, located in Cameron Parish, Louisiana, encompasses 9,621 acres (3893.50 hectares) of marsh and prairie. Nesting, migrating, and wintering waterfowl use the refuge as a critical habitat. Lacassine National Wildlife Refuge, located in Cameron Parish encompasses 34,886 acres (14117.92 hectare) and was established to preserve habitat for migrating and wintering waterfowl.
Lacassine NWR also manages a 3,345-acre (1353.70 hectare) wilderness area, a 20,000 acre (8093.75) private lands refuge program for migrating waterfowl in six state refuges, and oversees wetland easements in Jefferson Davis Parish. Sabine National Wildlife Refuge, also located in Cameron Parish is 125,000 acres (50585.93 hectare) of diverse habitat and fresh, intermediate, and brackish wetlands.
The Lacassine National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) maintains a 16,000-acre (6475 hectares) controlled impoundment built to enhance waterfowl resting and nesting habitat. The Lacassine Pool is a primary tool in the management of waterfowl using the area refuges. Fifteen management objectives of the refuge and the pool provide for migratory waterfowl loafing and resting areas, while adjacent areas are managed to support feeding. submerged aquatics within the pool provide food sources for hundreds of species of waterbirds and waterfowl.


Figure 14. Cameron Prairie National Wildlife Refuge, Mitch Coffman 2005

Figure 15. Lacassine National Wildlife Refuge, Mitch Coffman 2005

Figure 16. Sabine National Wildlife Refuge, Mitch Coffman 2005

Figure 17. Lacassine National Wildlife Refuge Map, USFWS


Figure 18. Cameron Prairie National Wildlife Refuge Map, USFWS


Figure 19. Sabine National Wildlife Refuge, USFWS

The Complex of refuges provides a wide variety of habitat for wildlife, while accommodating public uses such as hunting, fishing, wildlife photography, environmental education, wildlife observation and analysis. Cameron Prairie and Sabine refuges are on the Creole Nature Trail, a National Scenic Byway and All American Road, cultural programs recognizing the historical and natural significance of traditional roads with the American highway network. Cameron Parish in the state of Louisiana hosts all three refuges, with portions of the NWRs extending into Evangeline and Calcasieu Parishes.
Clustering of WMA’s into a single administrative complex is longstanding practice employed by the USFWS. According to Nita Fuller, Midwest regional chief of the National Wildlife Refuge System, “The decision to consolidate is based on the common resource goals and issues facing all of these river refuges.” said Fuller. She continued, “These refuges also share many of the same contacts with the states, other federal agencies, and a host of non-government conservation groups who partner with us to conserve resources on these important rivers. The consolidation will provide a better coordinated and consistent management throughout the Upper Mississippi River System.”
However, criticism of the complex structure does exist. According to Mike Stewart, former manager of the Lacassine NWR, “…the Complex structure is a matter of administrative benefit only. In my opinion, personnel on the ground are required to manage expansive areas of wetlands.”
Current employees of the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex support the clustering concept. “Combining the goals of the individual refuges with unified management plans provides continuity in our primary mission to manage the refuges for the benefit of all waterfowl. We do staff the refuges with onsite personnel who report to the complex manager and staff. We have a close relationship with state personnel and all work for the benefit of the entire wetland region.” Complex Planner, Judy McClendon noted, that the three area National Wildlife Refuges host many of the same waterfowl, fish, shrimp and migratory bird populations and share the same watershed-Cameron Creole.
Rockefeller State Wildlife Refuge encompasses 84,000 acres (33993.73 hectares) nestled between the Lacassine and Cameron Prairie NWRs. The state refuge offers waterfowl, wildlife, fish, and birds a continuous or at least near contiguous stretch of protected managed wetlands. Large live oak trees find high ground at Rockefeller, while wading bird rookeries are located behind the refuge headquarters.
The Holleyman-Sheely-Henshaw Migratory Bird Sanctuary is a Baton Rouge Audubon Society sanctuary located on a chenier, coastal ridge, adjacent to the beach in Cameron Parish. In addition to the live oak-hackberry woods of the chenier, the nearby beaches and marshes makes this location an especially diverse area with a high concentration of wildlife.

Regional Geography of the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge
The Calcasieu-Sabine Basin is historically interconnected with the Mermentau Basin. Dredging of navigation corridors and agricultural draining of wetlands has made the two basins more hydrologically distinct. In the 1920s, industry established a presence in the watershed with the discovery of petroleum in nearby Jennings, Louisiana. Navigational routes made easy access to barges and water transportation that enabled the establishment of many different petroleum based companies in the area. Refining and chemical operations headed by 30 major industries are located within Calcasieu, Sabine and Cameron Parishes, including corporations such as PPG, Conoco, Citgo, Equistar, and Firestone.
Two groups of wetland areas exist in this region. Marine or coastal wetlands are found in the mainly in the Sabine NWR, but occur in other areas of the Complex near gulf inlets. These types of wetlands are closely linked to the estuaries of the area. Inland wetlands also are found within the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex. These types of wetlands are located on the natural floodplains along area river basins, bayous, swamps, and in depressions surrounded by higher land, such as the cheniers of Sabine National Wildlife Refuge. Freshwater marshes of the in the Complex parishes are also included in the inland wetland category. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service, which oversees the entire region’s wetland planning policies, including state policies at Rockefeller Wildlife Refuge, manages the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex.
Characteristic flora, used in regulatory definitions, designates these regions as marine or salt marsh. Spartina alterniflora, commonly called smooth cordgrass or oyster grass, is the dominant vegetation of the salt marsh in the Complex. The Spartina, which prefers the higher salinity content of these marginal wetlands, is the desired plant of management officials, as a native species to the wetland landscape of south Louisiana’s coastal zone.
Smooth cordgrass shares habitat with the perennial glasswort (Sarcocornia perennis) in low tidal marshes of the Sabine NWR and through parts of Cameron Prairie and Lacassine refuges, where saltwater inundation is greatest. In these more saline areas some components of the southern cordgrass coastal prairie famed and threatened with eradication in Louisiana are found and include saltgrass (Distichlis spicata), and marshhay cordgrass (Spartina patens).
In 2002, the USFWS and the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex notified the public of the intent to prepare a Comprehensive Management Program for the Complex. The comprehensive conservation plan will guide management decisions and will re-affirm refuge goals, long-range objectives, and strategies for achieving best management practice on the refuges. The planning process will consider many elements including wildlife and habitat management, public recreational activities, and cultural resource protection. The Gibbstown Unit and East Cove Unit of Lacassine NWR exist as two management units based upon habitat types. The Gibbstown Unit habitat consists of fresh marsh, coastal prairie and old rice fields. The Gibbstown unit provides excellent habitat for waterfowl, water birds, white-tailed deer, small game, furbearers, and many other wildlife species. Gibbstown unit is managed to provide natural foods for wintering waterfowl and other water birds.
The East Cove Unit consists of intermediate, brackish and salt marshes. It is an integral part of the Cameron Creole Watershed Project, a large marsh restoration project. East Cove is an important habitat for many estuarine marine organisms (shrimp, crab, menhaden, redfish, etc.) and also waterfowl and other water birds. Public use on East Cove includes recreational fishing, boating and wildlife observation. East Cove is accessible only by boat via Calcasieu Lake.


Figure 20. Louisiana Sabine Cameron Region

FINDINGS
The Complex Is A Unique Example Of Natural Wetlands.
Criterion One: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it contains a representative, rare, or unique example of a natural or near-natural wetland type found within the appropriate bio-geographic region.
The Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex is a representative example of a wetland ecosystem. Ramsar uses a classification system for categorizing wetlands (see appendix). The Convention groups landscapes into marine, inland and fabricated wetlands with guidelines for categorization of proposed sites. In accordance with those procedural guidelines, this thesis document has assigned categories to the Complex for which data exists to justify the position. The proposed categorization fulfilling this criterion for listing as a Wetland of International Importance for the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex follows, (Table 5).
Four types of marsh exist in Louisiana and each type is found in the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex. Each wetland type represents an excellent example of natural, and/or near natural wetland ecosystems that fulfill Ramsar’s Criterion 1.
The marine or coastal zone salt marsh of the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex wetlands exists at the tidal margins of the Gulf of Mexico waters in Cameron and Jeff Davis Parishes. The salt marsh also exists within the many sounds and estuaries and backs of barrier islands in the Complex. Some areas of salt marsh exist near the flooded deltas of navigational channels or natural inlets with regular saltwater tides. The entire state of Louisiana contains 40 percent of the saltwater marsh in the contiguous United States.
Continuous water activity in around the salt marsh contributes to a highly productive and biologically diverse wetland community. Tidal flows and wave actions transport organic matter into and out of the marsh, continually flushing and enriching the environment. Less saline or brackish marsh regions are found on the Complex, usually at the upper edge of the Gulf of Mexico. These smaller strips of wetland landscapes are unique types of wetlands typically having a higher salinity than that of upland brackish marshes that exist as part of the same salt marsh watershed.

Figure 21. Salt Marsh, talkingtree.com

Figure 22. Sabine NWR Wetlands
Larger expanses of brackish marshes are found in the heads of bayous and in the interior of large marsh islands located on the Complex and exist as separate brackish marsh ecosystems. These marsh landscapes are somewhat removed but not distant nor separate from the tidal connection with the Gulf of Mexico.
Freshwater inflow from area channels and rivers such as the Mermentau, Calcasieu, Sabine and other smaller watercourses, dilute much of the salinity of the water in these larger brackish marshes. Typically, the range of these wetlands is less than that of salt marshes because of occident saltwater intrusion in the eroding coastline of Louisiana.
Sabine National Wildlife Refuge has 91,511 acres classified as brackish intermediate marsh. Brackish marshes have a diminished tidal environment than that of salt marshes, but nonetheless fluctuate in water capacity.
The wetland plant, Juncus romerianus, black needle grass or black rush is the dominant plant of the brackish marsh ecosystem. In these less saline and more brackish conditions, plants include big cordgrass (Spartina cynosuroides), switchgrass (P. virgatum), and Olney threesquare or 3-Corner grass (Scirpus americanus).
Freshwater marsh wetlands in the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex exist at the margins of the brackish mashes and along rivers and bayous that regularly flood with freshwater. Freshwater wetlands like those of Sabine NWR Impoundment 3 depend upon rainfall for freshwater sources. Other freshwater marshes are often times artificially bordered by freshwater canals and affected by natural movement of the areas’ bayou waters.
Some freshwater marshes on the Complex depend upon water control structures put into place to manage water levels in the landscape, often times these prevent saltwater intrusion into the sensitive freshwater marsh.

Figure 23. Lacassine NWR Brackish Marsh Plant “3 Corner Grass” Mitch Coffman 2005
On Sabine National Wildlife Refuge, 33,000 acres are classified as impounded freshwater marsh. On the Lacassine National Wildlife Refuge “…over 16,000 acres of natural, freshwater marsh interspersed with open water and 16,000 acres of managed, freshwater marsh (Lacassine Pool), 2,200 acres of rice, wheat, soybean, and natural moist soil fields, 350 acres of flooded gum and cypress trees, and 350 acres of restored tall grass prairie. Of those acres, 3,345 acres are federally designated as a Wilderness Area.”
At Cameron Prairie NWR, 5,137 acres of impounded fresh marsh, 1,928 acres of Moist Soil Units, 1,402 acres of non-impounded fresh marsh, and 315 acres of natural wet prairie exist among 97 miles of canals, 88 miles of levees, 13 impoundment water control structures, and 34 moist soil water control structures.
Species that occur in freshwater wetland sites include bog rush (Juncus effusus), Jamaica sawgrass (Mariscus jamicensis), maidencane (Panicum hemitomon), panicum (P. repens), common reed (Phragmites australis), arrowhead (Sagittaria spp.), California bulrush (Scirpus californicus), softstem bulrush (S. validus), gulf cordgrass (Spartina spartinae), southern cattail (Typhus domingensis), and great cutgrass (Zizaniopsis miliacea). “A sawgrass meadow is a good indication of regular freshwater flow.” Tidal freshwater marsh is distinguished from adjacent swamp forest and upland forests by the lack of a dominant tree or shrub layer.

Figure 24. Lacassine NWR Freshwater Marsh Sawgrass, Mitch Coffman 2005
Sub categories of inland wetland forests with mixed tree species occupy important wetland areas of the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge. High ground for habitat refuge and nesting is often found in the inland wetland forest of Lacassine NWR and along the cheniers of the Sabine NWR. Natural flood cycles hosting specific fauna characterize the wetland forests of the Complex. Some regions in the Complex experience permanent flooding in these swamp areas located in Cameron Prairie NWR.
Other areas of the Complex are affected by seasonal river flooding of the Mermentau River, Calcasieu River, and nearby Lake Arthur. Some areas of the Complex exist as bottomland hardwood forests hosting tree species that act as a defining characteristic of this landscape typology. The cypress tree-pond, bald and American-(Taxodium sp.) and water tupelo tree (Nyssaceae aquatica) or water gum tree, fill areas of the forested wetlands. These wetland communities typically exist with permanent or near permanent standing water on the ground.

Figure 25. Lacassine NWR Bottomland Hardwood Forest, Mitch Coffman 2005
Another sub category of inland wetlands includes bottomland hardwood forests, which exist between aquatic and upland ecosystems at the Lacassine NWR. As mentioned, these areas usually have distinct vegetation and soil characteristics. Diverse trees that adapt to the wide range of soil conditions, water levels or chemistry of this wetland typology, dominate the vegetation in these areas.
These plant species incur fast growth and adapt to most any environmental conditions that exist within that particular landscape. Often times, this landscape is a product of human disturbance. Aggressive, adaptive and sometimes invasive species of trees exist here including, the black willow (Salix nigra), red maple (Acer rubrum), green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica), laurel oak (Quercus laurifolia), American elm (Ulmus americana), and sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua).
Wetlands comprised of scrub/shrub evergreens, deciduous, and mixed plant species typify another distinct category of wetland landscape-Shrub/scrub. NOAA’s Department of Restoration and Research notes that, “A scrub-shrub wetland typifies a community in transition and exemplifies the dynamic nature of wetlands in general”. This phraseology might be a tempered way of explaining that this landscape is recovering from recent human impact.
The scrub/shrub wetland acts as a climax community for freshly created wetlands such as human constructed ponds or from lakes that are shifting boundaries-again due to alteration within the watershed. Plant species are dependent upon the duration of water inundation in the area, with black willow (Salix nigra) and dogwood (Cornus sp.) growing in the temporarily to seasonally wet areas and buttonbush (Cephalanthus occidentalis) in semi-permanently flooded areas.
In some areas of the Lacassine NWR, these scrub shrub regions are converted agricultural croplands while other areas of Lacassine scrub shrub border the pool impoundments and constructed canals on the refuge. They also may be present along the flanks of spoil disposal areas, particularly spoil banks along canals dredged through marsh during restoration efforts.

Figure 26. Scrub Shrub Wetland on Constructed Canal, Mitch Coffman 2005

Table 4 Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex Proposed Ramsar Wetland Classification
Marine
A.Permanentshallow marine waters less than six meters ( deep at low tide; includes sea bays and straits
E. (Sand, shingle or pebble shores; includes sand bars, spits and sandy islets; also dune systems)
F. (Estuarine waters; permanent water of estuaries and estuarine systems of deltas)
G. (Intertidal mud, sand or salt flats)
H. ( Intertidal marshes; includes salt marshes, salt meadows, saltings, raised salt marshes; also tidal brackish and freshwater marshes)
J. (Coastal brackish to saline lagoons; brackish to saline lagoons with at least 1 relatively narrow connection to the sea)
K. (Coastal freshwater lagoons; includes freshwater delta lagoons)
Inland
M. (Permanent rivers, streams and creeks; includes waterfalls)
O. (Permanent freshwater lakes (over 8 ha); includes large oxbow lakes)
P. (Seasonal and intermittent freshwater lakes (over 8 ha); includes floodplain lakes)
Q. (Permanent saline, brackish and alkaline lakes)
Sp. (Permanent saline, brackish and alkaline marshes and pools)
Tp. (Permanent freshwater marshes and pools; ponds (under 8 ha in area); marshes and swamps on inorganic soils with emergent vegetation that is water-logged for at least most of the growing season)
U. (Non-forested peatlands; includes shrub or open bogs, swamps and fens)
W. (Shrub-dominated wetlands on inorganic soils; includes shrub swamps, shrub-dominated freshwater marsh, shrub carr, and alder thicket)
Xf. (Freshwater, tree-dominated wetlands on inorganic soils; includes freshwater swamp forest, seasonally flooded forest and wooded swamps)
Fabricated
2. (Ponds; includes farm ponds, stock ponds, small tanks (generally less than 8 ha in area)
3. (Irrigated land; includes irrigation channels and rice fields)
6. (Water storage areas; reservoirs, barrages, dams and impoundments (generally over 8 ha in area)
9. (Water storage areas; reservoirs, barrages, dams and impoundments (generally over 8 ha in area)

The Complex Supports Endangered and Threatened Species.
Criterion 2: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports vulnerable, endangered, or critically endangered species or threatened ecological communities.
The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 is administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC), and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The USFWS is primarily responsible for terrestrial and freshwater species and migratory birds and the NMFS for anadromous and marine fish species. The USFWS manages the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex and maintains records of sightings and locations of these endangered or threatened animals.
The purpose of the ESA is to conserve “the ecosystems upon which endangered and threatened species depend and to conserve and recover listed species” . Endangered species are species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Threatened species are defined as species likely to become endangered in future. Section 6 of the ESA encourages each state to develop and maintain conservation programs for resident federally listed threatened and endangered species. Adding Ramsar designation to the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex would augment the Louisiana state program to protect, research and recognize these species.
Almost half of all endangered or threatened species, including birds, wintering waterfowl, and mammals, rely upon coastal waters and associated estuaries for nesting and breeding. Threatened and endangered species using the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex include bald eagles, golden eagles, American alligators, sea turtles, terns and even the Louisiana black bear. Louisiana ranks second in the Eastern U.S. for Bald Eagle nesting with more than 100 active Bald Eagle nests found in South Louisiana and around the coastal zone.
The published list for the State of Louisiana includes 28 animal and 4 plant species. The Louisiana Natural Heritage Program, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF) maintain species listed as threatened and endangered in Louisiana. “Of the approximately 3,200 plant species that comprise Louisiana's diverse flora, about 2400 are native and about 350 are rare. The Louisiana Natural Heritage Program (LNHP) part of LDWF collects data on rare plant populations. WMA's and refuges currently support 348 rare plant occurrences and 137 natural community occurrences.”

Table 5 Threatened and endangered plant and animal species in Louisiana, USFWS 2004
Louisiana ESA Listing, Animals – 24 species
Status
Listing
T(S/A) Alligator, American ( Alligator mississippiensis)
T(S/A) Bear, American black (County range of LA black bear) ( Ursus americanus)
T Bear, Louisiana black ( Ursus americanus luteolus)
T Eagle, bald ( Haliaeetus leucocephalus)
T Heelsplitter, Alabama ( Potamilus inflatus)
E Manatee, West Indian ( Trichechus manatus)
E Mucket, pink ( Lampsilis abrupta)
T Pearlshell, Louisiana ( Margaritifera hembeli)
E Pelican, brown (except U.S. Atlantic coast, FL, AL) ( Pelecanus occidentalis)
T Plover, piping (except Great Lakes watershed) ( Charadrius melodus)
T Sea turtle, green (except where endangered) ( Chelonia mydas)
E Sea turtle, hawksbill ( Eretmochelys imbricata)
E Sea turtle, Kemp's ridley ( Lepidochelys kempii)
E Sea turtle, leatherback ( Dermochelys coriacea)
T Sea turtle, loggerhead ( Caretta caretta)
T Sturgeon, Gulf ( Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi)
E Sturgeon, pallid ( Scaphirhynchus albus)
E Tern, least (interior pop.) ( Sterna antillarum)
T Tortoise, gopher (W of Mobile/Tombigbee Rs.) ( Gopherus polyphemus)
T Turtle, ringed map ( Graptemys oculifera)
E Vireo, black-capped ( Vireo atricapillus)
E Whale, finback ( Balaenoptera physalus)
E Whale, humpback ( Megaptera novaeangliae)
E Woodpecker, red-cockaded ( Picoides borealis)
Louisiana ESA Listing Plants – 4 species
Status
Listing
T Geocarpon minimum (No common name)

E Quillwort, Louisiana ( Isoetes louisianensis)
E Pondberry ( Lindera melissifolia)
E Chaffseed, American ( Schwalbea americana)

The Complex Supports Species Important For Maintaining Biological Diversity.
Criterion 3: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports populations of plant and/or animal species important for maintaining the biological diversity of a particular biogeographic region.
Biological diversity is “…categorized in terms of the number of species, the variety in the area's plant and animal communities, the genetic variability of the animals, or a combination of these elements.” The marshes of the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex and surrounding region include a range of habitats utilized by both freshwater and saltwater species of fish. More than 95% of all marine species living in the Gulf of Mexico spend all or part of their life cycle in Louisiana’s wetlands.
Additionally, researchers record more than 200 bird species at the Cameron Prairie NWR, including waterfowl, songbirds, seabirds, shore birds, upland game birds, and raptors. Kingfishers, multiple species of doves, hawks, harriers, ospreys and eagles, are all inhabitants of the Complex’s wetlands.
The hardwood swamps and bottomland forests, as well as the oak cheniers and the coastal prairies of southwest Louisiana provide habitat to numerous land and water birds. Louisiana geographically situated in the Mississippi and Central flyways, is often the terminus of these historical travel routes for birds. The coast of Louisiana is a necessary refuge for migratory birds traveling routes extending from Canada, the Rocky Mountain region, throughout the Midwest of America to the Northern Atlantic Coast and to South America and back.
Other wildlife species, including white-tailed deer, American alligators, opossum, raccoons, turkeys, squirrels, boars, snakes, and thousands of diverse animal types live on the Complex refuges. The Complex also monitors Louisiana Black Bear populations, while regulating the harvest of pelt animals like the rabbit, beaver, nutria and mink.
The Complex Supports Fish, Mollusk and Shrimp at Critical Stages.
Criterion 4: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it supports plant and/or animal species at a critical stage in their life cycles, or provides refuge during adverse conditions.
This criterion may be more appropriately separated into two parts. Firstly, acknowledgement of the property as an estuarine facility and secondly, as a site where animals may seek refuge during migrations and natural disasters. The Complex is comprised of numerous estuaries critical to the survival of marine shrimp. These species include the brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus), white shrimp (Penaeus setiferus), seabob shrimp (Xiphopenaeus kroyeri), pink shrimp (Penaeus Ouorarum), and royal red shrimp (Pleoticus robustus). Brown and white shrimp, the most abundant of the shrimp species, spawn in the Gulf of Mexico and use the Complex wetlands as estuaries. Throughout February and March, the brown shrimp larvae move into the lower estuaries. These young adult shrimp eventually emigrate into deeper estuarine waters, and then move into the Gulf of Mexico, usually within territorial borders of Louisiana, in early to mid summer. Another species using the wetlands of the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex at various stages of their life cycles is the local and commercial favorite, the blue crab (Callinectes sapidus). This crab is the most common and important commercial crab species in the north central Gulf of Mexico. Subtle declines in the quality of the crab’s habitat and environmental conditions play an important role in the harvest of crab stocks, augmenting the need for protection of the wetland environment. The blue crab can survive in a range of healthy hydrological environments, from offshore marine waters to freshwater marshes.
Like the shrimp, the blue crab is dependent upon the state’s estuaries for the completion of its life cycle. In late summer, egg-baring females migrate offshore to spawn. Shortly thereafter, the larvae of the blue crab adopt the inshore migration patterns of estuarine-marine fish. Mature male blue crabs remain in brackish and freshwater estuaries for the remainder of their lives; conversely, female blue crabs complete their life cycle on the continental shelf. The blue crab also serves as an important food source for animals and fish of the Complex.
This criterion, as suggested and in the case of this site nomination, is appropriate for consideration because of the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex’s role as a stop over during extensive migration routes. Dr. Jay Huner of the ULL Center for Cultural Studies and Ecotourism, notes, that migrant bird species including perching birds and shorebirds use the area as a vital link in migration patterns.
The birds, he says, “…either stage in the area’s wetlands and wooded oak Chenier ridges preparing to fly south across the Gulf of Mexico for the winter or stop in the area to rest and feed upon return from points south during their northward migrations during the spring.” These regions also act as shelter from natural disasters or storms. Characteristic trees and vegetation on some the Complex’s higher ground in these regions provide protection for many animals and birds during coastal storms.
Bird migrations also attract human visitors. Through Ramsar listing, the Complex would enhance current tourism opportunities while incorporating the use concept encouraged by Ramsar. Additionally, Ramsar designation would bolster the status of the refuge among wetland properties, theoretically gaining increased attention from researchers and additional bird or eco tourism enthusiasts.
In fact, Ramsar designation could draw more birders and visitors throughout the year where they might find birding favorites such as loons, pelicans, cormorants, roseate spoonbills, sand hill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, shorebirds, gulls, terns, and songbirds like vireos, swallows, orioles, and finches all throughout the wetlands of the Complex.
The Complex Supports More Than 20,000 Waterbirds.
Criterion 5: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it regularly supports 20,000 or more waterbirds.
During the winter months, the Lacassine and Cameron Prairie refuges support peak populations of 300,000 or more ducks and geese. “The refuges support one of the largest concentrations of wintering waterfowl of any refuge in the National Wildlife Refuge system.” Historical wintering duck populations and geese at Lacassine NWR alone, are among the largest in the National Wildlife Refuge System.
Migrating snow geese migrate, winter and reside throughout the Cameron Prairie National Wildlife Refuge during the fall, winter, and spring seasons. As many as 10,000 white fronted snow geese have been recorded using the refuge.
Pintail, blue-winged and green-winged teal, mallards, ring-necked ducks, gadwalls, and American widgeon are also common on the refuges during the winter months. In the summer months, populations of black-bellied whistling-ducks, wood ducks, and blue-winged teal breed and live on the refuges. The mottled duck is a full time inhabitant of nearby private and public wetland management areas and on all three refuges of the Complex.
The refuge preserves a major wintering site for a large population of waterfowl. The Lacassine Pool of the Lacassine NWR, is a feeding location for pintail populations. The Pool, 16,000 acres, is one of the key pintail wintering areas in the continent. Recent wintering pintail populations have reached almost 400,000 - which is 50% to 80% of the entire southwest Louisiana midwinter survey of ducks.
Waterfowl counts for the state total 1,270,000 mixed species. Duck numbers reported in the state’s October 2003 habitat flyover estimate 779,000 of mixed species just in southwest Louisiana. In 2004 aerial surveys, biologists recorded an estimated 2.5 million birds along the coastal zone. Louisiana has no less than 411 different bird species that live in the state for part or all of the year. These species descend from 19 orders and 66 families.
Criterion 5 extends towards wetlands of varying size. Wetlands identified as being of international importance under Criterion 5 are encouraged to include a large enough area to form an ecological unit and as such, favors cluster sites of wetland habitat. This criterion further supports the Louisiana cluster site nomination proposal advocated by this thesis document.

Figure 27. Lacassine Viewing Platform, Mitch Coffman 2005

Figure 28. Lacassine Pool, Lacassine NWR, Mitch Coffman 2005
The Complex Regularly Supports Mottled Duck Species.
Criterion 6: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it regularly supports 1% of the individuals in a population of one species or subspecies of waterbird.
The Mottled Duck, a distinct species of duck often confused with the common mallard is referred to colloquially as a “Summer Duck, Black Mallard, or Black Duck”. This species is a permanent resident of the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex. Black duck (Anas rubripes) populations are decreasing in similar U.S. wetlands due to habitat loss.
Black ducks avoid humans more so than other species of waterfowl making prime wetland habitat in close proximity to human development unsuitable. The Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex provides a year round habitat for large groups of Mottled Ducks. This duck, is a resident species with estimated numbers averaging over 50,000.
According to waterfowl band tracking data, most banded ducks reported from Louisiana migrate from the wetland Prairie Pothole Region of the Northern U.S. and Canada. The Ducks Unlimited duck banding program tracks USFWS banded waterfowl that is collected from hunters reporting downed birds with bands.
The latest report from 1990 to 2000 for all duck species banded north of Louisiana counts 11,299 duck bands reported within the state borders. Of those, “41 percent were banded in Saskatchewan, 13 percent in Manitoba, 11 percent in Alberta, 5 percent in North Dakota, and 5 percent in Iowa. Mallards represented the majority (50%) of banded birds harvested in Louisiana. Blue-winged teal (19%), wood ducks (16%), and pintails (6%) were the next closest species.
These four species represent over 91% percent of total duck band recoveries from Louisiana during the 10-year period.” This high concentration of specific duck species may qualify under the loosely defined requirements associated with the criterion.
The parishes located along the coastal and delta portions of Louisiana reported the most band recoveries, with Cameron Parish, location of the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge, reporting the highest number of collected bands. As Ducks Unlimited says, “It’s no surprise that these parishes harvested the most banded ducks. Habitat is the key. These parishes have abundant, high quality duck habitat in the form of flooded agricultural fields (i.e., rice fields), moist-soil wetlands, and coastal marshes that produce an abundance of submerged aquatic vegetation.”

Figure 29. Mottled Duck, USFWS

Table 6. ThreeYear Waterfowl Survey Data
Waterfowl Numbers on Lacassine Pool
SPECIES 01/03/01 1/10/02 01/06/03
Mallard 34,603 16,657 15,978
Mottled Duck 259 371 414
Blue-winged Teal 0 336 2,331
Shoveler 3,048 1,009 5,356
Gadwall 4,854 4,473 4,205
Wigeon 3,256 909 1,015
Green-winged Teal 33,863 7,929 28,843
Pintail 20,845 18,326 29,867
Wood Duck 0 7 0
Ringneck 1,466 3,812 2,487
Black-Bellied Whistling Duck 1,193 1,193 0
Lesser Scaup 33 228 70
Redhead 0 0 0
Canvasback 0 0 0
Bufflehead 0 0 0
Ruddy Duck 0 0 0
Fulvous Whistling Duck 0 0 0
White-fronted Geese 7,636 1,173 3,596
Snow Geese 2,196 704 5,352
Canada Geese 0 0 0
Coots 1,372 6,667 298
Ducks/Geese Total 114,770 63,794 99,823
Puddle Ducks 100,874 50,017 88,016
Diving Ducks 2,692 5,233 2,561
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region

The Complex Provides Habitat for Fish Stocks as an Estuary.
Criterion 8: A wetland should be considered internationally important if it either is an important source of food for fishes, spawning ground, nursery and/or migration path on which fish stocks, within the wetland or elsewhere, depend.
Examples of species that nest, spawn, or migrate through and live in the Complex’s diverse wetlands include the commercially and recreationally popular red drum or redfish (Sciaenops ocellatus), speckled trout, (Cynoscion nebulosus), largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), and southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma).
Other commercially and recreationally important fish species nurtured in the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex estuaries include sheepshead (Archosargus probatocephalus), Atlantic croaker (Micropogonias undulates), sand seatrout (Cynoscion arenarius), Gulf menhaden (Brevoortia petronus), bay anchovy (Anchoa mitchilli), and catfishes (lctaluridae). These fish species find sustenance and vital organic nutrients in the diverse food chain living in the wetlands of the Complex.
The deeper coastal waters of the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex act as habitat to many finfish common to the Gulf of Mexico. Species often congregate around structures used by the oil industry, both in shallow and deep water areas of the refuge Complex. Pilings, stanchions, pipelines drilling platforms and other similar structures act as artificial reefs that provide shelter to species including the commercially and recreationally important red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus) and associated sub species of snapper, the wahoo (Acanthocybium solandri ) or lemonfish, yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares ), blue marlin (Makaira nigricans) and hundreds of species of sharks.
Natural habitats for fish of the Complex, other than grass beds, canebrakes, mangroves and the like, are made of oyster reefs, mud flats, breakwaters and jetties. These areas attract baitfish, shrimp, crabs, squid and other reptiles, tortoises, fish and animals where the feed on planktons and encrusted organisms. These fish and animal species of the area supply the food chain that reaches offshore where species of tropical and neo-tropical as well as Atlantic and Pacific origin live and migrate.

CONCLUSION
The Complex Satisfies Ramsar Criteria
The nomination of the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex to the Ramsar List of Wetlands of International Importance is a valid research exercise because the wetland landscapes of the area satisfy Ramsar Criterion 1,2,3,4,5,6, and 8. This also indicates that other Louisiana National Wildlife Refuges along the coastal zone may potentially cluster into valid Ramsar nominations so that they too may benefit from the complete habitat management and planning programming, as well as enjoy the economic benefits and scientific attention germinating from Ramsar listing.
To wit; the Complex is a representative example of a natural wetland ecosystem providing food and shelter for native and anadromous fish, shrimp and crabs in a biologically diverse estuarine environment where endangered species, endemic flora and fauna as well as migratory waterbirds and thousands of waterfowl, roost among the diverse categories of wetland landscapes existing in Cameron Prairie, Lacassine, and Sabine National Wildlife Refuges.
Nominating these refuges as a cluster site is in accordance with the guidelines set forth by the Ramsar Convention and within the associated framework advocated by the Conference of the Contracting Parties. Likewise, nomination of these Louisiana coastal zone properties to the Ramsar list is in accordance with COP6 recommendations supporting strong coastal zone management programs.
This cluster nomination also follows the procedural guidelines required by the USFWS when considering properties for submission to the Ramsar Bureau. Specifically, these properties are public landscapes under the authority of the United States government. Furthermore, this thesis document encourages the nomination of these Louisiana wetland sites because of the Convention’s underlying mission advocating use (wise) of Ramsar sites.
This active use philosophy, in addition to the primary mission of conservation, is harmonious with the state of Louisiana’s efforts to market the wetland landscape as tool for economic development. Justification for application of the Ramsar criterion to the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex is easily documented.
The overwhelming amount of research data on wetlands, Louisiana wetlands, and U.S. Government law, policy and management approaches to wetlands is published in numerous and various formats, which should augment the nomination process of the limited descriptions required by the Ramsar Information Sheet (RIS). Additionally, wildlife and waterfowl data as well as private and public surveys of bird counts and endangered species listings are readily available to further support justification for nomination under the presented criterion.
The application of Ramsar Criteria should not be limited to the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge. The Convention has the potential to extend to other National Wildlife Refuges within the Louisiana Coastal Zone and perhaps more inland wetland sites around the state.
Louisiana has an abundance of lakes, rivers, streams and bayous. Those areas under public domain, such as state WMAs and NGO property are eligible for nomination to the Ramsar list, under the U.S. guidelines for nomination of wetland areas.
Catahoula National Wildlife Refuge is on the Ramsar List
Louisiana has one site on the Ramsar List. Catahoula National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), founded in 1958, is a Louisiana Wetland of International Importance named on June 18, 1991. Catahoula NWR is 25 miles northeast of Alexandria, Louisiana. Catahoula Lake of the NWR is a 26,000-acre (10521.87 hectare) inland wetland that is a historic concentration area for shorebirds, waterbirds and waterfowl. “The Catahoula Lake region and the current Catahoula NWR are among the most important wetland habitats for waterfowl in the world,” said Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton. Biologists record populations of waterfowl peaking at 75,000 ducks - 100,000 ducks, which is equivalent to areas on the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex. Waterfowl, primarily mallards, are abundant during the winter period while wood ducks reside year-round at Catahoula NWR.

Figure 30. Catahoula Lake, Ramsar Convention Wetland of International Importance
The refuge has a managed water impoundment constructed in the 1970s, named Duck Lake. The Lacassine Pool is a similar tool used for waterfowl management at the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex. The Catahoula NWR, like the Complex, borders state refuge property. Dewey Wills Wildlife Management Area (WMA), which this author posits, could act as a cluster site addition to Catahoula’s existing Ramsar status.
Increasingly, federal and state support of the Ramsar Convention’s and the underlying mission is spreading. In fact, it is implied in the 2005 Gubernatorial Proclamation designating February 2nd as “America’s Wetland Day”. As mentioned earlier in this document, February 2nd is historically used by the Ramsar Bureau as an anniversary date commemorating the ratification of the Ramsar Convention. In the spirit of Ramsar, and perhaps unwittingly, the Louisiana proclamation called upon citizens “…to learn more about how Louisiana’s wetland loss impacts our state, the nation and the world”.

Figure 31. Louisiana National Wildlife Refuges, USFWS

RECOMMENDATIONS
Complete Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex RIS
Attached to this thesis document is a blank Ramsar Information Sheet (RIS). In compliance with Ramsar, this RIS should be completed by the nominating authority and submitted to the USFWS International Affairs Division and eventually the Ramsar Bureau for formal placement on the Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance List. Information and data contained in this thesis document will be an asset to the compiler of the RIS. In fact, this thesis document may suffice in and of itself as a preliminary nomination to the Ramsar list under the designated criterion.
However, validation of this thesis and the confirmation of the information contained herein is suggested and may be necessary as this document is unpublished graduate student work. Notwithstanding, a diligent and true effort was made to verify, note, cite and attribute all data or theories to their respective source, except where put forth as original.
Begin Lobbying at State and National Level
The Ramsar Convention was produced in 1971 and United States ratified the treaty 16 years later. Obviously, agreements of this magnitude, as beneficial as they may be, move at a diplomatically slow pace. Unfortunately, the needs of wetlands of Coastal Louisiana’s wetlands and those of the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex do not adhere to this bureaucratic timeline. In other words, starting the nomination process for the Complex must begin soon. As stated in this document, Congressional approval is mandatory and many levels of interested public parties and government divisions will need to sign off on the nomination proposal. Having said this, a recommendation is made to begin the process using this thesis document as a working guideline.
Apply Ramsar to Louisiana Wetland Cluster Sites
Inclusion of the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex on the Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance List will benefit the state and associated localities through conservation of the region’s natural resources that include flora, fauna and associated habitats. Inclusion of the Complex on the Ramsar list will also strengthen the management practices employed by the state and federal authorities in relation to waterfowl and wetland planning. Ramsar listing will also ally with the Louisiana’s growing practice of marketing wetlands as eco tourism opportunities for economic development.
Ramsar designation opportunities should be explored in future state management forecasts. Extending the cluster site, coastal zone nomination concept to other wetland landscapes in Louisiana is conceivable. As documented in this thesis, nearly 48% of the U.S. coastal wetlands territory exists in Louisiana. The complexity of wetland characteristics submitted on behalf of the Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex exists within most of the state’s coastal zone. Potential candidate National Wildlife Refuges are located throughout the coastal zone of the state, as are inland wetland sites. In the coastal zone of eastern Louisiana, Breton, Big Branch, Bayou Savage, and others could qualify as a cluster site nomination to Ramsar.
Ramsar holds the possibility of bringing increased positive attention to the wetlands of Louisiana. Currently, private and public organizations, such as Wetlands America, LACoast, the Audubon Society and others are banding together with government and business entities to conserve and promote the natural, commercial and cultural value of Louisiana’s wetlands. Ramsar listing would elevate this effort to the global level. Through listing, thousands of acres of wetlands could potentially be rewarded with increased attention from the scientific, public, and government communities, all committed to conserving and using these areas for the benefit of animals and humans.

REFERENCES

1. 33 CFR 328.3(b) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; 40 CFR 230.3(t) Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
2. 33 CFR 328.3(b) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; 40 CFR 230.3(t) EPA, Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972.
3. 33 U.S.C. 401 et seq., Section 329.4, General definition.
4. 3rd Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties in Regina, Canada in 1987
5. 4th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties Recommendation 4.7, “Mechanisms for improved application of the Ramsar Convention”, (Montreux, Switzerland, July 1990).
6. 6th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties, “Recommendation 6.8: Strategic Planning in Coastal Zones”, (Brisbane, Australia, March 1996).
7. 8th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties to the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971), “Wetlands: Water, Life, and Culture”, (Valencia, Spain, November 2002).
8. 8th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties to the Convention on Wetlands, “Wetlands: Water, Life, and Culture”, New Guidelines for Management Planning of Ramsar Sites and Other Wetlands, Section III, Spain, (November 2002).
9. A Directory of Wetlands of International Importance, United States of America 4US010, http://www.wetlands.org/RDB/Ramsar_Dir/USA/US010D02.htm.
10. Aaron Duhon, “Landowners Reclaim Wetlands”, The Advertiser, (Lafayette LA, June 11 2005).
11. AEWA, African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbird Agreement, Conservation Guidelines, Wetlands International, Swiss Agency for the Environment, Forests and Landscape, The Ministry of Agriculture, Nature Management and Fisheries of the Netherlands, p. 48, (April 1999).
12. America’s WETLAND Newsletter, America’s, WETLAND: Campaign to Save Coastal Louisiana (February 2005), online http://www.americaswetland.com/article.cfm?id=205&cateid=1&pageid=3&cid=17.
13. America’s Wetlands, Our Vital Link between Land and Water”, EPA, Office of Water, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, (Washington, D.C., 1992).
14. American Electric Power (AEP), Environmental Synergy, Inc. (ESI), The Conservation Fund and the USFWS, http://www.environmental-synergy.com/popups/aep.html.
15. American University from American University Library, Citation Style Guides/Citing Sources, 2004, at http://www.library.american.edu/e_ref/citation.html.
16. Association of State Wetland Managers, “Wetland and Watershed Protection Toolkit”, (February 2002), online http://www.aswm.org/lwp/nys/section3.htm.
17. Barbier, E. B., Acreman, M. C. and Knowler, D. 1996, “Economic Valuation of Wetlands: A Guide for Policy Makers and Planners”, (Ramsar Convention Bureau, Gland, Switzerland, 1997).
18. Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, C.N.302.1992.TREATIES-9, C.N.248.1993.TREATIES-7.
19. Boesch, D. F. and D. Levin, Subsidence in Coastal Louisiana: Causes, Rates and Effects on Wetlands, 1983.
20. Boesch, D. F., Scientific Assessment of Coastal Wetland Loss, Restoration and Management in Louisiana, Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, Vol. 27. 1995.
21. Bourne, J., 2000, Ecology: Louisiana’s Vanishing Wetlands, Science, 289.
22. Brinson, MM, A hydrogeomorphic classification for wetlands. Wetland research programme technical report WRP-DE-4. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, (1993).
23. Carolina Lasén Díaz, “Discussion Document Legislative Complementarity and Harmonisation of Biodiversity-related Multilateral Environmental Agreements”, Foundation for International Environmental Law and Development (FIELD), UNEP/UNDP/GEF Biodiversity Planning Support Programme (BPSP), (London, February 2002).
24. Carter, Virginia, National Water Summary on Wetland Resources, United States Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2425, “Technical Aspects of Wetlands Wetland Hydrology, Water Quality, and Associated Functions), U.S. Geological Survey, (Washington, D.C., 1997).
25. Catahoula NWR, Big Game Hunt, online http://www.biggamehunt.net/sections/Louisiana/public_lands/page2.html.
26. Chacko, J. J. 1995. Minimization of Potential Geo-environmental Wetland Impacts Related to Petroleum Extraction in Coastal Louisiana. Geological Society of America. Abstracts with Programs. Vol. 27.
27. Chris Reid, “Botanizing on LDWF Lands”, Louisiana Conservationist, Vol. 58, No. 2, (Baton Rouge March 2005).
28. Coastal Management Division (CMD), Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, online http://www.dnr.state.la.us/crm/coastmgt/coastmgt.asp.
29. Coastal Zone Management Act Of 1972 as amended through P.L. 104-150, The Coastal Zone Protection Act of 1996, §1452, Congressional Declaration of Policy (Section 303).
30. Coastal Zone Management Act Of 1972 as amended through P.L. 104-150, The Coastal Zone Protection Act of 1996 § 1451, Congressional findings (Section 302).
31. Coastal Zone Management, NOAA, (Washington D.C., May 2003), online http://www.ocrm.nos.noaa.gov/czm/.
32. Coffman, Vernon Dale, Guy Scroggins, Inc., Personal Interview, (Lafayette, LA May 2005).
33. Conner, W. H., and J. W. Day, Jr. 1987. The Ecology of Barataria Basin, Louisiana: An Estuarine Profile. Biological Report. Vol. 85(7.13).
34. Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat, opened for signature Feb. 2, 1971, T.I.A.S., No. 11084, 996 U.N.T.S. 245.
35. Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, Especially as Waterfowl Habitat, Final Text adopted by the International Conference on the Wetlands and Waterfowl (Ramsar, Iran, February 1971).
36. Convention on Wetlands, Australian Department of the Environment and Heritage, June 2004, online, http://www.deh.gov.au/water/wetlands/ramsar/.
37. COP8 Ramsar DOC. 31: “Further elaboration of the Ramsar criteria and guidelines” , Ramsar COP8 DOC. 31, Discussion Paper for Technical Session 4 and COP8 - DR 10, (Valencia Spain 2002).
38. Craig, N.J., R. E. Turner and J. W. Day, Jr., Wetland Losses and their Consequences in Coastal Louisiana, 1980.
39. Cramer, G.H., Hopkins, W., Elevated Highway Construction on Water Quality in Louisiana wetlands: Federal Highway Administration, Louisiana State Department of Transportation Final Report, 1981.
40. David J. Welsch, James N. Boyer, David L. Smart, et. al, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers “Forested Wetlands, Functions, Benefits and the Use of Best Management Practices”, (1995).
41. Delaune, R. D., W.H. Patrick, Jr., and C.J. Smith. 1996. Marsh Aggradation and Sediment Distribution Along Rapidly Submerging Louisiana Gulf Coast. Environmental Geological and Water Sciences. Vol. 20(1) p.57-64.
42. Don Moser, “1976 - The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: much to do just undoing what's been done” Smithsonian Magazine, April 1995.
43. Douglas A. Wilcox, Wetlands, Journal of the Society of Wetlands Scientists, National Biological Service, Great Lakes Science Center, “Wetland,” Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia 2005, online http://encarta.msn.com.
44. Duck Stamp Program, USFWS, Lacassine, online http://duckstamps.fws.gov/Conservation/states/Louisiana/LacassineNWR.htm.
45. Ducks Unlimited, Southern Regional Office, “Where Louisiana Ducks Get Their Start”, 2005, online http://southern.ducks.org/LAbands.php.
46. Dugan, P.J., Wetland conservation: a review of current issues and required action. IUCN, (Gland, Switzerland, 1990).
47. Duncan, Wilbur H, Duncan, Marion B., The Smithsonian guide to seaside plants of the Gulf and Atlantic Coasts from Louisiana to Massachusetts, exclusive of lower peninsular Florida, Smithsonian Institution Press, p. 409, Washington, DC 1987.
48. Eilers, H. P. and A. Taylor. 1983. Vegetative Delineation of Coastal Marsh Boundaries.
49. Endangered Species Act, 16 USC 1531, et seq.
50. Environment Canada, “Wetlands, The Nature of Water”, Sept. 2003, online http://www.ec.gc.ca/water/en/nature/wetlan/e_wet.htm.
51. Environmental Alliances\Clusters, “Future Paths: A Look at Four Leading Concepts”, RAND Organization December 2003, online http://www.rand.org/scitech/stpi/ourfuture/Newworld/sec7_futurepaths.html.
52. EPA Document 843-F-04-011a, “Wetlands Overview”, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, (Washington, D.C., December 2004).
53. EPA Home, Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment, Products and Reports, Condition of the Mid-Atlantic Estuaries, Condition of Living Resources, September 2003, online http://www.epa.gov/maia/html/es-condition.html.
54. EPA Home, Water, Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, Wetlands, Wetlands Fact Sheets, Section 404 of the Clean Water Act: An Overview, March 2005, 55. EPA Wetlands Fact Sheet, online http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/facts/fact10.html.
56. EPA, “What are Wetlands”, Washington D.C, March 23, 2005, online http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/vital/what.html.
57. EPA, Federal Register, Volume 68, Number 12, (Washington, D.C., January 2003).
58. EPA, Office of Water, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, “America’s Wetlands, Our Vital Link between Land and Water”, (Washington, D.C., 1992).
59. Evolution of International Environmental Governance”, Natural Resources Defense Council, May 2005, online http://www.nrdc.org/international/fgovernance.asp
60. Executive Order, MJF 00-41, Saltwater Marsh Die-Off Action Plan, Louisiana Governor Mike Foster, (Baton Rouge January 2000).
61. Explore Louisiana, Louisiana Office of Tourism, Cameron Parish Tourist Commission, online http://www.louisianatravel.com/explorela/results.cfm?id=391&sec=all&idx=2&rgn=3&cit=2&kw=&lulu=0&bo=0.
62. Factoids About Louisiana’s Coastal Wetlands, Louisiana Coastal Authority, Storm Buffers, Hurricanes and Tropical Storms, online http://www.lacoast.gov/education/factoid%20old.htm.
63. Farrow, DRG., Arenstam, A., DeSouza, A., et. al., Coastal Zone Boundary Review, National Summary, State Characterization Reports, Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment, Strategic Environmental Assessments Division, Silver Spring MD (1992), p. 141.
64. Federal Duck Stamp Program, USFWS, online http://duckstamps.fws.gov/Conservation/states/Louisiana/profiles/SabineNWR.htm.
65. Final Environmental Impact Statement on the Proposed Port Fourchon Development Plan, Phase IV, LaFourche Parish, Louisiana, 1978.
66. Finlayson, CM & van der Valk, AG (1995), “Classification and Inventory of the World’s Wetlands”, Advances in Vegetation Science, Academic Press (Netherlands 1995).
67. Future Paths, A Look at Four Leading Concepts, RAND Corporation (2003), online http://www.rand.org/scitech/stpi/ourfuture/Newworld/sec7_futurepaths.html.
68. Garofalo, D. and Burk and Associates, Inc. 1982. Mississippi Deltaic Plain Region Ecological Characterization: An Ecological Atlas. Biological Services Program. Oct. 1982.
69. Global Sustainable Development Picture, EM Magazine. November 2002.
70. Gosselink, James G., et al., “Coastal Louisiana”, Status and Trends of the Nation Biology, United States Geological Survey, (1999, 2003) online http://biology.usgs.gov/s+t/SNT/noframe/gc138.htm.
71. Guidelines for the Implementation of the Wise Use Concept, First adopted as an annex to Recommendation 4.10 of the 4th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties (Montreux, Switzerland, 1990), online http://www.ramsar.org/key_guide_wiseuse_e.htm
72. Hammer, D.A., “Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment”, (Lewis Publishers, Inc., MI. 1989).
73. Hayes, MO (1977). Morphology of sand accumulation in estuaries: an introduction to the symposium. In: Estuarine research (Vol 2): geology and engineering (ed. Cronin LE). Academic Press, New York: 1–587.
74. Huner, Jay, Dr., “Birding Opportunities Abound in Louisiana”, Center for Cultural and Eco-Tourism, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, (ULL), March 2004, online http://ccet.louisiana.edu/04a_Environmental_Tour_Files/Birdwatching.html.
75. Institute For Wetland & Environmental Education and Research, Short Courses For Environmental Professionals, online http://www.wetlanded.com/primer.html.
76. Interview with Judy McClendon, USFWS Natural Resource Planner, SW Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex, Cameron Prairie NWR office, Bell City LA (May 11, 2005).
77. Interview with Mike Stewart USFWS (retired), 31-year employee USFWS, 23 years with Lacassine NWR, Lake Arthur LA, (May 21, 2005).
78. Interview with Vernon Coffman, (Lafayette, LA May 2005).
79. Interview, Southwest NWR Complex Biologist, (Lake Charles, LA May 2005.
80. J. Bennett, S. Whitten, M. Handley, W. Moss and Dr B. Phillips, “Wetland Management Assistance for Private Landholders”, Environment Australia, 2002 online http://www.deh.gov.au/water/wetlands/publications/management/sheet11.html
81. J. Sommer, “Legal Protection of Wetlands in Poland”, in Legal Aspects of the Conservation of Wetlands, IUCN Environmental Policy & Law Paper No. 25 (1991) p. 107.
82. James Evans, About Nutria and their Control, (Denver, U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, 1970).
83. Jim Lee, Trade and Environment Database, “Nutria in the U.S. and Trade”, Washington University, (Washington D.C., April 1996).
84. John Pitre, “Lost and Found: Louisiana’s Coastal Prairies”, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service and Larry Allain, U.S. Geological Survey.
85. John W. LeBlanc, University of California Cooperative Extension, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Resources: Forest Stewardship Glossary, online http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/departments/espm/extension/CONTENT.HTM.
86. Joshi, Deependra, “Wetlands: Multiple Roles and Benefits”, ViewPoint, Vol. 22, No.30, Feb.2003.Kruchek, Beth L., “Extending Wetlands Protection under the Ramsar Treaty’s Wise Use Obligation”, University of Arizona, James E. Rogers College of Law, (2003).
88. Kuchler, A. W., “Manual to Accompany the Map of Potential Vegetation of the Conterminous United States”, Special Publication No. 36, American Geographical Society, p. 77, (New York, 1964).
89. L. M. Cowardin, et al., “Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, USFWS, (Washington, D.C., 1979), 131.
90. LA. R.S. 49:214.21
91. Lacassine National Wildlife Refuge, online http://lacassine.fws.gov/.
92. LCA News Release, “La. Governor, Corps Chief Will Sign Historic Agreement,” (Baton Rouge January 2005).
93. Local Coastal Programs, Louisiana Dept. of Natural Resources, online http://www.dnr.state.la.us/crm/coastmgt/interagencyaff/lcp/lcp.asp
94. Lopez, C. M. Finlayson, G. Begg, J. et al., “Asian Wetland Inventory-A Multiple Stakeholder Tool for Inventory to Enable Assessment and Monitoring of Wetland Biodiversity and Wise Use”, Wetlands International National Centre for Tropical Wetland Research, (Australia 2001).
95. Louisiana Coastal Area (LCA), Louisiana-Ecosystem Restoration Plan, online http://lca.gov/.
96. Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force, “Hydrologic Investigation of the Louisiana Chenier Plain”, Louisiana Department of Natural Resources (Baton Rouge, LA October 2002).
97. Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force, “Turning the Tide, the Fight to Keep Coastal Louisiana on the Map”, Department of Natural Resources, LaCoast.gov.
98. Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Coastal Management Division, “Gulf Ecological Management Site”, Sabine National Wildlife Refuge, (Cameron, LA February 2001).
99. Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, Fur and Refuge Division, Baton Rouge online http://www.wlf.state.la.us/apps/netgear/index.asp?cn=lawlf&pid=57.
100. Louisiana Endangered Species, online http://www.endangeredspecie.com/states/la.htm.
101. Louisiana Office of State Parks, State Parks See Third Year of Over Two Million in Visitation, Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism, Baton Rouge (July 26, 2004).
102. Louisiana Shrimp and Shrimping, Louisiana Fish and Wildlife Service, Louisiana Regional Restoration Planning Program, “Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement”, Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Baton Rouge (May 2003).
103. Louisiana Sportsmen Magazine, “Duck Numbers Rise in January, but Hunting success still spotty”, 2005, online http://www.louisianasportsman.com/news/2005/jan05/finalduckreport.htm
104. Louisiana, Association of State Wetland Managers, online http://www.aswm.org/swp/la9.pdf.
105. Lowery, G.H., Jr., “Louisiana Birds”, Louisiana State University Press, (Baton Rouge, LA 1974).
106. LSU Highlights, Science and Technology, “Barrier Island Breakdown, Ship to Shoal to the Rescue”, (Baton Rouge LA, Spring 2005) online http://www.lsu.edu/highlights/051/barrier.html.
107. M. J. Bowman, “The Ramsar Convention Comes of Age”, Netherlands Int’l. L. R., XLII: 1-52, T.M.C. Asser Institute,(Netherlands 1995).
108. Mac, M.J., Opler, P.A., Puckett Haecker, C.E., and Doran, P.D., “Status and Trends of the Nation’s Biological Resources”, Two Volumes: U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, (Reston, VA, 1998), p. 385-436.
109. Makhijani, Arjun and Gurney, Kevin R., Journal of Political Ecology, “Case Studies in History and Society, Insights on the Global Environment, Mending the Ozone Hole: Science, Technology, and Policy”, Vol. 5, 1995, MIT Press.
110. Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia 2005, “Wetland,” online http://encarta.msn.com.
111. Mike Stewart USFWS (retired), 31-year employee USFWS, 23 years with Lacassine NWR, Personal Interview, Lake Arthur LA, (May 21, 2005).
112. Natural Resources Conservation Service Fact Sheet, Wetlands Reserve Program, USDA, September 2004.
113. NOAA Coastal Services Center, “Coastal Restoration for the Expert”, (Washington, D.C., April 2004), online http://www.csc.noaa.gov/coastal/expert/natreview/natreview01.htm.
114. NOAA, “Calcasieu Coastal Environment”, Calcasieu Estuary Watershed, Coastal Protection and Restoration Division, Washington, D.C., online http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/cpr/watershed/calcasieu/calc_html/calcenv.html.
115. NOAA, “Calcasieu Coastal Environment”, Calcasieu Estuary Watershed, Coastal Protection and Restoration Division, Washington, D.C., online http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/cpr/watershed/calcasieu/calc_html/calcenv.html.
116. NOAA, “What Are Coastal Wetlands”, Washington D.C., online http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/habitatprotection/wetlands.htm.
117. NOAA, Department of Restoration and Research, Restoration Research Planning Document, “The Louisiana Regional Restoration Planning Program Draft Regional Restoration Plan”, RRP_DPEIS.doc, Region 2, September 2003, online, www.darp.noaa.gov/partner/rrpp-la/pdf/la2041app.pdf.
118. Nyman, J. A., R. D. Delaune, S. R. Pezeshki and W.H. Patrick, Jr. "Organic Matter Fluxes and Marsh Stability in a Rapidly Submerging Estuarine Marsh." March 1995 Estuaries Vol.18 No. 1B
119. Oceans and Coastal Resources: A Briefing Book”, 23 Congressional Research Service Rep. 97-588ENR (1997).
120. Palmisano, Angelo W., Jr. and Newsom, John D., “Ecological factors affecting occurrence of Scirpus olneyi and Scirpus robustus in the Louisiana coastal marshes”, Proceedings, 21st Annual Conference of Southeastern Association of Game and Fish Commissions, 1968, 21: 161-172.
121. Peter H. Sand, European Journal of International Law, “Whither CITES? The Evolution of a Treaty Regime in the Borderland of Trade and Environment”, Oct. 2003.
122. Pezeshki, S. R. and R. D. Delaune. 1995. Variations in Response of Two U.S. Gulf Coast Populations of Spartina alterniflora to hypersalinity. Journal of Coastal Research. Vol. 11(1) p.89-95.
123. Population Estimates Program, Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau , Internet Release Date April 11, 2000, Revised date June 28, 2000, online http://www.census.gov/popest/archives/1990s/popclockest.txt
124. Ramsar Bureau, “What is the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, Ramsar Info Pack, Information Paper #2”, (Gland Switzerland 2005), online http://ramsar.org/about_infopack_2e.htm#top.
125. Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, The Criteria for Identifying Wetlands of International Importance as adopted by the 4th and 6th Meetings of the Conference of the Contracting Parties to the Convention on Wetlands, Annexes to Recommendation 4.2, Montreux, Switzerland, 1990, and Resolution VI.2, (Brisbane, Australia, 1996).
126. Ramsar Convention Secretariat, “Ramsar Convention Manual: a Guide to the Convention on Wetlands”, (Ramsar, Iran, 1971), 3rd ed. Gland, Switzerland, 2004.
127. Ramsar Convention toolkit for the conservation and wise use of wetlands including Guidelines adopted by the 7th and 8th Conferences of the Parties, 2nd Edition Wise use of wetlands includes guidance on Guidelines for implementation of the wise use concept.
128. Ramsar Convention, COP8, (Brisbane Australia 2002).
129. Ramsar Information Paper 4, The Ramsar Info Pack, The List of Wetlands of International Importance, online http://www.ramsar.org/about/about_infopack_4e.htm.
130. Reed, D. J. and L. P Rozas. 1994. Potential for Enhancement of Fisheries Habitat by Infilling OCS Pipeline Canals.
131. S. Durham, M. Perot, J. Butcher, “Waterfowl Population Estimates Date: Coastal Zone November 3-5, 2003 in Louisiana’s Coastal Zone below NW La. Oct 30 U.S. Highway 90 and on Catahoula Lake”, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, (Baton Rouge October 31 2003).
132. S. Lyster, International Wildlife Law, Grotius Publications, (Cambridge, 1985), p. 470.
133. Seaweb Briefing Book, 1998, online, http://www.seaweb.org/background/book/coasts.html.
134. Semeniuk, V and Semeniuk, “A geomorphic approach to global classification for natural wetlands and rationalization of the system used by the Ramsar Convention – a discussion”, Wetlands Ecology and Management 5:145–158, (1997).
135. Shell America’s Wetland, “Louisiana Department of Tourism, America’s Wetland Birding Trail on the Louisiana Great Gulf Coast”, 2005.
136. Statement of the U.S. National Ramsar Committee Submitted to the United States Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, (Washington D.C., April 1997).
137. Teal, J.M., “Salt Marshes: They Offer Diversity of Habitat,”14 Oceanus 13 (1996).
138. Thomas J. Culliton, “Population: Distribution, Density and Growth”, NOAA's State of the Coast Report, (Silver Spring, MD 1998) online http://state_of_coast.noaa.gov/bulletins/html/pop_01/pop.html
139. Turner, R. E, J. M. Lee and C. Neil. 1994. Back filling Canals as a Wetland Restoration Technique in Coastal Louisiana.
140. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wetlands Delineation Manual, Part I, Introduction, Background, online http://www.wetlands.com/coe/87manp1a.htm
141. U.S. Congress, Statement of the U.S. National Ramsar Committee Testimony Submitted to the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, (Washington D.C., April 1997).
142. U.S. Department of the Interior, “What’s Happening to Wetlands and Aquatic Habitats USGS, National Wetlands Research Center, (Lafayette LA September 2001).
143. U.S. Dept. of Energy, Environmental Policy and Guidance, Coastal Zone Management Act, Purpose and Organization, Washington, D.C., (Jan. 1996), http://www.eh.doe.gov/oepa/laws/czma.html.
144. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, “What Is the Current Status of Wetlands”, Wetland Primer, Washington D.C., online http://northeast.fws.gov/wetlandfest/primer.html.
145. USFWS, “Lacassine, National Wildlife Refuge Bird List”, (Lake Arthur LA, Aug. 2002).
146. USFWS, “Wetland Primer, What is the Current Status of Wetlands?” online http://northeast.fws.gov/wetlandfest/primer.html.
147. USFWS, Cameron Prairie National Wildlife Refuge, Management Activities, online http://refuges.fws.gov/profiles/index.cfm?id=43612.
148. USFWS, Catahoula National Wildlife Refuge, online http://www.fws.gov/catahoula/.
149. USFWS, Federal Register, International Affairs, “Listing Wetlands of International Importance”, Vol.55 (71):13856-13857, (Washington D.C., 1990).
150. USFWS, Sabine National Wildlife Refuge, Management Activities, online http://refuges.fws.gov/profiles/index.cfm?id=43640.
151. USFWS, Sabine National Wildlife Refuge, Overview, online http://refuges.fws.gov/profiles/index.cfm?id=43611.
152. USGS, Center for Coastal Geology, “Gulf of Mexico Tidal Wetlands, Marsh Grasses”, (Washington D.C., February 23, 1991), online http://coastal.er.usgs.gov/wetlands/gallery/grasses.html.
153. Weber State, Department of Botany, online http://faculty.weber.edu/sharley/AIFT/wetlands.htm.

APPENDIX: RAMSAR PROPOSAL
Louisiana Landscapes International, submits a proposal for implementing Ramsar nomination-a nongovernmental association of planning, management and wise use stakeholders, by Mitchell Ward Coffman, August 2005©.
Ramsar Convention nomination and subsequent submission to the Ramsar Bureau for designation of the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex to the Wetlands of International Importance List, based upon meeting the established criterion of the Ramsar international environmental treaty. The primary proposal includes preliminary designation of the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex as a Ramsar site and subsequent establishment of an intercontinental, transboundary wetland complex incorporating wise use planning and management guidelines into a network of wetland ecosystem habitats synchronous with sustainable development of the natural resources of the areas.
The Southwest National Wildlife Refuge Complex is a representative example of unique wetland types that provides nesting, spawning and breeding grounds as well as supplying food sources and refuge to reptiles, fish, birds, and mammals, including endangered species, during critical cycles of their life and during coastal storms or natural disasters. These internationally significant wetland resources and associated habits include waterfowl, waterbirds, neo-tropical migratory birds, anadromous and endemic fish stocks and native plants, necessary to maintaining biological diversity of animal and plant populations of the site.
Ramsar designation for this regional complex site is proposed-with a secondary mission to address the international aspect and importance of this particular Louisiana landscape, suggested through nomination of coherent sites located in an international transboundary wetland complex network reaching into Canada at the Ramsar site of Last Mountain Lake Bird Sanctuary in Saskatchewan and extending to Mexico at the Marismas Nacionales Ramsar site on Gulf of Mexico coast and the U.S. National Ramsar Committee endorsed and proposed Ramsar site-Rio Soto la Marina & Laguna Flamingo on the Mexican gulf coast. The Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex will act as the central headquarters for planning, management and wise use guidelines suggested by Ramsar and serve as the depository for this transboundary wetland complex after the primary mission of Ramsar listing is achieved.
Background
Louisiana Landscapes International (LLI) was established on July 4, 2005 to advocate application of international conservation planning and wise use management principles for area landscapes that have interdependent flora, fauna, and hydrologic and geographic and bio-diverse qualities. The idea for LLI originated from the Environmental Studies Department of Louisiana State University during graduate research conducted by founder of Louisiana Landscapes International, Mitch Coffman ASLA/M.L.Arch., M.Sc.
Mission
Louisiana Landscapes International is a non-governmental organization (501c3-applied for) promoting conservation and wise use planning, management and development principles for the natural ecosystems and cultural heritage of Louisiana communities through application of international environmental conventions.
Objectives
• Establish and strengthen community, government, private and public relationships with the global community of nations
• Gain Ramsar Convention designation of Louisiana wetlands and coastal zone as Wetlands of International Importance
• Gain World Heritage Designation through the application of World Heritage Convention criterion to Louisiana cultural and natural landscapes
• Promote and apply other U.S. ratified international environmental treaties, e.g., (Conference on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora-CITES, Global Program of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities, Convention for the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea-ICES, Convention on Migratory Species, Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the Western Hemisphere, et al), to state landscapes and natural habitats
• Augment planning, management and wise use policies of local, regional and transboundary conservation associations and public agencies within Louisiana, the U.S., North America, including Canada, Mexico and Central America as well as within the Latin America, South America and Caribbean basin
• Develop a voluntary participation network of expertise on Louisiana landscapes, ecosystems, natural habitats and the flora and fauna that sustain the biological diversity of the natural and human constructed environment
• Solicit funding or research grants from and provide informational and on site support to public agencies, local communities, educational institutions, governments, volunteers, experts and associations with similar missions
• Conduct public outreach campaigns advocating planning, management and wise use of the landscape and associated natural resources
• Form non governmental associations and manage projects directed at implementing international promotion, preservation, conservation, economic development and wise use of internationally important cultural and natural landscapes, plants, wildlife, waterfowl, waterbirds, animals, fish and people and activities
• Advocate the establishment of a state agency focusing upon international affairs development, application, management and coordination of environmental matters of importance to migratory birds, fish, plants, soils, water, watersheds, etc.
• Provide consulting and advising in environmental issues, conservation, restoration and wise use projects as well as managing of sustainable development programs to international, national, regional and private and public institutions, stakeholders and governments
• Twin watershed-wide partnerships in Mexican Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance sites and candidate sites with Louisiana Ramsar sites and candidate sites with Canada Ramsar sites and associated watersheds
• Establish economic development and tourism opportunities through the promotion of international programs supporting marketing efforts of business, government and private landowners
Benefits
Coordinated planning, management and wise use policies/regulations among international, federal, state, and local environmental bodies
• Depository for international environmental affairs within Louisiana
• Establishment of International Affairs Division with Louisiana and other states
• Nomination to Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance for select areas
• Nomination to the World Heritage Convention for the Atchafalaya Basin
• Nomination to the Biosphere Reserve Convention
• Establishment of coherent cluster sites and coherent cluster networks of wetlands having interdependent management missions and natural resource connections
• Implementation of environmental management projects in communities as well as providing educational programs, field activities, field research, public speaking opportunities and generally promoting and contributing to environmental awareness and the global relationship of landscapes to local and regional communities
• Collaboration of environmental experts, research professionals, managers and planners, universities and other external partners
• Economic Development through Ramsar ecotourism opportunities
• CZM policies in Mexico that positively benefit Louisiana
Framework Action Plan
Timetable for LLI sponsored nomination of the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex Wetland of International Importance listing and the additional, transboundary wetland complex network project, based upon submission of the nomination dossier to the Ramsar Convention Wetlands of International Importance meeting in Uganda in November 2005 at COP9.
1. July 2005
i. Register for COP9—Request Submitted via email July 5, 1990
ii. Revise Thesis to accommodate international connection concept
iii. Revise Slide Show
iv. Submit document to Editor for Approval
v. Form initial NGO (use sec. of state business forms), --Directors, Mitch Coffman, Advisors Mike Wascom, Margaret Reams
1. “Louisiana Landscapes International”
2. Form allied NGO corporation “Louisiana Mexico Canada Ramsar Wetland Complex Network Initiative”
a. Include in Proposals in Thesis Appendix
b. Include Framework for Action
c. Include Timeline in Appendix
d. Include Organizational Structure in Appendix
e. Include Wetlands Conservation Fund RFP and guidelines in Appendix
f. Include Wetlands for the Future RFP, cover letter, and application forms in appendix
vi. Include all grant forms, SeaGrant Research employment and personnel contact sheet and support resolutions/letters, etc. and post exam project plan proposal in finished thesis appendix, include post exam chapter with notes
vii. Request scientific, academic, government support of thesis concept
1. Compose, submit resolutions for public officials and NGO's
2. Prepare Ramsar Info Pack to distribute to communities
a. What, who, why, where, when
b. Maps, legislation
3. Call to Action from public officials by meeting with them
4. Gather public input on concept
5. Invite “Associate Experts” a group of individual experts nominated by LLI
6. Complete RIS-Attach Expert documentation supporting justification of criteria attached to Ramsar submission
2. August 2005
a. Begin task force assembly and preparation for final reports
i. Notify U.S. Ramsar Committee of intent to submit and request support and assistance
ii. Hold “task force” meeting and present Ramsar concept
iii. Request support of project in one page document with official signature
b. Collect Experts’ reports with summary of justification for Wetlands of International Importance nomination documenting statements and their expertise in specific Ramsar criterion
3. September 2005
a. Formalize Task Force Report
b. Formalize completed RIS
1. Attach expert submitted data justifying Ramsar criterion
a. Waterfowl
i. Migration numbers
ii. Mottled duck species
iii. Canada-Louisiana Coastal Zone-Mexico Flyway Wetland Network Concept-statement of support/validity
iv. Species and population numbers
v. Whistling Duck of Mexico/Central America
vi. Migration cycles/dates/locales/stopovers from Canada to Mexico
vii. Wetland Habitat Food sources
b. Waterbirds/shorebirds/Neo-tropical birds
i. Migration from Louisiana to Mexico and back
ii. Coastal Zone barrier islands, cheniers, man made structures importance
iii. Numbers hosted and annual cycle of migrations
c. Endangered Species
i. Species listing and numbers
ii. Connection between/among proposed sites
iii. Plants and invasive species threats to displacement of food sources for waterfowl and estuary habitat
d. Wetland types
i. Categories
ii. Value
iii. Representative types in the proposed network and relation
iv. Estuaries
c. Formalize nomination dossier
i. Collect Supporting documents from the USFWS
ii. Supporting documents from the Complex Administration/Managers
iii. Supporting documents and endorsement from U.S. National Ramsar Committee
iv. Supporting documents and endorsement from Louisiana Governor
v. Supporting documents from DNR, Coastal Zone Mgt. Div.
vi. Supporting documents from U.S. Rep. Charles Boustany
vii. Supporting documents from U.S. Senators
viii. Supporting documents from Audubon Internationally Important Bird Areas, Peveto Woods/Nature Conservancy
ix. Supporting documents from Cameron, Jeff Davis, Calcasieu, Evangeline, Parish and Local Officials, mayors, police juries, tourism/economic development authorities
d. Meet with Congressional Representatives
i. Present Ramsar Slide Show
ii. Request support of Ramsar nomination
e. Submit to USFWS International Division
i. Submit letter to USFWS director describing site and the justification for criterion applied under, lat and longitude of site
ii. Complete RIS, letters of concurrence from wildlife and natural resources agency and member of congress for the state to Division of International Conservation at 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, STE 730, Arlington VA 22203-1622.
4. October 2005
a. Apply for funding research support and grants to
i. Wetlands for the Future program grant opportunities based upon Ramsar USFWS MOU.
ii. Wildlife Without Borders, Latin America and Mexico based upon the Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the Western Hemisphere. Melida Tajbakhsh, Branch of Latin America & Mexico, Division of International Conservation, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 730
Arlington, Virginia 22203-1622 Teléfono: 703-358-1766; Fax: 703-358-2115 Email: melida_tajbakhsh@fws.gov
iii. Wildlife Without Borders- Latin America and the Caribbean initiative. If you have questions about the Latin America & Caribbean Grants program, This small-grants initiative will focus on the Caribbean and Latin American regions, and grants provided by the United States Government will be disbursed by the Ramsar Bureau for meritorious proposals that are intended to:
1. Develop human resources needed for the conservation and sustainable management of wetlands
2. Train wetlands managers in the professional and technical skills needed to pursue the goals of the Ramsar Convention;
3. Establish regional technical information networks to support conservation and sustainable management of wetlands;
4. Develop local, national, or regional awareness of and support for conservation of wetlands;
5. Advance ecologically sound community management; or
6. Link this initiative to other programs that share the overall goals of wetlands management and conservation. Contact, Frank Rivera-Milan
Branch of Latin America & the Caribbean, Division of International Conservation, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 730, Arlington, Virginia 22203-1622, Phone: 703-358-2103; Fax: 703-358-2115, frank_rivera@fws.gov.
iv. North American Wetlands Conservation Act Grants Program-- provides matching grants to organizations and individuals who have developed partnerships to carry out wetlands conservation projects in the United States, Canada, and Mexico.
1. Standard Grants proposals: David Buie (david_buie@fws.gov), (301) 497-5870
2. Small Grants Program proposals: Keith Morehouse (keith_morehouse@fws.gov), (703) 358-1888. General office number: (703) 358-1784.
v. The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act Grants Program, USFWS-Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act establishes a matching grants program to fund projects in the United States, Latin America, and the Caribbean that promote the conservation of these birds. For every $1 received in grant funds, the applicant must commit $3 in partner funds. Any U.S., Latin American, or Caribbean individual, corporation, government agency, trust, association, or other private entity can apply for funding. The Act's purposes are to
1. Perpetuate healthy populations of neotropical migratory birds,
2. Assist in the conservation of these birds by supporting conservation initiatives in the United States, Latin America, and the Caribbean, and
3. Provide financial resources and foster international cooperation for those initiatives. For more information, contact the Division of Bird Habitat Conservation at 703-358-1784 or neotropical@fws.gov.
vi. Louisiana State University
1. Solicit support from the Office of Graduate Research Studies
2. Sea Grant Fellowship
3. Sea Grant Employment
4. ENVS Research Associate Position
vii. Louisiana Department Natural Resources
1. Coastal Zone Management-CWPPRA funds
2. LA Coast Project Development Fund
viii. Commercial/Private Funding
1. Shell Oil Wetlands International Campaign
2. Duck Unlimited Canada, Mexico Grants
ix. Ramsar, Wetlands for the Future Fund--Neotropical Region of the Ramsar Convention and Mexico have access to the Fund. National, State, provincial, or local government agencies, academic institutions, and non-profit organizations may apply to, Rue Mauverney 28, CH-1196 Gland Switzerland. Tel. 41-22-999-0170
x. Ramsar Small Grants Fund
1. Project proposals are those which contribute to the implementation of the Convention's Strategic Plan 2003-2008 for the conservation and wise use of wetlands;
2. Projects may be proposed and implemented by any agency, NGO, or individual, but proposals MUST be endorsed
3. “SGF Operational Guidelines”, which include complete information and the required forms, available on the Ramsar Web site
5. November 2005
a. Attend Ramsar COP9--The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands--The 9th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties, “Wetlands and water: supporting life, sustaining livelihoods”, in Kampala, Uganda on the 8th –15th of November 2005.
b. Invite select task force members or thesis committee members to attend COP9
i. Present Thesis Working Document to COP9
ii. Submit Initial Southwest Louisiana NWR Complex RIS with Supporting Documents from Task Force
iii. Propose Louisiana Mexico Canada Initiative for Ramsar Coherent Cluster Wetland Complex Network
iv. Enlist Ramsar Bureau Assistance for both initiatives
v. Enlist Scientific/Academic Assistance from attendees
vi. Request Financial Assistance from the Wetlands for the Future Fund administered by Ramsar and funded by the USFWS
vii. Join appropriate Ramsar committees and endorsement
Strategy
Nominate the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex for Wetlands of International Importance listing under the Ramsar Convention criterion by formalizing this thesis-working document. Begin official compilation of the Ramsar Information Sheet (RIS) and attachments for inclusion into the nomination dossier.
Additionally, begin Ramsar designation process for the Southwestern Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex, based upon establishing an intercontinental, transboundary wetland complex incorporating wise use planning and management into a network of wetland ecosystem habitats synchronous with sustainable development of the natural resources of the areas that are interdependent-despite territorial government borders.
These internationally significant wetland resources and associated habitats include waterfowl, waterbirds, neo-tropical migratory birds, and anadromous fish stocks necessary to maintain biological diversity of animal and plant populations, while providing refuge to reptiles, fish, birds, mammals, including endangered species during critical cycles of their life and during coastal storms or natural disasters.
Outcome
The Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex will be nominated for inclusion to the Ramsar Wetlands of International Importance List and serve as the central headquarters and research depository for this transboundary wetland complex.
Coordinated effort to manage and conserve Louisiana wetlands and associated landscapes will provide a healthy habitat for animals and plants while providing economic development opportunities for the region and maximizing benefits to the community through commercial, recreational, cultural and educational awareness and use.
Ramsar designation for Canadian and Mexican landscapes and co-joining (twinning), of existing coherent sites forms an international transboundary wetland complex network that includes western Canada, located at the Ramsar site of Saskatchewan’s Last Mountain Lake Bird Sanctuary, extending to Mexico at the Marismas Nacionales Ramsar site on the Gulf of Mexico coast, as well as to the U.S. National Ramsar Committee endorsed and proposed Ramsar site-Rio Soto la Marina & Laguna Flamingo on the gulf. This network forms a comprehensive management approach while coordinating a multi national effort to protect valued landscapes.
Habitat quality improves preventing further degradation of the biological diversity of wetland sites including water, plant, food sources, fish, trees, birds, and disappearing coastal wetlands.
Coastal zone management principles are applied to Mexico natural habitat sites and coastal zone areas of the country. Migratory birds, fish, shrimp, crabs, neotropical song birds, waterfowl, butterflies and other animals dependent upon the shared coastal zones of Louisiana and Mexico are protected, conserved and managed for wise use applications, including commercial and recreational opportunities.
Justification
Last Mountain Lake in Saskatchewan is the oldest waterfowl refuge in North America. The Canadian national refuge was established in 1887 to protect 1000 hectares of breeding grounds and provides over 41% of USFWS collected waterfowl bands in Louisiana-with the majority of those collected in Cameron Parish.
In 2004, U.S. National Ramsar Committee Chair Dwight Shellman proposed that the USNRC and the Caddo Lake Ramsar Center (USNRC Headquarters) seek to “twin” (join together administratively and symbolically) through watershed-wide partnerships in Mexican sites with partnerships in Caddo Lake’s watershed which empties into the Gulf of Mexico through Louisiana’s Atchafalaya Basin estuarine wetland complex.
He supports the Ramsar sites that would include the potential for Mexican and U.S. wetland sites whose watersheds could form a transcontinental, transoceanic wetland network.
Incorporating the international connection of Louisiana wetlands to the globally endorsed Ramsar Convention is justified through the existing natural relevance of the sites as well as through the historical planning objectives of the associated countries.
Areas of Concentration
1. Mexico/Central America
a. Coastal Zone Management of wetland resources
i. Dr. Eric Gustafson and Dr. Xico Vega as Mexican members of the new Western Hemisphere Ramsar Team, who will develop eco-tourism linkages and exchanges between the Caddo Lake Regional Ramsar Center and existing and candidate sites in the Americas.
ii. Candidate site, Rio Soto la Marina & Laguna Flamingo on the Gulf Coast of Mexico. Significant populations of roseate spoonbill and associated fishery and nursery areas.
iii. Planning with Caddo Lake/USNRC to develop similar link with the Marismas Nacionales Ramsar site on the Mexican Coast and the Laguna Flamingos Project in Tamaulipas, Mexico,12,400 acres woodlands, pastures and 4,000 acres of brackish lagoons and freshwater ponds
iv. Avian habitats nearby include the Rio Soto La Marina and Laguna Madre on the Yucatan Peninsula
b. Migratory fish stocks
i. U.S. Caribbean Basin initiative advocated by U.S. National Ramsar Committee called “White Water to Blue Water”
ii. Yellowfin tuna
iii. Shrimp
c. Endangered Species
i. Sea Turtles
1. Five of the seven species of sea turtles are found in the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean Sea; all five of these have been observed in Louisiana's coastal waters. At one time three of these species, the green turtle, hawksbill, and loggerhead, were very plentiful and had great commercial value.
2. Over the past few decades, sea turtle populations have seriously declined. Three of the species are listed as endangered and two as threatened. This report briefly reviews the biological background of each of the five species of sea turtles inhabiting the Gulf of Mexico, discusses the chief causes of turtle mortality and the preservation measures undertaken, and summarizes the results of an investigation of the status of sea turtles in Louisiana's coastal waters. Deborah A. Fuller, Anne M. Tappan & Mary C. Hester, 1987, Copy available online from Louisiana Sea Grant.
ii. Alligators
iii. Eagles
d. Migratory Waterfowl Flyways
i. Increased population of Black bellied whistling duck Mexico to Louisiana
1. Mexico, last three decades- the 28 Key Wetlands receive 83.8% of the Migratory Waterfowl distributed in Mexico.
2. Of those, 7 are located in the Mississippi Flyway, 14 in the Pacific Flyway and 7 in the Central Flyway
ii. Of the 28 Key Wetlands, 21 of them coincide with coastal areas. These zones are characterized by their land extensions, where wetlands with 200,000 hectares or more can be found, e.g., Lagunas de Tabasco and Laguna Madre in Tamaulipas, also there are areas with less than 50,000 hectares like Bahia San Quintin and Topolobampo in Sinaloa.
iii. Neo-tropical Water and Songbird Migration
1. Roseate Spoonbills, Pelicans, Terns
2. Ruby Throated Hummingbird
3. Prothonotary Warbler
iv. Monarch Butterfly
2. Canada
a. Migratory Waterfowl Flyways (Rocky Mtn., Central Mississippi
i. Saskatchewan Wetlands-Last Mountain Lake Ramsar Site
ii. Prairie and Pot Hole Breeding Areas
b. From 1990 to 2000 for all duck species banded north of Louisiana during the breeding season, and then identified the top five duck production areas for the state.
i. Of the 11,299 duck bands reported in Louisiana, 41 percent were banded in Saskatchewan, 13 percent in Manitoba, and 11 percent in Alberta.
ii. Mallards represented the majority (50%) of banded birds harvested in Louisiana. Blue-winged teal (19%), wood ducks (16%), and pintails (6%) were the next closest species. These four species represent over 91% percent of total duck band recoveries from Louisiana during the 10-year period.
Proposal Contacts
1. Mitch Coffman, Louisiana Landscapes International, P.O. Box 61581, Lafayette LA USA, 70596, mitchcoffman@gmail.com

2. Michael Wascom, J.D., Louisiana State University Environmental Studies Dept., Baton Rouge LA 70810, coewas@lsu.edu

3. Dr. Margaret Reams, Louisiana State University Environmental Studies Dept., Baton Rouge LA 70810, mreams@lsu.edu

4. Marina Sansostri Ratchford, Division of International Conservation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Suite 740d, Arlington, VA 22203, 703-358-2480, 703-358-2115, marina_ratchford@fws.gov

5. Clayton Adams, UNEP-Washington DC, ph. 202-785-0465, cadams@rona.unep.org

6. Margarita Astralaga, Sr. Advisor for the Americas, Colombia, astralaga@ramsar.org

7. Peter Bridgewater, Ramsar Secretary General, bridgewater@ramsar.org

8. Adrián Ruiz-Carvajal, Assistant Advisor for the Americas, (Mexico), americas@ramsar.org

9. Stan Austin, US EPA Headquarters Wetlands Division, (4502T) Ariel Rios Bldg, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington DC 20460, ph. 202-566-1385, Fax 202-566-1349, austin.stanley@epa.gov, (USNRC member)

10. Donald J. Voros, USFWS, Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 1428 Highway 27, Bell City, LA 70630-9618, 337-598-2216 Ext. 33, 337-598-2492 fax, 337-794-4216 cell, don_voros@fws.gov

11. Judy L. McClendon, USFWS, Natural Resources Planner, Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 1428 Highway 27, Bell City LA 70630, 337-598-2216 Ext. 33, 337-598-2492 fax, judy_mcclendon@fws.gov

12. Robert Helm, Catahoula Lake, Louisiana Department of Wildlife & Fisheries Wildlife Division, P.O. Box 98000, Baton Rouge, LA 70898-9000, 225-765-2358, helm_RN@wlf.state.la.us, David Hayden Hayden_D@wlf.state.la.us

13. Eric Sipco, Kim Randall, Catahoula Lake National Wildlife Refuge, P.O. Drawer Z, Rhinehart, LA 71363-0201, 318-992-5261, 318-992-6023

14. Jack Capp, Office of International Programs, USDA Forest Service, jcapp@fs.fed.us, (USNRC member)

15. Philip Cicconi, Friends of Eastern Neck, Inc., PO Box 4500, Rock Hall MD 21661, 410-639-2387, Fax 410-639-2516, pcicconi@friend.ly.net, (USNRC member)

16. Alex Desherbinin, Columbia University Center for Int'l Earth Science Info Network, 61 Route 9W, PO Box 1000, Palisades NY 10964, 845-365-8936, 845-365-8922, adesherbinin@ciesin.columbia.edu, (USNRC member)

17. Charles D. Duncan, Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network, 76 Emery Street, Portland, ME 04102, T: 207-871-9295, F: 207-842-6496, cduncan@manomet.org

18. George Furness, Conservation Treaty Support Fund, ctsf@conservationtreaty.org, (USNRC member)

19. Royal Gardner, Stetson University College of Law, GARDNER@law.stetson.edu, (USNRC member)

20. John Goodin, US EPA Hdqtrs. Wetlands Division, (4502T) Ariel Rios Bldg, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington DC 20460, 202-566-1385, 202-566-1349, goodin.john@epa.gov, (USNRC member)

21. Bill Howard, Wildlife Habitat Council, 1010 Wayne Ave., Suite 920S, Silver Spring MD 20910, 301-588-8994, Fax 301-588-4639, bhoward@wildlifehc.org, (USNRC member)

22. Kathy Hurld, Environmental Protection Agency Wetlands Division, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW (4502T), Washington DC 20460, 202-566-1269, Fax 202-566-1349, hurld.kathy@epamail.epa.gov, (USNRC member)

23. Paul Jackson, The Nature Conservancy, 421 West First Ave., #200, Anchorage AK 99567, 907-276-3133X115, Fax 907-276-2584, pjackson@tnc.org, (USNRC member)

24. Jon Kusler, Association of State Wetland Managers, 1434 Helderberg Trail, Berne, NY 12023-9746, (518) 872-1804, aswm@aswm.org

25. Kathleen Kutschenreuter, US EPA Headquarters, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, Washington DC 204060, 202-566-1383, kutschenreuter.kathleen@epa.gov, (USNRC member)

26. Donald E. MacLauchlan, Asesor de Proyectos Internacionales, Asociacion Internacional de Agencias de Pesca y Vida Silvestre, 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 544, Washington, DC 20001, Phone 202-624-3600, Fax 202-624-7891, donmac@sso.org, (USNRC member)

27. Larry Mason, 1891 Patrick Henry Dr., Arlington VA 22201, 703-241-8896, 703-241-8896, lawrmason@cs.com, (USNRC member)

28. Ron Miska, (USNRC member)

29. Bruce Monroe, Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge, 640 Sea Breeze Dr., Seal Beach CA 90740-5747, 562-430-8495, fax 562-493-8365, bandcmonroe@earthlink.net, (USNRC member)

30. Joyce Namde, Department of State, Washington DC, namdejw@state.gov, (USNRC member)

31. Lisa G. Sorenson, Ph.D., Project Coordinator, West Indian Whistling-Duck and Wetlands Conservation Project, Adjunct Assistant Professor, Dept. of Biology, 5 Cummington St., Boston University Boston, MA 02215, 617-353-2462, 617-353-6340, lsoren@bu.edu

32. Scott Sutherland, Ducks Unlimited, 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., Suite 402, Washington DC, 202-347-1530, 202-347-1533, ssutherland@ducks.org, (USMRC member)

33. Gerald Winegrad, American Bird Conservancy, 1834 Jefferson Place, NW, Washington DC 20036, 202-452-1524 x202, 202-452-1534, gww@abcbirds.org, (USMRC member)

34. Jane Madgwick, Wetlands International, Jane.Madgwick@Wetlands.org

35. Stephen Virc, National Protected Areas Coordinator/ Coordonnateur national des aires protégées, Canadian Wildlife Service / Service canadien de la faune, Place Vincent Massey, 351 St-Joseph, Hull (Québec), K1A 0H3, Tél. 819.953.1421 Fax 819.994.4445, stephen.virc@ec.gc.ca

36. Canadian Wildlife Service, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0H3, Telephone: (819) 997-1095, Fax: (819) 997-2756, cws-scf@ec.gc.ca

37. Ducks Unlimited, Canada

38. Ducks Unlimited, Mexico

39. Louisiana Ornithological Society

40. Charles A. Wilson, Long lining for Yellowfin Tuna in the Gulf of Mexico, LA SeaGrant

41. Marilyn Barrett-O’Leary, Functions & Values of Wetlands in Louisiana

42. Valerie Eichman (editor), Community Stewardship Projects on Exotic Aquatic Species

43. Dwight K. Shellman Jr., U.S. National Ramsar Committee Chair, The Caddo Lake Institute, PO Box 2710, Aspen, CO 81612, 970-925-2710 Voice, 970-923-4245 Fax, 970-618-6023 Cell, dks@sopris.net

44. Royal Gardner, U.S. National Ramsar Committee Vice Chair, Stetson University College of Law, 1401 - 61st Street South, Gulfport, FL 33707, 727-562-7849 Voice, 727-347-3030 Fax, gardner@law.stetson.edu

45. George Furness, U.S. National Ramsar Committee Treasurer, Conservation Treaty Support Fund, 3705 Cardiff Road, Chevy Chase, MD 20815, 301-654-3150 Voice 301-652-6390 Fax

46. Don MacLauchlan, U.S. National Ramsar Committee Secretary, International Association Of Fish & Wildlife Agencies, 444 N. Capitol Street, NW #544, Washington, DC 20001, 202-624-7890 Voice, 202-624-7891 Fax, donmac@sso.org

47. Elizabeth Gauger, U.S. National Ramsar Committee Coordinator, The Caddo Lake Institute, PO Box 2710 Aspen, CO 81612, 970-925-2710 Voice1, 970-963-1919 Voice2, 970-923-4245 Fax, eliza16@comcast.net

48. Dr. Eric Gustafson, President, U.S.-Mexico Chamber, Garza Garcia, Mexico

49. Xico Vega, Conservation Director of Pronatura Noroeste, Culiacan, Mexico

50. LACoast--Coast 2050

51. Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco

52. Louisiana Lt. Governor Mitch Landrieu

53. Louisiana Department of Natural Resources Commissioner

54. Louisiana Department of Fish and Wildlife Commissioner

55. Louisiana Department of Culture Recreation and Tourism Commissioner

56. Louisiana State University Dean of the School of Energy and Coastal Sciences

57. Louisiana Congressional Delegation Members

58. Calcasieu Parish Police Jury

VITA
Mitchell Coffman is a native of Lafayette Louisiana, which is located 60 miles east of the Southwest Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex. He is the son of Vernon and Mattie Coffman.
Louisiana State University (LSU) graduated him in 1987 with a Bachelor of Arts in from the Speech Communication Department. Louisiana State University (LSU) graduated him in 2004 from the College of Arts and Design with Master of Landscape Architecture.
He is a former staff member of United States Senator John Breaux (retired and author of the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act or Breaux Act-CWPPRA). He worked on Capitol Hill before joining the staff of Louisiana’s Lt. Governor Melinda Schweggman in 1991. He served as Communications Director for the Lt. Governor and the Department of Culture, Recreation and Tourism for three years. He worked for the New Orleans Chamber of Commerce and the economic development branch of the organization, MetroVision as Communications Manager.
Mitchell Coffman is a survivor of West Nile virus encephalitis, viral meningitis and poliomyelitis, and the founder of the West Nile Virus Survivors Foundation. He is a registered Louisiana lobbyist, working for the advancement of research and support for West Nile virus survivors and is administrator of www.westnilesurvivor.com. He also has his 1st dan degree in Tae Kwon Do martial arts, and is a certified Feng Shui practitioner and a member of the Four Winds Cherokee Tribe of Louisiana. Mitch is also a licensed Louisiana Landscape Contractor, ASLA member and a graduate of the Louisiana oil spill response management-training program.