Hawai'i-Pacific Islands Region

Values correspond to Index scores

Description of time series:

Positive PDO values typically mean cool surface water conditions in the interior of the North Pacific Ocean and warm surface waters along the North American Pacific Coast while negative PDO conditions typically mean warm surface water conditions in the interior to the North Pacific Ocean and cool surface waters along the North American Pacific Coast. During the last five years, the PDO indicator shows a significant downward trend.

Description of gauge:

The unitless two-way gauge depicts whether the average of the last 5 years of data for the climate indicator is above or below the median value of the entire time series. High values in either direction mean extreme variation from the median value of the entire time series. 

Description of Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO):

The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) is a long-term pattern of Pacific climate variability. The extreme phases of this climatic condition are classified as warm or cool, based on deviations from average ocean temperature in the northeast and central North Pacific Ocean. When the PDO has a positive value, sea surface temperatures are below average (cool) in the interior North Pacific and warm along the Pacific Coast. When the PDO has a negative value, the climate patterns are reversed, with above average sea surface temperatures in the interior and sea surface temperatures below average along the North American coast. The PDO waxes and wanes; warm and cold phases may persist for decades. Major changes in northeast Pacific marine ecosystems have been correlated with phase changes in the PDO. Warm phases have seen enhanced coastal ocean biological productivity in Alaska and inhibited productivity off the west coast of the United States, while cold PDO phases have seen the opposite, north-south pattern of marine ecosystem productivity. We present data from the Pacific Islands, Alaska, and California Current regions.

Data Background:

Climate indicator data was accessed from the NOAA NCEI (https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/teleconnections/pdo/data.csv). The data plotted are unitless and based on Sea Surface Temperature anomalies averaged across a given region.

Values correspond to Index scores

Description of time series:

Positive EP-NP values mean above-average surface temperatures over the eastern North Pacific, and below-average temperatures over the central North Pacific and eastern North America and the opposite for negative EP-NP values. During the last five years, the EP-NP indicator shows no significant trend.

Description of gauge:

The unitless two-way gauge depicts whether the average of the last 5 years of data for the climate indicator is above or below the median value of the entire time series. High values in either direction mean extreme variation from the median value of the entire time series. 

Description of East Pacific/ North Pacific Teleconnection Pattern Index:

The East Pacific - North Pacific Teleconnection Pattern Index is a measure of climate variability. Positive EP-NP values mean above-average surface temperatures over the eastern North Pacific, and below-average temperatures over the central North Pacific and eastern North America and the opposite for negative EP-NP values.

This climate condition impacts people and ecosystems across the globe and each of the indicators presented here. Interactions between the ocean and atmosphere alter weather around the world and can result in severe storms or mild weather, drought, or flooding. Beyond “just” influencing the weather and ocean conditions, these changes can produce secondary results that influence food supplies and prices, forest fires and flooding, and create additional economic and political consequences. The positive phase of the EP-NP pattern is associated with above-average surface temperatures over the eastern North Pacific, and below-average temperatures over the central North Pacific and eastern North America. The main precipitation anomalies associated with this pattern reflect above-average precipitation in the area north of Hawai'i and below-average precipitation over southwestern Canada.

Data Background:

Climate indicator data was accessed from Columbia University (https://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu/SOURCES/.NOAA/.NCEP/.CPC/.Indices/.NHTI/EPNP/T+exch+table-+text+text+skipanyNaN+-table+.html). The data plotted are unitless anomalies and averaged across a given region. Index calculated using the operational CPC definition.

Values correspond to change in degrees C

Description of time series:

The Oceanic Niño Index (ONI) is NOAA’s primary index for monitoring the El Niño-Southern Oscillation climate pattern. It is based on Sea Surface Temperature values in a particular part of the central equatorial Pacific, which scientists refer to as the Niño 3.4 region. Positive values of this indicator, greater than +0.5, indicate warm El Niño conditions, while negative values, less than -0.5, indicate cold La Niña conditions. The ONI indicator changed from positive to negative during the summer of 2020, and is now showing La Niña conditions, though it is once again approaching 0 as of summer 2021.

Description of gauge:

The unitless two-way gauge depicts the most recent seasonal value for the ONI showing how far it is above or below the median value of the entire time series. High values in either direction mean extreme variation from the median value of the entire time series. 

Description of El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO 3.4):

El Niño and La Niña are opposite phases of the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO), a cyclical condition occurring across the Equatorial Pacific Ocean with worldwide effects on weather and climate. During an El Niño, surface waters in the central and eastern equatorial Pacific become warmer than average and the trade winds - blowing from east to west - greatly weaken. During a La Niña, surface waters in the central and eastern equatorial Pacific become much cooler, and the trade winds become much stronger. El Niños and La Niñas generally last about 6 months but can extend up to  2 years. The time between events is irregular, but generally varies between 2-7 years. To monitor ENSO conditions, NOAA operates a network of buoys, which measure temperature, currents, and winds in the equatorial Pacific. 

This climate pattern impacts people and ecosystems around the world. Interactions between the ocean and atmosphere alter weather globally and can result in severe storms or mild weather, drought or flooding. Beyond “just” influencing the weather and ocean conditions, these changes can produce secondary results that influence food supplies and prices, forest fires and flooding, and create additional economic and political consequences. For example, along the west coast of the U.S., warm El Niño events are known to inhibit the delivery of nutrients from subsurface waters, suppressing local fisheries. El Niño events are typically associated with fewer hurricanes in the Atlantic while La Niña events typically result in greater numbers of Atlantic hurricanes.

Data Background:

ENSO ONI data was accessed from NOAA’s Earth Systems Research Laboratory (https://psl.noaa.gov/data/correlation/oni.data). The data are plotted in degrees Celsius and represent Sea Surface Temperature anomalies averaged across the so-called Niño 3.4 region in the east-central tropical Pacific between 120°-170°W. Index calculated using the operational CPC ONI definition.

Values correspond to Index scores

Description of time series:

Like the Oceanic Niño Index, positive MEI values indicate warm, El Niño conditions and negative MEI values indicate cold, La Niña conditions. The MEI indicator changed from positive to negative during the summer of 2020, and has since shown La Niña conditions.

Description of gauge:

The unitless two-way gauge depicts the most recent seasonal value for the MEI showing how far it is above or below the median value of the entire time series. High values in either direction mean extreme variation from the median value of the entire time series. 

Description of Multivariate El Niño-Southern Oscillation Index:

The Multivariate El Niño-Southern Oscillation Index (MEI) is a more holistic representation of the atmospheric and oceanic conditions that occur during ENSO events and characterizes their intensity. MEI is determined from five variables from the central and eastern equatorial Pacific (Sea-level pressure, surface wind components, sea surface temperature, surface air temperature, and cloudiness) while ENSO ONI is calculated from only two (sea surface temperature and trade wind strength). This index is calculated twelve times per year for each sliding bi-monthly season i.e. Dec-Jan, Jan-Feb, Feb-Mar, etc. We present data from the Pacific Islands, Alaska, and California Current regions.

This climate condition impacts people and ecosystems across the globe and each of the indicators presented here. Interactions between the ocean and atmosphere alter weather around the world and can result in severe storms or mild weather, drought, or flooding. Beyond “just” influencing the weather and ocean conditions, these changes can produce secondary results that influence food supplies and prices, forest fires and flooding, and create additional economic and political consequences.

Data Background:

MEI data was accessed from NOAA’s Earth Systems Research Laboratory (https://psl.noaa.gov/enso/mei/). The data plotted are unitless anomalies.

Sea surface temperature is defined as the average temperature of the top few millimeters of the ocean. Sea surface temperature monitoring tells us how the ocean and atmosphere interact, as well as providing fundamental data on the global climate system

Description of time series:

The time series shows the integrated sea surface temperature for the Hawai‘i region. During the last five years there has been no notable trend but values were above the 90th percentile of all observed data in the time series

Description of gauge:

The gauge value of 92 indicates that the mean sea surface temperature between 2016 and 2020 for the Hawai‘i region was higher than 92% of the temperatures between 1982 and 2020.

Description of Sea Surface Temperature:

Sea surface temperature (SST) is defined as the temperature of the top few millimeters of the ocean. This temperature directly or indirectly  impacts the rate of all physical, chemical, and most biological processes occurring in the ocean. SST is globally monitored by sensors on satellites, buoys, ships, ocean reference stations, autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) and other technologies. 

SST monitoring tells us how the ocean and atmosphere interact, as well as providing fundamental data on the global climate system. This information also aids us in weather prediction, i.e. identifying the onset of El Niño and La Niña cycles - multiyear shifts in atmospheric pressure and wind speeds. These shifts affect ocean circulation, global weather patterns, and marine ecosystems. SST anomalies have been linked to shifting marine resources. With warming temperatures, we observe the poleward movements of fish and other species. Temperature extremes—both ocean heatwaves and cold spells—have been linked to coral bleaching as well as fishery and aquaculture mortality. We present the annual average SST at the Large Marine Ecosystem scale in all regions.

Indicator and source information:

The SST data were accessed from (https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oisst).  The data are plotted in degrees Celsius. 

Data background and limitations:

To compensate for platform differences and sensor biases, satellite and ship observations are referenced to buoys. These data are NOAA 1/4° Daily Optimum Interpolation Sea Surface Temperature (version 2.1). Measurements of SST served through this portal incorporate data obtained from various platforms such as satellites, buoys, Argo floats, and ships. 

Sea level varies due to the force of gravity, the Earth’s rotation and irregular features on the ocean floor. Other forces affecting sea levels include temperature, wind, ocean currents, tides, and other similar processes.

Description of time series:

The time series shows the relative sea level, water height as compared to nearby land level, for the Hawai‘i–Pacific Islands region. During the last five years there has been no notable trend but values were above the 90th percentile of all observed data in the time series.

Description of gauge:

The gauge value of 95 indicates that the sea level between 2016 and 2020 for the Hawai‘i–Pacific Islands region was higher than 95% of the sea level between 1980 and 2020.

Description of Sea Level:

Sea level varies due to the force of gravity, the Earth’s rotation and irregular features on the ocean floor. Other forces affecting sea levels include temperature, wind, ocean currents, tides, and other similar processes. With 40 percent of Americans living in densely populated coastal areas, having a clear understanding of sea level trends is critical to societal and economic well being.

Measuring and predicting sea levels, tides and storm surge are important for determining coastal boundaries, ensuring safe shipping, emergency preparedness, and other aspects of the well-being of coastal communities. 

Indicator and source information:

NOAA monitors sea levels using tide stations and satellite laser altimeters. Tide stations around the globe tell us what is happening at local levels, while satellite measurements provide us with the average height of the entire ocean. Taken together, data from these sources are fed into models that tell us how our ocean sea levels are changing over time. For this site, data from tide stations around the US were combined to create regionally averaged records of sea-level change since 1980. We present data for all regions.

Data background and limitations:

Sea level data presented here are measurements of relative sea level, water height as compared to nearby land level, from NOAA tide gauges that have >20 years of hourly data served through NOAA’s Center for Operational Oceanographic Products and Services (CO-OPS) Tides and Currents website. These local measurements are regionally averaged by taking the median value of all the qualifying stations within a region. The measurements are in meters and are relative to the year 2000.

Chlorophyll a, a pigment produced by phytoplankton, can be measured to determine the amount of phytoplankton present in water bodies. From a human perspective, high values of chlorophyll a can be good (abundance of nutritious diatoms as food for fish) or bad (Harmful Algal Blooms that may cause respiratory distress for people), based on the associated phytoplankton species.

Description of time series:

This time series shows the average concentration levels of chlorophyll ɑ for the Hawai‘i region. During the last five years there has been no notable trend and values have remained within the 10th and 90th percentiles of all observed data in the time series.

Description of gauge:

The gauge value of 35 indicates that between 2016 and 2020 the average concentration levels of chlorophyll a in the Hawai‘i region were considerably lower than the long term median of all chlorophyll ɑ concentration levels between 1998 and 2020.

Gauge values

0–10: Chlorophyll a was significantly lower than the long term median state.

10–25: Chlorophyll a was considerably lower than the long term median state.

25–50: Chlorophyll a was slightly lower than the long term median state.

50: Chlorophyll a was at the long term median state.

50–75: Chlorophyll a was slightly higher than the long term median state.

75–90: Chlorophyll a was considerably higher than the long term median state.

90–100: Chlorophyll a was significantly higher than the long term median state.

Description of Chlorophyll a:

Phytoplankton are microscopic plants at the base of most marine food webs and produce nearly half of the Earth’s oxygen. One way we estimate the number of phytoplankton in the ocean is by measuring the amount  of chlorophyll a in the water.  Chlorophyll a is a green pigment (the same pigment that makes tree leaves appear green) that the phytoplankton use to absorb sunlight. The amount (or concentration) of chlorophyll a in surface waters  can be calculated by measuring the color of the water ( also referred to as “ocean color”) which can be “seen” by sensors on satellites in space almost like your eyes see the color of the ocean. Environmental and oceanographic factors continuously influence the abundance, species composition, spatial distribution, and productivity of phytoplankton. Tracking the amount of phytoplankton in the ocean conveys the status of the base of the food web, and how much food is available for other animals. Changes in the amount of phytoplankton in the ocean are part of the natural seasonal cycle (similar to seasonal changes of plants on land), but can also indicate an ecosystem’s response to a major external disturbance such as a hurricane or typhoon.

Indicator and source information:

The data for this Chlorophyll a annual indicator were provided by the NOAA Fisheries Coastal and Oceanic Plankton Ecology, Production, and Observations Database (COPEPOD).  COPEPOD determined the annual Large Marine Ecosystem (LME) chlorophyll a concentrations using mapped, monthly composites of chlorophyll a concentration as calculated from radiance measurements ("ocean color") made by the SeaWiFS and MODIS-Aqua satellite sensors.   These monthly composites were obtained from NASA (https://oceancolor.gsfc.nasa.gov/).  Annual means for each LME for each year were calculated from the average of the LME 12 monthly means in that year.  The overall “National Annual Mean mean was calculated as the average of all LME annual means. See the Data Background section for more details.  Source: https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/copepod/about/about-copepod.html.

To learn more about satellite-based chlorophyll a measurements within NOAA or to supplement the time series data shown here, please visit NOAA CoastWatch for more information and assistance.

Data background and limitations:

Satellite chlorophyll a, 9 km mapped, monthly composited data from SeaWiFS and MODIS-Aqua NASA products were spatially re-binned into 0.5 degree latitude by 0.5 degree longitude boxes (nominally about 50 km² near the equator) then those ~50 km² box values were averaged over the area of a given LME, resulting in 12 values per LME, one value for each month.  The annual LME chlorophyll a amount reported here is the average of those 12 monthly values.  This technique was done for each LME from North America and Hawaii.  The overall “National Annual Mean mean was calculated as the average of all the LME annual means.  Note that chlorophyll a  is often plotted on a logarithmic scale to accentuate proportional changes.  In other words, small changes in concentration when amounts are relatively low could mean a very big proportional change in the phytoplankton whereas as the same change in absolute concentration when amount are relatively large is less meaningful.

Description of time series:

Between 2015 through 2019 the average concentration of zooplankton biomass showed a significant downward trend.

Description of gauge:

The gauge value of 27 indicates that between 2015 and 2019 the average concentration of zooplankton biomass in Hawai'i - Pacific Islands waters was lower than the median value of all zooplankton biomass concentration levels between 1994 and 2019. 

Gauge values

High values of zooplankton can be good (lots of lipid rich colder water species) or bad (lots of lipid poor warmer water species), depending on the region.

0 - 10: The five-year zooplankton biomass average is very low compared to the median value.

10 - 25: The five-year zooplankton biomass average is much lower than the median value.

25 - 50: The five-year zooplankton biomass average is lower than the median value.

 50: The five-year zooplankton biomass average equals the median value.

50 - 75: The five-year zooplankton biomass average is higher than the median value.

75 - 90: The five-year zooplankton biomass average is much higher than the median value.

90 - 100: The five-year zooplankton biomass average is very high compared to the median value.

Description of Zooplankton:

Zooplankton are a diverse group of animals found in oceans, bays, and estuaries. By eating phytoplankton, and each other, zooplankton play a significant role in the transfer of materials and energy up the oceanic food web (e.g., fish, birds, marine mammals, humans.) Like phytoplankton, environmental and oceanographic factors continuously influence the abundance, composition and spatial distribution of zooplankton. These include the abundance and type of phytoplankton present in the water, as well as the water’s temperature, salinity, oxygen, and pH. Zooplankton can rapidly react to changes in their environment. For this reason monitoring the status of zooplankton is essential for detecting changes in, and evaluating the status of ocean ecosystems. We present the annual average total biovolume of zooplankton in the Alaska, California Current, Gulf of Mexico, Hawai'i-Pacific Islands and Northeast regions.

Indicator information

Zooplankton data for each region were obtained from the NOAA Fisheries Coastal & Oceanic Plankton Ecology, Production, & Observations Database, an integrated data set of quality-controlled, globally distributed plankton biomass and abundance data with common biomass units and served in a common electronic format with supporting documentation and access software. Hawai'i-Pacific Islands  specific data comes from the Hawai’i Ocean Timeseries (HOTS) program: https://hahana.soest.hawaii.edu/hot/. 

Data Background and Caveats:

Unlike previous years, all value are now standardized to "ml/m3". For example, EcoMon data units went from "ml/100m3" to just "ml/m3", but that did not affect the shape of the trends as it is a linear multiplicative factor. CalCOFI, however, went from "ml/m2" to "ml/m3", and the trend has changed noticeably.  It is now noisier and no clear trend.  One converts "ml/m2" to "ml/m3" by dividing by the towing depth (m).  That is a non-linear muplicative factor, so it can affect each data point and change the data shape.

HI -Note that Hawai’i is Wet Mass (g/m3) , not DV (ml/m3).  

Finally, a log10 value frequency histogram of the raw data values showed that 99.9% of the DV  data values were less than 15 ml/m3.   To reduce the impact of large outliers (i.e., due to a large jellyfish or an algal mat caught in the net), any DV value greater than 15 was capped at a value of just 15. Again, this would only affect < 0.1% of the data.  In some extreme cases, original DV values were over 100+ ... which greatly skewed the means and trends if not removed. This is actually standard practice.   CalCOFI offers both a "large" and "small" DV value (with the latter having large values removed), for example, and some programs automatically remove any plankter larger than the 5 cm length from the net sample before measuring the DV.

Zooplankton data for each region were obtained from the NOAA Fisheries Coastal & Oceanic Plankton Ecology, Production, & Observations Database, an integrated data set of quality-controlled, globally distributed plankton biomass and abundance data with common biomass units and served in a common electronic format with supporting documentation and access software. Source: https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/copepod/about/about-copepod.html

Data Interpretation:

The scores you see for each region are composite scores for the themes and then one overall score. The overall score is an average of all four theme scores for the Main Hawaiian Islands region’s coral reef ecosystem score. 

Benthic – Composite gauge for benthic theme score in the Main Hawaiian Islands region is 65%, meaning it is ranked impaired with very few indicators meeting reference values.

Fish – Composite gauge for fish theme score in the Main Hawaiian Islands region is 66%, meaning it is ranked impaired with very few indicators meeting reference value.

Climate – Composite gauge for climate theme score in the Main Hawaiian Islands region is 70%, meaning it is ranked fair with some indicators meeting reference values.

Human connections – Composite gauge for human connections theme score in the Main Hawaiian Islands region is 81%, meaning it is ranked good with most indicators meeting reference values.

Overall Ecosystem – Overall coral reef ecosystem score for the Main Hawaiian Islands region is 71%, meaning it is ranked fair with some indicators meeting reference values.

Description of each theme is provided in the indicator information section below.

Gauge values

90–100% Very good: All or almost all indicators meet reference values.

80–89% Good: Most indicators meet reference values.

70–79% Fair: Some indicators meet reference values. 

60–69% Impaired: Few indicators meet reference values.

0–59% Critical: Very few or no indicators meet reference values.

Description of Main Hawaiian Islands

The Hawaiian Archipelago includes the state of Hawai‘i and the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. The archipelago consists of volcanic islands, atolls, and seamounts that stretch over 1,500 miles from southeast to northwest. The NCRMP status report has two main Hawaiian regions, the Main Hawaiian Islands (the State of Hawai‘i) and the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands. The Main Hawaiian Islands are inhabited islands in the Pacific Ocean. The Islands consist of eight volcanic islands surrounded by coral reefs. The Main Hawaiian Islands were further subdivided into four regions based on geographic location and data availability. The four regions are O‘ahu, Hawai‘i, Maui Nui, and Kaua‘i and Ni‘ihau. The total coral reef hardbottom habitat less than 30 m in depth that was monitored is 974 sq km

Description of Coral Reefs:

Coral reefs are some of the most diverse and valuable ecosystems on Earth. Though they cover less than one percent of the Earth’s surface, they are estimated to provide ecosystem services (economic and environmental services) worth hundreds of billions of dollars each year. Healthy reefs protect islands and coasts from storm surge, contribute to local economies through tourism (i.e., sportfishing, snorkeling, and diving), and contribute about one-quarter of the total fish catch, providing critical food resources for tens of millions of people particularly in developing island nations.

Data Source:

The coral reef ecosystem scores shown here were analyzed using data from the National Coral Reef Monitoring Program (NCRMP). The scores you see for each region are composite scores for all four themes (benthic, fish, climate, human connections) assessed separately and then one overall score. The overall score is an average of all four theme scores for a specific region’s coral reef ecosystem score. The sources for these values and geographical regions are obtained from the NCRMP’s Status Report Scoring Methodology for Pacific Jurisdictions and 2020 Status Report Scoring Methodology for Atlantic Jurisdictions. The definitions for the themes are as follows:

- Benthic (Corals & algae): Corals and algae make up the base of the coral reef ecosystem, providing food and shelter for fish and other marine animals.

- Fish: Coral reefs serve a vital ecological role for fish species. Fish are important to the ecology of the reef, the economy, and the livelihoods of local communities.

- Climate: Climate affects all components of a reef system. Climate change and ocean acidification influence reefs across the globe, but conditions vary at the regional and local level.

- Human Connections: Coral reef management agencies protect reef resources through management plans, public education, and involving communities in managing their resources.

Data Interpretation:

The scores you see for each region are composite scores for the themes and then one overall score. The overall score is an average of all four theme scores for the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands region’s coral reef ecosystem score. 

Benthic – Composite gauge for benthic theme score in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands region is 77%, meaning it is ranked fair with some indicators meeting reference values.

Fish – Composite gauge for fish theme score in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands region is 92%, meaning it is ranked very good with all or almost all indicators meeting reference value.

Climate – Composite gauge for climate theme score in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands region is 58%, meaning it is ranked critical with very few indicators meeting reference values.

Human connections – Human connections theme was not scored for Northwestern Hawaiian Islands region because the region is uninhabited.

Overall Ecosystem – Overall coral reef ecosystem score for the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands region is 76%, meaning it is ranked fair with some indicators meeting reference values.

Description of each theme is provided in the indicator information section below.

Gauge values

90–100% Very good: All or almost all indicators meet reference values.

80–89% Good: Most indicators meet reference values.

70–79% Fair: Some indicators meet reference values. 

60–69% Impaired: Few indicators meet reference values.

0–59% Critical: Very few or no indicators meet reference values.

Description of Northwest Hawaiian Islands

The Northwestern Hawaiian Islands are the mostly uninhabited northwestern three quarters of the Hawaiian Archipelago stretching 1,350 miles. They are completely encompassed within the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument and include coral islands, seamounts, banks, and shoals. The total coral reef hardbottom habitat less than 30 m in depth that was monitored is 911 sq km.

Description of Coral Reefs:

Coral reefs are some of the most diverse and valuable ecosystems on Earth. Though they cover less than one percent of the Earth’s surface, they are estimated to provide ecosystem services (economic and environmental services) worth hundreds of billions of dollars each year. Healthy reefs protect islands and coasts from storm surge, contribute to local economies through tourism (i.e., sportfishing, snorkeling, and diving), and contribute about one-quarter of the total fish catch, providing critical food resources for tens of millions of people particularly in developing island nations.

Data Source:

The coral reef ecosystem scores shown here were analyzed using data from the National Coral Reef Monitoring Program (NCRMP). The scores you see for each region are composite scores for all four themes (benthic, fish, climate, human connections) assessed separately and then one overall score. The overall score is an average of all four theme scores for a specific region’s coral reef ecosystem score. The sources for these values and geographical regions are obtained from the NCRMP’s Status Report Scoring Methodology for Pacific Jurisdictions and 2020 Status Report Scoring Methodology for Atlantic Jurisdictions. The definitions for the themes are as follows:

- Benthic (Corals & algae): Corals and algae make up the base of the coral reef ecosystem, providing food and shelter for fish and other marine animals.

- Fish: Coral reefs serve a vital ecological role for fish species. Fish are important to the ecology of the reef, the economy, and the livelihoods of local communities.

- Climate: Climate affects all components of a reef system. Climate change and ocean acidification influence reefs across the globe, but conditions vary at the regional and local level.

- Human Connections: Coral reef management agencies protect reef resources through management plans, public education, and involving communities in managing their resources.

Data Interpretation:

The scores you see for each region are composite scores for the themes and then one overall score. The overall score is an average of all four theme scores for the American Samoa region’s coral reef ecosystem score. 

Benthic – Composite gauge for benthic theme score in the American Samoa region is 82%, meaning it is ranked good with most indicators meeting reference values.

Fish – Composite gauge for fish theme score in the American Samoa region is 73%, meaning it is ranked fair with some indicators meeting reference values.

Climate – Composite gauge for climate theme score in the American Samoa region is 77%, meaning it is ranked fair with some indicators meeting reference values.

Human connections – Composite gauge for human connections theme score in the American Samoa region is 88%, meaning it is ranked good with most indicators meeting reference values.

Overall Ecosystem – Overall coral reef ecosystem score for the American Samoa region is 80%, meaning it is ranked good with most indicators meeting reference values.

Description of each theme is provided in the indicator information section below.

Gauge values

90–100% Very good: All or almost all indicators meet reference values.

80–89% Good: Most indicators meet reference values.

70–79% Fair: Some indicators meet reference values. 

60–69% Impaired: Few indicators meet reference values.

0–59% Critical: Very few or no indicators meet reference values.

Description of American Samoa

American Samoa is an unincorporated United States Territory in the South Pacific. The Territory consists of five volcanic islands and two atolls, all of which are surrounded by fringing coral reefs. American Samoa was divided into six regions based on geographic location and data availability. The six regions are North Tutuila, South Tutuila, Ta‘u, Swains Island, Ofu and Olosega, and Muliava (Rose Atoll). The total coral reef hardbottom habitat less than 30 m in depth that was monitored is 62 sq km.

Data Source:

The coral reef ecosystem scores shown here were analyzed using data from the National Coral Reef Monitoring Program (NCRMP). The scores you see for each region are composite scores for all four themes (benthic, fish, climate, human connections) assessed separately and then one overall score. The overall score is an average of all four theme scores for a specific region’s coral reef ecosystem score. The sources for these values and geographical regions are obtained from the NCRMP’s Status Report Scoring Methodology for Pacific Jurisdictions and 2020 Status Report Scoring Methodology for Atlantic Jurisdictions. The definitions for the themes are as follows:

- Benthic (Corals & algae): Corals and algae make up the base of the coral reef ecosystem, providing food and shelter for fish and other marine animals.

- Fish: Coral reefs serve a vital ecological role for fish species. Fish are important to the ecology of the reef, the economy, and the livelihoods of local communities.

- Climate: Climate affects all components of a reef system. Climate change and ocean acidification influence reefs across the globe, but conditions vary at the regional and local level.

- Human Connections: Coral reef management agencies protect reef resources through management plans, public education, and involving communities in managing their resources.

Data Interpretation:

The scores you see for each region are composite scores for the themes and then one overall score. The overall score is an average of all four theme scores for the Northern Mariana Islands region’s coral reef ecosystem score. 

Benthic – Composite gauge for benthic theme score in the Northern Mariana Islands region is 71%, meaning it is ranked fair with some indicators meeting reference values.

Fish – Composite gauge for fish theme score in the Northern Mariana Islands region is 76%, meaning it is ranked fair with some indicators meeting reference values.

Climate – Composite gauge for climate theme score in the Northern Mariana Islands region is 69%, meaning it is ranked impaired with very few indicators meeting reference values.

Human connections – Composite gauge for human connections theme score in the Northern Mariana Islands region is 97%, meaning it is ranked very good with all or almost all indicators meeting reference value.

Overall Ecosystem – Overall coral reef ecosystem score for the Northern Mariana Islands region is 78%, meaning it is ranked fair with some indicators meeting reference values.

Description of each theme is provided in the indicator information section below.

Gauge values

90–100% Very good: All or almost all indicators meet reference values.

80–89% Good: Most indicators meet reference values.

70–79% Fair: Some indicators meet reference values. 

60–69% Impaired: Few indicators meet reference values.

0–59% Critical: Very few or no indicators meet reference values.

Description of Northern Mariana Islands 

Located just north of Guam in the Western Pacific, the Northern Mariana Islands is a 300-mile archipelago consisting of 14 islands. Data for the Northern Mariana Islands status report were from four sub-regions: Rota, Saipan,Tinian, andAguijan, Northern Islands, and National Monument. The total coral reef hardbottom habitat less than 30 m in depth that was monitored is 105 sq km

Description of Coral Reefs:

Coral reefs are some of the most diverse and valuable ecosystems on Earth. Though they cover less than one percent of the Earth’s surface, they are estimated to provide ecosystem services (economic and environmental services) worth hundreds of billions of dollars each year. Healthy reefs protect islands and coasts from storm surge, contribute to local economies through tourism (i.e., sportfishing, snorkeling, and diving), and contribute about one-quarter of the total fish catch, providing critical food resources for tens of millions of people particularly in developing island nations.

Data Source:

The coral reef ecosystem scores shown here were analyzed using data from the National Coral Reef Monitoring Program (NCRMP). The scores you see for each region are composite scores for all four themes (benthic, fish, climate, human connections) assessed separately and then one overall score. The overall score is an average of all four theme scores for a specific region’s coral reef ecosystem score. The sources for these values and geographical regions are obtained from the NCRMP’s Status Report Scoring Methodology for Pacific Jurisdictions and 2020 Status Report Scoring Methodology for Atlantic Jurisdictions. The definitions for the themes are as follows:

- Benthic (Corals & algae): Corals and algae make up the base of the coral reef ecosystem, providing food and shelter for fish and other marine animals.

- Fish: Coral reefs serve a vital ecological role for fish species. Fish are important to the ecology of the reef, the economy, and the livelihoods of local communities.

- Climate: Climate affects all components of a reef system. Climate change and ocean acidification influence reefs across the globe, but conditions vary at the regional and local level.

- Human Connections: Coral reef management agencies protect reef resources through management plans, public education, and involving communities in managing their resources.

Data Interpretation:

The scores you see for each region are composite scores for the themes and then one overall score. The overall score is an average of all four theme scores for the Pacific Remote Islands region’s coral reef ecosystem score. 

Benthic – Composite gauge for benthic theme score in the Pacific Remote Islands region is 80%, meaning it is ranked good with most indicators meeting reference values.

Fish – Composite gauge for fish theme score in the Pacific Remote Islands region is 93%, meaning it is ranked very good with all or almost all indicators meeting reference value.

Climate – Composite gauge for climate theme score in the Pacific Remote Islands region is 74%, meaning it is ranked fair with some indicators meeting reference values.

Human connections – Human connections theme was not scored for the Pacific Remote Islands region  because the region is uninhabited.

Overall Ecosystem – Overall coral reef ecosystem score for the Pacific Remote Islands region is 82%, meaning it is ranked good with most indicators meeting reference values.

Description of each theme is provided in the indicator information section below.

Gauge values

90–100% Very good: All or almost all indicators meet reference values.

80–89% Good: Most indicators meet reference values.

70–79% Fair: Some indicators meet reference values. 

60–69% Impaired: Few indicators meet reference values.

0–59% Critical: Very few or no indicators meet reference values.

Description of Pacific Remote Islands

The Pacific Remote Islands are a group of unincorporated US territories spread over hundreds of miles

in the Pacific Ocean. They consist of three islands, three atolls, and one reef, which are each national

wildlife refuges. These refuges make up the core of the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National

Monument. The Pacific Remote Islands data were divided into five sub-regions from Johnston atoll, Kingman reef and Palmyra atoll, Howland and Baker islands, Jarvis island, and Wake atoll. The total coral reef hardbottom habitat less than 30 m in depth that was monitored is 128 sq km

Description of Coral Reefs:

Coral reefs are some of the most diverse and valuable ecosystems on Earth. Though they cover less than one percent of the Earth’s surface, they are estimated to provide ecosystem services (economic and environmental services) worth hundreds of billions of dollars each year. Healthy reefs protect islands and coasts from storm surge, contribute to local economies through tourism (i.e., sportfishing, snorkeling, and diving), and contribute about one-quarter of the total fish catch, providing critical food resources for tens of millions of people particularly in developing island nations.

Data Source:

The coral reef ecosystem scores shown here were analyzed using data from the National Coral Reef Monitoring Program (NCRMP). The scores you see for each region are composite scores for all four themes (benthic, fish, climate, human connections) assessed separately and then one overall score. The overall score is an average of all four theme scores for a specific region’s coral reef ecosystem score. The sources for these values and geographical regions are obtained from the NCRMP’s Status Report Scoring Methodology for Pacific Jurisdictions and 2020 Status Report Scoring Methodology for Atlantic Jurisdictions. The definitions for the themes are as follows:

- Benthic (Corals & algae): Corals and algae make up the base of the coral reef ecosystem, providing food and shelter for fish and other marine animals.

- Fish: Coral reefs serve a vital ecological role for fish species. Fish are important to the ecology of the reef, the economy, and the livelihoods of local communities.

- Climate: Climate affects all components of a reef system. Climate change and ocean acidification influence reefs across the globe, but conditions vary at the regional and local level.

- Human Connections: Coral reef management agencies protect reef resources through management plans, public education, and involving communities in managing their resources.

Data Interpretation:

The scores you see for each region are composite scores for the themes and then one overall score. The overall score is an average of all four theme scores for the Guam region’s coral reef ecosystem score. 

Benthic – Composite gauge for benthic theme score in the Guam region is 62%, meaning it is ranked impaired with very few indicators meeting reference values.

Fish – Composite gauge for fish theme score in the Guam region is 66%, meaning it is ranked impaired with very few indicators meeting reference values.

Climate – Composite gauge for climate theme score in the Guam region is 71%, meaning it is ranked fair with some indicators meeting reference values.

Human connections – Composite gauge for human connections theme score in the Guam region is 85%, meaning it is ranked good with most indicators meeting reference values.

Overall Ecosystem – Overall coral reef ecosystem score for the Guam region is 71%, meaning it is ranked fair with some indicators meeting reference values.

Description of each theme is provided in the indicator information section below.

Gauge values

90–100% Very good: All or almost all indicators meet reference values.

80–89% Good: Most indicators meet reference values.

70–79% Fair: Some indicators meet reference values. 

60–69% Impaired: Few indicators meet reference values.

0–59% Critical: Very few or no indicators meet reference values.

Description of Guam

Guam is an unincorporated territory of the US in the western Pacific Ocean. It is the largest and southernmost island of the Mariana Archipelago. Guam was divided into three sub-regions consisting of Western Guam, Eastern Guam, and the marine protected areas of Guam. The total coral reef hardbottom habitat less than 30 m in depth that was monitored is 51 sq km.

Data Source:

The coral reef ecosystem scores shown here were analyzed using data from the National Coral Reef Monitoring Program (NCRMP). The scores you see for each region are composite scores for all four themes (benthic, fish, climate, human connections) assessed separately and then one overall score. The overall score is an average of all four theme scores for a specific region’s coral reef ecosystem score. The sources for these values and geographical regions are obtained from the NCRMP’s Status Report Scoring Methodology for Pacific Jurisdictions and 2020 Status Report Scoring Methodology for Atlantic Jurisdictions. The definitions for the themes are as follows:

- Benthic (Corals & algae): Corals and algae make up the base of the coral reef ecosystem, providing food and shelter for fish and other marine animals.

- Fish: Coral reefs serve a vital ecological role for fish species. Fish are important to the ecology of the reef, the economy, and the livelihoods of local communities.

- Climate: Climate affects all components of a reef system. Climate change and ocean acidification influence reefs across the globe, but conditions vary at the regional and local level.

- Human Connections: Coral reef management agencies protect reef resources through management plans, public education, and involving communities in managing their resources.

The x-axis represents years. The y-axis represents the number of fish stocks or fish populations that are deemed by NOAA as overfished. Overfished means the population of fish is too low. Therefore the population can not support a large amount of fishing.

Description of time series:

The series shows the number of fish populations that have qualified as overfished since 2000. Between 2016 and 2020 the number of overfished stocks shows no trend

Description of gauge:

The gauge value of 100 indicates that between 2016 and 2020 the average number of overfished stocks in Hawaiʻi-Pacific Islands waters was greater than 100% of the average of overfished stocks between 2000 to 2020.

Overall Scores mean the following:

High values for overfished stocks are bad, low numbers are good.

• 0 - 10: The five-year overfished stock status average is very low compared to the median value.
• 10 - 25: The five-year overfished stock status average is much lower than the median value.
• 25 - 50: The five-year overfished stock status average is lower than the median value.
• 50: The five-year overfished stock status average equals the median value.
• 50 - 75: The five-year overfished stock status average is higher than the median value.
• 75 - 90: The five-year overfished stock status average is much higher than the median value.
• 90 - 100: The five-year overfished stock status average is very high compared to the median value.

Description of Overfished Stocks:

An overfished stock is a population of fish that is too low. From a technical standpoint, a stock that is overfished is depleted below a minimum level and active rebuilding is required. Stocks that are overfished cannot support a large amount of fishing. A fish stock can be listed as overfished as the result of many factors including overfishing, habitat degradation, pollution, climate change, and disease. The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires the status of overfished stocks be reported annually.

Stock assessments provide information to determine if a stock is overfished or experiencing overfishing (harvest higher than a maximum fishing threshold). This is done by estimating fishing intensity and the abundance of fish stocks and comparing those estimates to management reference points. Stock assessments can provide the science that supports the steps necessary to rebuild overfished stocks to sustainable levels.

It is important to track the status of fish stocks because fish play an important role in marine ecosystems, such as supporting the ecological structure of many marine food webs. Fish also support significant parts of coastal economies including recreational and commercial fisheries, and play an important cultural role in many regions.  

This site presents the number of overfished stocks by year in all US Large Marine Ecosystems (LMEs).

Data Source:

Data were obtained from the NOAA Fisheries Fishery Stock Status website. Stocks that met the criteria for overfished status were summed by year for each region.

Values Correspond to the Number of ESA Threatened or Endangered Species in a given region

Data Interpretation

Gauge and Trend Analyses were not appropriate for marine mammal data.

Data Background and Caveats

NOAA Fisheries goes through required regulatory steps to list, reclassify, or delist a species under the ESA. For more information, see a step-by-step description of the ESA listing process. The listing process requires time and resources; as a result, the timing and number of listed marine species is not necessarily indicative of the actual number of currently endangered or threatened species and the exact timing of when these species became eligible to be listed under the ESA. Many marine species were initially listed when the ESA was passed in 1973; others have taken more time to be listed, and some have been reclassified or delisted since then.

Description of Threatened and Endangered Marine Mammals (ESA):

NOAA Fisheries is responsible for the protection, conservation, and recovery of endangered and threatened marine and anadromous species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The ESA aims to conserve these species and the ecosystems they depend on. Under the ESA, a species is considered endangered if it is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range, or threatened if it is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range See a species directory of all the threatened and endangered marine species under NOAA Fisheries jurisdiction, including marine mammals. 

Under the ESA, a species must be listed if it is threatened or endangered because of any of the following 5 factors:

1) Present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range;

2) Over-utilization of the species for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes;

3) Disease or predation;

4) Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and

5) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence.

The ESA requires that listing determinations be based solely on the best scientific and commercial information available; economic impacts are not considered in making species listing determinations and are prohibited under the ESA. There are two ways by which a species may come to be listed (or delisted) under the ESA:

- NOAA Fisheries receives a petition from a person or organization requesting that NOAA lists a species as threatened or endangered, reclassify a species, or delist a species.

- NOAA Fisheries voluntarily chooses to examine the status of a species by initiating a status review of a species.

Values correspond to the number of MMPA Strategic or Depleted Marine Mammal Species listed each year in each region

Data Interpretation

Gauge and Trend Analyses were not appropriate for marine mammal data.

Data Background and Caveats

NOAA Fisheries prepares marine mammal stock assessment reports to track the status of marine mammal stocks. Some marine mammal stocks are thriving, while others are declining, and we often don’t know all the reasons behind a species or stock’s population trend. Because of this variability, it is difficult to indicate the state of an ecosystem or specific region using stock assessment data for marine mammal species that often range across multiple ecosystems and regions.

Description of Marine Mammal Strategic and Depleted Stocks (MMPA):

A stock is defined by the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), as a group of marine mammals of the same species or smaller taxa in a common spatial arrangement, that interbreed when mature. See a list of the marine mammal stocks NOAA protects under the MMPA.

A strategic stock is defined by the MMPA as a marine mammal stock—

- For which the level of direct human-caused mortality exceeds the potential biological removal level or PBR (defined by the MMPA as the maximum number of animals, not including natural mortalities, that may be removed from a marine mammal stock while allowing that stock to reach or maintain its optimum sustainable population); 

- Which, based on the best available scientific information, is declining and is likely to be listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) within the foreseeable future; or 

- Which is listed as a threatened or endangered species under the ESA, or is designated as depleted under the MMPA. 

A depleted stock is defined by the MMPA as any case in which—

- The Secretary of Commerce, after consultation with the Marine Mammal Commission and the Committee of Scientific Advisors on Marine Mammals established under MMPA title II, determines that a species or population stock is below its optimum sustainable population; 

- A State, to which authority for the conservation and management of a species or population stock is transferred under section 109, determines that such species or stock is below its optimum sustainable population; or 

- A species or population stock is listed as an endangered species or a threatened species under the ESA. 

Values correspond to the total coastal population for a given region

Description of time series:

The 2014 – 2018 average coastal population in Hawaii was substantially above historic levels, although the recent trend is not different from historical trends.  

Description of gauge:

The average coastal population in Hawaii between 2014 and 2018 was greater than 96% of all population levels between 1970 to 2018, again highlighting the substantial growth in the coastal population of this region.

Extreme Gauge values:

A value of zero on the gauge means that the average coastal population over the last 5 years of data was below any annual population level up until that point, while a value of 100 would indicate the average over that same period was above any annual population level up until that point.

Description of Coastal Population:

While marine ecosystems are important for people all across the country, they are essential for  people living in coastal communities. The population density of coastal counties is over six times greater than inland counties. In the U.S. coastal counties make up less than 10 percent of the total land area (not including Alaska), but account for 39 percent of the total population. From 1970 to 2010, the population of these counties increased by almost 40% and are projected to increase by over 10 million people or 8+% into the 2020s. 

The population density of an area is an important factor for economic planning, emergency preparedness, understanding environmental impacts, resource demand, and many other reasons. Thus, this indicator is important to track. We present the number of residents within all regions.

Indicator Source Information:

The American Community Survey (ACS) helps local officials, community leaders, and businesses understand the changes taking place in their communities. It is the premier source for detailed population and housing information about our nation. The 2020 ACS Data Update will be publicly available no later than November 30, 2021.

Data Background and Caveats:

The values represented here are coastal county population estimates for states bordering US Large Marine Ecosystems as calculated by the US Census Bureau from the American Community Survey.

Values correspond to percent change in the GDP of the Tourism Sector of Coastal Counties in US States that border a region

Description of Time Series: Between 2014 and 2018 the average change in coastal county tourism GDP showed an increasing trend.

Description of Gauge: The gauge value of 77 indicates that between 2014 and 2018 the average change in coastal county tourism sector GDP was much higher than the median change in coastal county tourism sector GDP between 2006 and 2018.

Extreme Gauge values:

A value of zero on the gauge means that the average coastal tourism GDP over the last 5 years of data was below any annual coastal tourism GDP level up until that point, while a value of 100 would indicate the average over that same period was above any annual coastal tourism GDP value up until that point.

Description of Coastal Tourism:

U.S. coasts are host to a multitude of travel, tourism, and recreation activities. To manage our coasts, plan for development, and assess impacts as a result of coastal hazards including sea level rise, it is important to have baseline economic information. To accomplish this, we need indicators of the economic value of recreation and tourism. We present the annual total change in billions of dollars of goods and services (GDP), employment and annual wages provided from tourism industries in the Gulf of Mexico, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, Hawaii-Pacific Islands, Southeast, and California Current regions. This data does not include industries located in U.S. territories. 

Indicator Source Information

Coastal tourism Gross Domestic Product is the total measure (in billions of 2012 dollars) of goods and services provided from various industries involved in tourism services and products along the coast. Data for Coastal Counties come from the US Census Bureau. This dataset represents US counties and independent cities which have at least one coastal border and select non-coastal counties and independent cities based on proximity to estuaries and other coastal counties. The dataset is built to support coastal and ocean planning and other activities pursuant to the Energy Policy Act, Coastal Zone Management Act, Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, National Environmental Policy Act, Rivers and Harbors Act and the Submerged Lands Act.

Values correspond to percent change in the total Employment of the Tourism Sector of Coastal Counties in US States that border a region

Description of Time Series: Between 2014 and 2018 the average change in coastal county employment showed no significant trend.

Description of Gauge: Between 2014 and 2018 the average change in coastal county tourism sector employment was lower than the median change in coastal county tourism sector employment between 2006 and 2018.

Extreme Gauge values:

A value of zero on the gauge means that the average coastal tourism employment over the last 5 years of data was below any annual coastal tourism employment level up until that point, while a value of 100 would indicate the average over that same period was above any annual coastal tourism employment level up until that point.

Description of Coastal Tourism:

U.S. coasts are host to a multitude of travel, tourism, and recreation activities. To manage our coasts, plan for development, and assess impacts as a result of coastal hazards including sea level rise, it is important to have baseline economic information. To accomplish this, we need indicators of the economic value of recreation and tourism. We present the annual total change in billions of dollars of goods and services (GDP), employment and annual wages provided from tourism industries in the Gulf of Mexico, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, Hawaii-Pacific Islands, Southeast, and California Current regions. This data does not include industries located in U.S. territories. 

Indicator Source Information:

Coastal tourism employment is the total measure of jobs in tourism industries along the coast.  Data for Coastal Counties come from the US Census Bureau. This dataset represents US counties and independent cities which have at least one coastal border and select non-coastal counties and independent cities based on proximity to estuaries and other coastal counties. The dataset is built to support coastal and ocean planning and other activities pursuant to the Energy Policy Act, Coastal Zone Management Act, Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, National Environmental Policy Act, Rivers and Harbors Act and the Submerged Lands Act.

Values correspond to percent change in the total real wage compensation of the Tourism Sector of Coastal Counties in US States that border a region

Description of Time Series: Between 2014 and 2018 the average change in coastal county real wage compensation showed no significant trend.

Description of Gauge: Between 2014 and 2018 the average change in coastal county tourism sector real wage compensation was higher than the median change in coastal county tourism sector real wage compensation between 2006 and 2018.

Extreme Gauge values:

A value of zero on the gauge means that the average coastal tourism wage compensation over the last 5 years of data was below any annual coastal tourism wage compensation level up until that point, while a value of 100 would indicate the average over that same period was above any annual coastal tourism wage compensation level up until that point.

Description of Coastal Tourism:

U.S. coasts are host to a multitude of travel, tourism, and recreation activities. To manage our coasts, plan for development, and assess impacts as a result of coastal hazards including sea level rise, it is important to have baseline economic information. To accomplish this, we need indicators of the economic value of recreation and tourism. We present the annual total change in billions of dollars of goods and services (GDP), employment and annual wages provided from tourism industries in the Gulf of Mexico, Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, Hawaii-Pacific Islands, Southeast, and California Current regions. This data does not include industries located in U.S. territories. 

Indicator Source Information:

Coastal tourism wage is the measure of wages (nominal) paid to employees in tourism industries along the coast. Data for Coastal Counties come from the US Census Bureau. This dataset represents US counties and independent cities which have at least one coastal border and select non-coastal counties and independent cities based on proximity to estuaries and other coastal counties. The dataset is built to support coastal and ocean planning and other activities pursuant to the Energy Policy Act, Coastal Zone Management Act, Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, National Environmental Policy Act, Rivers and Harbors Act and the Submerged Lands Act.

Values correspond to total employment in all industries in a given region

Description of time series:

Hawaiʻi’s average coastal employment between 2014 and 2018 was substantially above historical levels, although no trend is apparent over that same period.  

Description of gauge:

The gauge value of 90 indicates that coastal employment between 2014 and 2018 for Hawaii and the Pacific Islands was higher than 90% of all years between 1990 and 2018.

Extreme Gauge values:

A value of zero on the gauge means that the average coastal employment level over the last 5 years of data was below any annual employment level up until that point, while a value of 100 would indicate the average over that same period was above any annual employment level up until that point.

Description of coastal employment:

The total coastal employment is the number of jobs in coastal communities. Businesses in coastal counties employ tens of millions of people nationally. This includes hundreds of thousands of ocean-dependent businesses that pay over $100 billion in wages annually. Many coastal and ocean amenities attracting visitors are free, generating no direct employment, wages, or gross domestic product. However, these “nonmarket” features are key drivers for many coastal businesses. We present data for all regions.

Data Source :

Coastal employment numbers were downloaded from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ quarterly census of employment and wages, filtered to present only coastal county values using the Census Bureau’s list of coastal counties within each state. Of note is that these data fail to include self-employed individuals. Coastal county employment numbers were then summed within each region for reporting purposes.

Values correspond to landings in millions of metric tons

Description of time series:

Commercial landings from Hawai’i between 2015 and 2019 were similar to historical patterns of landings, with no trend apparent.  

Description of gauge:

The gauge value of 87 indicates that the mean annual commercial landings between 2015 and 2019 for Hawaii and the Pacific Islands was higher than 87% of all years between 1981 and 2019

Extreme Gauge values:

A value of zero on the gauge means that the average revenue or landings over the last 5 years of data was below any annual value up until that point, while a value of 100 would indicate the average value over that same period was above any annual value up until that point.

Description of Commercial Fishing (Landings and Revenue):

Commercial landings are the weight of, or revenue from, fish that are caught, brought to shore, processed, and sold for profit. It does not include sport or subsistence (to feed themselves) fishermen or for-hire sector, which earns its revenue from selling recreational fishing trips to saltwater anglers. 

Commercial landings make up a major part of coastal economies. U.S. commercial fisheries are among the world’s largest and most sustainable; producing seafood, fish meal, vitamin supplements, and a host of other products for both domestic and international consumers. 

The weight (tonnage), and revenue from the sale of commercial landings provides data on the ability of marine ecosystems to continue to supply these important products. 

Indicator Source Information:

Landings are reported in pounds of round (live) weight for all species or groups except univalve and bivalve mollusks, such as clams, mussels, oysters and scallops, which are reported as pounds of meats (excludes shell weight). Landings data may sometimes differ from state-reported landings due to our reporting of mollusks in meat weights rather than gallons, shell weight, or bushels. Also, NMFS includes some species such as kelp and oysters that are sometimes reported by state agricultural agencies and may not be included with state fishery agency landings data.

Data Background and Caveats:

All landings summaries will return only non confidential landing statistics. Federal statutes prohibit public disclosure of landings (or other information) that would allow identification of the data contributors and possibly put them at a competitive disadvantage. Most summarized landings are non confidential, but whenever confidential landings occur they have been combined with other landings and usually reported as "Withheld for Confidentiality" Total landings by state include confidential data and will be accurate, but landings reported by individual species may, in some instances, be misleading due to data confidentiality.

Landings data do not indicate the physical location of harvest but the location at which the landings either first crossed the dock or were reported from.

Many fishery products are gutted or otherwise processed while at sea and are landed in a product type other than round (whole) weight. Our data partners have standard conversion factors for the majority of the commonly caught species that convert their landing weights from any product type to whole weight. It is the whole weight that is displayed in our web site landing statistics. Caution should be exercised when using these statistics. An example of a potential problem is when landings statistics are used to monitor fishery quotas. In some situations, specific conversion factors may have been designated in fishery management plans or Federal rule making that differ from those historically used by NOAA Fisheries in reporting landings statistics.

The dollar value of the landings are ex-vessel (as paid to the fisherman at time of first sale) and are reported as nominal (current at the time of reporting) values. Users can use the Consumer Price Index (CPI) or the Producer Price Index (PPI) to convert these nominal landing values into real (deflated) values.

Landings do not include aquaculture products except for clams, mussels and oysters.

Pacific landings summarized by state include an artificial “state” designation of “At-Sea Process, Pac.” This designation was assigned to landings consisting of primarily whiting caught in the EEZ off Washington and Oregon that were processed aboard large vessels while at sea. No Pacific state lists these fish on their trip tickets which are used to report state fishery landing, hence the at-sea processor designation was used to insure that they would be listed as a U.S. landing.

Landing summaries are compiled from data bases that overlap in time and geographic coverage, and come from both within and outside of NOAA Fisheries. 

Values correspond to real revenue is 2020 US Dollars

Description of time series:

Commercial landings from Hawai’i between 2015 and 2019 were similar to historical patterns of landings, with no trend apparent.  

Description of gauge:

The gauge value of 79 indicates that the mean annual commercial revenue between 2015 and 2019 for Hawai’i and the Pacific Islands was higher than 79% of all years between 1981 and 2019

Extreme Gauge values:

A value of zero on the gauge means that the average revenue or landings over the last 5 years of data was below any annual value up until that point, while a value of 100 would indicate the average value over that same period was above any annual value up until that point.

Description of Commercial Fishing (Landings and Revenue):

Commercial landings are the weight of, or revenue from, fish that are caught, brought to shore, processed, and sold for profit. It does not include sport or subsistence (to feed themselves) fishermen or for-hire sector, which earns its revenue from selling recreational fishing trips to saltwater anglers. 

Commercial landings make up a major part of coastal economies. U.S. commercial fisheries are among the world’s largest and most sustainable; producing seafood, fish meal, vitamin supplements, and a host of other products for both domestic and international consumers. 

The weight (tonnage), and revenue from the sale of commercial landings provides data on the ability of marine ecosystems to continue to supply these important products. 

Indicator Source Information:

Landings are reported in pounds of round (live) weight for all species or groups except univalve and bivalve mollusks, such as clams, mussels, oysters and scallops, which are reported as pounds of meats (excludes shell weight). Landings data may sometimes differ from state-reported landings due to our reporting of mollusks in meat weights rather than gallons, shell weight, or bushels. Also, NMFS includes some species such as kelp and oysters that are sometimes reported by state agricultural agencies and may not be included with state fishery agency landings data.

Data Background and Caveats:

All landings summaries will return only non confidential landing statistics. Federal statutes prohibit public disclosure of landings (or other information) that would allow identification of the data contributors and possibly put them at a competitive disadvantage. Most summarized landings are non confidential, but whenever confidential landings occur they have been combined with other landings and usually reported as "Withheld for Confidentiality" Total landings by state include confidential data and will be accurate, but landings reported by individual species may, in some instances, be misleading due to data confidentiality.

Landings data do not indicate the physical location of harvest but the location at which the landings either first crossed the dock or were reported from.

Many fishery products are gutted or otherwise processed while at sea and are landed in a product type other than round (whole) weight. Our data partners have standard conversion factors for the majority of the commonly caught species that convert their landing weights from any product type to whole weight. It is the whole weight that is displayed in our web site landing statistics. Caution should be exercised when using these statistics. An example of a potential problem is when landings statistics are used to monitor fishery quotas. In some situations, specific conversion factors may have been designated in fishery management plans or Federal rule making that differ from those historically used by NOAA Fisheries in reporting landings statistics.

The dollar value of the landings are ex-vessel (as paid to the fisherman at time of first sale) and are reported as nominal (current at the time of reporting) values. Users can use the Consumer Price Index (CPI) or the Producer Price Index (PPI) to convert these nominal landing values into real (deflated) values.

Landings do not include aquaculture products except for clams, mussels and oysters.

Pacific landings summarized by state include an artificial “state” designation of “At-Sea Process, Pac.” This designation was assigned to landings consisting of primarily whiting caught in the EEZ off Washington and Oregon that were processed aboard large vessels while at sea. No Pacific state lists these fish on their trip tickets which are used to report state fishery landing, hence the at-sea processor designation was used to insure that they would be listed as a U.S. landing.

Landing summaries are compiled from data bases that overlap in time and geographic coverage, and come from both within and outside of NOAA Fisheries. 

Values correspond to cumulative number of angler trips

Description of time series:

Between 2016 and 2020, recreational fishing effort in the Hawaiʻi-Pacific Islands is around historic levels and shows a significant upward trend. 

Description of gauge:

The gauge value of 72 indicates that the recreational fishing effort between 2016 and 2020 for Hawaiʻi and the Pacific Islands was higher than 72% of the recreational fishing effort values between 2003 and 2020

 Extreme Gauge values:

A value of zero on the gauge means that the average effort or harvest over the last 5 years of data was below any annual value up until that point, while a value of 100 would indicate the average value over that same period was above any annual value up until that point.

Description of Recreational Fishing (Effort and Harvest):

U.S. saltwater recreational fishing is an important source of seafood, jobs, and recreation for millions of anglers and for-hire recreational businesses. Recreational fishing effort is measured as “Angler Trips”, which is the number of recreational fishing trips people go on. Recreational fishing harvest is the number of fish caught and brought to shore on recreational fishing trips. 

Recreational effort and harvest help us understand how recreational opportunities and seafood derived from our marine environment is changing over time. Fisheries managers use this data to set annual catch limits and fishing regulations, including season lengths, size, and daily catch limits. We present the total number of fish harvested and angler trips annually for all marine fish in all regions. 

Indicator Source Information

Recreational harvest and effort data pulled from National Summary Query. Units of data are in Effort in Angler Trips and Harvest in numbers of fish. The data from these queries is used by state, regional and federal fisheries scientists and managers to maintain healthy and sustainable fish stocks.

Data Background and Caveats:

To properly interpret this information, it is important to consider the following key points:

• When comparing harvest estimates across an extended time series, note differences in sampling coverage through the years. Some estimates may not be comparable over long time series.
• Changes may occur between preliminary and final estimates and year to year, meaning that the data may change when updated. Please review the Limitations and other sections on the Using the Data page from the source for more information.

Values correspond to harvest in millions of fish

Description of time series:

Between 2016 and 2020, recreational harvest from Hawaii are around historic levels. There is a significant upward trend apparent. 

Description of gauge:

The gauge value of 78 indicates that the recreational fishing harvest between 2016 and 2020 for Hawaii and the Pacific Islands was higher than 78% of the recreational fishing harvest values between 2003 and 2020

 Extreme Gauge values:

A value of zero on the gauge means that the average effort or harvest over the last 5 years of data was below any annual value up until that point, while a value of 100 would indicate the average value over that same period was above any annual value up until that point.

Description of Recreational Fishing (Effort and Harvest):

U.S. saltwater recreational fishing is an important source of seafood, jobs, and recreation for millions of anglers and for-hire recreational businesses. Recreational fishing effort is measured as “Angler Trips”, which is the number of recreational fishing trips people go on. Recreational fishing harvest is the number of fish caught and brought to shore on recreational fishing trips. 

Recreational effort and harvest help us understand how recreational opportunities and seafood derived from our marine environment is changing over time. Fisheries managers use this data to set annual catch limits and fishing regulations, including season lengths, size, and daily catch limits. We present the total number of fish harvested and angler trips annually for all marine fish in all regions. 

Indicator Source Information

Recreational harvest and effort data pulled from National Summary Query. Units of data are in Effort in Angler Trips and Harvest in numbers of fish. The data from these queries is used by state, regional and federal fisheries scientists and managers to maintain healthy and sustainable fish stocks.

Data Background and Caveats:

To properly interpret this information, it is important to consider the following key points:

• When comparing catch estimates across an extended time series, note differences in sampling coverage through the years. Some estimates may not be comparable over long time series.
• Changes may occur between preliminary and final estimates and year to year, meaning that the data may change when updated. Please review the Limitations and other sections on the Using the Data page from the source for more information.

The x-axis on this time series represents years and the y-axis represents the percent of communities that are moderate to highly engaged in commercial fishing across Hawaiʻi. Commercial fishing engagement is measured by the number of permits, fish dealers, and vessel landings across Hawaiʻi. 

Description of time series:

This time series shows the percent of communities moderately or highly engaged in commercial fishing in Hawaiʻi  from 2009 to 2018. Between 2013 and 2018 (highlighted in green) the percent of communities moderately or highly engaged in commercial fishing showed a downward trend. 

Description of gauge:

The gauge value of 30 indicates that the average annual commercial fishing engagement between 2013 and 2018 for Hawaiʻi was higher than 30% of all years in the time series.

Extreme Gauge values:

A value of zero on the gauge means that the average percentage of communities engaged in commercial or recreational fishing over the last 5 years of data was below any annual engagement level up until that point, while a value of 100 would indicate the average over that same period was above any engagement level up until that point.

Description of Fishing Engagement:

Recreational and commercial fishing engagement is measured by the presence of fishing activity in coastal communities. The commercial engagement index is measured through permits, fish dealers, and vessel landings.  The data for recreational engagement indicators varies by state. A high rank within these indicates more engagement in fisheries. For details on both data sources and indicator development, please see https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/socioeconomics/social-indicators-fishing-communities-0.

NOAA Monitors recreational and commercial fishing engagement to better understand the social and economic impacts of fishing policies and regulations on our nation’s vital fishing communities. This and other social indicators help assess a coastal community’s resilience. NOAA works with state and local partners to monitor these indicators. We present data from the Northeast, Southeast, Gulf of Mexico, California Current, Alaska, and Pacific Island regions.

Data Source:

Commercial fishing engagement data is from the National Marine Fisheries Service’s social indicator data portal:https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/data-and-tools/social-indicators/ The percentage of all communities in each region classified as medium, medium high, or highly engaged is presented for both recreational and commercial fishing.

The x-axis on this time series represents years and the y-axis represents the percent of communities that are moderately to highly engaged in recreational fishing across Hawai’i.

Description of time series:

This time series shows the percent of communities moderately to highly engaged in recreational fishing in Hawai’i and the Pacific Islands from 2010 to 2018. Between 2013 and 2018 (highlighted in green) the percent of communities moderately or highly engaged in recreational fishing showed a downward trend.

Description of gauge:

The gauge value of 33 indicates that the average annual recreational fishing engagement between 2013 and 2018 for Hawai’i and the Pacific Islands was only higher than 33% of all years between 2010 and 2018

Extreme Gauge values:

A value of zero on the gauge means that the average percentage of communities engaged in commercial or recreational fishing over the last 5 years of data was below any annual engagement level up until that point, while a value of 100 would indicate the average over that same period was above any engagement level up until that point.

Description of Fishing Engagement:

Recreational and commercial fishing engagement is measured by the presence of fishing activity in coastal communities. The commercial engagement index is measured through permits, fish dealers, and vessel landings.  The data for recreational engagement indicators varies by state. A high rank within these indicates more engagement in fisheries. For details on both data sources and indicator development, please see https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/socioeconomics/social-indicators-fishing-communities-0.

NOAA Monitors recreational and commercial fishing engagement to better understand the social and economic impacts of fishing policies and regulations on our nation’s vital fishing communities. This and other social indicators help assess a coastal community’s resilience. NOAA works with state and local partners to monitor these indicators. We present data from the Northeast, Southeast, Gulf of Mexico, California Current, Alaska, and Pacific Island regions.

Indicator Source Information:

The Hawai'i recreational engagement index is measured using the number of trips for charter, private recreational, shore and all modes combined.

Data Source:

Commercial fishing engagement data is from the National Marine Fisheries Service’s social indicator data portal:https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/data-and-tools/social-indicators/ The percentage of all communities in each region classified as medium, medium high, or highly engaged is presented for both recreational and commercial fishing

Beach closures are the number of days when beach water quality is determined to be unsafe.

Data Interpretation:

Time series: This time series shows the average number of beach closure days in the Hawai‘i–Pacific Islands region from 2000 to 2020. During the last five years there has been a significant upward trend while values have remained within the 10th and 90th percentiles of all observed data in the time series.

Gauge: The gauge value of 62 indicates that between 2016 and 2020 the average number of beach closure days in the Hawai‘i–Pacific Islands region was higher than the median value of beach closure days between 2000 and 2020 which was 0.

Gauge values

0–10: The five-year beach closure days average is very low compared to the median value.

10–25: The five-year beach closure days average is much lower than the median value.

25–50: The five-year beach closure days average is lower than the median value.

50: The five-year beach closure days average equals the median value.

50–75: The five-year beach closure days average is higher than the median value.

75–90: The five-year beach closure days average is much higher than the median value.

90–100: The five-year beach closure days average is very high compared to the median. 

* gauge value is the percentile rank of the last five years based on the time series.

Description of beach closures:

The beach closure indicator is the number of days a beach is closed, because the water and/or air quality is determined to be unsafe. Unsafe water and air quality may have significant impacts on human health, local economies, and ecosystems. 

Indicator and source information:

Unsafe water quality may have significant impacts on human health, local economies, and the ecosystem. Beach water quality is determined by the concentration of bacteria in the water (either Enterococcus sp. or Escherichia coli). 

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) supports coastal states, counties and tribes in monitoring beach water quality, and notifying the public when beaches must be closed. The information presented is from states, counties, and tribes that submit data to the EPA Beach Program reporting database (BEACON). Data obtained from the EPA BEACON website have been provided to EPA by the coastal and Great Lakes states, tribes and territories that receive grants under the BEACH Act. Data were refined to closure, by state or territory, by year.

Data background and limitations:

Data compiled by states or territories are combined in regions defined as US Large Marine Ecosystems (LME). Changes in the number of beach closure days may be driven by changes in the number of beaches monitored under the BEACH Act versus by state and local municipalities and not by changes in water and/or air quality. Not all US beach closures are captured in this database, because not all beaches in a state or territory are monitored through the EPA BEACH Act. Data that were not identified to a water body or identified as inland water were not included. Data for beaches monitored by state and local municipalities are not included. 

Values correspond to the number of events in a given year

Interpretation of Time Series

Billion dollar disasters in Hawaii are infrequent, with only one disaster of that magnitude being recorded between 1980 and 2020. There is no trend in the number of disasters.   

Extreme Gauge values

A value of zero on the gauge means that the average number of disasters over the last 5 years of data was below any annual level up until that point, while a value of 100 would indicate the average over that same period was above any annual number of disasters up until that point. 

Description of billion dollar disasters:

In the United States, the number of weather and climate-related disasters exceeding 1 billion dollars has been increasing since 1980. These events have significant impacts to coastal economies and communities. The Billion Dollar Disaster indicator provides information on the frequency and the total estimated costs of major weather and climate events that occur in the United States. This indicator compiles the annual number of weather and climate-related disasters across seven event types. We Present the total annual number of disaster events for all regions.

Indicator Source Information:

Billion dollar disaster event frequency data are taken from NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information. The number of disasters within each region were summed for every year of available data. Although the number is the count of unique disaster events within a region, the same disaster can impact multiple regions, meaning a sum across regions will overestimate the unique number of disasters.

Data Background and Caveats:

Events are included if they are estimated to cause more than one billion U.S. dollars in direct losses. The cost estimates of these events are adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and are based on costs documented in several Federal and private-sector databases.