Essays A Blueprint for the Oceans: Implications of Two National Commission Reports for Conservation Practitioners ELISE F. GRANEK, ∗ DANIEL R. BRUMBAUGH,† SCOTT A. HEPPELL,‡ SELINA S. HEPPELL,‡ AND DAVID SECORD§ ∗ Department of Zoology, Oregon State University, 3029 Cordley Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, U.S.A., email graneke@science.oregonstate.edu †Center for Biodiversity and Conservation, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, NY 10024, U.S.A.; and National Marine Protected Areas Center, Science Institute, 110 Shaffer Road, Santa Cruz, CA 95060, U.S.A. ‡Department of Fisheries & Wildlife, Oregon State University, 104 Nash Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331, U.S.A. §Program on the Environment, University of Washington at Seattle, Box 352802, Seattle, WA 98195-2802 U.S.A. and IAS Environmental Science Program, University of Washington at Tacoma, Box 358436, 1900 Commerce Street, Tacoma, WA 98402-3100, U.S.A. Abstract: In the first comprehensive reviews since 1969, two high-level reports on the status of U.S. marine ecosystems and resources have been released: that of the nongovernmental Pew Oceans Commission in 2003 and that of the congressionally mandated U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy in 2004. Although the two com- missions differed in the breadth and depth of their mandates, their findings on the state of our oceans and need for new management approaches are similar, and their major recommendations for science, governance, management and conservation, and education echo and reinforce each other. The history behind the two commissions and the structure and objectives of each remind us of the crucial roles conservation practition- ers and scientists must play in the implementation of report recommendations. The reports suggest priorities for conservation practitioners to improve science, management, conservation, governance, and education to better manage and protect ocean resources and ecosystems. To redirect activities affecting the state of global marine resources, integrated research; education and outreach by terrestrial, aquatic, and marine conserva- tion practitioners; and a clear definition of their roles in the implementation of recommendations is essential. Marine ecosystems provide a test case of society’s ability to manage complexity in human and natural systems in an integrated manner, with extensive opportunities for participation by conservation practitioners from all disciplines. Key Words: conservation and management, marine ecosystem, ocean governance, Pew Oceans Commission, U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy Un Anteproyecto para los Oc´ eanos: Implicaciones de Dos Reportes de Comisiones Nacionales para Practicantes de la Conservaci´ on Resumen: En las primeras revisiones integrales desde 1969, se han publicado dos reportes de alto nivel sobre el estatus de los ecosistemas y recursos marinos de E.U.A.: el de la no gubernamental Comisi´ on Pew para los Oc´ eanos en 2003, y el de la Comisi´ on de E.U.A. sobre Pol´ ıticas para los Oc´ eanos, ordenada por el Congresoen 2004. Aunque las dos comisiones difirieron en la amplitud y profundidad de sus trabajos, sus hallazgos sobre el estado de nuestros oc´ eanos y la necesidad de nuevos enfoques de manejo son similares, y sus principales recomendaciones para la ciencia, el control, el manejo y conservaci´ on y la educaci´ on hacen eco y se refuerzan mutuamente. La historia detr´ as de las comisiones y la estructura y objetivos de cada una nos recuerdan el papel crucial que deben jugar los practicantes y cient´ ıficos de la conservaci´ on en la implementaci´ on de las Paper submitted December 20, 2004; revised manuscript accepted March 15, 2005. 1008 Conservation Biology 1008–1018 C 2005 Society for Conservation Biology DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00221.x