Last month I wrote an editorial about the impact of creating a heritage fishing area off our Central Coast as described in the Journal's February "Marine Sanctuary" column, Proposal For Protecting Local Fishing Fleet: Create a Heritage Fishing Area.
In the March "Marine Sanctuary" column, I was amazed to see that the article was promoting the expansion of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) to include SLO County, "Habitats Worth Protecting with National Marine Sanctuary Designation."
The article states "Panelists described the business partnerships, educational curricula, volunteer and resource protection programs and benefits to the tourism industry the sanctuary has brought to their communities." The writers recounted and rebutted criticisms from the fishing industry.
This month I'm commenting on the article "Panel Discusses Benefits of National Marine Sanctuary" from the February issue of the SLO Coast Journal.
The Sierra Club article starts with the declaration:
"As part of the longstanding effort to bring national marine sanctuary protections to the waters of San Luis Obispo County, a panel of experts on the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary came to the Sycamore Mineral Springs Resort in Avila Beach on Saturday, February 25, to meet with SLO County business owners for a discussion of the economic benefits of a national marine sanctuary."
Ten years ago the same proposal was floated through our community. Many citizens became involved in the process and the proposal was dropped from the MBNMS reauthorization process due to our communities speaking out against SLO County inclusion. In 2002-3 we had several local meetings and the Morro Bay City Council voted not to support an expansion of MBNMS to our area. (See City Council Letter) Our city council determined that MBNMS was not suited to manage our area. The Marine Interest Group (started by Lois Capps to investigate local sanctuary interest) came to the same conclusion. (See MIG )
With great interest I watched a meeting (aired on CAL-SPAN) with keynote speaker Congresswoman Capps. Congresswoman Capps pointed out that NOAA had a 14% decrease in budget and current sanctuaries are suffering budget shortfalls. The panel's theme is just do it (expand MBNMS) and the money will miraculously appear.
"The MBNMS panelists described the business partnerships, educational curricula, volunteer and resource protection programs and benefits to the tourism industry the sanctuary has brought to their communities. They recounted and rebutted criticisms from the fishing industry and noted the work of the sanctuary in creating a Community Supported Fishery (CSF) program."
Fifty-four (54:00) minutes into the panel's formal presentation, Dr. Chris Harrold discussed "benefits" the sanctuary had helped develop with regard to education and fishermen. I found it interesting that our fishermen and women, without government help or funding, have many of the same types of programs.
Monterey and Santa Cruz shouldn't be compared to San Luis Obispo and Morro Bay. We are different and have different needs. Many potential benefits cited are already a reality here, if not on the same scale. We have marine education — the Central Coast Women for Fisheries is a good example of local involvement with education. Kids at Sea is another program that takes local youth to sea and provides the hands-on experience of a life time. The Faces of California Fishing is an outreach program that shares information about the commercial fishing community on the Central Coast. Faces representatives travel to conferences, festivals, and fairs promoting sustainable fishing and local access to seafood. The Faces web site also has information about fishermen in your local harbor that sell directly to the public. Faces on Facebook also has updates of upcoming events and appearances. (See also: Good Times, Santa Cruz The Faces of Fishing article.)
We also have the first community supported fishery (SLO Fresh Catch) program in the state. Subscribers receive fresh local seafood at drop points in SLO County. All of the programs are funded and staffed by local volunteers. You are welcome to contact any of the above groups for additional information, volunteer or donate. This year Kids at Sea could really use more community involvement.
During the first hour of the broadcast, panelists made formal presentations and promoted their ideas about the benefits of the MBNMS in their areas of expertise. The meeting became interesting when the question and answer period started. Our local citizens asked some important questions and the response's may surprise you. I would like to focus on some of the answers that relate to the "fishermen's criticisms."
(1:11:00) One hour and eleven minutes into the video Dan Haifley of the O'Neill Sea Odyssey (a Santa Cruz nonprofit that has a marine education program) tells a story about the Stagnaro family (150 years of fishing on Monterey Bay) and how they now have a whale watching business in Santa Cruz.
Tom: This was a success story? Is this the legacy of a family that placed several million seafood dinners on our plates? He goes on to say that the fishermen took a neutral position with regard to creating MBNMS. I suggest you read the 2001 letter from Members of Congress Anna Eshoo and Sam Farr. (See: Eshoo-Farr Letter)
(1:14:00) Dr Harrold states "the Sanctuary has forged a very positive working relationship with the agricultural community in the Salinas Valley, a partnership where the sanctuary works with farmers . . . for best management practices."
Tom: Were farmers in 1992 (when MBNMS was founded) aware of they would have a new partner?
(1:17:00) Dan Haifly states you need a coalition of agriculture and tourism interests, but ignores fishermen to garner sanctuary support.
Tom: Dr. Harrold did mention that the Monterey fishermen were no longer on board.
(1:19:00) A winery and agriculture question is asked of the panel. Dr. Harrold paints a pretty picture of the relationship with Salinas Valley agricultural community.
Tom: Call your friends in the Valley and ask them how the sanctuary has enhanced their lives. There are at least two sides to every story.
(1:22.00) Dr. Chris Harrold of the Monterey Bay Aquarium goes on to say Leon Panetta being a good politician wouldn't clarify the "promise" and the designation document states the sanctuary will work with California Department of Fish & Game (CDF&G) and the Pacific Fishery Management Council, but if there isn't a suitable resolution the Sanctuary can enact regulations. This is the threat that has fishermen upset." He goes on to say "two or three generations from now" the sanctuary will have enhanced fishing and we will enjoy benefits from the sanctuaries control. (See: Dave Danboms Letter)
The MBNMS has continually influenced the fisheries in the Sanctuary by developing "science " that promotes conservation and management with a holistic approach. The Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) initiative is the next project we will spend tax dollars researching. We fishermen feel the entire ocean is essential fish habitat. The EFH document describes a new research proposal that will undoubtedly make additional changes that will effect fisheries in the future. The results of the EFH will be presented to the California DF&G and the Pacific Fisheries Management Council "as best science" with requests for additional regulations within the sanctuary. This is one more example of how the MBNMS influences fisheries without making regulations. Dr. Harrold stated in his presentation the MBNMS hasn't "made any fishery regulations-zero." While the statement may be true it's not accurate.
The Morro Bay fleet was an active participant in seeing 3.8 million acres declared EFH by the Commerce Department in 2006. See the attached chart at the end of the EFH document to get a sense of the amount of protected areas already in place.
(1:24.30) "Cal Poly and commercial fishermen are working on trawl impacts very harmoniously." Tom: Actually there are several ongoing research projects. This is only one of the several collaborative projects that were a result of the Marine Interest Group that was formed in 2003 to examine the possibility of expanding the MBNMS to SLO County.The MIG determined that a sanctuary wasn't in the best interests of our communities. (MIG)
(1:25.00) Dan Haifley sums up by pointing out the niche businesses being created and adds the fisheries are declining anyway.
(1:25.40) Dr Harrold points out that a current Ecotrust study states the income (or Ex Vessel Value, price paid to fishermen at the dock) today is the same as 1992.
Tom: Yet fisheries are declining?
(1:25.20) Former Santa Cruz City Councilwoman Cynthia Mathews goes on about talking to your "electeds" and work on grass roots support.
Tom: In 2002-3 we had several local meetings and our Morro Bay City Council voted not to support an expansion of MBNMS to our area. (See: City Council Letter). Our city council determined that MBNMS was not suited to manage our area.The Marine Interest Group (started by Lois Capps to investigate local sanctuary interest) came to the same conclusion.
The Sanctuary Advisory Committee (SAC) is a group of twenty stakeholders that should be able to give a broad spectrum of views and influence their sanctuary. The SAC members aren't allowed to add agenda items unless the MBNMS supervisor approves the agenda item in advance.Many SAC stakeholders are frustrated and we would not have any more influence than Monterey locals.
At the February SAC meeting a letter was presented by MBNMS staff for SAC approval to advance the border to include SLO County. Testimony at the meeting indicated there is wide support for inclusion to the sanctuary. We do have a small group of people that go to meetings and keep pushing for inclusion to the MBNMS but for years the local community has avoided this inclusion.
These comments were presented at the MBNMS SAC meeting during October in Cambria:
"Andrea Lueker, City Manager for Morro Bay, provided an April 2003 resolution from the City of Morro Bay in opposition of the creation of a national marine sanctuary in San Luis Obispo County coastal area and opposition of expanding a national marine sanctuary in that area. Lueker requested that if staff is coming to San Luis Obispo County the City of Morro Bay should be invited to the meeting. (Cambria is the most southern site the SAC meets at once a year. All other meetings are in the Monterey Bay area).
Steve McGrath, Harbor Manager for Port San Luis harbor, stated the National Marine Sanctuaries Act was first authorized in 1972 and has not been re-authorized since1990. The current reauthorization proposed is significantly different. He is not in support of national marine sanctuary expansion. It would seem premature to support or encourage expansion until the reauthorization is complete. McGrath supports the commercial fishing industry and is concerned over the impacts on that industry if there is an expansion south in already regulated waters. McGrath echoes Andrea Lueker's comments regarding discussions related to expansion or a new sanctuary and ask that Port San Luis be brought in early in the discussions." (These quotes were taken from SAC Cambria meeting minutes Oct 2012)
The SAC, at its February 2012 meeting, considered sending a letter to NOAA asking that additional sanctuaries and expansion of exiting sanctuaries be considered. It postponed action until its April meeting in Salinas to gather more information. If the letter to NOAA is passed at the next SAC meeting, we will have our local wishes ignored.
On the Central Coast we have a recognizable sense of place, a "brand" that brings value to our community. It differentiates us from other California communities and is recognizable by locals and visitors. If we are included in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary we won't stand apart. We'll be overwhelmed by the largest sanctuary in the US. Our representation on the SAC will be minimal and our benefits will be diminished. MBNMS may get some additional funding but we won't have a say in the way it's spent regardless of how expansion proponents spin it.
The Morro Bay Commercial Fishermen's Organization promotes sustainable stewardship of the resource through transparency (one can track every pound of fish by species landed in Morro Bay on the CDF&G website, regulatory compliance, our fishermen are some of the most compliant in the world due to the maturity of the industry, permit requirements, enforcement and even intrinsic sustainability based on a model of small boats, family-run businesses focused on high value, not high volume and a host of temporal and spatial restrictions, collaboration with science, regulators, and NGOs. Our fishing fleet is currently healthy and conducting fishing in an ages old, small-scale manner and our local ocean is vibrant. We concur with The Sierra Club and the Surfrider Foundation that our ocean needs to be healthy and protected, but disagree on the vehicle.
The SAC web site hasn't posted the minutes for the February meeting. The next meeting is April 19-2012 in Salinas. The web site hasn't published any information about that meeting either. I was informed by a SAC member that the letter requesting absorbing SLO County will be considered again at the April meeting.
Please tell your friends to email their comments to MontereyBay@noaa.gov, Att: SAC. Or you can send a fax to (831) 647-4250, write a letter to MBNMS Main Office, 299 Foam Street, Monterey, California 93940, or phone (831) 647-4201.
