At their November meeting the Marine Life Protection Act's (MLPA) Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) cobbled together an "integrated preferred alternative" map (see image) of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) to be submitted to the California Fish & Game Commission (FGC). This map and the three maps previously created by the stakeholder's groups and submitted to the BRTF will be considered by the FGC at their upcoming meeting in Los Angeles on December 9 and 10.
When the MLPA was passed and signed in 1999, I was very hopeful that it would put the State of California in the vanguard of marine protection due to the act's original focus on the use of science to locate and design an appropriate network of MPAs to ensure high quality examples of specified marine ecosystems receive protection, and that the network will create spillover of eggs, larvae and adults from these areas into the adjacent unprotected areas. It has been shown in numerous scientific studies that such systems can work both to conserve ecosystems from excessive human interference and improve the quality of recreational and commercial fishing in the adjacent unprotected areas.
I attempted to follow the decision making by the BRTF during their November meeting, and found that decisions were being made so quickly, I couldn't follow them. My sense (as well as that of some participants in the meeting) of the decisions made, especially in the creation of the "integrated preferred alternative" map for SoCal, is that the decisions too often went contrary to the best science and instead sided with the economic interests involved. Certainly the current economic climate in the State of California is far worse than when the MLPA was first passed. However, the economic considerations were not to be the primary factors considered... the science was.
Certainly several of the maps represent a step upward in the protection of our marine ecosystems. For that I am grateful... and we all should be since it is well past the time when these important conservation approaches should have been taken IMHO. However, I am concerned that with the increased closures of areas on the mainland coast, there will be added fishing pressure on Catalina waters. Three of the four maps seem to do a decent job of protecting Catalina's leeward coast from too much impact. There is a network, less effective than I'd hoped, but a network nonetheless on that coastline. However, I believe there are insufficient closures on the windward side of Catalina.
Certainly the angling community presented a case for the economic impacts on recreational fishing activities. Many in the dive community sat back and did relatively little, and therefore were not heard. I feel the economic contribution of SCUBA diving to the economy of southern California was not adequately assessed or seriously considered. We have what are considered world class kelp forest diving sites here on Catalina. Through my international dive travel and visits here by divers from many different countries across the globe, I have seen the value of these waters in attracting non-consumptive recreational and technical divers to our island. The economic importance of SCUBA divers extends well beyond the boundaries of California. While the great fishing in our waters in decades past drew anglers from all over the world decades and a century ago, the waters have since been overfished and no longer have the international draw they once did in earlier times. SCUBA diving however continues to attract visitors from around the world to experience our magnificent kelp forests.
The ecological quality of the island waters is therefore very important in attracting divers and ensuring a good dive experience for them. The economic impacts of SCUBA diving need to be weighed in as effectively as those of the fishing community. More important to me is that the future health of our marine waters needs to be restored after decades of cumulative overfishing. The waters off Catalina outside Avalon tend to be the cleanest and most pollution free in southern California. These factors make recovery here even more likely. I am hopeful that divers will speak up either directly by attending the FGC meeting in Los Angeles, or by submitting written statements via e-mail to the Commision at fgc@fgc.ca.gov.
I don't like to put words in the mouths (or keyboards) of others. I assume too many repetitious e-mails using the same language are less effective in reaching the Commission than a few that are independently written. However, here are a few of the talking points I see that may be important to include. Weigh them based on your own knowledge and experience.
1. The mainland MPA closures will redirect fishing pressure to Catalina and other offshore locations just as the closure of certain areas of Anacapa have caused increased commercial fishing pressure for squid in Catalina waters, further reducing food resources for many species including white sea bass and giant sea bass.
2. The MPA network on the leeward side of Catalina has created a reasonable (although by no means optimal) network of reserves designed that also allows fishing for pelagics to be relatively unaffected. This shows a good balance between competing uses since pelagic fish are not intended to be directly protected by MPAs.
3. The windward side of Catalina presents a whole set of different marine habitats due to the consistently higher energy environment there, the cooler water temperatures, longer daylength, and other factors on that side. Species such as mussels that dominate in portions of these wave swept coasts are far rarer on the calmer leeward side. Lower temperatures there create conditions more favorable to cooler water species like painted greenling and lingcod than on the leeward side (where they are usually found deeper if at all).
4. Because of the unique differences between Catalina's leeward and windward coasts, adequate networks of MPAs should be established along BOTH coasts to more fully capture the diversity of the island habitats. Being an island, Catalina has these unique differences along its 54 mile coastline unlike any comparable stretch of mainland coasts. Its highly dissected coastline also provides a wide range of microhabitats on each side.
5. To be truly effective as a network of reserves, major reserve sites should be located up-current to ensure that eggs, larvae and adults are dispersed to other protected sites as well as the adjacent unprotected areas. Although protection of Farnsworth Bank is critical, the extension of that reserve area to encompass just a small part of the windward coast occurs at a location where the island is near its widest. Spillover produced from that region way well be swept by currents past the southern windward coast of the island and out to the open ocean where they will do neither the ecosystems nor the anglers any good. Ideally at least one reserve north of that area, perhaps on part of the West End, and hopefully a second one perhaps near the Little Harbor-Ben Weston area would greatly improve the network on that side. The Farnsworth MPA should be extended further south past China Point into the Bight on the south windward coast to better ensure egg, larval and adult fish along that imnportant coastal stretch. It should also protect more of the prime squid harvest area since the excessive take of these important members of our natural food webs affects a host of species important to both healthy ecosystems and recreational fishing. If excess harvest of squid is being burned on the mainland as I have heard reported, this despicable activity should be made unlawful.
6. I would like to thank the creators of several of the proposed maps for affording real protection to the Casino Point Dive Park. Although this site does not meet many of the ecological guidelines for an effective reserve or network component, it is an important location for the many thousands of divers who dive it each year. It offers a great opportunity to ensure the educational value of this site.
Take some time to consider this, craft your own input using this and your own observations and take the time to contact the Fish & Game Commision at fgc@fgc.ca.gov before their meeting on December 9/10th. Our voices need to be heard in this last major public meeting in the South Coast process.
Blue areas are proposed State Marine Conservation Areas (SMCA) and red areas are proposed State Marie Reserves (SMR). Both provide some protection although the SMRs provide the most complete protection.
When the MLPA was passed and signed in 1999, I was very hopeful that it would put the State of California in the vanguard of marine protection due to the act's original focus on the use of science to locate and design an appropriate network of MPAs to ensure high quality examples of specified marine ecosystems receive protection, and that the network will create spillover of eggs, larvae and adults from these areas into the adjacent unprotected areas. It has been shown in numerous scientific studies that such systems can work both to conserve ecosystems from excessive human interference and improve the quality of recreational and commercial fishing in the adjacent unprotected areas.
I attempted to follow the decision making by the BRTF during their November meeting, and found that decisions were being made so quickly, I couldn't follow them. My sense (as well as that of some participants in the meeting) of the decisions made, especially in the creation of the "integrated preferred alternative" map for SoCal, is that the decisions too often went contrary to the best science and instead sided with the economic interests involved. Certainly the current economic climate in the State of California is far worse than when the MLPA was first passed. However, the economic considerations were not to be the primary factors considered... the science was.
Certainly several of the maps represent a step upward in the protection of our marine ecosystems. For that I am grateful... and we all should be since it is well past the time when these important conservation approaches should have been taken IMHO. However, I am concerned that with the increased closures of areas on the mainland coast, there will be added fishing pressure on Catalina waters. Three of the four maps seem to do a decent job of protecting Catalina's leeward coast from too much impact. There is a network, less effective than I'd hoped, but a network nonetheless on that coastline. However, I believe there are insufficient closures on the windward side of Catalina.
Certainly the angling community presented a case for the economic impacts on recreational fishing activities. Many in the dive community sat back and did relatively little, and therefore were not heard. I feel the economic contribution of SCUBA diving to the economy of southern California was not adequately assessed or seriously considered. We have what are considered world class kelp forest diving sites here on Catalina. Through my international dive travel and visits here by divers from many different countries across the globe, I have seen the value of these waters in attracting non-consumptive recreational and technical divers to our island. The economic importance of SCUBA divers extends well beyond the boundaries of California. While the great fishing in our waters in decades past drew anglers from all over the world decades and a century ago, the waters have since been overfished and no longer have the international draw they once did in earlier times. SCUBA diving however continues to attract visitors from around the world to experience our magnificent kelp forests.
The ecological quality of the island waters is therefore very important in attracting divers and ensuring a good dive experience for them. The economic impacts of SCUBA diving need to be weighed in as effectively as those of the fishing community. More important to me is that the future health of our marine waters needs to be restored after decades of cumulative overfishing. The waters off Catalina outside Avalon tend to be the cleanest and most pollution free in southern California. These factors make recovery here even more likely. I am hopeful that divers will speak up either directly by attending the FGC meeting in Los Angeles, or by submitting written statements via e-mail to the Commision at fgc@fgc.ca.gov.
I don't like to put words in the mouths (or keyboards) of others. I assume too many repetitious e-mails using the same language are less effective in reaching the Commission than a few that are independently written. However, here are a few of the talking points I see that may be important to include. Weigh them based on your own knowledge and experience.
1. The mainland MPA closures will redirect fishing pressure to Catalina and other offshore locations just as the closure of certain areas of Anacapa have caused increased commercial fishing pressure for squid in Catalina waters, further reducing food resources for many species including white sea bass and giant sea bass.
2. The MPA network on the leeward side of Catalina has created a reasonable (although by no means optimal) network of reserves designed that also allows fishing for pelagics to be relatively unaffected. This shows a good balance between competing uses since pelagic fish are not intended to be directly protected by MPAs.
3. The windward side of Catalina presents a whole set of different marine habitats due to the consistently higher energy environment there, the cooler water temperatures, longer daylength, and other factors on that side. Species such as mussels that dominate in portions of these wave swept coasts are far rarer on the calmer leeward side. Lower temperatures there create conditions more favorable to cooler water species like painted greenling and lingcod than on the leeward side (where they are usually found deeper if at all).
4. Because of the unique differences between Catalina's leeward and windward coasts, adequate networks of MPAs should be established along BOTH coasts to more fully capture the diversity of the island habitats. Being an island, Catalina has these unique differences along its 54 mile coastline unlike any comparable stretch of mainland coasts. Its highly dissected coastline also provides a wide range of microhabitats on each side.
5. To be truly effective as a network of reserves, major reserve sites should be located up-current to ensure that eggs, larvae and adults are dispersed to other protected sites as well as the adjacent unprotected areas. Although protection of Farnsworth Bank is critical, the extension of that reserve area to encompass just a small part of the windward coast occurs at a location where the island is near its widest. Spillover produced from that region way well be swept by currents past the southern windward coast of the island and out to the open ocean where they will do neither the ecosystems nor the anglers any good. Ideally at least one reserve north of that area, perhaps on part of the West End, and hopefully a second one perhaps near the Little Harbor-Ben Weston area would greatly improve the network on that side. The Farnsworth MPA should be extended further south past China Point into the Bight on the south windward coast to better ensure egg, larval and adult fish along that imnportant coastal stretch. It should also protect more of the prime squid harvest area since the excessive take of these important members of our natural food webs affects a host of species important to both healthy ecosystems and recreational fishing. If excess harvest of squid is being burned on the mainland as I have heard reported, this despicable activity should be made unlawful.
6. I would like to thank the creators of several of the proposed maps for affording real protection to the Casino Point Dive Park. Although this site does not meet many of the ecological guidelines for an effective reserve or network component, it is an important location for the many thousands of divers who dive it each year. It offers a great opportunity to ensure the educational value of this site.
Take some time to consider this, craft your own input using this and your own observations and take the time to contact the Fish & Game Commision at fgc@fgc.ca.gov before their meeting on December 9/10th. Our voices need to be heard in this last major public meeting in the South Coast process.
Blue areas are proposed State Marine Conservation Areas (SMCA) and red areas are proposed State Marie Reserves (SMR). Both provide some protection although the SMRs provide the most complete protection.
