Scoping Meeting Summary
Gualala 6:30 PM

Please note that these are the raw comments extracted from the scoping meeting held at the location listed above. They were edited for the purpose of clarity where necessary.  A synthesis of comments will be available soon.
 

• Sanctuaries should be aware of the loss of the commercial fishing culture.
• Concerned about Americans eating farm raised fish and garbage.
• Concerned about loss of access to recreational lingcod fishery and fisheries in general for preservation for future generations.
• Would like to see boundary sanctuary extended north.
• Concerned about diminished abalone population in areas she goes.
• Concerned about oil drilling.
• Changing management with changing environment—make management more flexible.
• No oil drilling
• Opposed to oil drilling off the coast.
• Concerned about offshore oil drilling
• Concerned about decline of sport fishing opportunities.
• Would like to see sanctuary boundaries extended north to protect estuaries.
• Question the use of national marine sanctuaries as right solution—work on enhancement of resource instead.
• Commend sanctuary for protecting coastlines from oil drilling.
• Suggest national marine sanctuaries remain to protect coastlines from oil drilling.
• Concerned about proliferation of bio-political beauracracy.
• Do not want to see offshore oil drilling off these coasts—would like to see boundaries extended north if that is the only way to stop oil drilling here.
• Opposed to oil drilling because of disgusting reality of presence of oil platforms.
• Rules and regulations relative to sanctuary should take fishing cultures into account as situations change (be more flexible).
• We should have ideas and goals of what we would like the coasts to look like when making policies and regulations.
• There should be more education and outreach to local schools and media in areas surrounding the sanctuary (especially north).
• Mitigate human impacts on the marine environment.  Stop trying to solve problems by controlling people- manage resources.
• Call sanctuaries no oil drilling zone if that iss what they are.  Be honest.
• Better oil spilling preparedness both within sanctuary boundaries and with out.
• Concerned about how sanctuaries affect commercial and recreational fishing industries.
• Concerned about loss of commercial fishing culture.
• Concern for large factory fisheries; keep out factory (large commercial) fishery.
• Would like to see expansion of sanctuary up to Sea Ranch.
• Expand education of public that marine resources are limited; educate fishers that marine resources are limited.
• Increase ecosystem education for the general public.
• Increase education of public on regulations and enforcement.
• Need to increase the diversity of interested parties. E.g. local tribes
• Would like the MLPA process to be resolved first- wait another 5 years before considering addition marine reserves in the sanctuary.
• Extend sanctuary to prevent offshore oil drilling extending off the CA coast.  At least to the continental shelf. 
• Management decisions should be based on good science not public opinion.
• No offshore oil drilling anywhere.
• Balance local economic interests with protection of biodiversity.
• Fishing should continue but only for targeted fisheries; eliminate bycatch and factory fisheries.
• Preserve and enhance the functioning ecosystem using science (good to get away from species management). Avoid the train-wrecks like spotted owl and MAMU.
• Address the issue of lowering bycatch.
• Encourage sound fisheries and more sustainable fisheries.
• Consider watershed/ upland uses and how they impact the marine environment- agriculture, vineyards, forestry/logging, waste management.
• Vessel traffic- sanctuaries need to influence shipping industry to provide improved oil spill prevention.
• Increase protection against destructive commercial fishing gear in all sanctuaries.
• More education for the public about fishing methods, what is being fished, and where and distance from shore (the ones you can not see).
• Adequate agency funding for whatever management plan is developed.
• Have sanctuary system that preserves the full range of all of the ecoregions.
• Increase monitoring to insure a balanced ecosystem.
• The northern coast characteristics are similar enough as to what is already protected and should be considered to be added to the sanctuary.
• Maintain sport fishing in area.
• Satisfied with Monterey’s sanctuary.
• Limit overprotection of areas and species that affect fisherman.
• Do not expand boundaries of sanctuary.
• Sea lions are an overprotected species.
• Incorporate all management concerns of marine resources, look at big picture.
• Get agencies to get all cards on the table and coordinate efforts to get clear chain of command.
• How can onshore residents help agencies and help fisheries resources?  More education.
• Keeping sport and commercial fishery healthy.
• Education about offshore impacts (overfishing, dumping of wastes, etc) on health of marine ecosystem, in local communities.
• Keep things the way they are, do not add more sanctuary.
• Work with Fish and Game to publish research efforts so it will be public information. (NMS)
• Coordinate efforts between agencies for information to be public. Ex: press releases and education in the broad sense.
• Prohibition of oil exploration maintained.
• Promote alternative energy sources.
• Show evidence that sanctuary expansion will enhance marine resources (and fisheries, if the evidence exists).
• Like to see management as holistic ecology including humans and their commercial and recreational needs in process.
• Provide more access to sanctuary.
• Education about impacts of road building, paving, logging, and agriculture on marine ecosystem.
• Management should promote sustainable resources, habitat restoration.  All parties should benefit and it should be a win/win situation.  Ecosystem approach to boundary placement.  Look at wider ecosystem (streams, outfalls).
• Boundary should be extended to arena rock to prevent oil exploration/ development.  Avoid turning into industrial wasteland. Preserve local fishing too.   Not National Park.
• Census biological resources to tell impact of overfishing, etc. Assess impacts, baseline studies.  Concerned about San Francisco Bay water quality impacts.
• Against overfishing (Fish and Game).   Concerned with overfishing by factory ships offshore.  Drag boats effect on bottom. Small boats to less harm. Offshore boundaries inadequate. Lumber activities upstream detrimental to sanctuary. Improve jurisdiction and interagency cooperation. Watershed protection.  Common sense.
• Concerned steelhead restoration projects not yielding results.  Do not waste money on unsuccessful restoration. Fisheries important. Sanctuaries should not prohibit fishing altogether.  Fish and Game regs not all sensible.  Watershed damage from clearcuts.
• Draggers damage seabed/ fish habitat, should be stopped.
• Wants fishers and public involvement. Less adversarial approach by biologists and agencies. Developing policy to include users.
• Wants to know re: various jurisdictions and about boundary placement.
• Wants integrated management among agencies and with public input. Establish task force to implement.

Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary
Sean Morton, Management Plan Coordinator
299 Foam Street
Monterey, CA 93940
(831) 647-4217 • Sean.Morton@noaa.gov

Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Bank
National Marine Sanctuaries
Anne Walton, Management Plan Coordinator
Fort Mason, Building 201
San Francisco, CA 94123
(415) 561-6622 • Anne.Walton@noaa.gov