Plan Review (JMPR)
Scoping Meeting & Dates
of Scoping Meeting Comments
Priority Issues New!
Sanctuary Advisory Council Meetings
Current Sanctuary Management Plans &
State of the Sanctuary Reports
Press Releases & Notices
Links to Sanctuary Websites
Bank, Gulf of the Farallones & Monterey Bay
National Marine Sanctuaries
Scoping Meeting Summary
Half Moon Bay 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.
Duplicate comments were not repeted. A synthesis of comments
will be available soon.
- There should not be a general ban on motorized
personal watercraft (MPW) in Monterey Bay, Cordell Bank,
or Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuaries;
however offensive activities relating to MPW operation
should be identified and banned where appropriate, and
banned activities should be sufficiently enforced.
- MPWs are a valuable tool for certain activities such
as search and rescue, enforcement, and research, and
their use for these activities in the sanctuaries should
not be restricted.
- Sedimentation occurs naturally during storm events at
Pillar Point Harbor. Sanctuary should allow harbor to
dredge, and dispose of dredge spoils on the other side of
the breakwater, where the beach area is eroding.
- Sanctuaries should adopt buffer zones for all
harbors. MBNMS is currently restricting natural human
activities in harbors. Buffer zones should be 2 miles
- MBNMS was formed with the express promise of not
being another layer of fisheries management.
- Sanctuaries should not be involved in fisheries
- The Southern boundary of GFNMS should be extended to
include Pillar Point harbor, because it makes sense
- Mankind should be considered in the decision-making.
Consider our natural affect on ocean, we are part of the
- Sanctuaries should consider economic impacts on local
communities as part of the Joint Management Plan Review
(JMPR). Should provide mitigation for impacts on
- The Southern boundary of GFNMS should be moved to
Año Nuevo, for political, geographical, and
ecological reasons. Also because GFNMS already has a
presence there in the form of education programs, oil
incidents response, and about 30 volunteers in San Mateo
- Sanctuaries should increase resources for developing
programs in schools, to educate about ecosystems, and
interconnectedness between human and biological
- Concerned because use of MPWs in the surf zone of
Half Moon Bay is not safe. Enforcement of this activity
must be improved.
- Concerned about over harvesting of fish. There is a
need for sustainable fisheries management. This issue
must be addressed now before it becomes a bigger
- Oil and gas development should be permanently banned
within GFNMS, MBNMS and CBNMS.
- Concerned about the impacts of bottom trawling on
benthic habitats. More research about this activity must
- Fiber Optic cables running north and south should be
located on land not in ocean.
- Sanctuaries should be more active in the prevention
of the proliferation of non-native invasive species.
- Sanctuaries should develop better educational
programs in schools to equip children with the knowledge
to address issues.
- More funding should be made available for education
in schools (elementary school to college).
- The southern boundary of GFNMS should be extended to
Pigeon Point, because it is an easily identifiable point
for fisheries and research.
- Vessel traffic lanes are examples of too many
agencies involved, yet not coordinating with others
(fishers). By expanding traffic lane, increased
possibility of accidents. Too much politics, not
- The regulations for all National Marine Sanctuaries
should be the same. They should all be standardized.
(e.g. "discharge from outside that enters NMS + injures
- Sanctuary Advisory Council (SAC) members should be
appointed by the constituency they represent.
- MBNMS SAC should include more than one fishing
representative, due to the variety of fishing methods
utilized in the Sanctuary.
- NMS should not get into telling people what they can
and can't do (e.g. MPWs) (MPW industry should be given
credit for improvements.)
- Marine reserves in temperate environments are not
effective. The sanctuaries should focus their efforts on
partnering with other users to educate about impacts, and
not on managing fisheries.
- Concerned because socioeconomic studies don't reflect
sociological impacts on communities.
- Sanctuaries should not restrict access for fishing
- Research should be made for a larger geographic area,
beyond where a particular activity is taking place.
Should be more concrete. Economic effects should be less
of a concern.
- Sanctuary should assist CDFG with the MLPA process in
banning fishing in Fitzgerald Marine Reserve. A 2-mile
closure is too much, however a 1/2-mile closure would be
- Management as it relates to location
who do I
who is close by
- Sanctuaries should increase education that relates
specifically to consequences of actions, and what people
can do to help.
- Need stronger education specifically relating to
action consequence and what they can do.
- Sanctuaries should use more on-site educational tools
like visitor centers and signage.
- Sanctuaries should be more involved in coastal
development issues such as golf courses and sea
- Sanctuary should increase its attention of the San
Mateo Coast. This is currently lacking.
- Offshore research and general focus on San Mateo
Coast is currently lacking.
- Sanctuaries should increase general awareness of
their programs, as well as education about issues such as
water quality. Up-stream enforcement should be a
- Sanctuaries should increase cooperation with other
agencies, especially regarding estuaries.
- Sanctuaries should examine the overlapping regulatory
structure and investigate ways to streamline the
- Sanctuaries should examine their effectiveness in
addressing issues related to population increase
- Sanctuaries must be consistent in their response to
- Consistent response to oil spill. Would like GFNMS
boundary changed to manage down to Ano Nuevo, to improve
public access to Sanctuary staff, improve public
- Sanctuaries should continue to provide consistent
- 2 million gallons went into the Sanctuary. Bring
Sanctuary boundary to coast and who is responsible make
- Bring Sanctuaries closer to urban environment.
- Joint management of Sanctuary is confusing.
- Increase in overall enforcement of sanctuary
- MBNMS should consider including Mavericks in the MPW
- Increase staffing of sanctuaries to meet goals.
- Build focus on collaboration with other resource
groups, specifically "the lost coast" ie. San
- Shark chumming should be banned in GFNMS. All
shark-related activities should be permitted through the
- Sanctuaries should become mandatory members of the
- Sanctuaries should ensure comprehensive coverage with
overlapping jurisdiction, to improve resource
- MPW regulations for MBNMS should be the same as those
- Sanctuaries should be more aggressive about
monitoring of watershed pollution and other
- Concerned about water quality with respect to
agricultural runoff , sewer, pollution studies.
Fleishacker Facility has had a noticeable impact on
crabs, etc. Fisheries to contribute to identifying
problems and coming up with solutions. Involve tourism,
ports and community in process. Fishers have long
history in env conservation
- Sanctuaries should establish more marine reserves
with the involvement of all stakeholders.
- Sanctuaries should protect biodiversity.
- Sanctuaries should investigate the root causes of
water quality degradation. More resources should be made
available for infrastructure of sewage treatment
- Concerned about sewage spills at San Carlos beach,
which cause monthly closures.
- Support Ed Ricketts Marine Reserve, and beach access
in that area.
- Water Quality-sewage spills at San Carlos cause
monthly closures, including summer.
- Reserves &endash; support Ed Ricketts Marine Reserve
and beach access in that area.
- Oppose hotel construction and desal plant on Monterey
- Sanctuaries should not control or overrule SACs, nor
should they choose SAC members, or "censor" SAC
- Sanctuaries should "grow" marine reserves over the
- Sanctuaries should improve communications to clarify
issues with fishers and other user groups, and regulatory
- Communication must be improved to clarify issues
between fishers and other user groups, and regulatory
agencies. Avoid polarizing positions needlessly because
communication was hampered.
- Concerned about urban runoff and other non-point
pollution. Sanctuaries should improve monitoring of urban
and agricultural runoff.
- Achieve balance of fishing abundance by addressing
needs of all Sanct. Users. Pollution runoff from asphalt
and other non-point source polluters. Urban and agri
runoff monitoring needed.
- Sanctuaries should use both breakout sessions (like
this JMPR scoping meeting), and an open forum format at
the end of the meeting, where comments are limited to 2-3
- Communication: Use both open forum and breakout
sessions to free up info exchange. (Open forum at end of
meeting, limit comments to 2-3 minutes).
- Concerned that rip-rap being used on the golf course
at the Ritz-Carlton is causing erosion of adjacent
- Not sure how MBNMS can effectively monitor 300 miles
of coast. Sanctuary should investigate the use of
volunteer surveys for monitoring.
- Not sure who investigates and enforces Sanctuary
- Sanctuaries should require low impact gear for bottom
- Fishers should be compensated for marine reserve
areas that have been taken out of access.
- Sanctuaries should give financial support to research
on marine reserves. Creation of reserves should be based
on "good science".
- Bottom trawling &endash; require low impact gear.
Reserves: compensate fishers for areas taken out of
access. (This is a fisheries issue-vs. Sanctuary). But
Sanctuaries to support.
- Fund more research on MPAs , yield "good science" as
basis for reserve creation.
- Concerned about mineral extraction.
- Need public education regarding gas use and drilling
- Biodiesel fuel should be provided at all ports.
- Concerned about management of kelp resources, and the
impacts from abalone farming and other aquaculture
- Sanctuaries should actively support the State's
Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) process, in lieu of
sanctuaries' adoption of reserves.
- The "doughnut hole" in the northern MBNMS (off
Pacifica and San Francisco) should be included in the
GFNMS. Boundary of GFNMS should be moved south to San
Mateo/Santa Cruz County line.
- Maintain collaboration between Farm Bureaus and
MBNMS. The Sanctuary now works effectively with the
coalition of farm bureaus in reducing siltation and
transport of pollutants. The MBNMS had added staff to
work with this coalition, and there is concern that we
will lose this staff if the MBNMS boundary moves south to
the county line.
- Marine reserves established by the State, should be
extended into federal waters by the National Marine
- More cooperation should occur between the State and
Federal governments in setting up marine reserves.
- The Davidson Seamount should be included within the
boundaries of MBNMS, to protect abundant seabirds and
marine life, and to preserve its current pristine
- Sanctuaries should adopt marine reserves in federal
- Sanctuaries should encourage more marine biology
education at the high school level. This education should
include more technical programs such as shoreline
- Sanctuaries should support academic/science
competitions e.g. "National Ocean Science Bowl".
- GFNMS regulatory structure should be maintained;
enforcement must be adequately funded and staffed.
- Maintain GFNMS, MBNMS, and CBNMS education programs,
but improve funding and staff (especially GFNMS).
- Sanctuaries should encourage increased marine biology
education opportunities to average or disadvantaged high
school students, as well as more in-class guest speakers
on marine related topics.
- Sanctuaries should hold more public forums on
research within the sanctuaries.
- MBNMS should build visitor centers, and consider
co-locating with other visitor centers. Fitzgerald Marine
Reserve would be an ideal location.
- Sanctuaries should develop programs to address the
pollution that enters the sanctuaries from San Francisco
- More coordination between the sanctuaries research
and monitoring. EX. What would the sanctuaries like to
have the FMR monitoring and coordinate sampling
protocols. Ex. Protocol meetings; make suggestions to the
Research Activities Panel; pick up phone and ask.
- All sanctuaries should prohibit the attraction and
harassment of white sharks.
- Sanctuaries should investigate erosion rates along
San Mateo coast.
- Sanctuaries should require that all vessels enter the
San Francisco Bay from the westbound lane.
- Southern boundary of the MBNMS "doughnut hole" should
be moved as far north as possible.
- Do not allow fiber optic cables to be placed in GFNMS
- Extend the GFNMS boundary South to the point where it
is being co-managed.
- Greater Sanctuary involvement regarding coastal
- More interpretive signage at kayak launch sites and
dive entry points in regard to marine mammals viewing
etiquette (especially otters).
- More funding for monitoring of water quality.
- Increase education, outreach and media exposure for
the JMPR process.
- Concerned about the long-term impacts of MPW use in
near shore areas. Sanctuaries should conduct
environmental impact studies on this activity.
- MPW regulations in MBNMS should be made less
specific, to prevent loopholes and other opportunities
for circumvention of the regulations.
- Sanctuaries should explore the feasibility of
adopting marine zones where no human activities are
allowed, with the exception of research.
- Sanctuary should better protect low tide reef areas
at Pillar Point.
- Increased education of general public regarding what
a sanctuary is and defining its regulations.
- GFNMS is the older sanctuary but has a better regime
- MBNMS and CBNMS regulations regarding white sharks
should be adopted by GFNMS.
- Sanctuaries should adopt a set of standards for all
wildlife viewing. This should include a "controlled speed
perimeter" for recreational boaters and wildlife
- Sanctuaries should consider adopting a limited entry
policy and code of conduct for commercial wildlife
- Sanctuaries should strive to reach a balance between
research and wildlife viewing.
- Sanctuaries should do a better job in distributing
educational materials to Fitzgerald Marine Reserve and
other recreational sites.
- Sanctuaries need to ensure that planning commissions
are aware of their regulations.
- Collaboration between the staffs of MBNMS and
Fitzgerald Marine Reserve should be improved.
- Agencies that manage resources are starting to
overlap, co-manage, and integrate. (Seamless
- Sanctuaries need to improve education program in
regards to fisheries. Involve fishermen in this process,
increase outreach to them, and create opportunities for
them to get involved.
- The San Mateo Coast does not get much overall
attention from MBNMS (in terms of regulations, education
- All three sanctuaries should be combined into a
"Central California Sanctuary" which manages all these
- Central California Sanctuary to manage all these
- Loopholes are confusing boundaries.
- Synergistic resolution to this JMPR process.
- Exemption zone in SF (due to combined storm
drain/sewer system) less than secondary treatment.
- How much leverage would the Sanctuary have to
influence/improve the current sewers/drains. Situation
south of SF
- Sanctuaries should work with Chambers of Commerce and
hotels, in educating the public.
- Sanctuaries should expand education and outreach to
reach more of the general public.
- Sanctuaries should not allow SONAR and acoustical
- Opposed to SONAR and sound testing in Sanctuary
- Concerned about water quality throughout entire
- Water quality through entire watershed
- How does role of Sanctuary fit with State's proposal
for marine reserves (interaction between both).
- Need consistency between agencies.
- Sanctuaries should serve as an advocate to facilitate
funding for improved water quality (sewage systems,
watersheds, toxic algae blooms).
- Advocate for funding for water quality (sewage
systems, watersheds) toxic algae blooms.
- Advocate for law enforcement (Sanctuary) its own self
- MBNMS should make SAC meetings more accessible to
- Año Nuevo reserve should remain part of
- GFNMS boundary should be moved southward to just
north of Santa Cruz.
- MBNMS unable to manage the Northern portion of the
Sanctuary (North of Santa Cruz)
- Reasons for moving: ecosystem; species range; Bay
delta feed mostly at GFNMS. Elkhorn Slough feeds to
Monterey Bay, emergency response by other State/federal
agencies (Coast guard etc.)
- Volunteer programs for GFNMS already under one
umbrella-National unable to understand the local process,
personalities-National unable to support above.
- Adopt no-take zones; do not sidestep scientific data
and cave in to special interest groups.
- Develop marine protection zones do not cave in to
special interest groups, and do not sidestep the
scientific data that supports the marine protected
- Concerned about the lack of water flowing through
- Water quality problems: some creeks not flowing
therefore no support for natural ecosystems.
- Sanctuaries should work in tandem with other agencies
to enforce water quality regulations.
- Sanctuaries should coordinate with other agencies to
create one joint interpretive center, rather than 1
center for each agency.
- MBNMS agriculture action plan should have a specific
timeline, goals, and audits. It should be open to the
public, and not be self-regulating.
- Sanctuaries should prohibit open water aquaculture,
because there is no control over what is broadcast into
- Sanctuaries should increase education and outreach
regarding aquaculture, further north of Elkhorn Slough.
- Sanctuaries should conduct more watershed
- Concerned about the lack of cohesiveness regarding
emergency response to coastal incidents (oil spills
- Enforcement in Marine Sanctuaries: Laws passed but
lack of resources for enforcement beyond just taking note
of violation. No follow up resources; increase
- Shark attraction should be banned completely in GFNMS
- Consider including harbors as part of
- Increase funding for staffing at GFNMS.
- GFNMS and CBNMS need better facilities to serve as
meeting rooms for volunteer meetings, and education and
outreach. These should include a wet lab.
- Increase funding for the sanctuaries.
- Concerned about the beach closures and water quality
in San Mateo County. There are not enough sampling sites
to adequately notify people of conditions.
- Sanctuaries should hold accountable, operations such
as golf courses and nurseries that use chemicals or other
pollutants, which enter into the ocean.
- Sanctuary should lobby at all levels for improved
- MBNMS should develop a policy and guidelines to
monitor water quality in streams, rivers, creeks, etc.
emptying into the Sanctuary. These should be clean enough
to swim in.
- Water quality will affect the ecosystem as a whole,
but also the microorganisms within the sanctuaries.
- Tertiary treatment should be required for all sewer
systems that empty into sanctuaries
- Shoreline armoring should be prohibited in the
sanctuaries, because it leads to the transfer of wave
energy to another location and encourages development too
close to the water.
- MBNMS should better coordinate with Cal Trans in
regards to disposal of sediment from landslides.
Sanctuary should listen to the geologists.
- All three Sanctuaries need more resources for
exploration. There is more known about outer space than
the ocean. You can't protect what is not known. Sanctuary
needs more data on species and habitat and human impacts,
- Sanctuary needs stronger ability to protect
resources. Burden of proof should be on individuals
wanting to conduct certain activities.
For more information contact your
local sanctuary office at:
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