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
San Rafael 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
For more information contact your local sanctuary
MBNMS should not keep divers out of the Sanctuary. If you keep them
out, it reduces those who use it and see it and therefore will want to
protect it. This should be applicable to all Sanctuaries.
Outreach and education is important and I would like to see it continued,
specifically with local schools.
The Sanctuary and FMSA should continue to do education and outreach, there
should be funds to support these programs.
Concerned about fisheries management by the Sanctuary. The roles
of the agencies that regulate state and federal fisheries should be clarified.
Wants to see the Sanctuary have a fishery observation program for monitoring
high-impact gear (ie bottom set long-lines, gill nets, trawlers).
The regulations with respect to modifying behavior of sharks (such as shark
cage diving and chumming) at the Farallones need to be clarified.
The burden of proof should be on the industry to demonstrate that these
types of activities will not impact or cause harm to the sharks.
These activates should be watched and/or monitored.
Concerned about allowing divers and sportsmen into the Sanctuary with out
regulating them. Would like to see a program that monitors what tools
they use, is the operator competent, and monitoring of what is taken.
Maybe this could re-enforce additional educational efforts specific to
diver uses on what is good behavior. Perhaps develop a certification
All three sanctuaries have worked well with collaborating agencies and
researchers, they should continue to do this.
Education through the Sanctuary Associations misses some groups such as
schools. Education and outreach should be increased and money should
be focused on these programs at all 3 sanctuaries.
All of the sanctuaries that are located further offshore or that are inaccessible
to the general pubic should be made more accessible using technology to
bring the sanctuary to them ie underwater cameras.
Should increase awareness about the sanctuaries and educate the public
about what a sanctuary means. Increase the amount of funds to sanctuary
associations for these purposes.
More funds should go to the sanctuaries for research to allow more collaboration
with researcher institutions that are doing research in the sanctuary.
Funds should go to support graduate research in the Sanctuary to gain a
better understanding of the ecology of the sanctuary.
Concerned about noise pollution in Cordell Bank NMS. Would like to
see research and monitoring on this with regards to impacts on whales.
This should be done at all sanctuaries.
Is reef building or other aggregate devices that are used to attract fish
a good way of increasing habitat? Would like to see the sanctuary
do research on this and if it is deemed viable, they should implement it.
Researchers that work with white sharks and take film footage of them should
not be allowed to profit from the sale of the film. A royalty should
be paid or the money should go back to the Sanctuary for research.
Would like to see no-take MPAs within the Sanctuary boundaries.
Keep the old oil rigs and existing structures for fish habitat, but there
should be no new oil drilling in the Sanctuaries.
Large scale commercial fishing should be monitored and should be above
sustainable limits for all species, whether or not the Sanctuary or another
agency does the regulation.
Need to look at unbiased methods of research to include a broader spectrum
of species, research should be less anthropocentric and take more of an
Money should be spent on appropriate signage to identify sanctuary boundaries,
zones, and appropriate uses.
Are ferry use, commercial and personal watercraft regulated? If not,
they should be regulated based upon horsepower, types of engines, noise
pollution and daily limits of use.
Would like to see MBNMS focus more on the extremities of the Sanctuary.
Maybe GFNMS should manage the Northern portion of MBNMS and additional
measures be put in place to address the Southern portion.
Make sure wildlife in the sanctuary is protected.
Extend the Northern boundary of GFNMS to at least include Jenner and the
Russian River, possibly at Salt Point.
GFNMS should extend down to Ano Nuevo.
GFNMS volunteer program is superb for both the environment and public education.
The Sanctuary should look as far as the Columbia River watershed for possible
impacts on the sanctuary. If we don’t look at the headwaters for
species like salmon, we aren’t addressing the whole problem.
Need to better integrate land-uses with NMS/offshore uses. Of particular
concern is non-point source pollutants.
Concerned about increased underwater noise criteria on the increase in
the ocean, exploration, reconnaissance, seismic testing, military uses,
sea net. NMS need to establish a noise criteria.
Gillnetting: need more education about gillnetting.
Revise the boundaries of GF and MB. MBNMS shouldn’t extend into SF.
Change boundary to Ano Nuevo for better consistency and coordination.
Boundary change should be based on resource-based reasons.
Need more education about oil spills.
Concerned about having scientific-based establish marine protected areas.
Concerned about who will be conducting the research.
Need to coordinate with NMFS in the recovery plan for coho salmon.
Need to lend the NMS to the recovery of salmon.
Policies of sub-fiber optic cables; policies need to be developed through
the NMS program.
Concerned about aquaculture and invasive species. Need better coordination
between agencies and various jurisdictions.
Encourage the continuation of the NMS program.
Encourage increased effective coordination between various agencies and
Management goals result in sustainable resources.
Increase the amount of education to the coastal communities. Look
at ways to bring message to inland communities. Marine education
and education about the NMSs needs to be statewide. NMS needs to
be a conduit for state education.
Need more signage and other effective media so people know they are in
a sanctuary. Need to better coordinate education of the public with
other agencies. Where ever there is always an agency educating the
public the NMS should have something there. Eg. Visitor centers.
Strengthen the resources of the NMS. Don’t dilute them.
Need to address the increased siltation of Tomales Bay. Deal with
watershed problems. Get the money behind this.
Increase direct output to general public and conservation groups and environmental
Increase funding for output to general public.
Need to involve the community more frequently. Eg. Increased funding
for programs like Beachwatch.
Open office (Visitor Center) in Marin, San Rafael Civic Center.
Need to follow up discussions with coastal commission and MBNMS and shoreline
Two stroke marine engines should be banned.
No offshore oil drilling.
Concerned that regulations are not enforced. There should be enforcement
if not in place already.
Gull presentation on the more sensitive species on the islands. Take
action if results prove useful.
Concerned about commercial fishing effects on sanctuary either complete
control within boundaries or not at all. Get in or get out.
Concerned about human impacts on marine mammals and other species with
sanctuary and minimize impacts.
Concerned about polluting vessels. Look into all possible vessel
pollution, that the sanctuary should be concerned and manage for this.
The sanctuary should be concerned about invasive species, try to limit.
Concerned about navy testing within Sanctuary specifically sonar detection
of submarines, educate public on this topic.
All agencies, specifically navy, inform sanctuary when in use by other
agency. Specifically sound pollution.
Beach watch is a great program, should continue. Outreach to extend
schools to help with volunteer programs.
Procedures for handling oiled animals should be reviewed- specifically
live: almost dead: dead animals.
Work with other agencies to limit tankers entering the bay as well as monitor
the number of tankers. Educate public on general vessel pollution.
How this affects fish health and then human health.
Would like sanctuary to be able to enforce ecological, system wide protection.
Concerned about overfishing such as abalone. Would like to ban fishing
if necessary with sanctuary.
Also concerned about bilge discharge with sanctuary and would like sanctuary
to take action on both. Protect what we have.
Sanctuary should increase education about commercial fishing, other uses
with sanctuary boundary.
Publicize good and bad news about sanctuary.
Small visitor/ education facility north of GG Bridge such as Marin Co.
Concerned about run off from streets would like to educate public as well
enforcement of NPSP.
Would like gas/oil/mineral exploration to continue to be banned.
Thinks that scooping process is very important, critical, as well as SOS
reports, that we publish it as a great education tool.
Difficult to enforce small area reserves, therefore easy for fishing to
violate. Therefore it is harder to enforce. Therefore MPAs
should be larger.
Concerned about too many agencies. Fewer agencies, or better coordination
and definement of responsibility.
Would like boundaries extended in both directions, to protect more of the
Protect diversity and habitat with sanctuary.
Concerned about agency funding to implement programs.
Involve fishers in MPR process. They’re environmentalists, too.
Avoid EXCESSIVE regulation on fisheries.
As above, plus- sanctuaries promised at their inception not to become fisheries
regulators. Re: management or designation of MPAs- Sanctuaries should
not get involved (Boccaccio, canary, goldeneye, cow and lingcod are examples).
Aquaculture (shellfish) operations in Tomales bay introduce disease and
alien species. Encourage white shark research e.g. and other biosystems
Magnusson Act to protect fish (EFH) habitat has not been enforced.
Prohibit trawling. Increase no-take zones.
Increase public education re: sanctuary issues, e.g. tourism impact.
More outreach/ effort.
As above, plus industry pollution, gear entanglement of whales.
Naval testing (ocean noise).
Naval testing ignores protective regulations, whales died in GFNMS.
LFAS whale mortality being dismissed/denied. How can sanctuaries
be empowered to protect whales from ocean noise?
Water pollution from urban use (car oil leaks, sewage, and chlorine added
to treat sewage). Jet skies pollute from fuel.
Emphasize and increase awareness of conservation ethics and methods in
school curriculum. Mandate this by the government.
Conservation success in Bay area over past decades should serve as example
and inspiration. Let’s keep up the good work and involve kids in
the effort. Issues of concern: increased pollution and dams.
Salmon gillnets, small-mesh gillnets were banned. Essential fish
habitat necessary. Eco-tourism (educational) can be good for wild
life and ecosystem awareness. Need more outreach.
Threat of species depletion is worldwide. Sanctuaries should be seedbeds
for replenishing depleted species.
Rockfish very depleted, sanctuaries should be involved in increasing public
awareness about endangered species.
Need more outreach to adults as well as kids and tourists.
Sanctuaries should protect whole food web, not just top predators (eg whales).
All issues raised here are interconnected. Persist in protecting
existing resources, even if some others are lost.
Reduce resource consumption.
Make Monterey Bay reserves- no fishing, no vessel traffic. Build
on successes and move forward from here.
Concerned about sanctuaries closing all fishing grounds, it could have
a huge impact on commercial and recreational fishing activities, on people
that make their living fishing on Cordell Bank and GFNMS.
Concerned about impacts of non-native species. For example, Spartina sp.
is starting to make its way into sanctuary. Sanctuary should take
role in prevention of spread of non-natives.
Has had trouble finding info about enforcement. Publish more info
about enforcement in sanctuaries. If enforcement is not sufficient,
sanctuary should increase its role in enforcement. Make information
and education materials easier to find.
Concerned about human impact on whale population in sanctuaries.
Noise may disrupt their behavior. Be able to identify where boats
may be in relationship to where whales may be such as any damage boats
may cause to whales.
Water quality- agricultural runoff, metals, etc. Increase monitoring
efforts in sanctuary waters, esp. agriculture run-off and heavy metals.
Concerned about noise impacts above and below sea surface specifically
NMS be able to establish noise pollution standards (be active in supporting
those standards). Work cooperatively with other groups to establish these
standards. Instill ways to enforce those standards.
Provide budget to support enforcement effort for ocean noise pollution
Improvement of water quality in sanctuaries. Work with other agencies
to eliminate non-point source pollution run-off (pollution causes by land-use
Concerned about uncontrolled population growth of sealions on the coast
and their impact on fisheries.
Better funding and research for monitoring of sea lion populations.
Support monitoring of all marine species of concern and make info available
to public through education and outreach.
Confined emphasis on public education programs.
Would like to see balance between certain areas reserved for time to rebuild
fish populations. And places/times for fishing communities to be
able to fish those replenished stocks while being monitored in order to
maintain fishing livelihood and fish populations.
Rotating system greater communication between fishing industry and marine
sanctuary to sustain work cooperatively with agencies that manage fisheries
and keep public informed as to how that cooperation is going and progressing.
Concerned about laying of fiber-optic cables in sanctuaries, especially
in relationship to habitat and whales (how it effects their health).
Make effort to get input from small scale fishers that use the area- provide
increased funding to support and restoration of watersheds that feed to
sanctuaries and increased funding to support research towards watershed
Avoid another layer of government regulation of fisheries.
Increased education of what current regulations are for the general public
and effectiveness of these regulations.
More support and funding for research in the sanctuary in particular management
techniques. Cooperate with other agencies that also manage coastal
Need more education, more publicity, more publications, press releases,
public campaign to increase public awareness of NMS.
Create email bulletin to spread the word about upcoming events and
Greater outreach to tourist industry of impact of recreational activities.
Improving biodiversity in NMS and sustaining fisheries management.
Make sure information is available to public, sanctuary managers and fishing
Provide funding to produce videos/movies of sanctuary and issues related
to it. For example, documentaries and local distribution on local issues
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