Fish & Game Commission 

Marine Resources Committee Meetings Minutes

March 14, 2023 - March 16, 2023 Monterey, CA

Committee co-chairs: Commissioner Sklar and Commissioner Murray

Notes: Ava Schulenberg

DAY 1 – March 14, 2023; 8:30 AM 

Call to Order 

1. Approve agenda and order of items

2. California halibut fishery bycatch evaluation in support of the fishery management review

Receive Department update on evaluating fisheries bycatch and acceptability in the California halibut set gillnet fishery, discuss initial results, provide committee direction on next steps, and potentially develop committee recommendation.

  • Priority Species - Determined from the Bycatch evaluation report and federal observer data 

    • Pacific angel shark

    • Brown Smoothhound

    • CA Skate

    • Bat ray

    • Rock crab

    • Barred sand bass

    • CA sea lion

    • Brandt’s cormorant

    • Giant sea bass

    • Great white shark

    • Sublegal CA halibut

    • Humpback whale - There are no documented entanglement incidents in the set gillnet fishery since the nearshore ban in 1994

  • Outreach

    • Emailed over 500 stakeholders

    • Focused notification and survey to gill net fleet (20 permittees)

  • Legality of Take of the Bycatch Species - Set of inquiry questions provide a structured analysis to the impact report

    • Preliminary results

      • Priority species analyzed (none may be retained):

        • Rock crab

        • Barred sand bass

        • Brandt’s cormorant

        • Sublegal CA halibut

        • CA sea lion

      • Low threat to sustainability (these species are not caught in significant numbers/low vulnerability):

        • Brown smoothhound

        • Rock crab

        • Barred sand bass

        • Brandt’s cormorant

        • Sublegal CA halibut

      • Moderate threat to sustainability:

        • Pacific angel shark

        • CA skate

        • Bat ray

        • Giant sea bass

        • Great white shark

        • CA sea lion

      • Low risk impacts on fisheries:

        • Pacific angel shark

        • Brown smoothhound

        • Rock crab

        • Barred sand bass

        • Sublegal CA halibut

      • Moderate risk of impact on fisheries:

        • CA skate

        • Bat ray

      • Low risk of impacts on ecosystem:

        • Pacific angel shark

        • CA skate

        • Bat ray

        • Rock crab

        • Barred sand bass

      • Moderate risk of impacts on ecosystem:

        • CA sea lion

    • Conclusions (analyzed a handful of species but they could apply it to other species with concerns related to bycatch:

      • Sharks, skates, and rays pose moderate/unknown threats

      • Marine mammals and seabirds pose low, moderate, and unknown threats

      • Finfish pose low to moderate threats

    • Next steps:

      • Acceptability determination - “unacceptable” triggers step 4

      • Potential management measures

    • Contact info for anyone who wants to follow up:

    • Public Comment (answers italicized):

      • Chris Voss:

        • What he believes is critical for the commission to consider is how much area has been lost over time (having a hard time hearing what he is saying due to audio issues). Susan says this is an interesting perspective to think about the history of conservation measures when making these decisions. 

        • Eric says the concept of wasting life is philosophical not always scientific and that’s why we have a commission so we can all talk through these issues.

      • Laurel Irvine:

        • Gillnet fishery represents 90% of juvenile white shark bycatch 

      • Kim Selkoe:

        • How do you make the call as to whether to categorize the sustainability risk as moderate vs. low? For example sea lion/white shark populations are expanding yet are marked as moderate? Craig Shuman says it’s a gray area and there’s a range but we do know that both populations are increasing and the take seems to be low compared to the population status. Ashcraft says this is why we have a commission to clarify these aspects and analyze criteria. 

        • Our local set gillnet fishermen are a key component to Kim’s seafood business, Get Hooked, as they provide critical species that customers love and do it in a sustainable way.

        • Kim emphasizes that having a multispecies fishery as a fish buyer is fantastic as a community supported fishery because it enriches the local engagement with our fisheries.

      • Gillnet fisherman (did not hear name):

        • We are the last people that want to endanger a species, we want to fish for tomorrow.

      • Neil (could not hear last name), brother of man above:

        • Fishes crab now - Stopped gillnetting after 1994 because the area that you’re allowed to fish in is a sliver, so it is mind blowing that that chart of preliminary results was produced based on the small amount of gillnetters that are left fishing in that sliver. 

        • In Mexico they allow fishing within the 3 mile zone. If we could do that here we would catch tons of halibut, but we would likely also have more interactions with seals. Because of our zone restrictions farther than 3 miles, seals shouldn’t even be a concern.

        • Commissioner Murray says that there’s definitely disagreement between scope and scale of bycatch in this fishery on the state level vs. NGOs. In the set gillnet fishery, 64% of animals caught are discarded and 50% discarded as dead. 

      • Commissioner Murray: 

        • She asks about sublethal determinations -Kirsten says that there is a post discard mortality rate and in those situations we incorporate that into their evaluation but they don’t have a lot of data so there is an information gap but with the information they do have they incorporate that into their evaluation process.

        • Commissioner Murray says CA has some of the most well-regulated fisheries in the world and we set the example of how to properly manage things in a sustainable way. She does not want to see gillnetters hanging up their gear and us having to depend on Mexico for the species caught in the set gillnet fishery. She would like to see a full list of incidental species caught in this fishery.

    • Craig Shuman: Closing thoughts

      • Gear marking (low hanging fruit) similar to how we do it for Dungeness 

      • Better data - Transitioning to electronic logs 

3. Aquaculture leasing in California – public interest determination 

Receive and discuss proposed public interest criteria for new lease applications and public input, and potentially develop committee recommendations.

  • Marine advisor Susan Ashcraft says they are asking for guidance in terms of process options that diverge prior to CEQA 

  • Randy says that finding a lease to be available is fairly easy exercise but making the jump from available to being in the public interest - public interest infers suitability of that location which is a vagrant leap

  • Commissioner Murray says we’ve gotten wrapped around “the old axle” on this one. She thinks what has been proposed in this report makes a ton of sense and it makes it clear that we’re not calling for any underground regulations.

  • Public comment (answers italicized):

    • Margaret Pilaro, Program Manager Aquaculture Port of San Diego:

      •  Just received the report 36 hrs ago so have not had enough time to fully create a response, however based on the initial report, she would like the commission to provide clarity for applicants regarding the commission's aquaculture leasing process because it is still unclear and does not allow an applicant to know what is expected. CEQA already includes a scoping process so how will these compare? Why would the commission need additional guidelines for this process because CEQA already covers so much? The proposed process lacks balance.Katelyn with Oceana largely agrees with Commissioner Murray and Sklar on this issue. She believes the proposal provides sufficient information and Pilaro’s concerns in fact are addressed. 

    • Kim Thompson (ED of Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association):

      • Echoes port of San Diego’s concerns around timing and vagueness. Any aquaculture lease agreement should be determined by public interest.

    • Bernard Friedman (SB Mariculture):

      • He is confused more than ever - We’ve all been talking about this for 5 years and there’s still no clear plan of what we’re trying to accomplish. What is the goal with aquaculture? Is the commission supportive? Not supportive? What is the time frame? Where is the transparency? Commissioner Murray says these stalling issues are not relevant to the discussion today around predeterminations/pre evaluations. She says it’s been 2 years, not 5 years, and what is new is having a plan for how they decide based on pre-screening evaluations, etc.

    • David Willett:

      • The determination of public interest as Randy said is difficult to make. Commissioner Murray says they did make a public interest determination by looking at data that was ad hoc.

    • Susan asks is it in the public’s best interest to commercialize a space and lose those public grounds for a separate use? 

    • Doug Bush (Cultured Abalone Farm):

      • In response to the comments from Oceana representatives - What is the justification for asking for the double nested specificity for the marine mammal entanglement and eelgrass? He appreciates Susan’s comments on taking a global approach to taking a space away from the public. 

BREAK FOR LUNCH - Return at 1:00PM

4. Coastal Fishing Communities Policy 

Receive Commission staff update on the coastal fishing communities policy development process and public input, including outcomes from the December 1, 2022 public workshop. Receive and discuss staff-recommended final draft policy for potential Commission adoption, and potentially develop committee recommendation.

  • Susan says this is a culmination of 2 years of work involving 2022 Sea Grant Fellow Kimi Rogers:

    • Proposed Policy on Coastal Fishing Communities

5. Giant and bull kelp 

(A) Kelp recovery tracking and restoration efforts 

Receive Department update on kelp coverage trends along California and progress in kelp restoration strategies, including projects conducted in collaboration with agency partners and stakeholders. 

  • Last update was March 2021

  • Kristen Elsmore (CDFW):

    • Kelp canopy coverage trends

    • Select North Coast Research/Recovery Efforts

      • Exploring efficacy of urchin grazer suppression techniques:

        • Commercial urchin divers

        • Recreational divers

        • Experimental divers

      • Exploring efficacy of kelp enhancement techniques

        • Green gravel

        • Spore bags

        • Seeded lines

        • Concentrated spore solution

        • Bull kelp genetics

        • Bull kelp spore dispersal model

    • Select Central Coast Research and Recovery Efforts:

      • Urchin grazer suppression

        • Efficacy of culling by rec divers

        • Impact to reef structure due to culling

      • Kelp outplanting techniques

      • Kelp forest monitoring, recovery, and research

      • Santa Barbara and San Diego Counties

        • SB shows normal variability in kelp coverage with recent years on the upper end of that historical range - The Channel Islands are excluded from this data as they are analyzed separately

        • SD shows normal variability

    • South Coast Research and Recovery Efforts

      • Palos Verdes Kelp Restoration Project

        • Ongoing for 10+ years, across 58 acres

        • Documented increase in the following:

          • Algal and benthic invertebrate diversity

          • Fish biomass

          • CA spiny lobster density

          • Red and purple urchin gonad production

        • Kelp restoration guide

(B) Kelp restoration and management plan development (Kristen cont.)

Receive Department update on and discuss development, timeline, and public engagement opportunities for a kelp restoration and management plan for giant and bull kelp.

  • Last update was March 2022

  • Kelp restoration and management plan:

    • Goal is to develop a robust, adaptive, climate-ready approach to managing giant and bull kelp forest ecosystems statewide

    • Core components include:

      • Adaptive kelp harvest framework

      • Ecosystem-based management

      • Restoration toolkit

    • Proposed timeline:

      • 2022 - Funding approved

      • 2023 through 2026 - Conduct scientific, tribal, and stakeholder engagement, synthesize state of the science, identify and address key knowledge gaps

      • 2025 - Begin KRMP drafting

      • 2026 - Finalize KRMP drafting, CEQA, and Peer review

      • 2027 - Begin implementation; Commissioner Murray thinks this is a very elongated plan which is understandable but surprising. Shuman thinks this is just a realistic approach 

  • Summary:

    • Kelp canopy data

      • Persistent kelp loss in the north coast

      • Different patterns on loss and recovery across state

    • Research and recovery efforts

      • Broad suite of collaborative efforts across the state 

  • Public Comment (answers italicized):

    • Grant Downey (2nd generation commercial urchin diver based in Mendocino):

      • Has been deeply involved in restoration work given the collapse of kelp populations in his area and has worked with Joshua Russo who spearheaded the efforts. He agrees with Commissioner Murray that the elongated timeline will pose threats to the timeline of them being able to work as commercial divers and harvest decent catch.

    • Jack Likins:

      • Former rec diver on the North Coast during the time when the heat wave and urchin explosion all happened he saw it first hand. The last couple years he's been living in Laguna Beach. He wants to support what Commissioner Murray said in terms of the elongated timeline. There’s a lot we don’t know about the marine environment but there are some common sense things we can be doing at least on small scales to figure out what’s going on at the same time that we’re trying to restore the kelp. He’d like to see a timeline that has more of a paralleled action plan to not only study what affects the kelp but also do smaller projects at the same time and if they do work, be able to expand them to larger areas.

      • He has heard a lot about restoration and kelp recovery but all that won’t do any good unless we control what’s causing the problem. A lot of people say global warming, and other causes are the reason for kelp not recovering, but he would like to see more work and research done in the area of toxic pollution.

    • Mike (last name Escrow?):

      • Wants to highlight OPCs work on all things kelp - Their work to date at OPC is based on research from 2019-2022. This year OPC will be producing a finalized kelp action plan that will synthesize the results of the pilot projects and will help us all learn how we get to that final stage in 2027 (should be ready by December 2023).

6. Staff and agency updates

Receive updates from staff and other agencies on topics requested by the Committee. Note: To enhance meeting efficiency, the Committee intends to receive updates primarily in writing. The public will be given an opportunity to provide comment, although the level of in-meeting discussion will be at the discretion of the Committee. 

(A) California Ocean Protection Council 

I. Statewide aquaculture action plan development update

  • Noah Ben-Alderet

    • Completion targeted for December 2023

    • For more details and a broad/high-level outline, please visit the OPC website

  • Commissioner Murray asks Director Egerly (not sure if that’s her last name, hard to hear?) if she can provide an update on the policy document that we’re all awaiting.

    • Director says they are trying to finalize a draft that they can share with agency partners because they’ve had several iterations and the final touches are pulling out the policy recommendations so she is hopeful in the next few weeks they can get that out and the idea is to share it with State Lands, the Waterboard, CDFW, and any other agencies so they can broadly get the policy out to the world 

(B) Department 

II. Law Enforcement Division 

III. Marine Region a. Rulemaking – lampara nets for commercial take of Pacific herring in Humboldt Bay

IV. Office of State Aquaculture Coordinator a. Aquaculture state water bottom leases: existing lease requests and new applications 

  • Officer Erik (Kors? Not sure of last name):

    • Update on Abalone: in the 2018 commission, suspended recreational abalone diving suggested the population was in decline though the decline was not related to recreational harvests but climate change and other harvests. There has been an uptick in illegal poaching in recent years in Mendocino county in 2022. 

    • Lobster poaching investigation: Crew found a vessel full of scuba divers at Catalina Island with 17 lobsters (5 had been speared which is illegal, and 6 illegally sized lobsters) 12 violations totaled - They also had divers with no lobster cards.

  • Craig Shuman:

    • Marine Region Year in Review/By the Numbers:

      • Marine Region 2022 Year in Review and By the Numbers now available online:

        • Companion documents, published annually

          • YIR showcases marine regions’ major accomplishments

          • By the numbers summarizes important commercial and recreational fishing statistics, as well as other marine region efforts

          • wildlife.ca.gov/fishing/ocean/year-in-review to learn more

  • Randy Lovell:

    • Pending Aquaculture Lease Actions accomplished

      • Of the 17 listed pending actions since March 2022:

        • 5 are approved; amendments being executed

        • 1 new methods request

      • The remaining pending actions consist of:

        • 5 CEQA review (various stages)

        • 4+ Reconcile boundaries (survey work)

        • 6 various review, coordination, or leaseholder tasks

        • 2 on hold by applicants

(C) Commission staff

  • Susan welcomes Kinsey Matthews new Fellow from Sea Grant replacing Kimi Rogers

  • Public Comment (answers italicized):

    • Ken Bates (CFRA):

      • He has been an advocate for gillnet fisheries on the Northern coast for decades

      • Looking for a responsible way to catch small amounts of Herring 

7. Future agenda items - Commissioner Murray

(A) Review work plan agenda topics, priorities, and timeline 

  • Susan says this is a good opportunity to peruse the current MRC work plan

(B) Potential new agenda topics for Commission consideration

8. General public comment for items not on the agenda 

The Committee may not discuss or take action on any matter raised during this item, except to consider whether to recommend that the matter be added to the agenda of a future meeting [Sections 11125, 11125.7(a), Government Code].

DAY 2 

MPA Day: Management Review Forum Agenda 

Wednesday, March 15, 2023 | 9AM-5PM PST Monterey County Fair and Event Center | 2004 Fairground Road, Monterey, CA 93940

Welcome 

Land acknowledgment and welcome from Louise Ramirez, Chairwoman of the Ohlone Costanoan Esselen Nation, and remarks from Charlton H. Bonham, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Samantha Murray, California Fish and Game Commission, Jenn Eckerle, California Ocean Protection Council, and Nicole Cropper, California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

  • CA MPAs make up 852 sq. miles, this 16% counts towards the 30% of the 30x30 initiative 

  • Marine Life Protection Act passed 24 yrs ago - Commissioner Murray highlights the oversight that this act was silent on the impact it would have on tribes

Introducing the Decadal Management Review 

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) staff will provide a brief overview of the Review, including connections to the Marine Life Protection Act and how it will inform the MPA Management Program

  • Master plan for MPAs is a 10-year adaptive management review cycle (this is based on the species life cycles in the CA current and the administrative capabilities)

MPA Management Pillars, Session 1

CDFW staff will provide an overview of each pillar of the Review, including key findings and recommendations, and connections to climate and fisheries. Panelists representing diverse perspectives will share their experiences with the MPA Network. Opportunities for Q&A on each pillar will follow the presentations and panel discussions. Sessions will focus on the following pillars:

● Research and Monitoring:

  • Challenges:

    • CA’s ecological and human coastal communities are diverse and unique across the state

    • The MPA Network is still young in the ecological timeframe of the state’s temperate ecosystems

    • Inconsistent monitoring over time and space

    • Example recommendations:

      • Build tribal capacity to participate in MPA management activities by providing adequate resources to tribes

      • Develop comprehensive community science strategy 

  • Panelists:

    • Spenser Jaimes (Tomol Paddler/Caretaker, Sacred Places Institute for Indigenous Peoples):

      • Ancestors lived on Chumash land in Santa Barbara and on Santa Cruz Island prior to the missionaries taking over.

      • He is here to speak as a tribal youth, not a researcher.

      • Believes our colonial and capitalist mindset needs to change in regard to our marine resources; We should only be taking what we need. Abalone is an example because the state does not allow anyone to fish for abalone due to overfishing even though the tribes never abused this resource.

      • Asks for support in legislation for free access to state parks/beaches and fishing licenses for all indigenous people.

      • The MPA process could be more inclusive simply by having meaningful conversations and genuinely taking in information from tribal communities who hold centuries of knowledge that we wouldn’t otherwise have access to.

      • The ocean has been here long before us and will be here long after we’re gone, so we need to do everything we can to preserve it.

      • Don’t just check the box, build relationships with tribal communities that will last so we can better partner in the future.

    • Severino Gomes (Cultural Keeper, Kashia Band of Pomo Indians):

      • Recently traveled to New Zealand to speak with Maori tribes who fear an abalone situation similar to what happened in CA.

      • Would like to plan to farm abalone on land in order to provide sustenance to tribes since fishing is not allowed.

    • Mark Carr (Principal Investigator, Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans [PISCO], also a professor at UC Santa Cruz):

      • The goal of any monitoring/evaluation program is to inform interested parties just how well that policy is achieving the goals it was designed to accomplish. He believes the MPAs are doing a great job at accomplishing its goals so far. 

      • MPA networks are social/ecological systems that help define the scope of the monitoring program. It’s one of the largest networks in the world because CA has such a long coastline with such diverse ecosystems distributed throughout the state. Therefore, the only way you can monitor these networks is to build consortia that will monitor areas collaboratively. 

    • Lisa Gilfillan (Ocean Conservation Manager CA for Wild Coast, also a coordinator for the MPA watch program):

      • MPA watch is a science workshop that looks at human use along our coasts to see how people use these shared spaces in a passive way.

    • David Rudie (CA Sea Urchin Commission, President of Catalina Offshore Products):

      • Landings of urchins over the last decade have been significantly reduced due to the implementation of MPAs climate change.

      • Unlike finfish and other crustaceans, urchins do not have any spillover benefits from MPAs.

      • Was personally involved in organizing the baseline MPA study of the lobster population in southern CA at the onset of the MPAs in 2012.

  • Q&A Portion for Panelists (answers italicized):

    • Spenser Jaimes (Tomol Paddler/Caretaker, Sacred Places Institute for Indigenous Peoples):

    • Severino Gomes (Cultural Keeper, Kashia Band of Pomo Indians):

    • Mark Carr (Principal Investigator, Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans [PISCO], also a professor at UC Santa Cruz):

      • Someone asks Mark how the monitoring is funded? He says there is a diversity of sources not strictly from the state; Funding largely comes from NGOs and other environmental groups/agencies

    • Lisa Gilfillan (Ocean Conservation Manager CA for Wild Coast, also a coordinator for the MPA watch program):

      • Someone asks Lisa about how the watch program uses the data they collect? Lisa says the results go to the Dept. of Fish and Wildlife so they can see overviews of what happens in those regions (6 month/annual reports for each region). She feels there should be other people who get the results but is not sure who.

    • David Rudie (CA Sea Urchin Commission, President of Catalina Offshore Products):

      • Someone asks the following: There is a 20 to 1 ratio of purples to reds on the central coasts, can fishermen participate in bringing out purple urchins to help solve their overpopulation problems and also maybe bring them to ranches to be fed and then sold if they don’t have enough uni inside? David says in San Diego he’s seen many die offs, can’t speak to the Northern coast, but if that doesn’t happen, there are absolutely ways that commercial divers can be of help. There are opportunities to harvest purple urchins to bring them to the market for the ones that have uni in them or like this man suggested bringing them to ranches to “fatten them up before selling.”

  • Closing Comment:

    • Chuck Bonham emphasizes that our current administration is aware of the previous wrongdoings of those who came before us to tribal communities and says they are committed to righting their wrongs going forward. He states that an example of this are the dams coming down.

● Enforcement and Compliance

  • Challenges:

    • Enforcing and patrolling 124 MPAs in addition to all CA state waters with 50 wildlife officers. Also coastal CDFW officers assigned to inland districts

    • Communicating the importance of prosecuting wildlife crimes, including poaching in MPAs

    • Compiling comprehensive enforcement data including historical citations and data from allied agencies

    • Improving compliance and awareness of MPAs - This was a particular issue during the pandemic as folks who weren’t familiar with the ocean were heavily populating MPA areas without knowing how to fish and where they were allowed to be

    • Example recommendations of Enforcement and Compliance:

      • Create and implement cohesive and actionable MPA enforcement plan by providing guidance on confirming the validity of a scientific collecting permit occurring in the field

      • Increase enforcement capacity by assessing needs for equipment such as replacing older boats, and also explore technologies that could assist with enforcement

    • Chief officer (unsure of name) moderating takes a moment to thank commercial fishermen in particular for being here today because it is unpaid time that could be spent fishing and making money to provide for their families, so he is especially grateful for their engagement.

  • Panelists:

    • Tina Calderon (Culture Bearer, Director Ocean Protection Program; IYEJ Associate, Sacred Places Institute for Indigenous Peoples):

      • The world’s natural elements were our first teachers of reciprocity and harmony - We need to follow the models set forth by water/plant systems in regard to how we interact with and respect the environment.

      • Agencies must understand that coastal tribes are deeply connected to our natural environment.

    • Ruthie Maloney (Founder and CEO, North Coast Native Protectors Tribal Marine Collaborative):

      • Let the tribes know what you’re doing if you plan to conduct any research/monitoring along the coast; It’s important to include them in any activity that goes on.

      • She addresses rumors about many CDFW officers being here in the room today because tribal people were coming to these meetings. She feels there are so many officers here today because of racism against tribal people and thinking they will cause trouble/protest. She asks the room how many people have had a gun pointed at them and emphasizes that the majority of people standing are tribal people. She highlights how difficult it is to live every day being a person of color facing discrimination from law enforcement. Moderating chief officer (unsure of name) says that all officers are here today to listen and learn and not to prosecute anyone especially based on their identity.

      • She emphasizes that it’s important to know where your water comes from and urges folks to do their research.

    • Calla Allison (Director, MPA Collaborative Network):

      • Collaboratives assist with priority projects with a top-down MPA management approach through education/outreach, research/monitoring, and enforcement/compliance

      • MPA Compliance Initiative 2019-2022:

        • Compliance actions from enforcement partners statewide in the last 3 years:

          • 180,000 violations observed

          • 1.5 million contacts made

          • 500 infraction citations issued

          • 45 misdemeanor citations issues

    • Jess Morten (CA Marine Sanctuary Foundation & NOAA CINMS):

      • Supporting Improved Marine Domain Awareness in CA’s MPAs:

        • eFINS: 

          • Geospatial data collection and reference tool used by CDFW and NPS officers

          • Allows officers to record and reference geospatial data from enforcement efforts and contacts in an offline marine environment

          • Streamlines reporting and analyses

          • Facilitates data sharing between agencies

        • Marine Monitoring:

          • Designed to detect vessels in nearshore of MPAs (range of ~5 nm)

          • Fully autonomous and runs 24/7

          • Secure data stored locally and transferred in real-time to the cloud for remote access

          • Track alarms are customizable to each location

    • Dick Ogg (Commercial Fisherman from Bodega Bay):

      • Broadstroke perspective of fishermen in general:

        • Owner operator of F/v Karen Jean out of Bodega Bay, has lived in Sonoma County for over 60 years and has had the opportunity to witness a lot of changes over this time period

        • He sincerely understands the want/need to preserve pristine ecological/marine conditions, however the conservation measures come with a cost. As commercial fishermen, we are very adaptable - We have to change where we fish, be aware of climate change, weather conditions, markets, and species do move. Those shifts cause an impact to us in general in our ability to provide a resource to the public. 

        • The implementation of MPAs has impacted our access to a resource that belongs to the public. We’re those people that are able to bring that resource to you so I’m speaking specifically to the no-fishing zones, not the overall ecological protection. We, as fishermen, understand that we need to protect those areas but we also have a concern as to how we can do our jobs simultaneously. 

        • CDFW has been very effective in protecting the fish in general, so we question if we should have access to these areas in order to provide food for us and to the public. The biggest fear for us is implementation of additional restrictions so that we’re not able to provide for our families and local economies. He does not know any fishermen who want to see additional restrictions and MPAs imposed on the fleet. 

        • He emphasizes that fishermen are the biggest advocates for the environment because our livelihood depends on it, so we need to work together to ensure that we can protect our environment without compromising our ability to fish.

    • Michael Quill (Marine Programs Director, Los Angeles Waterkeeper):

      • Does MPA watch trips all over the LA coastal areas documenting all vessels and monitoring for violations

      • Believes the MPA process years ago was a vortex of dysfunction but feels we’ve come a long way and are going in the right direction with all the collective work aimed at including tribal communities and their concerns. 

      • He does a lot of work with kids from impoverished tribal communities and enjoys bringing them out on the water and building connections with them because they otherwise would not have many opportunities to connect with the ocean.

  • Q&A Portion for Panelists (answers italicized):

    • Tina Calderon (Culture Bearer, Director Ocean Protection Program; IYEJ Associate, Sacred Places Institute for Indigenous Peoples):

      • No questions

    • Ruthie Maloney (Founder and CEO, North Coast Native Protectors Tribal Marine Collaborative):

      • Ruthie asks where the money goes that’s taken from citations and if those funds can go to community service efforts? An officer says some of that money goes toward the county, some goes to the department and goes into a Fish & Game conservation fund. The most important part is that we’re having this conversation because we want to collaborate on how we can improve this process in the future.

    • Calla Allison (Director, MPA Collaborative Network):

      • No questions

    • Jess Morten (CA Marine Sanctuary Foundation & NOAA CINMS):

      • Someone asks about how the data being collected is used? Jess says the systems she highlighted are pilot efforts but there is an official record system that CDFW manages so they can speak better to what they do with that data that she can. Jess says the eFINS data however does allow for more regional analysis. The Moderating Chief Officer says the transition from paper to electronic has been very helpful in their ability to analyze data - They mostly look at hotspots for where violations are happening. They also track MPA citations and any ocean citations so they can look at percentages and see what areas to focus on based on what zones are being hit the most. Another officer says education is the first component relevant to enforcement because their goal is to try to get people to comply with regulations so people can enjoy the environment in a lawful manner (education then citation). 

      • Similar to this question, another person asks if demographics of citations are tracked specifically in terms of the race of the recipient; Who is tracking the racial data and what’s being done with that information? Chief moderating officer says their citation forms are standardized so to track that information they would need to change that form so they will definitely look at making that improvement because it’s a great suggestion. Michael Quill says there is a shift in consciousness around this issue, maybe not the tracking yet but in the consciousness for sure, because he has been lectured by CalTip and other folks about using the right language instead of derogatory terms that have racial implications.

    • Dick Ogg (Commercial Fisherman from Bodega Bay):

      • Someone asks if there is a difference between an MPA and a no-fishing zone in terms of how you fish? Dick says his interests are to be able to provide that product to the public with minimal impact and he thinks we do a very good job. The no-fishing zones allow no access to our coastal pelagic shields like for salmon and crab, making us focus on areas outside the MPA which isn’t something we would do normally but are forced to. He would like to see a reevaluation on salmon in particular. It’s a public resource and we want to be able to provide that to you sustainably.

    • Michael Quill (Marine Programs Director, Los Angeles Waterkeeper):

      • No questions

BREAK FOR LUNCH - Return at 1:40PM

MPA Management Pillars, Session 2 

Revisit Q&A from Session 1. The afternoon session will focus on the following pillars, using the same format as Session 1:

  ● Outreach and Education:

  • Challenges:

    • More effort is needed to make MPA information accessible to wider audiences and promote justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion

    • Example recommendations of outreach and education: 

      • Evaluate outreach needs, assess effectiveness of resources, and identify and pursue the most impactful and cost-efficient tools

      • Conduct more targeted outreach to specific audiences so improving coordinating with fishing communities, tailoring outreach to better serve specific audiences, and creating more regionally focused and culturally informed MPA materials

  • Panelists:

    • Angela Mooney D’Arcy (Executive Director/Founder, Sacred Places Institute for Indigenous Peoples ):

      • There is a disconnect between environmental work and racial justice, especially when it comes to ocean conservation and indigenous peoples

    • Emily Burgueno (Head Seed Keeper, Maat Hetemii):

      • She is a non-governmental tribal official but appreciates all the officials in the room. She emphasizes the importance of incorporating native tribes in the decision making process of these MPAs and all conservation efforts. If you want to reach out to tribes all you have to do is Google it - Her tribe has a website and can be reached out to directly online.

      • Be cognizant of tokenization of colonial institutions. Be sure to try to pronounce things even if you don’t know how to say it, tribal communities appreciate when people try.

      • She says fishermen have the power to help include tribal communities more than they realize. There are a lot of indigenous people who have never had a variety of fish species/other seafood because they don’t have access. 

    • Jules Jackson

    • Rikki Eriksen (Ph.D, CA Marine Sanctuary Foundation):

      • MPA Accomplishments:

        • Over 500 signs installed

        • Over 1000 laminated replica signs for businesses

        • MPA training programs

        • Kids and family programs

        • Curriculum developed

        • Thousands of interpretive brochures distributed

    • Wayne Kotow (Executive Director, Coastal Conservation Association CA):

      • He says he represents the recreational fishermen. He says he believes in conservation and thinks it’s unfair for fishermen to get thrown under the bus because fishermen are more concerned about conservation than everyone else

      • Runoff is harming the ocean because runoff drags pesticides, DDT, other chemicals, etc. into the ocean and there is not enough attention paid to this issue 

      • Balloons are also a major issue that don’t get addressed enough - Fishermen pick up more balloons probably than anyone else. Balloons should be banned.

      • There is a CalTip app that he urges everyone to download and easily document things you see

  • Q&A Portion for Panelists (answers italicized):

    • Angela Mooney D’Arcy (Executive Director/Founder, Sacred Places Institute for Indigenous Peoples ):

      • No questions

    • Emily Burgueno (Head Seed Keeper, Maat Hetemii):

      • No questions

    • Jules Jackson:

      • No questions

    • Rikki Eriksen (Ph.D, CA Marine Sanctuary Foundation):

      • Ruthie asks the following question: What is the foundation doing to recognize those current marine sanctuaries prior to Marine Land Protection Acts? Also, to CDFW, Ruthie says knowing the lack of salmon and the return were going to be having, she’d like to plant the seed for any hatcheries to open to benefit tribal communities. Rikki says she does not work for the national sanctuary though they are here in the room, she works for the state sanctuary foundation. She says she is happy to facilitate any conversation around this topic.

    • Wayne Kotow (Executive Director, Coastal Conservation Association CA):

      • An indigenous woman brings up the issue of fishing nets and other gear causing harm - She suggests hiring native peoples to weave nets instead of using plastics. Wayne says there are different buckets of fishermen so it’s important not to categorize all fishermen together under blanket judgments. He says if you look at our new circle hook it comes back to what we learned from a past hook that was used in coastal waters by indigenous peoples - His point is that we are collectively trying to work with others and we do not want to waste resources/animals because we do respect it for the future.

      • Someone asks the following: Could you please explain to everybody the efforts that you have been doing to educate people? Wayne says they have clubs up and down the coast that take underprivileged/potentially uneducated groups out on the water and help them learn as much as they can about conservation but also help them enjoy the art of fishing. Wayne acknowledges that especially reaching out to kids is essential because they are the future and it’s the right thing to do.

● Policy and Permitting:

  • Highlights:

    • Clarification and refinement of MPA policy and regulations is an integral part of adaptive management

    • Mitigation payments from power plants that use once-through cooling help fund MPA Management Program activities

    • CDFW’s Scientific Collecting Permit Program regulates take in MPAs for research and education purposes

  • Challenges:

    • CDFW’s Scientific Collecting Permit Program is in need of structural improvements

    • Policy regarding restoration and mitigation in MPAs needs to be clarified and a science-based framework to evaluate projects needs to be developed

    • Policy refinement is needed regarding maintenance of pre-existing structures

    • Example recommendations:

      • Improve the Scientific Collecting Permit Program

      • Apply lessons from the Decadal Review to support proposed changes to the MPA Network and Management Program

  • Panelists:

    • Chairwoman Louise Miranda Ramirez (Chairwoman, Ohlone Costanoan Esselen Nation):

      • Chairwoman Ramirez says consultation is useless without action and recognition. Also, any consultation with a tribal group should allow for them to be compensated because they deserve to be paid for their time.

    • Chairman Lopez:

      • Based on the definition of policy given today, there are important things to consider when discussing “policy.” Mother nature is sacred and everything she provides is a gift given to us. The wildlife, the plants, those are gifts and at the same time their creation story tells them that their creator gave human beings a higher intelligence to problem solve and use tools and with that gift of intelligence comes the responsibility to take care of the natural world.

      • His tribe led a calling ceremony to bring salmon back and they expected them to return in 5-6 years, but they returned in 1 year. He feels their creator heard their prayer because the salmon returned the very next year.

      • He says the ocean as a whole is a cultural resource to the tribes and it’s important that we don’t see the ocean just as a resource of fish or oil or other things to capitalize on - We must see it as space that tribes have a moral and sacred responsibility to protect.

    • Erika Zavaleta (Vice President, CA Fish & Game Commission):

      • Erika says people aren’t the problem per se - It’s folks who are doing extractive activities improperly and polluters.

      • She says 94% of MPAs worldwide allow some form of fishing.

    • Jenn Eckerle (Deputy Secretary for Oceans and Coastal Policy at California Natural Resources Agency; Executive Director at California Ocean Protection Council):

      • The OPC is leading the charge on the 30x30 Initiative in 4 ways with a threats-based approach:

        • MPAs - There is not a separate process specific to 30x30 in regard to MPAs

        • National Marine Sanctuaries - Are there ways we can strengthen biodiversity in these areas 

        • Partnering with coastal tribes to create stewardship areas

        • Understanding ecosystem benefits of each region with considerations of other spatial uses like offshore wind, etc.

    • Karen Grimmer (Resource Protection Coordinator at NOAAs Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary):

      • NOAA’s Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary:

        • Marine Policy and Partnerships are key to action:

          • MPA statewide leadership team membership since 2015

          • MPA Collaborative membership since their inception

          • Piloting kelp forest restoration studies, working in partnership with CDFW, Ocean Protection Council, and recreational dive community

          • Permits and MPAs - Continue to discuss changes to allowed activities

        • Greater Access to MPAs:

          • A second “Get Into Your Sanctuary” - Day on the beach with shared adventures:

            • >300 individuals with diverse special needs

            • Adaptive sports: recreational fishing, kayaking, outrigger canoeing, SCUBA, and beach wheelchair rides/floats

          • Establishing a college seat on the sanctuary advisory council, learning about and inviting participation by tribal and indigenous communities in the sanctuary

    • Anna Neumann (Harbormaster, Fort Bragg Noyo Harbor):

      • She says harbormasters are glorified landlords and in her harbor she represents over 150 jobs and approximately 80 commercial fishermen, plus a number of other recreational fishermen 

      • In her area they went from a kelp forest to an urchin barren so they’ve experienced a major ecosystem shift - They are looking at a different system than how it was when they started and she is not sure how to answer questions so she says she is here primarily to learn more about MPAs just like everyone else in the room so she can better serve her harbor

  • Q&A Portion for Panelists (answers italicized):

    • Chairwoman Louise Miranda Ramirez (Chairwoman, Ohlone Costanoan Esselen Nation):

      • Someone asks why we pay for coastal access in the case of Pebble Beach because we should not have to pay a fee - What do we do as people who want the access but also know it’s our right to have free access to the beach? Chairwoman says they don’t care, they just want your money and she faces the same issues. She has spoken with their attorneys because they have had issues with wanting to conduct burial services, but they are not willing to even have a conversation about it.

    • Chairman Lopez:

      • No questions

    • Erika Zavaleta (Vice President, CA Fish & Game Commission):

      • No questions

    • Jenn Eckerle (Deputy Secretary for Oceans and Coastal Policy at California Natural Resources Agency; Executive Director at California Ocean Protection Council):

      • Someone asks how much the state is thinking about 30x30 as an opportunity to cross that boundary from water to land? If we look at salmon as an example, there's a continuum where certain species need that accessibility to be able to go up into the watershed, so what are those water to land opportunities with 30x30? Jenn says they are absolutely looking at the land to sea connection because there’s no exact line that divides one ecosystem from another. She says they just met with state parks to see how they can leverage resources and identify additional opportunities for 30x30 - What can they do to improve biodiversity in the ocean, it’s not a concrete answer now but they are working on it.

      • Someone asks to explain what adaptive management is? Jenn says what she sees as a key next step after this decadal review is defining what it means to adaptively manage our network by means of developing a scientific framework to understand how these important decisions will be made. Erika says adaptive management is about learning what has happened to date and applying that to how we plan for the future. She says the Decadal Report is home to a plethora of important data that will assist in our ability to better plan and modify our processes for the future.

    • Karen Grimmer (Resource Protection Coordinator at NOAAs Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary):

      • No questions

    • Anna Neumann (Harbormaster, Fort Bragg Noyo Harbor):

    • Jaime Diamond says she worries about the future for her kids in terms of being able to fish and she says bad policy hurts people. She states she is one of the youngest persons involved in the management process and she is approaching her “2nd 39th birthday,” because older generations are getting exhausted of participating and it’s essential that we still give newer generations hope for the future by way of creating good policies that are easy to get involved in. She emphasizes that we are on our own dime away from our families to be a part of this process, but we can’t afford not to show up and speak our concerns. Last year Jaime spent approximately 2 months (cumulatively) at fisheries management meetings all over the country. Her question is - How can we make it easier for the people (that this whole process is for) to change policy? Because it is incredibly difficult to participate in a meaningful way especially if you don’t have someone paying for you to be here. She says there are a lot of people who would be here if they could but they can’t afford to. Anna says she sees this in her commercial fishing fleet in Fort Bragg, for example looking at salmon season this year and it’s not great, how do we reinvigorate them to get back into the conversation because this affects their livelihood? She doesn’t have an answer but acknowledges Jaime’s concern and says she shares her frustrations. Erika also says that she rarely hears from folks outside of these meetings so she encourages people like Jaime to reach out. Craig Shuman reassures Jaime that what she has done has made a difference and she definitely continues to make an impact by sparing her time.

Discussion and Q&A 

Opportunity for a broader discussion and Q&A among forum participants across the MPA management pillar

  • Someone asks how we make changes in a meaningful way? Jenn emphasizes the aforementioned scientific framework that will inform future discussions around restoration in MPAs.

  • Someone comments about wind farms and says the one aspect that people refuse to talk about is the electromagnetic field when they suspend those turbines in salt water. She also says the birds will be heavily impacted and hopes all fishermen especially can help find a way to stop it. The Chairwoman says to participate in as many meetings as you can and voice your opposition wherever you can. Jenn also says her organization is working to address these issues and encourages anyone to reach out to her to discuss further.

  • Dick Ogg asks about adaptive management - Are there going to be fishermen involved in that decision process? Because it’s very important to have on-the-ground information from fishermen. Jenn says the process through which proposals to adaptively manage the network is considered is still a work in progress. The Decadal Management Review was just in front of the Fish & Game commission so it is yet to be determined if and how fishermen will be involved. Erika says we certainly need to have input from fishers, she is just not able to confirm exactly how at this time.

  • Someone asks 

Closing 

Remarks from Craig Shuman, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and closing from Chairwoman Ramirez.

  • Craig says what gives him hope is all of us being here because we all have a connection to it so despite our differences and challenges it’s our shared love of the ocean that will get us through the next 10 years.

​​Reception and Poster Session 

Participants are invited to attend a poster presentation session in the King City Room. Light refreshments will be provided courtesy of California Sea Grant.



DAY 3 – March 16, 2023; 8:30 AM 

Call to Order 

9. Marine protected areas (MPA) decadal management review Receive public input and discuss the first decadal management review for California’s MPA network and a summary of the MPA Day: Management Review Forum hosted on March 15, 2023. Explore next steps for continued review by and guidance from the Commission. Note: There is no clock/time limit for comments today.

(A) Reflections on the decadal management review and forum 

  • Susan welcomes folks to come to the front of the room starting with elder tribal folks/chairpersons and any tribal members that are here:

    • Gabrielle Crow emphasizes how grateful she is for recent tribal engagement but she also wants it to be meaningful because they have the responsibility to take care of the ocean for generations to come. 

    • Spenser says 10 years ago tribal nations were not involved in the planning process and are still not treated with respect because everyone else is in charge and they are here just to give information and it’s still just an extractive relationship. When tribal members are leading this program is when he feels real progress will be made. He invites commissioners to spend quality time with tribes and fish, hike, and do other activities together so there can be a real relationship vs. just a non-reciprocated relationship. And if the commission doesn’t have an interest in doing that, Spenser feels they will not be able to represent their interests in any way.

    • Other tribal community members continue to press the aforementioned concerns and emphasize a lack of access not only to their home lands but to the ocean and islands as well.

      • President Eric Sklar says he has felt a lot of grief on a personal level in response to all the comments made by tribal members. He says he is proud of the commission for being receptive to their voices but still believes there is a lot of work to be done. He ensures the tribal members that they will continue to reach out and attempt to build relationships with their communities.

      • Commissioner Murray acknowledges everything that was said in particular to the cost of parking fees and fishing permits; She will look into this accessibility issue for Native American communities. She is grateful for the generous offers of building relationships with tribal members as human beings, not just “tokens.”

  • Judie Mancuso from Laguna Beach is vehemently against any fishing in MPAs and says she is the voice for animals facing our 6th mass extinction and that all fishing must stop.

  • David Rudie (Chairman of the CA Sea Urchin Commission which is run by the Dept. of Food and Ag) says the current number of urchin permit holders in CA is about 200 but they are trying to get that number down to 150 based on kelp levels and MPAs. He says the urchin fishery has suffered greatly in the past decade due to climate disruption affecting kelp populations, in addition to the spatial loss set forth by MPAs. He presses that fishermen need to be integrated into the MPA planning process wherever possible. He requests that the commission direct staff to work with the CA Sea Urchin Commission to do a scientifically monitored harvest of urchins inside some MPAs. Craig says they could not do that under an SEP so he wonders if EFP or regulatory changes would be needed to regulations. Dave said there is a specific law that will allow commercial urchin harvesting if there is a letter written by the Dept. of Fish & Wildlife. Craig says he will look into this.

  • Jaime Diamond makes a comment: She is a community leader, wife, and mother of 3 children who whole-heartedly love the ocean. She says there was deep hurt and mistrust within the fishing community when the MPA planning process began 10 years ago. She says she looks forward to opportunities to participate in the planning path forward. 

  • Ken Franky recommends to Craig Shuman that they execute cooperative research including tagging projects, etc. wherever and whenever they can. As we move forward, Ken says we take a good look at the adaptive management cycle as we approach 30x30 and continue to look to science for answers. Craig thanks Ken and all of SAC and Jaime Diamond for engaging in this process.

  • Ryan Meyer from a research group at UC Davis says his team is focused on the wide range of ways people can get involved in community science. He believes what is happening with MPAs and community science is uniquely exciting. He says more than 80,000 people participated in MPA citizen science who contributed over 500,000 volunteer hours. He says community science could be a great tool to implement inclusion and equity. 

  • Penny Owens from SB Channelkeeper makes a comment: Channelkeeper strongly supports MPAs and hopes not to weaken any regulations/protections within the MPAs. She says the report shows that the MPAs are working and show healthier ecosystems that provide recreational and educational experiences for our community to engage with. She thanks the commission for all their efforts.

  • Heal the Bay representative proudly supports the MPA network whole-heartedly and thanks all staff who made this DMR happen. She says this is a momentous occasion worth celebrating. 

  • Chris Voss: He would like to draw attention to the massive spatial loss that we are enduring as a commercial fishing community. Offshore wind, 30x30, aquaculture, it is a lot of take. Thousands of sq miles will be dedicated to offshore wind alone and a massive impact to the commercial fishing industry. What he’d like to draw attention to is the opportunity we have now to discuss 30x30 planning specifically if we use the federal existing sanctuaries as a means to try to get to that objective, we have to resist sanctuaries designed to medal in commercial fisheries. The sanctuaries have medaled in MPA planning and impacts on fishermen in the past, so if we’re going to incorporate federal sanctuaries into our MPA network, we have to push back because as a representative that’s trying to make progress in fisheries interests, it’s unfair to bring in a gorilla like the sanctuary and allow them to influence the commission and council process. If it’s possible to have a deeper dive for direction from the commissioners as to what the 30x30 process looks like and what they have as a vision, he’d like to open it up to a discussion around that so we can get a better understanding of what to expect. Commissioner Murray says she is happy to discuss this and opens up a conversation. Craig says with respect to 30x30 he defers to the comments that Jenn Eckerle gave yesterday about 4 approaches specifically that any changes to CA’s MPAs would go through the commission process here, not some separate process. He also says fisheries management overall will continue to be managed by the council and commission process. Commissioner Murray emphasizes the 4 paths to 30x30 (listed in notes above), in particular the 4th part where adaptive management of MPAs being how the commissioners weigh in. She says that MPAs are working especially shown in data of intertidal pools along the coast. She says they have not collected monitoring data evenly so there is room for improvement and that is where the adaptive management approach comes in. Chris says they are rolling out their hopes and dreams based on a meaningful framework, but it still is uncertain as to how we can engage in a way that has great influence which he guesses is here with them. Commissioner Murray personally sees what changes they make to the MPA network driven by adaptive management and does not see the process as being driven by 30x30. Chris asks about petitioning - Commissioner Murray says it requires scientific underpinnings in terms of relevancy to climate resiliency and social justice. Commissioner Sklar says for petitioning, we have a process and adaptive management is the way we should approach it. People can petition them on anything they want to change but it will only be seriously considered if it addresses the criteria Commissioner Murray mentioned above. Craig says what he’s hearing from the co-chairs is any changes to the network would be based on the goals of the MLPA in addition to the layers articulated by Commissioner Murray outside of the 30x30 process (though this process does “count” toward the 30x30 process). He says the planning process was intense and that they spent a lot of time designing the network of MPAs that they have in place today, so any changes to that network are going to require the same level of engagement across the board. He says there’s tradeoffs in everything they do so if they allocate staff to work on changes, they can’t work on other important things so they need to be cognizant of those tradeoffs and consider if they're looking to make minor tweaks around the edges or what kind of changes are they looking to make - He emphasizes these are important conversations to have. Chris continues to voice his concerns around 30x30. Craig says the additional 14% can come through other options besides the MPA network.

  • Anna Neuman believes in the science but in the north coast the MPAs aren’t working because they have urchin barrens and she says they need to do some sort of grazer suppression if what we’re trying to do is manage a kelp forest. She says there are MPA restrictions in place for an ecosystem that isn’t there. She says they need to develop a market for these purple urchins so there is more incentive for them to be removed. She does not agree with the statement that commercial fishermen “take too much” however in this situation, she is openly suggesting that we overfish the purple urchins so it can provide jobs in her town. They only have 7,000 people in Fort Bragg and they need those jobs, plus she says it will restore their kelp forests which ties into her argument that the MPAs are a “network” and this is an opportunity to prove this. Commissioner Murray says that adaptive management is the answer to this because not every area is doing the best it could. She suggests that Anna reach out to Dave Rudie and Anna says she knows him. Commissioner Murray does not see fishermen as villains and she encourages Anna to continue to be part of the process. Anna has been working with the CA Sea Urchin Commission and wrote her master’s thesis on purple urchins but has not yet found the solution she and her community needs. She says what Southern CA did with red urchins is what needs to take place on the north coast with purple urchins.

(B) Reflections on adaptive management recommendations and actions to prioritize for the next decade of the adaptive management cycle

  • The main consensus from representatives of all environmental groups is that they are in full support of the MPAs and hope to continue to protect and even expand them with time. 

  • Wayne Kotow urges the commission to incorporate fishermen expertise when going through the adaptive management process. He emphasizes that fishermen (sport and commercial) are the experts of the sea and they should co-manage any potential changes to MPAs in the future.