Choosing Marine Protected Areas That Will Work Best for Southern California

California is creating Marine Protected Areas throughout its waters because, if well-designed, they will work to restore our oceans and protect the biological gems of our underwater world.  Since 1990, California commercial fishing revenues have decreased by half and the number of fishing boats has declined by nearly three quarters.  By increasing both the size and number of fish, marine protected areas will benefit fishing, diving, wildlife watching and the many other important ocean activities that are a critical part of California's economy. 

In order to work, protected areas must be put in quality habitat.  That's why scientific guidelines are written into California's law, the Marine Life Protection Act, to ensure that networks of protected areas include enough nurseries and other productive habitats to support diverse species.  Tomorrow, a task force of experts will select their preference for the protected area network that will work best for Southern California.  As venerated deep sea explorer Sylvia Earle discusses in her LA Times Op-Ed today, the Conservation Plan,  Proposal 3,  best meets the science guidelines while still leaving 88% of Southern California's coastal waters open to fishing.

Around the world, marine protected areas have been shown to restore the health of ocean ecosystems - not just individual fish, but also the habitat they live in and the entire web of life. To really do the job, protected areas must be located where critters feed and breed.  In Southern California, the lush breeding grounds in places such as Point Dume and Palos Verdes are the right spots, and the Conservation Plan does the best job of protecting these places. 

The Fishing Industry Plan, known as Proposal 2, includes vacant sandy patches that don't host much life, instead of the eel grass, an important nursery habitat, and other productive hot spots that are needed to make the MPAs work.  This plan also leave big gaps in critical habitats like kelp and nearshore rocky reef.  Advocates of Proposal 2 have suggested that we have to settle for this third-rate habitat to minimize socio-economic impacts, but 5-year reviews of reserves or marine protected area networks in the Florida Keys and the Channel Islands indicate no adverse impacts on recreational fishing revenues resulting from marine protected areas. Today, the Chief Economist at the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries sent a letter to the task force to expose the flaws in the fishing industry's economic arguments. 

Not only do MPAs Work, they also take a lot of work to create, especially when they are designed by community members through a thoughtful, science-based process - here's a photo of that process in action today in Southern California. 

We agree with Sylvia that the Conservation Plan--Proposal 3--creates the greatest conservation value and best meets the scientific guidelines.  Proposal 1, the Middle Ground Plan, is a fair alternative as well, especially because it has support from a broad array of  interest groups.  However, the Fishing Industry Proposal 2 fails to meet key science guidelines, omits nursery habitats, and is therefore not a good option. 

Stay tuned tomorrow for updates as the Blue Ribbon Task Force evaluates the science and public input to choose their preferred protected areas network for the South Coast.