Yesterday, after almost five hours of public comments from over 100 speakers, the Fish and Game Commission enacted into law the plan for a network of marine protected areas (MPAs) on the North Central Coast of California, as required by the 1999 Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA).  The culmination of an exemplary 2.5 year public process, this meeting was truly a great show of leadership and foresight by the Commissioners who voted to finalize this network of underwater parks, creating a string of protected areas that connects to the existing network in the Central Coast.  (See this "Lessons Learned Study" for an evaluation of how the process worked.) 

The final hearing was an electrified and emotional meeting for everyone there, because every single person in the jam-packed provisional hearing room clearly cares strongly about the health of one of California's greatest scenic, natural, recreational and economic resources - our coastal and ocean ecosystem.  While every one of the speakers voiced a strong opinion, the underlying choices-the compromise "Integrated Preferred Alternative" (IPA) plan, the fishing industry plan "2-XA", and the conservation-oriented alternative 3-had a remarkable amount of common ground. 

The compromise network enacted yesterday protects threatened and unique habitats along the coast, while still leaving nearly 90 percent of state waters open to various forms of fishing.   California's marine protected areas encourage recreational and educational uses of the ocean; activities like kayaking, diving, snorkeling, surfing, bird and wildlife watching, and swimming are generally allowed in all MPAs. 

Commissioner Richard Rogers provided eloquent comments and important perspective on the process before joining Commissioners Sutton and Benninghoven in voting for the IPA plan:

"I am committed to returning California to the sustainable abundance that it once enjoyed - and I know that it once enjoyed that because I saw it, and that wasn't all that long ago, that was only 50 years ... I believe that what is in front of us today is the result of a complicated, extraordinarily open, historic public process, certainly the state of California has never seen one like it ... I believe that the IPA is the best thing that we have in front of us today in a process that I believe is the single most important thing that I have ever done in my entire life.  I believe that 20 to 30 years from now, we are going to be really proud of what we do here."

The Commissioners voted to adopt the "Integrated Preferred Alternative" because, according to the state's analysis of environmental, socio-economic, and other impacts, this plan is the environmentally superior alternative whose benefits will outweigh any potential short-term adverse impacts.  Fortunately, five years of monitoring in existing marine protected areas off the Channel Islands has demonstrated that even potential short-term impacts are likely to be minimal or not occur.  Prior to the creation of the Channel Island MPAs, some fishing groups expressed the same fears about possible negative impacts of those areas - these fears were virtually identical to many of the fears expressed about the MLPA.  The 5 years of monitoring in the Channel Islands shows that MPAs work and are beginning to yield more and larger target species, as well as increased biodiversity - while having no, or only positive impacts, on the number and success of commercial and recreational fishing activities off the Channel Islands.

The final network of protected areas off the North Central Coast was developed over the course of a 2.5 year public process - the plan itself was designed by 40 diverse coastal stakeholders, finalized by a Blue Ribbon Task Force, and meets specific science guidelines.  This timeline demonstrates the number of public meetings and the extensive documents available online give detailed information about how the plans were developed.