BAY NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY
Minutes - June 1st, 2001
Landing Marine Laboratories
Moss Landing Road
Landing, CA 95039
Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) Advisory Council met on Friday,
June 1st, 2001, at the Moss Landing Marine Labs, Moss Landing,
California. Public categories and government agencies were present as
State Parks: Bill Berry
Large: Ron Massengill
Large: Jenna Kinghorn - ABSENT
Large: Deborah Streeter
& Industry: Dave Ebert
& Harbors: James Stilwell
Coastal Commission: Tami Grove - ABSENT
Dept. of Fish and Game: awaiting appointment
EPA: Craig J. Wilson
Resources Agency: Brian Baird
Coast Guard: LT Tom Stuhlreyer
non-voting members were present as indicated:
Islands NMS: LCDR Matt Pickett - ABSENT
of the Farallones NMS and Cordell Bank NMS: Ed Ueber - ABSENT
Slough NERR: Becky Christensen
Bay NMS: William J. Douros
Rhodes, CA State Parks
Mitteldorf, At Large
CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL, APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 6th, 2001
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES
Call to Order and Roll Call
meeting was called to order by Chair, Stephanie Harlan, at 9.10 a.m.
Dan Haifley conducted the roll call, a quorum was present.
Approval of Meeting Minutes
SAC unanimously adopted the minutes from the April 6th, 2001 Sanctuary
Advisory Council meeting, with the following changes.
10 - correct "Kate Wayne" to "Kate Wing"
the 4 groups that submitted letters - SOS, CMC, WWF and NRDC.
Vickis statement "The 4 conservation groups - SOS, CMC,
WWF and NRDC commented that there should be a fair and balanced process
regarding the marine reserves issue."
3 - correct, "Dan suggested" to "Dan stated that the
minutes should be taken by a court reporter."
introduced by Dan Haifley, seconded by Deborah Streeter
17 in favor, 0 opposed (unanimous)
Approval of SAC Annual Report
Harrold - expressed approval for the current process of compiling
information for the annual report.
Clark-Gray - concurred with Chris.
Harlan - commented that for next years annual report we
should start earlier, and she would be happy to work with the chairs
of the working group to develop a draft. She would then pass it on
to the SAC and staff for revisions and comments.
Clayton - responded that we are not following our protocols, but
that he is willing to follow the procedures that Stephanie has outlined.
Action (unanimous agreement):
COUNCIL MEMBER & STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS
Harlan a photo of the Big Sur coast and card is being circulated
to sign and send to Brady Phillips. She received a letter to Tom Capos
from Gayle Norton, the Secretary of Interior, regarding the national
monument. He welcomes thoughts on the Secretarys views on the
traditional and multiple uses, areas to conserve, etc.
Baird Mary Nichols of the State Resources Agency was asked
to comment on that designation, and the Department of Fish and Game
was involved in specific aspects related to the monuments.
Clark-Gray - an interpretive sign is being developed by state
parks that show the boundaries. She passed a draft graphic around
to SAC members.
Douros alerted people that the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) staff want to help with staff recruitment, they are looking
for an office in Monterey, and would like to be close the Sanctuary
office if possible. He also asked for input regarding the new web-based
SAC meeting material distribution.
Harlan - she had a little trouble initially, but then had an expert
update her Acrobat 5 software, and walk her through the process.
Harrold - expressed overall approval for the new strategy, and
had trouble downloading one document (the Chairs-Coordinators Workshop
Douros - we can add follow-up pieces to the agenda after the SAC
Streeter - suggestions on what to print out would be helpful to
her. She requested that we dont use acronyms in the SAC or working
Harrold - are the download designation documents available?
Douros you will be getting those today during the Management
Plan Review update.
Streeter - is now able to refer people to the website.
Massengill - please restrict documents to download size. He deposits
all documents regarding SAC meetings at the Cambria public library.
Clayton have a header that tells us how many pages are
contained in the document.
Pease you can also print out individual pages.
Stilwell - we should let libraries know that this is available
on the website.
Tom Stuhlreyer informed us of a Coast Guard meeting hosted
by Carol Teraoka, the NOAA enforcement officer that is working with
the Sanctuary. They had an outstanding array of stakeholders attending,
from San Mateo to San Luis Obispo County.
Scheiblauer asked if the harbor patrols were involved?
Stilwell this is a sore point with harbors.
Tom Stuhlreyer we can make sure to include them next meeting.
Harrold - Monterey Bay Aquarium has two new exhibits focusing
on seahorse and tuna conservation. Project Seahorse highlights the
Nichols announced Save Our Shores Benefit Book Signing
Cruise on the Princess of Whales out of Moss Landing, with celebrated
author David Helving is coming up June 9th at 3:00 PM.
Ebert just returned from South Africa and a symposium on
marine protected areas. He attended the IUCN meeting and the Shark
Baird just finished the last of six public meetings on
public shoreline erosion. Policy was developed in 1978, and involves
how to utilize how to utilize sediments for beach nourishment. The
meetings had between 6-65 people in attendance.
Massengill gave a Cambria report there are big changes
with satellite office, as it is doing really well with outreach. He
is focused on SAC concerns and getting the word out to people. Some
local events include the annual awards for docents occurred, BeachCombers
was kicked off in May, and Snapshot day in April. He is going to be
available for public input on the first Tuesday of every month. Visitation
to elephant seals is slower right now, population is at about 105,000.
Memorial weekend saw about 30,000 visitors to the seals in one day,
Nichols Wednesdays SeaWeb presentation in Santa Cruz
Harrold - sea otter census is occurring, press release on findings
will be coming in the next two weeks. He will forward information
on a book to Bill, for him to read, and see if we would like to purchase
a copy. The book is by the Ocean Study Board. Let Karen know if youre
Stilwell he noticed a new adhoc modeling group on page
three of office report. He asked if the Army Corp of Engineers was
Baird responded that the Corps was solicited about 5 years
ago, and the ball got dropped.
Stilwell - there are funds available to carry a study forward
on erosion in Elkhorn Slough.
Clayton May 5th dive clean up. 80 people participated.
Fuel tank, old bottles, black cod nets, car parts, and many other
types of trash were removed. Karin Strasser-Kaufman, Steve Scheiblauer
and Ruth Vreeland handed out prizes. Kelly Newton, from the Sanctuary,
cataloged the items. Dive shops sponsored a barbeque. Next clean up
dive is scheduled for September. There is the possibility of expansion
Scheiblauer - the dive clean up could be done a number of times
a year. Some of the stuff is new, and the pier is still being used
to dump things over.
Gaffney why cant there be barriers to stop people
Scheiblauer weve looked at that, but the area is
so used, that option in a problem.
Canale fishing report slow salmon fishing all the
way from Point Reyes to Mexico. Regarding Wednesdays presentation
about MLPAs, he asked why there wasnt a fisherman on the
group. This is a large oversight on Cal Fish and Game. Monterey public
meetings on MLPA will be at the end of July, or beginning of August.
July 10th is in Half Moon Bay.
Douros there are two binders circulating; one for the SAC
and one for the public. SAC alternate, Heidi Tiura reported seeing
a North Pacific right whale in Monterey Bay on Tuesday. Last four
sightings outside of Alaska, were in the Sanctuary. Sanctuary staff
tried to locate the whale, but unfortunately, did not find the whale.
Please call us if sighted. This is good news for right whales.
Ebert - mentioned Henry Mollets research project on whale
shark sightings in the Monterey Bay area. Please keep an eye out for
whale sharks also.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Suman Associate Professor at University of Miami, Marine
Policy and Affairs. His research project is comparing the state and
federal public process; he is also looking at diving industry, the
dry Tortuga MPA process, and is comparing the processes of SAC between
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary and Monterey Bay National Marine
Sanctuary. He stated the goals of the project, and that Sanctuaries
have a lot in common. He is interviewing former SAC members and has
completed a survey to SAC members. More than 60 MBNMS SAC members
(current and past) have responded. He reviewed the results of the
survey. Overall, there is strong correlation between the responses
given by both SACs. He will send us the final report when complete.
Addis staffer from Fred Keeleys office who presented
a summary of the variety of policy issues that Keely is pursuing.
Canale expressed displeasure regarding the MLPA processes
exclusion of fisherman.
Addis will carry that message back to his office.
Scheiblauer the City of Monterey will be considering sending
a letter to Farrs office to request his presence in the Sanctuarys
management plan review process.
Clark-Gray regarding the May 17th Sanctuary Education Panel
(SEP) at Garland Park, please change dates on meeting minutes to reflect
the correct date.
Nichols the Conservation Working Group (CWG) is expanding,
having presentations on issues of interest, and extends an invitation
to anyone to join their meetings.
Stillwell does the CWG support no trawling areas? Is that
support for no fishing areas?
Nichols - no, we are simply listing that issue as one of many
Harlan the Workshop report is posted on the website. In
the NAPA report, the critical role of SAC is emphasized a number of
PRESENTATION: SEAWEB: PUBLIC SURVEY RESULTS ON OCEANS
Dropkin introduced the nonprofit, SeaWeb they are
based in DC, with a local office at Monterey Bay Aquarium. The focus
is communications; media was the main target to carry the information
and engage a dialogue with the public; SeaWeb then expanded to develop
and implement a public opinion poll about marine protected areas.
They are also launching the seafood consumption campaign.
gave an overview of the surveys methodology, and their key research
findings. They have found that most Americans have a fairly negative
view of the overall health of the oceans, and nearly two-thirds believe
that regulations protecting the oceans are too lax. She mentioned
that the term "marine protected area" is confusing for everyone.
She went on to detail the survey results, which can be found in the
following report, SeaWeb: American Attitudes Toward MPA's - May 2001.
The report is posted on our website at:
Canale personally finds this survey valueless.
Harrold how can we find out how the public thinks? Fishermen
develop the survey? This is a statistically robust survey. I would
love to hear from another survey,
Dropkin validates Toms feelings. We needed to understand
what the public could understand.
Canale has a problem with an opinion poll driving our policy
Douros we do not intend to recraft the management plan
review based on this survey poll. This is a set of national results
that we need to be attentive to. The purpose of this was simply to
hear the results.
Canale a more useful tool would be developed by a large
group of people.
Stilwell "leading marine scientists" is
included in the question this is biased. Sure the poll has
validity. But, it does not substitute for what Ive said previously,
that we need this information from our local area. Who is qualified
as a "leading scientist"?
Dropkin concurs with Jim that this poll cannot substitute
for a local poll.
Haifley - can we break out the responses between the coastal and
Tom Stuhlreyer obviously people dont understand ocean
issues, and appreciate its uses. That is apparent by the huge number
of people indicated that selected marine transportation as a threat.
Dropkin there is a difference between what are issues,
and how are you going to make changes in your life? SAC members can
help figure out how to make these decisions.
Pease it has value. SeaWeb has paid for it. It does not
represent the statement of how the public feels it is SeaWebs
Streeter the public has a strong emotional connection to
the ocean. We are not good at controlling those emotions. Lets
cut ourselves some slack and recommit.
Fosmark she expressed concern about the poll results. She
felt the education process needs to provide more insights as to how
uses of the ocean can be more healthy, but not eliminated.
Scheiblauer the public needs more information; they may
be ignorant on many coastal area issues. What people think is one
thing their actions may be different.
Gaffney she has heard the presentation three times, and
finds the poll interesting and valid. Its good to know where
the public is at, whether or not we agree. Its good for the
SAC to hear what the nation thinks this is a national marine
sanctuary. So understanding what the country thinks about ocean issues
Canale three times may be a charm for him too he
retracted his statement that this is a valueless poll and thinks
that we do need to educate people more thoroughly and with good solid
PRESENTATION: MERITO MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION PROGRAM
Grimmer presented this item. In March of this year, the Monterey
Bay National Marine Sanctuary completed a new multicultural education
plan, known as "MERITO" or Multicultural Education for Resource
Issues Threatening Oceans. This initial component, (others are planned)
is targeted to the largest and fastest growing constituency in the
Sanctuary - local Hispanic communities. MERITO translates to "merit
or worth" in Spanish.
Sanctuary is not currently reaching the huge Hispanic population in
the Central Coast. Hispanics represent 65% of the city of Salinas,
47% of Monterey County, and 32% of Californias total population.
Hispanic leaders of government agencies, chambers of commerce and
industry (especially in agriculture and retail) are important constituencies
for the Sanctuary to connect with on conservation and resource management
issues. Through MERITO, we are developing relationships that provide
an interchange of communication between the NMSS and its Hispanic
planning is at the heart of this project. MBNMS is working closely
with over twenty local partner agencies, schools and universities,
nonprofits, inner-city community groups, and industry to develop sustainable
projects that meet the needs of the community.
provides three main services:
opportunities for Hispanic-serving teachers and Hispanic college
to state and federal agencies (Elkhorn Slough NERR and California
State Parks) that manage sites of high visitation by Hispanic families
and school students;
to Hispanic-serving youth leaders in integrating marine conservation
issues into their community programs.
requesting that NOAA provide three new staff members; a program manager
and two bilingual educators, as well as the program support needed
for implementation. These strategies are dependent on collaborative
efforts, and so time is of the essence. It is important to move now
in order to utilize the great momentum that this project has generated.
following benefits will result from full implementation of MERITO.
awareness of marine and coastal conservation issues by Hispanic
families, youth, and migrant workers.
opportunities in science resulting in a larger pool of Hispanic
professionals for NOAA.
communication and interchange between the NMSS and Hispanic leaders
in government and industry resulting in their expanded involvement
in all aspects of Sanctuary management. The upcoming joint management
plan review is one such example.
collaboration by state and federal agencies to pool resources and
increase the amount and effectiveness of outreach programs to Hispanic
suite of well-developed and tested bilingual education products
that can be used by other national marine sanctuaries, and across
model multicultural outreach program that can be adapted and utilized
by other national marine sanctuaries.
Streeter - suggests that we look to the religious faith-based
community. They can be excellent partners.
Christensen agrees that this project gets a lot of talk,
but little action. It is mutually beneficial for ESNERR to partner
with the Sanctuary and MERITO on the site-based component, as it puts
a body to a project, and puts people to work collaboratively.
Nichols SOS has been doing bilingual education for years.
Would we please add SOS to the list of partners.
Haifley its a good program likes the idea
of sharing a person with other programs.
SAC will send a letter of support to NOAA Acting Administrator, Scott
Gudes, and include all letters received to date as attachment.
introduced by Dan Haifley, seconded by Deborah Streeter
by role call: 16 in favor, 0 opposed, 1 abstention.
Baird has to abstain, as a proposal to support MERITO is
being reviewed by the State Resources Agency. But, he does support
the concept embodied by MERITO.
Hayes explained how the education and outreach team is
working on a regional education plan, and how it would soon involve
MERITO. She hopes that the SAC will be able to give their input to
the draft plan.
1:15pm LUNCH BREAK
DISCUSSION: NAPA REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
Harlan - introduced the one-pager on recommendations.
Douros gave a summary on his take on the report, and which
recommendations he would like to see us move forward on. He is pleased
to have the NAPA report done, and by an outside group (National Academy
of Public Administration). A number of recommendations came out of
the report, and he felt the sections that pertain to the Sanctuary
were accurate. There was no frustrations or disagreement about the
report. He copied and passed out the pages with the recommendations
and the appendix (opportunities), as this might give us some insight
as to how to proceed. Stephanie had asked Bill to identify which recommendations
he thought the SAC could work on assist in implementing. The report
contains fourteen recommendations in total. He describes #1, and accepts
it overall. #1 involves making sanctuaries more visable to the public
via signs and visitor centers and working cooperatively with state
highway departments, and other organizations. #8 pertains to "manage
for results", and Bill agrees with focusing on protecting resources
as the best way to serve broad statutory goals. He then describes
recommendation #12 - "NOAA should provide stronger support to
the sanctuary program." Bill comments that the SAC can help us
seek that support from NOAA. There are some other recommendations
we need to focus on as well, as they relate back to the broader national
goals. How do we have sustainable use as well as resource protection?
Does the focused attention on oil leasing and oil spills prevent a
clear focus on other, more important, and more likely threats to the
Clayton we need to look at item #6 "Clarify the role
and responsibility of sanctuary councils." An independent group
did the report, they found some issues relative to SACs throughout
the sanctuary sites.
Harlan should the SAC have designated seats, or have it
be open to all? At the SAC Coordinator/Chair workshop this year, they
agreed that have designated seats was the way to go. Many people,
as we know, dont have a good understanding of the program.
Stilwell asked if the Sanctuary supports business through
advertising or recognition labels.
Douros explained that the annual Sanctuary awards at the
Sanctuary Currents Symposium is one level of recognition. In addition,
we can raise revenue through marketing the logo. It has moved forward
in fits and starts, some sponsorships have immerged such as the one
with Robert Lynn Nelson Studios. The Sanctuary seal has been pushed
back. Maybe the SAC could look at that?
Massengill State Parks are using oil company logos on plaques.
Nichols Number 9, 2nd bullet; think in terms of that.
Harlan is there anything that we can incorporate into our
working groups? Develop an action plan and bring back to SAC for input.
Members of the NAPA committee are Ron, Jim, David, and Stephanie.
How would you like to proceed?
Stilwell - incorporate Bills recommendations into the action
Harrold would like SAC to focus on initiatives to improve
resources such as #2, bullet #2 and #9. Be results orientated.
Haifley on #9, 3rd bullet - would the annual report "Ecosystem
Observations" apply here?
Douros - SIMoNs annual report would be more useful for this
purpose, to measure results.
Harlan she would like to know how if Sanctuary Programs
HQ is interested in embracing these issues or not.
Clayton asked if it is worth knowing how Sanctuary Programs
Douros expressed that actions through the SAC have supported
this plan, and HQ is moving out on all these items anyway.
Nichols we should prioritize our recommendations and convey
them forward. Committee could come back after discussion to the SAC.
Streeter - volunteered her time to be on the NAPA committee.
Clayton several items are now being moved ahead on.
Action, rather general agreement that the NAPA Committee will return
with an action plan.
DISCUSSION: MANAGEMENT PLAN REVIEW (MPR)
Douros - introduced the change in timeline for the MPR, as indicated.
Meetings may be in November or December or January. State of the Sanctuary
report will be delayed, and that will affect the public scooping meetings.
Responding to Tami Groves prior request, here is list of ideas
and opportunities for the SAC to get involved. He gave a distillation
of memo. Themes exist for each meeting, and he laid out the schedule
for next four SAC meetings.
Stilwell please dont specify trawling as a seafloor
impact as there are more general examples.
Douros - these are just examples that may or may not be chosen.
Clayton how do we approach the boundary issue and bring
Douros - we may have to reevaluate the management of the three
sanctuaries on an ecological basis. There is an effort to collect
bioregional data and decide from that perspective. The SAC could evaluate
that from a management perspective.
Harrold the MPR is essentially a strategic plan for how
we spend energy in the next five years. Public and internal process
will need to prioritize the issues for the next five years. For the
October meeting we could hear presentations from each working
group on what should be the prioritized issues. Working groups could
organize their priorities and present to the SAC.
Douros - endorsed that idea, if the SAC directed so.
Nichols there might be a need to bring the information
of the Alliance to the SAC. How can the SAC take that information
and grapple with it.
Baird Sanctuary should engage more with coastal erosion
as a topic.
Douros requested an endorsement of the timeline, and then
for us to decide on a plan for October meeting.
Harlan could we request that Channel Island National Marine
Sanctuary come here and present their 10 best and 10 worst things
to do during the MPR process, followed by one-hour presentations from
each of the working groups.
Streeter endorses Stephanies suggestion. Regionally,
what is our purpose in regards to systems and our place in this region?
How can we address the land-based community issues? Housing prices
and the environmental movement has been flagged is a huge issue.
Douros - the MBNMS Water Quality Protection Program has worked
on those issues and will continue to do so.
Rhodes - suggests that the working group reports are all formatted
Douros - handed out copies of the set of key three documents,
put together by Sean Mortonthe 1992 Management Program, Regulations,
& Designation Document. Bill explained that these documents drive
where we are today. He asked the SAC to suggest additional tools or
materials they might need as educational products.
Haifley - asked if the SAC could help with distribution.
Harrold expressed that timing is crucial. He is concerned
with the outreach jumping the gun before the scoping meetings.
Douros we want a concentrated effort, two months before.
We share the same concern.
Nichols expressed that the State of the Sanctuary Report
is a critical piece, and it should identify the threats.
Douros - that will be a section of the report. But, we dont
want to feed the public issues. Secondly, that part may get cut out
depending on the NOAA leadership.
Clark-Gray can we borrow equipment to show Power Point
presentations? Slides may work better for some.
Douros he will check into that possibility.
Rhodes asked about using a professional facilitator for
the scooping meeting discussions.
Fosmark offered report for Jan 2001 has important
information and guidelines regarding economic impact.
Christensen this might be restrictive asked if we
can summarize the givens that are non-negotiables.
Douros - expressed that everything is on the table.
Christensen housing would be an example. Maybe we should
emphasize that there is a clean slate and anything is open.
Pease has a question about the three sanctuary working
in tandem process. Asked how will we control the time allotted to
people at scoping meetings. Commented that there maybe a level of
redundancy if the same constituency shows up.
Douros - CINMS has used the small group approach, to control that
Morton presented the proposed schedule and format for the
public scoping meetings to the SAC for their input. He explained that
the public scoping meetings will be organized in a workshop style.
In Monterey, he is thinking of having a day presentation that goes
into the evening. There is a large area to cover, and it gives people
Christensen asked if the northern sites will be facilitated
by Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Bank NMSs. There should be consistency
between process and facilitators. She requested that we publish all
dates and locations.
Douros - regarding the Salinas meeting and Sacramento meeting,
we need to get specific input.
Haifley - commented that a Spanish translator and a daytime meeting
in Santa Cruz would be good.
Rhodes there is value in meeting in Sacramento, as interest
and influence exists there.
Wilson concurs with Lynn.
Christensen asks about a possible Moss Landing meeting?
Douros if the SAC directs us, we can. So far, weve
heard that we should do a meeting in Sacramento, and Salinas with
a Spanish translator. What other suggestions?
Harlan suggests a one-pager with a survey that could be
in a newspaper.
Stilwell comments that we do not need to hold a meeting
in Moss Landing, and suggests that we need to translate some management
plan materials into Vietnamese.
Pease suggests that we need to let people know about how
to participate without going to a meeting.
Massengill comments that San Luis Obispo is a good choice
for southern region.
Douros asks about possible Saturday meetings.
Harrold responds with no.
Haifley responds with yes.
Bill Douros summarized the general agreement of the SAC. See below.
Douros gave a summary of appeal process, and that weve
laid that out and flagged the state level approvals. Burke had suggested
we develop a flow chart that lays it out.
Pease the ultimate MPR document is up to the staff. All
authority and preparation of documents is with the staff. What if
something we want is not incorporated?
Sheiblauer asks if the MOU with the state is also up for
Price responds that it could be up. It is referenced in
Pease requests clarification of the joint MPR process.
This was the 2nd factor that BTAP addressed. There is a concern that
the hearings being dominated by issues from other areas.
the Director of the NMSS made the decision. Could that be reconsidered?
Douros responded that the decision has been made - if the
SAC felt it was important enough, we could write a letter to ask if
we could break up the meetings.
Pease asked if there was a concern by anyone else. He feels
we are diluting our process.
Harlan commented that people probably wont travel
Douros commented that there will be overlap issues between
the three sanctuaries.
Hayes expressed that during the small group facilitation,
we could have separate tables for different sanctuaries. Topical round
tables would help alleviate that issue, and give people different
opportunities to offer their input.
Baird expressed that each community will come in with an
agenda with ten workshops, youll hear the party line
over and over. So, it makes sense to combine the three sanctuaries.
There are common issues to all three.
Harrold doesnt have the sense that people will not
travel. The boundary issue is probably why the NMSS wants to do it
Action taken by the SAC, rather there was agreement by the SAC on the
various management plan process items, as follows:
the following schedule and SAC involvement:
SAC Meeting : Receive/Give Input on Various MPR Planning Topics
guidance as offered in this summary
Frame Sanctuary Accomplishments on Existing Management Plan
presentation by MBNMS staff on program accomplishments, status of
list/criteria for narrowing issues
Power Point presentation for outreach
August SAC meeting we will discuss how to decide which items should
be reviewed in the MP update.
Open possible ideas include:
by Channel Islands NMS Staff on Draft MP/EIS
by Working Groups regarding issues (suggested and added by SAC with
recommendation that WG presentations be formatted in same fashion)
November: Outreach by SAC Members to constituent groups regarding
MPR process, getting involved; help distribute "State of the
Scoping Meeting for the SAC (Tentative)
input from SAC on management plan issues.
Review, Narrow Issues for Consideration
summary from MBNMS staff of issues from scoping process
priorities for MPR
subcommittees or delegate issues to existing working groups
Management Plan Review Scoping Meetings;
(added by SAC) & Evening
(Day added if SAC not in HMB)
Modesto/Stockton/San Jose (added by SAC)
(added by SAC)
Items Requested by SAC for Management Plan:
meeting in Santa Cruz should also include a Spanish interpreter.
(brochures/notices) should be printed in Vietnamese
outreach materials and notices to SAC members (and others
) mailing lists, possibly have Sanctuary pay for mailings by others
brochure or mailing notices should include a cut-out/ perforated
card to mail in responses or comments.
approval process should be laid out in a flow chart by July 15th.
by SAC: PowerPoint Presentation and/or slides will be available for
SAC members (Bill will check on whether MBNMS equipment can by used
by SAC members).
UPDATE: ALLIANCE OF COMMUNITIES FOR SUSTAINABLE FISHING
Price - gave an update on what has been happening since the initial
Fosmark announces that Dave Clayton is now a member. We
are in the early stages.
Scheiblauer announces that he had talked to Mike Ricketts,
and Mike wants to reiterate that he is looking forward to positive
dialogue. Katilin Gaffney is now a member, as is Mary Yaklavich, and
Baird - is assuming that the group is not an official arm of the
Sanctuary, and that both groups are meeting and working together.
Nichols requests clarification for if the meeting open
Scheiblauer - responds that anyone who wants to come can come.
There is not an attempt to advertise that fact. They will have an
open public meeting at some point in the future.
Action taken by SAC
DISCUSSION: BUSINESS & TOURISM ACTIVITY PANEL (BTAP) STATUS
Pease the BTAP would like to write and send a letter to
NMFS and USFW regarding the fireworks permitting issue. He asks if
the BTAP is governed by the same rules as the three official working
groups to the SAC.
Douros responds - yes, pretty much the same rules apply.
Although they are not an official working group of the SAC, the BTAP
that the Sanctuary supports cannot operate outside of the normal rules
applying to other official working groups.
Ebert expresses that the BTAP is in the gray area, and
were hoping to work this out in the upcoming next two meetings. They
would like guidance on how to proceed to become an official working
Douros - summarizes the background on how the BTAP was formed.
In the initial years, the staff wasnt clear on the nexus between
the business and tourism industry and the Sanctuary at that time.
The other working groups had clear ideas on how they supported the
Sanctuarys mandates of research, education and resource protection.
A strong nexus between business and the sanctuary should exist. This
is policy call for the SAC. Expectations for a new working group should
include that the entire Sanctuary be represented, and that there is
positive partnership between business, tourism and the Sanctuary staff.
Ebert expressed that he would like to broaden the base
and get more people involved in the BTAP. Most people he talked to
were a little apprehensive, and it was a new experience for them.
He would like to get a good corps of people coming to the meetings,
and find out more about the issues that people want to talk about.
Clayton expressed that the multiple use mandate gives us
a good opportunity to do this now.
Hayes commented that there is a tremendous amount of opportunity
there how to market businesses.
Ebert and Burke Pease concur
Pease asks if the Sanctuary want us to be in that status.
Douros responded that we want to work on collaborations
and not be adversarial.
Ebert - commented that he would like the BTAP to be in the loop,
and it would be collaborative.
Nichols said she believed that a working group needed to
be collaborative, and asks what kind of support can be given?
Douros responded that our staff now supports four annual
meetings - we could ramp up to 6 meetings.
Nichols asks if we endorse the BTAP, what would be the
expectations made of the staff.
Douros responded that staffing is an issue, and asks BTAP
chairs if they can agree to six meetings a year, and the SAC agrees
not to get any new working groups going.
Ebert - responded that six meeting a year is fine. The group has
been around for a few years.
Clayton - commented that this is not in the protocols, the protocols
dont say a working group has to have staff support. He said
the legislative working group operates without staff.
Douros said that the point of being a full working group
was to work with staff and collaborate. He said he thought the legislative
working group was a subcommittee. But regardless, its a different
kind of group formed to address a single issue. The BTAP is broader.
Gaffney commented that we could broaden what has been a
defacto group anyway. Broadening the working group to meet the mission
of the multiple use focus needs to be the goal.
Streeter expressed that she is looking forward to going
to a BTAP meeting. She requested that we make it clear at the beginning
of the meetings, that this is a formal working group of the SAC, and
give a brief overview of what that means.
Haifley moves to make motion that the SAC recognizes the
BTAP as a formal working group.
Harrold stops the motion to request clarification. Is the
main mission of the group to protect Sanctuary resources? He is concerned
with the term "user group" as not sounding consistent with
protection of the Sanctuary, a mission that drives the other three
Ebert responds that the health of the resources is paramount
to his business, and takes exception to the question. He comments
to Chris that from his perspective, researchers are also considered
a form of "user group".
Harrold responds that it was a question that he needed
Haifley - repeats the motion.
is recognized by the SAC as a formal working group.
introduced by Dan Haifley, seconded by Brian Baird
made by role call: 14 voted unanimous, no abstentions or nay votes.
Stilwell offers a correction to the record the legislation
working group was established as a working group since it had outside
ACTION: SET AUGUST RETREAT AGENDA
Harlan requested SAC members to send potential agenda topics to her.
SAC Meeting Agenda
MLPA process (Tom Canale)
adjourned at 4:15 p.m.
Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council Coordinator