Skip to main content
Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary National Marine Sanctuaries Home Page National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Home Page

MBNMS EIS banner
PART III: ALTERNATIVES, INCLUDING THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
III. Section: Management Alternatives

EIS Navigation

Cover
Table of Contents
List of Figures
List of Tables
Part I:
Executive Summary
Part II:
The Affected Environment
  I. Regional Context
  II. Sanctuary Resources
  III. Human ActivitiesI
  IV. Existing Resource Protection Regime
Part III:
Alternatives Including The Preferred Alternative
  I. Boundary Alternatives
  II.Regulatory Alternatives
  III. Management Alternatives
Part IV
Environmental Concequences
  I. Boundary Alternatives
  II. Regulatory Alternatives
  III. Management Alternative Consequences
  IV. Unavoidable Adverse Environmental or Socioeconomic Effects
  V. Relationship Between Short-term Uses of the Environment and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-term Productivity
Part V:
Sanctuary Management Plan
  I. Introduction
  II. Resource Protection
  III. Research
  IV. Education
  V. Administration
Part VI:
List of Preparers and Alternatives
Part VII:
List of Agencies, Organizations, and Persons Receiving Copies
Part VIII:
References
Part IX
Appendices

A. Introduction [Part III TOC]

Three management alternatives were identified and considered in terms of (1) resource protection, research, and education requirements, and (2) cost-effectiveness. The Management Plan (Part V) includes a detailed discussion of the proposed Sanctuary management regime regarding resource protection, research, education and administration.

B. Alternatives [Part III TOC]

1. Status Quo [Part III TOC]

Under this alternative protection and management of the proposed Sanctuary area would remain entirely under the existing regime of federal, state and local authorities, and existing research and eduction facilities and programs with no NOAA presence.

2. Sanctuary Management Alternative 1 [Part III TOC]

Under this alternative, NOAA would establish an independent management and administrative system for the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary in a headquarters that is managed and operated directly by NOAA. The location of the headquarters would be in the Monterey Bay region at either Santa Cruz, Moss Landing or Monterey.

This alternative would gradually phase in a variety of program activities and focus initially on research and education. Staffing would start with a NOAA manager and phase in an assistant manager, administrative assistant, research coordinator, education coordinator and a joint position of an interpreter/enforcement official.

The office would coordinate directly and actively with other state and local agencies in decision making and implementation of Sanctuary regulations. The Sanctuary Manager and the Advisory Committee would begin the process of informing the public as well as regional officials of the Sanctuary's mandate, regulations and research and education programs.

3. Sanctuary Management Alternative 2 (Preferred)

The preferred alternative is to set up the Sanctuary headquarters soon after designation (within six months) and immediately provide full-staffing in the positions described for Sanctuary Management Alternative 1. In addition, the preferred option is to provide "satellite" information centers as well as the main headquarters facility so that other areas of the Sanctuary are represented such as Pillar Point Harbor and Half Moon Bay

 

Part III Table of Contents

I. Section: Boundary Alternatives III-5
A. Introduction III-5
B. Boundary Alternative 1 III-6
1. Geography III-6
2. Distinguishing Characteristics III-6
C. Boundary Alternative 2 III-10
1. Geography III-10
2. Distinguishing Characteristics III-10
D. Boundary Alternative 3 III-14
1. Geography III-14
2. Distinguishing Characteristics III-14
E. Boundary Alternative 4 III-18
1. Geography III-18
2. Distinguishing Characteristics III-18
F. Boundary Alternative 5 (Preferred) III-22
1. Geography III-22
2. Distinguishing Characteristics III-22
G. Boundary Alternative 6 III-26
1. Geography III-26
2. Distinguishing Characteristics III-26
H. Boundary Alternative 7 III-30
1. Geography III-30
2. Distinguishing Characteristics III-30

II. Section: Regulatory Alternatives

III-34
A. Introduction III-34
B. Oil, Gas and Mineral Activities III-40
1. Status Quo III-40
a. Existing Regulatory Framework III-40
b. Impact to Resources III-40
c. Impact to Uses III-41
2. Sanctuary Alternative 1 III-41
a. Sanctuary Action III-41
b. Impact to Resources III-42
c. Impact to Uses III-42
3. Sanctuary Alternative 2 (Preferred) III-42
a. Sanctuary Action III-42
b. Impact to Resources III-43
c. Impact to Uses III-43
C. Discharges or Deposits III-44
1. Status Quo III-44
a. Existing Regulatory Framework III-44
(1) Point Source Discharges III-45
(2) Non-Point Source Discharges (NPS) III-45
(3) Hazardous waste, oil and trash disposal III-46

(4) Ocean dumping

III-47
b. Impact to Resources III-47
c. Impact to Uses III-48
2. Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred) III-49
a. Sanctuary Action III-49
b. Impact to Resources III-49
c. Impact to Uses III-50
(1) Vessels III-51
(2) Dredge Disposal Activities III-51
(3) Point Source Discharges III-52
(4) Non-Point Source Discharges (NPS) III-54
D. Historical Resources III-55
1. Status Quo III-55
a. Existing Regulatory Framework III-55
b. Impact to Resources III-55
c. Impact to Uses III-56
2. Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred) III-56
a. Sanctuary Action III-56
b. Impact to Resources III-56
c. Impact to Uses III-57

E. Alteration of or Construction on the Seabed

III-58
1. Status Quo III-58
a. Existing Regulatory Framework III-58
b. Impact to Resources III-58
c. Impact to Uses III-59
2. Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred) III-59
a. Sanctuary Action III-59
b. Impact to Resources III-59
c. Impact to Uses III-59
F. Taking Marine Mammals, Turtles and Seabirds III-61
1. Status Quo III-61
a. Existing Regulatory Framework III-61
b. Impact to Resources III-61
c. Impact to Uses III-61
2. Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred) III-61
a. Sanctuary Action III-61
b. Impact to Resources III-62
c. Impact to Uses III-62

G. Overflights

III-63
1. Status Quo III-63
a. Existing Regulatory Framework III-63
b. Impact to Resources III-63
c. Impact to Uses III-63
2. Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred) III-63
a. Sanctuary Action III-63
b. Impact to Resources III-64
c. Impact to Uses III-64
H. Operation of "Personal Water Craft" III-66
1. Status Quo III-66
a. Existing Regulatory Framework III-66
b. Impact to Resources III-66
c. Impact to Uses III-66
2. Sanctuary Alternative (Preferred) III-66
a. Sanctuary Action III-66
b. Impact to Resources III-67
c. Impact to Uses III-69
I. Vessel Traffic III-70

1. Status Quo (Preferred)

III-70
a. Existing Regulatory Framework III-70
b. Impact to Resources III-70
c. Impact to Uses III-72
2. Sanctuary Alternative III-73
a. Sanctuary Action III-73
b. Impact to Resources III-73
c. Impact to Uses III-74
J. Fishing, Kelp Harvesting and Aquaculture III-75
1. Status Quo (Preferred) III-75
a. Existing Regulatory Framework III-75
b. Impact to Resources III-75
c. Impact to Uses III-79
2. Sanctuary Alternative III-81
a. Sanctuary Action III-81
b. Impact to Resources III-81
c. Impact to Uses III-81

III. Section: Management Alternatives

III-82
A. Introduction III-82
B. Alternatives III-82
1. Status Quo III-82
2. Sanctuary Management Alternative 1 III-82
3. Sanctuary Management Alternative 2 (Preferred) III-82

 

 

URL: http://montereybay.noaa.gov/intro/mp/archive/original_eis/partIII_sIII.html    Reviewed: March 05, 2014
Web Site Owner: National Ocean Service

Privacy Statement | Site Disclaimer | User Survey
National Marine Sanctuaries | National Ocean Service | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration | USA.gov