MBNMS SAC Meeting Minutes April 4th, 2003

Channel Islands NMS: Chris Mobley
Gulf of the Farallones NMS & Cordell Bank NMS: Ed Ueber-ABSENT
Elkhorn Slough NERR: Becky Christensen-ABSENT
Monterey Bay NMS: William J. Douros

Kirk Schmidt-Agriculture
Harriet Mitteldorf-At-Large
Meg DeLano-At-Large

APPROVAL OF 2/7/03 DRAFT MEETING NOTES
MOTION: (Passed)

The SAC adopted the minutes from the February 7, 2003 Sanctuary Advisory Council meeting, with the following changes:

• page two line 7 change second year to third year for SAC Secretary
• page two line 15 include friend of Ed Cooper, Marc Shargel, Chair of the Coalition of Organizations for Ocean Life
• page two line 19 change city to resident of Santa Cruz

Motion introduced by Deborah Streeter , seconded by LT Tom Stuhlreyer
(Vote: 14 in favor, 0 opposed (unanimous)

WELCOME FROM CA STATE PARKS

Lois Harter, Superintendent for the Pfeiffer State Park, gave a warm welcome to the Advisory Council.

INTRODUCTION OF NEW SANCTUARY STAFF

Bill Douros introduced several new staff members who have joined the Sanctuary within the past year. He announced that Meg Delano, Citizen At-Large alternate, was recognized as Volunteer of the Year by Save Our Shores. Ruth Vreeland was recognized as one of ten Outstanding Women of the Year in Monterey County. He also announced that Stephanie Harlan was nominated by MBNMS staff for the Volunteer of the Year award by the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation.

RESIGNATION OF TOURISM ALTERNATE, MONTY CRISS

Nicole Capps announced the resignation of Tourism alternate, Monty Criss. She recommended that a subcommittee be established to help speed up the recruitment process. SAC members Dan Haifley, Kaitilin Gaffney, Ron Massengill and Dave Ebert volunteered to be on the selection committee. It was also suggested that Ted Balestreri be contacted and asked to volunteer. Staff would like to have the new alternate attend the June 26, 27 meeting.

Carolyn O’Donnell, Executive Director of the Santa Cruz Natural History Museum and Chair of the Board for the Otter Project, announced the release of the new sea otter recovery plan. The plan has three major changes:

• it identifies a broader range of threats to sea otters,
• suggests abandonment of the no otter zone in southern California south of Pt. Conception, and
• suggests delisting sea otters once they have reached a population of 3,090 animals 3 years in a row

Bill Douros introduced the AMS Planning & Research Consultants Bill Blake and Bob Bailey who are doing the feasibility analysis for the Sanctuary Visitor’s Center. The consultants gave an informative presentation on Phase I of the study that had just been completed and released. They gave a brief overview of the report and the information gathering that they had done. There were 942 surveys conducted in Cannery Row, Fisherman’s Wharf, Seacliff State Beach, Santa Cruz Boardwalk and the Municipal Wharf in Monterey. Phase I also looks at 23 possible sites. The old train depot in Monterey, Seacliff State Beach, the Fun Spot in Santa Cruz and the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk emerged as the top four locations. The second phase of the feasibility study-to complete detailed constraints and feasibility analyses, preliminary designs, and budget estimates for these four sites-will be complete by mid July. Bill Douros alerted the SAC that MBNMS staff will ask for its input on the four sites at the July 31/Aug 1 SAC meeting. For more information, visit http://montereybay.noaa.gov/visitorcenter/welcome.html for the Phase I report.

Public Comment

There were several comments from the public regarding the Visitor Center possibly being located at Seacliff State Beach. It was suggested that the Sanctuary and AMS Planning & Research focus their efforts in Phase II on the other three possible sites for the Visitor Center and drop the Seacliff site. Several other comments strongly supported the development of a Visitor Center in either of the two Santa Cruz sites. A supporter of the Visitor Center at the Monterey Train Depot commented that Monterey was “on the way to everywhere”.

SAC Comments

Paul Reilly asked whether the Sanctuary was considering several small visitor centers in addition to a larger facility. Bill Douros responded that the long-term goal would be to have one large center with 3 smaller ones in other locations within the Sanctuary. Charles Lester commented that a visitor center was a high priority land use and that the California Coastal Commission has, in general, a very positive view on a visitor center and suggested that they should collaborate early on in Phase II with the sanctuary office. The question of whether or not the SAC should vote to remove the Seacliff State Beach site because of opposition was also raised. Stephanie stated that it should be left in the study until there were more facts about what each site has to offer. Chris Mobley commented that having a range of choices makes for a better study. If everything that is being said about Seacliff being a bad site for a visitor center is true, than it will come out in the results of the comparative study.

No action was taken by the SAC regarding the MBNMS Visitor Center.

In reviewing the revised SAC Charter and Protocol document Bill Douros explained that the new, proposed changes up for discussion were in blue, and that the red changes were made and approved by the SAC in October 2000. He gave some background on some of the more substantial changes to the document. The SAC decided to come to consensus on any requested changes and vote on the finished document as a whole, with the exception of the following motion:

MOTION introduced by Dave Ebert, seconded by Tom Canale: (Passed)

To change the word “shall” to “may” in Section III: Operation of Standing Working Groups, so it would read as follows:

Section III: Operation of Standing Working Groups: The four standing working groups-conservation, education, research and business and tourism-shall operate in close cooperation with Sanctuary staff and under consistent procedures. Meeting of these four working groups may not be conducted in the absence of a Sanctuary staff person. The agendas for these meetings must be produced in consultation with Sanctuary staff. Any written materials, letters or reports, produced by the four working groups may be provided to Sanctuary staff for review and comment prior to finalization and distribution. The working groups may only write to the Sanctuary Advisory Council or Sanctuary Superintendent. Each of the four working groups shall have a process each working group develops for selecting membership and determining how decisions get made at working group meetings.

Passed by vote 9 in favor, 4 opposed

MOTION introduced by Dave Ebert, seconded by Dan Haifley: (Passed)

That the SAC adopt the SAC Charter & Protocols with the edits presented by MBNMS staff, with the following additional changes:

• On page 1, under Establishment, change “provide assistance” to “advise and make recommendations”
• On page 2, add the word “the” before National Marine Sanctuary Program
• On page 2, under roles, change “Chief of SRD” to “Director of NMSP”
• On page 4, under Members and Officers, add “such as” after “representatives of local user groups”
• On page 6, second paragraph, change “Chief of SRD” and “the Chief” to “Director of NMSP” and “the Director”
• On page 6, section 5(i), add to the end of the first sentence, “or among other candidates or nominees.”
• On page 6, section 5(ii), add the following sentences, “The alternate may choose to remain the alternate, if he/she applies for the primary seat or not. The term of the alternate will be adjusted to match the term of the primary representative.”
• On page 7, first paragraph, include the positions for all of the non-voting members (Cordell Bank has also been added since it now has its own manager).
• On page 10, number 5, change Sanctuary Manager to Sanctuary Superintendent
• On page 12, number 5, add “business” after the number 3
• On page 12, second paragraph under Protocol C, add end quote to first line
• On page 16, first paragraph, third line, add “provided” after the word “past”

Passed by vote 13 in favor, 0 opposed (unanimous)

Stephanie gave an update on the SAC Chair/Coordinators meeting that took place on February 19th-21st in Santa Barbara, CA. Each site gave a case study that touched on one specific issue that that site was dealing with. Stephanie presented many different issues during her case study, such as: cruise ships, MERITO, the Threatened and Thriving series and the SAC contracting letter approved at the February 2003 meeting. She passed around pictures that she had taken during the trip.

Dick Nutter gave some brief background information on the development of a collaborative program between the Sanctuary and agriculture. He introduced the two presenters, Katie Siegler, MBNMS Agriculture Water Quality Coordinator and Dawn Mathes, Coordinator for the Central Coast County Farm Bureaus. Katie briefed the SAC on the Agricultural Water Quality Plan. Dawn spoke about the formation of the Six County Farm Bureau Coalition. Over 500 farmers are involved in the Coalition’s watershed working groups. Under the Agriculture Water Quality Plan, there are approximately 97,200 acres of crops and land affected by this voluntary effort of farmers.

Through the efforts of Dick Nutter and Congressman Sam Farr, funds were provided to the Coalition for technical support. This allowed for more training to be given to the growers on water quality processes. Education and community relations is a very important aspect of the Agricultural plan. One thing on the horizon for the Farm Bureau is to look at creating a water conservation permit that will be held by one agency that can be more easily accessed by farmers. Coordinators for the Farm Bureau are looking into showing growers the different kinds of funding sources that are available to them. The Farm Bureau has been giving training for road maintenance on public and rural roads. Through the adoption of different conservation practices approximately 30,000 acres have been protected from erosion and 258,785 tons of soil was prevented from flowing into the MBNMS. Another key aspect of the Agricultural Water Quality Plan is water quality monitoring.

Alec Arago, District Director from the Salinas district office for Congressman Sam Farr, gave a brief update as to the Sanctuary related issues that Congressman Farr is currently involved with.

• The Federal Oceans Commission, which was established through legislative sponsored by Congressman Farr, has a report due out in the Fall.
• Congressman Farr is looking for an increase in the National Marine Sanctuary Program budget for next year. Last years budget was $43 million, the President’s request this year is for $45 million.
• Congressman Farr also secured $600,000 appropriation for the agricultural plan. This was a line item in the U.S. Department of Agriculture budget.
• Congressman Farr is looking forward to completing the Sanctuary Scenic Trail and is trying to get federal funds.

Sean Morton updated the SAC on the Joint Management Plan Review schedule for the remainder of the year. He invited SAC members to attend any of the remaining working group meetings. He introduced Huff McGonigal and Brad Damitz to give brief updates on two working groups that may have developments preceding the next SAC meeting-Krill Harvesting and Desalination. MBNMS staff wanted to give the SAC a heads up on these.

Huff indicated that the krill working group had broken strategies into two categories, one set dealing with krill in state waters and one dealing with federal waters. In federal waters, the principal strategy is to engage the Pacific Fisheries Management Council (PFMC) early in the process to convince them that they should pursue, with MBNMS, a ban on krill harvesting. There is currently a ban in state waters on harvesting and fishing, but there is a sunset clause, which is in 2011. There is a new bill, 1296, in the works that will hopefully push that date back. The working group has developed a good document that will hopefully be presented to PFMC as soon as June.

Brad gave an update on desalination. The action plan for this group is moving ahead quickly. The group is looking at taking a regional planning approach that the California Coastal Commission will be the lead on and the MBNMS will provide input. Desalination proponents were invited to a meeting and the group gave a presentation of their action plan. The action plan was very well received. Locally there have been two major projects in the papers, Plan B in Carmel and the desalination plant in Sand City. There was a state assembly bill passed last year, AB2717, directing the Department of Water Resources to develop a task force with other agencies, conservation groups and multi-stakeholder groups to identify strengths and opportunities for desalination in California. The task force has met a couple of times, but is currently on hold due to funding shortfalls. Also, bill AB 314 encourages use of desalination as part of the California water supply. Thanks to Jane DeLay, Save our Shores, and Tom Luster, California Coastal Commission, some of the language from the desalination action plan was put into the assembly bill. Another bill, if passed, would make water districts determine the amount of their water supply that would be produced from desalination.

Bill also gave two more brief updates on the JMPR. Regarding the internal Boundary team, almost all of the boundary options that came out of the scoping process have been dropped by NMSP headquarters, except for the option of whether the boundary between the Monterey/Gulf of the Farallones should be moved south. An internal discussion will take place on this issue that will consist of staff from each site, NMSP headquarters staff and observers from all three Advisory Councils. Bill commented that the team, led by NMSP headquarters staff, planned to send a draft action plan to the SAC by mid-June. He asked if the SAC would be interested in having a joint meeting with the Cordell Bank and Gulf of the Farallones SAC’s in mid to late August to talk about the boundary issue as well as the other cross-cutting issues. After a brief discussion the SAC seceded, through group consensus, to not schedule such a meeting at this time, but instead to wait until they can review the draft Boundary action plan and see how things develop in the June and July meetings. A possibility is to cancel the meeting in October and have one in September instead.

Kaitilin announced that on May 17th the Coastal Watershed Council co-sponsoring the 4th Annual Snapshot Day (and event originated from years ago in MBNMS), which this year is going to be coast-wide. Monitoring will take place in coastal water bodies from Mexico and Oregon. If anyone is interested in participating they can get in touch with Bridget Hoover or Kaitilin Gaffney for more information.

Chris Mobley announced that marine reserves in state water within the CINMS will be going into effect on April 9th. The Pacific Fisheries Management Council will take up a letter regarding how they and the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary will collaborate on marine reserves in federal waters.

Charles Lester commented that the California Coastal Commission will meet the week of April 7th in Santa Barbara. The meeting in May (second week) will take place in Monterey.

Ron Massengill announced that the Marine Interest Group established to discuss sanctuary status for the waters off San Luis Obispo has been meeting on a regular basis. They have met five times since the last SAC meeting.

Paul Reilly announced that as of Tuesday, April 8th, trapping for spot prawns will be prohibited.

The Beach Resort, Monterey

The meeting adjourned at 4:00