‘We will look at this situation as a temporary setback for them and continue educating the public as to the many problems associated with a National Sanctuary system,” said Jeremiah O’Brien of the MBCFO. ‘We will be interested in the content of the new proposal as the rejection letter described many of its deficiencies in the area of management, which is the area that has many of us here on the Central Coast concerned.’
In a March 6 letter to Fred Collins of the Northern Chumash Tribal Council, promoters of a proposed, new Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary off the Central Coast, Daniel Basta, Director of of the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, stated: “The nomination, as submitted, is not sufficient to more forward with a more detailed review.”
Mr. Collins submitted the nomination seeking national sanctuary status for the Chumash Marine Sanctuary on February 2.
While the proposal in no longer currently eligible of review, Mr. Basta suggests in his letter that Mr. Collins could resubmit his nomination after responding adequately to all the information, national significance criteria and management considerations required by NOAA to move forward.
Responding to the announcement, Jeremiah O’Brien, Director of the Morro Bay Commercial Fishermen’s Organization, said: “It appears the reasons [for rejecting the nomination] were lack of information and incomplete data on the application. The letter of rejection seems to encourage them to resubmit their proposal.
“Many of us have been trying to educate the public as to why it is not a good idea to turn over our ocean and beaches to federal control,” Mr. O’Brien told The ROCK. “We, therefore, will look at this situation as a temporary setback for them and continue educating the public as to the many problems associated with a National Sanctuary system. We will be interested in the content of the new proposal as the rejection letter described many of its deficiencies in the area of management. This is the area that has many of us here on the Central Coast concerned.”
Concluded Mr. O’Brien, “Losing or giving up control of our resources to federal management would be a shame. We believe our community is the best manager and steward or our coast, and our past performance speaks for itself. We only have to walk outside our door, take a deep breath, look around, and realize we have done well, and we will continue that tradition on our own.”
The Chumash Sanctuary proposal is supported by the Santa Lucia chapter of the Sierra Club and District 2 Supervisor Bruce Gibson.
‘Once we take on these additional layers of bureaucracy and find out in the future about the problems it causes, we will not be able to turn back.’
By JEREMIAH O’BRIEN Morro Bay Commercial Fishermen’s Organization
Well, the sanctuary question is back on the table. This issue seems to arise every few years since Monterey got their sanctuary. This one is in the form of the Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary. The commercial fishermen in our county are unanimously against it, and we have spoken to various sport fishing groups and have yet to find any one of these groups in support of a sanctuary in our area.
The sanctuary issue is a very big concern, not only for the fishing industry, but the entire county. This is an issue that should not be taken lightly. When we invite the federal government to take over control of our resources, we, meaning our communities, will lose the ability to manage our beaches, our ocean, our ports and our harbors.
The cost to communities for additional federal regulations governing areas such as runoff and discharges, currently administered by local and state government, will increase dramatically. These costs will severely impact our harbors and ports, increasing the difficulty for projects necessary for their operations, such as, dredging, soil samples, construction of docks and slips, as well as maintaining structures that are currently in place. Once we take on these additional layers of bureaucracy and find out in the future about the problems it causes, we will not be able to turn back.
Proponents of the National Marine Sanctuary issue have proclaimed there will be no loss of local control. Unfortunately, this is not true as “National Marine Sanctuary” clearly implies management will not be local but rather at the Federal level.
California Marine Affairs and Navigation Conference, or C-MANC, is a group of all of California’s harbors and the cities affiliated with those harbors. This group encompasses the area from San Diego to Crescent City, the entire length of our state, and deals directly in many of these areas with National Marine Sanctuaries, such as the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary, the Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary, and the Channel Island National Marine Sanctuary.
C-MANC has issued a legislative policy statement concerning marine sanctuaries, which consists of a list of five problems. Some of those problems include disposal of dredge materials, and requirements to the already burdensome federal and state processes, vessel traffic, fishing regulations, either direct or indirect, and general maintenance issues. And finally, C-MANC’s legislative policy reads: “C-MANC recommends suspending the expansion of existing sanctuaries until the problems identified above are resolved.” We should remember these are the representatives of their respective areas, many who are living under the umbrella of the National Marine Sanctuaries.
Our county, cities, towns, and commercial and sport fishermen have long been very outstanding stewards of our ocean. We work with many state, federal and environmental groups, as well as universities and colleges. The Central Coast has been the “poster child” of how to do things right in many discussions and meetings held in California, on the East Coast as well as our nation’s capital, Washington D.C. And finally, it is important to remember the amount of fishing grounds closed to some form of fishing, those include Marine Protected Areas, Essential Fish Habitat Areas, and Rock Cod Conservation Areas. I think we can be very proud of our stewardship of the Central Coast.
I guess I just love the Central Coast, and when my wife and I step outside and look around, we remind ourselves every single day of what we have here. We do not think additional layers of bureaucracy would be in the best interest or add to the beauty of this area.
Predicting how good the fishing will be in Morro Bay next year—amid shifting markets, changing ocean and ongoing regulatory constraints—is tricky business. However, even if the October report on state of the industry, “Morro Bay Commercial Fisheries 2014 Economic Impact Report,” covering the 2013 calendar year, is a fair-weather snapshot of current trends, Morro Bay fishing is in for some good economic times ahead.
By ED OCHS
Predicting how good the fishing will be in Morro Bay next year—amid shifting markets, changing ocean and ongoing regulatory constraints—is tricky business.
“In 2013, the commercial fishing industry in Morro Bay continued a powerful trend in increased earnings and landings from a 20-year low in 2007, states the report. “In the last seven years, earnings have increased over 350% and landings have risen more than seven and a half fold.”
“That the earnings are spread across a broad range of fishery types, aimed at differing habitats using different gear, is another indicator of sustainability,” according to the April 2104 companion report, “City of Morro Bay Fishing Community Sustainability Plan.” “Fishermen in Morro Bay target Spot prawn, Pacific hagfish and sablefish with traps, groundfish with hook and line and trawl, squid with purse seine nets, swordfish with drift gillnets, and salmon by surface troll.”
The 2014 editions of the “Economic Impact Report” and “Sustainability Plan” were prepared by San Luis Obispo-based Lisa Wise Consulting Inc., in partnership with the Morro Bay Commercial Fishermen’s Organization (MBCFO) and funded by the Central Coast Joint Cable/Fisheries Liaison Committee.
Morro Bay’s steady climb in fishing earnings was part of a statewide trend, the report notes. Commercial fishing earnings in the state nearly doubled between 2007 and 2013, and, significantly, at the same time, this growth overlapped the recent recession/depression, which bottomed in 2009, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. In other words, Morro Bay fishing suffered the same downtown as did practically every business in the U.S. at that time, and is now in full recovery.
Leading economic indicators place the commercial industry in Morro Bay at near-record highs. Landings by weight—the amount of seafood offloaded at the dock—reached almost 6.8 million pounds in 2013, a 33% increase from 2012, and the highest landings by weight since 1993. Earnings at the dock exceeded $7.1 million in 2013, a 9.3% increase from 2012, marking the third year of dock earnings over $6.5 million, and a 275% increase from the 20-year low in 2007.
According to the report, sablefish, Dungeness crab, hagfish, salmon, Market squid and halibut accounted for approximately 80% of the top-10 earning species in 2013. Shortspine thornyheads, Spot prawn, Petrale sole, Dover sole and Gopher rockfish made up the remaining 20% of the top 10 for a total of $6.25 million.
A top-15 port and statewide leader, Morro Bay led California in 2013 in hagfish with 42% of the state total; Aurora rockfish with 58% of state total; Bank rockfish with 68% of state total; and sablefish with 25% of state total.
Falling Price Per Pound
While earnings increased 9.3% and landings 33% from 2012 to 2013, the “Economic Report” notes, “Price per pound has fallen sharply, reflecting Morro Bay’s increasing participation in the Market squid fishery. Price per pound for Market squid in Morro Bay averaged $0.33 per pound in 2013. Morro Bay’s overall average price per pound in 2013 was $1.05, down from $1.27 in 2012.”
By comparison, species much more valuable than Market squid also hit the docks, though in far less volume. For example, the still-strong sablefish fishery (27% of overall dock earnings in 2013) averaged around $2.50 per pound in 2013. Dungeness crab (17% of earnings) registered its highest total in 24 years, nearly doubling 2012 when it averaged upwards of $5.04 per pound. White seabass averaged an all-time high of $4.62 per pound in 2012 (2013 figures unavailable). Chinook salmon (5%), long a key fishery in Morro Bay, averaged $7.54 per pound last year. In 2013, Nearshore species, including Cabezon, Gopher rockfish, Grass rockfish, Brown rockfish, Black and Yellow rockfish, Kelp greenling and Copper rockfish, fetched about $6.79 per pound. California halibut averaged $6.53 per pound. Spot prawn averaged around $13.31 per proud in 2013, making it the most valuable species to hit the dock.
The “Economic Report” commends fishermen’s “ability to adapt” to shifting markets and seize new and emerging opportunities. “Maintaining the upward momentum,” it states, “commercial fishermen met drops in key fisheries such as sablefish with increased landings and earnings of salmon, Market squid and Dungeness crab.”
“The Morro Bay fishing community is doing very well,” says Jeremiah O’Brien, former president and present director of the MBCFO. “Most of the guys are doing well financially because the fish stocks are there. As we see improvements in the landings, as we see improvements in the opportunities, and we see younger guys coming into the business.
“I’m very optimistic about the future,” O’Brien says. “What’s happening now is that the fish stocks are catching up with management efforts. The management has been very heavy for the last 25 years, and what we’re seeing now, finally, is an upswing in all of the fish stocks right across the board, because some of the efforts were necessary, some were not…”
“I don’t see anything currently that would impede the direction the growth has been traveling,” he says about room for future growth. “It’s steadily moving up the (earnings) chart very nicely. I don’t see anything currently that would impede those numbers. At some point, there more than likely would be a leveling off, and I don’t know when that would come.”
What complicates that picture is the Rock Conservation Area stretching from Canada to Mexico that is currently closed. “That area, between 30 and 150 fathoms, is the primary spawning area for all of the Rockcod on the West Coast,” he says. “It’s been closed since 1999. It’s going to have to open one day soon, and there’s already been rumblings and little tests. In fact, some tests were done here locally. When it does open I believe we’re going to see all of those numbers on the (landings and earnings) charts go up considerably.”
O’Brien feels optimistic about the future of the business.
“The markets look good. I believe we’re going to remain healthy for a long time to come,” he says, especially since the local fishing community has always enjoyed the strong support of the community at large, from the Harbor Department to the city councils. The coming and goings of the fishing boats are an integral part of the rhythm of daily life in Morro Bay.
“We need to ensure (the younger fishermen) are going to make a good living and that there’s opportunity in the future,” O’Brien says. “Management is keeping up with the industry and the stocks are looking healthy… as long as management keeps their eye on things and manages properly. We’ve got to make sure that we have fish for the future while ensuring that we are utilizing the stocks available to us properly now. It’s a fine line.”
Mark Tognazinni, a MBCFO director and business owner, says that while “we have had some great successes, all isn’t a glowing bed of coals in Morro Bay fisheries.”
He questions the largely squid-based economy.
“Let’s do the math,” he says. “6.8 million pounds (in landings), but remember 4 million pounds were squid… All out of town boats, less than five or six boats, mostly ran by non-owners selling to out of town markets, and most all that is consumed ends up leaving the U.S. to be processed. Other than the dock and dock workers who unload the squid there is very little economic gain for Morro Bay. The harbor loves it because it artificially inflates our landings and that keeps tax dollars flowing to the harbor. Squid production does little for Morro Bay other than disrupt other fisheries.
“So, in a year we have no squid landings, and there are more of those than not, do we say the landings have collapsed?”
“Fishermen have it better than we did five years ago,” Tognazinni says, “(but) certain doors are closed behind us as far as limited entry and limited access, (and) lots of active fishermen have manipulated the system and have become owners of very valuable permits for free.
“Morro bay fishermen really don’t need help,” he adds, “but we need to have organizations stop hurting us. Give us reasonable access to resources. Allow fishermen, real fishermen to have access without paying $100,000 of dollars to fish. Get rid of limited entry, individual quotas, and anything else that allows large corporations to own fish that should belong to all of us.”
Key indicators point to a similarly prosperous 2014. Landings and earnings at the dock, species mix and trends, price per pound, number of trips and vessels operating in the harbor; demand for offloading, staging, refrigeration/ice, processing, bait, gear storage, a chandlery and other marine services; as well as for retail space, employment generation, and synergies with tourism and other related businesses—all point to the local industry’s overall good health. Morro Bay is expected to build a boatyard/haul-out facility within the next few years, and that should further stimulate new economic activity at the docks, new taxes revenues, and more dollars spent in town.
And the new faces: “In the last three years [ending in 2012],” states the “Sustainability Plan,” “it is estimated that 12 new participants have entered the commercial fishing industry in Morro Bay, attracted by five years of steady economic growth and increased earnings.” Even more have entered the business in the last two years.
The “Economic Impact Report” “is a tool to give a very small snapshot of a blink of an eye in time,” Tognazinni counsels. “Fisheries are cyclic just like farming and other food producing businesses.
That’s the dire situation the County finds itself in as supervisor candidate Lynn Compton borrows from the Tea Party playbook in her manic attempt to unseat incumbent Caren Ray in the 4th district race that could tilt the balance of power on the SLO Board of Supervisors to the extreme right.
By AARON OCHS and ED OCHS
District 4 Supervisor candidate Lynn Compton embraces the midterm election madness that has consumed the country from coast to coast. Like the federal midterm races, elements of extremism have permeated an already heated political climate on a local level. Voices of extremism—which the voter majority has traditionally dismissed as fringe—now reverberate the loudest in District 4. With Compton’s brash and aggressive tactics in tow, the far right is waging war against the moderate Democrat voter majority with the intent to reshape the board and the direction of the county.
Deploying extreme tactics to win elections is nothing new in national or local politics, but the rise of extremism in county politics has reached new and alarming levels in the past several years. Nowhere is that extremism more evident than in the crucial District 4 Supervisor race—representing Arroyo Grande, Nipomo and Oceano—between newcomer, agri-businesswoman Compton and Gov. Brown-appointed incumbent, Caren Ray.
The County faces challenging issues like the drought, dwindling water supplies, oil companies seeking increased access by rail, drilling and fracking, and the current and future needs of SLO’s large homeless population. There’s a lot at stake for county taxpayers. Yet a burgeoning network of extremists have joined forces to assist Compton while, at the same time, undermining the clear severity of local issues.
Gov. Brown did Ray no great favor when he appointed her to fill the seat on the County Board of Supervisors. The seat was vacated by the untimely death of popular conservative Republican Paul Teixeira, but he knew what he was doing.
Ray, a registered Democrat, served as councilwoman for the city of Arroyo Grande from 2010 to 2013 and had been a modern world history teacher at Santa Maria High School since 2007. Before her tenure as councilwoman, Ray served on the Arroyo Grande Planning Commission from 2005 to 2010. Ray was vocal in extending the emergency ordinance in Paso Robles, which prevented further planting of vineyards in the Paso Robles groundwater basin. Before she was appointed, the Board of Supervisors were deadlocked, failing to obtain the four vote majority required for a moratorium extension. Since the drought began to adversely impact the entire state, Gov. Brown has supported local water conservation measures. Brown recognized the record-setting depletion of the Paso Robles groundwater basin, as evidenced by signing Assembly Bill 2453 into law. Authored by conservative Assemblyman Katcho Achadjian, AB 2453 was designed to establish the governance structure and authority of a water district in Paso Robles. The district would be responsible for managing the basin and taking proactive measures to conserve water.
Compton, who has sided with forces to oppose long-term management of the Paso Robles groundwater basin, wasted no time jumping into campaign mode. Just two days after Ray was officially sworn in, Compton held her kick-off party in Nipomo. Compton told news sources that she had every intention to enter the race after she sought the governor’s appointment. Compton told reporters that she waited to announce her candidacy in respect to Teixeira’s family.
Despite seeking the appointment, Compton later dismissed any legitimacy associated with the appointment process. Compton told the New Times’ Jono Kinkade, “It should be the people that decide, not the governor, with no disrespect to the governor.”
Three months after Gov. Brown selected Ray over Compton, Compton launched her campaign on that basis alone, without any platform, and that non-platform has continued to consist largely of charges, irrelevancies, assumptions and suppositions. Her often-stated support for property rights, less government, fewer taxes, and her abhorrence of rules and regulations that she claims cripple small businesses is eerily reminiscent of Tea Party strategies. Compton has not officially declared herself a Tea Party candidate. Despite resonating strongly in the national polls during the 2010 midterm elections, Tea Party relevance within the political landscape has sharply diminished. Any admission of toting Tea Party principles could risk offending some voters who might otherwise vote for her if they didn’t know her hard right-leaning bent.
Network of Supporters
Like a comet, Compton’s basically burst of nowhere, and she would probably prefer it stay that way at least until Election Day, but one look at the Compton campaign and who’s endorsing her raises a row of red flags on her candidacy.
The Republican Party chose Compton early on and threw their weight behind her as a viable candidate, which the successful businesswoman and attractive mother of two surely is; however, this isn’t your father’s Republican Party. Despite Compton using the Reagan namesake to tout her conservative values, the party she belongs to has swung to the right of her presidential icon. Though Ronald Reagan’s adopted son Michael Reagan keynoted a Compton fundraiser in February, the Republican Party of 2014 has veered so far to the right that if Ronald Reagan was president today, he’d been thrown out for raising taxes more than 10 times. During his presidency, Reagan also raised the debt ceiling 18 times.
Compton’s supporters display a long list of conspiracy theorists, right-wing extremists and thinly-veiled corporate interests. Hiding behind her many contributors, Compton is safely tucked in the back pocket of the current Republican establishment as they seize this golden opportunity to get control of the powerful Board of Supervisors, which, as they see it, the left has controlled too long. Though the late Teixeira tended to vote independently, it is doubtful that Compton, who often invokes Teixeira’s name to appeal to his voters, will do the same given her heavily partisan campaign pulled from the pages of the Tea Party playbook.
Perhaps the most eyebrow-raising public support for Compton comes from a handful of political lobbies clearly on the lunatic fringe, including Agenda 21 conspiracy theorists.
The “Agenda 21” conspiracy group, whose members believe that liberals are working with the United Nations to take away their property rights and personal liberties, preach weekly at Board of Supervisors meetings.
Agenda 21 conspiracy theorists, such as San Luis Obispo resident Laura Mordaunt, have sharply criticized District 2 Supervisor Bruce Gibson and District 3 Supervisor Adam Hill for allegedly bargaining with the United Nations to erode the rights and liberties of citizens. Mordaunt referred to the alleged attempt of subversion by Democrats on the board as “domestic terrorism” on March 6, 2013. Local residents attending South County events have witnessed Mordaunt and other Compton supporters—donning Compton t-shirts—videotaping known Ray supporters and following them in their cars. Residents have informed law enforcement. Mordaunt’s videos, photos and letters to the editor are prominently featured on Compton’s website.
Mordaunt is not the only Agenda 21 conspiracy theorist to be featured by Compton’s campaign.
Former Republican congresswoman and Compton supporter Andrea Seastrand has appeared before the Board of Supervisors to criticize the supervisors on several occasions. Last year, Seastrand accused supervisors of being complicit in a conspiracy to keep CalCoastNews co-publisher Karen Velie’s grandchildren in foster care as retaliation for the site’s investigative reporting. In September, Seastrand criticized Ray for voting to “weaken” Proposition 13. On February 11, four of the supervisors—with the noted exception of District 5 Supervisor Debbie Arnold—noted to approve their legislative platform. A portion of the platform sought a sales tax increase in SLO County’s unincorporated areas. Compton supporters point to a portion of the platform which reads, “Should a Constitutional amendment be proposed for the 2014 ballot that would authorize local agencies to raise taxes with a 55% approval threshold [instead of a two-thirds majority vote, as required by Proposition 13], seek inclusion in that amendment for counties to raise a tax in the unincorporated area only.” However, the platform merely anticipated a potential challenge to Prohibition 13, and offered to only advocate for an increase of tax in the unincorporated area. There was no endorsement, implied or otherwise, to “weaken” Proposition 13.
Additionally, Seastrand and the Compton campaign erroneously claimed that Ray and supervisors voted to increase sales tax in unincorporated areas. Compton wrongly concluded that the approved platform would place “a hit on property taxes,” when the portion dealt solely with sales tax. The platform stated nothing about weakening Proposition 13 homeowner protections statewide, as Seastrand and Compton supporters have claimed.
Despite Compton clearly misunderstanding the verbiage of the legislative platform, property rights advocates Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association rushed to endorse her and her interpretation. Ironically, the HJTA, a right-wing lobby, supported a significant modification to the Proposition 218 assessment for the Los Osos wastewater project in 2007. Traditionally, the HJTA supported Prop 218 property tax assessments that were approved by a two-thirds majority. Instead, the HJTA worked with then-Assemblyman Sam Blakeslee to undermine the two-thirds vote by allowing only a select group of homeowners to approve a tax that arguably benefited the entire community of Los Osos. The assessment was ultimately approved under duress by homeowners by a significant margin, although the margin touted by the County was embellished.
Claims that Ray sought to weaken Proposition 13 were echoed exclusively on controversial tabloid website CalCoastNews.
The website has echoed claims about Ray since she became a councilwoman for Arroyo Grande in 2010. The website accused her of having a “harried, secret life” as a former member of the SLO Hash House Harriers, a local chapter of an international running club. The story originated from CalCoastNews contributor Kevin P. Rice, who previously ran an unsuccessful campaign for a seat on the San Luis Obispo City Council. Rice, a vocal, sometimes inflammatory supporter of Compton’s campaign, was assigned by CalCoastNews to track Ray’s movements. In July 2013, Rice was seen taking photos of Ray as she met with Supervisor Hill at a coffee shop in San Luis Obispo. In an email dated July 26, 2013, Supervisor Hill told the Grover Beach City Council that Rice had “stalked” him throughout the morning of July 23. Rice denied the claims. Mired with stalking accusations from Hill and supporters of Oceano Dunes dust regulations, Rice has continued his one-sided campaign of sandbagging Ray on a myriad of issues on CalCoastNews, though he’s received ample criticism for being obsessed with the supervisor at the expense of the facts.
CalCoastNews boasts a heavy right-wing presence, featuring fringe personalities like Rice while shamelessly publishing right-wing propaganda and failing to disclose their affiliations to Tea Party groups. CalCoastNews and writer Josh Friedman have promoted their work within the North County Tea Party. Acting as a conduit for Tea Party principles and ideologies, the site has attacked Democrats such as supervisors Hill, Gibson and Ray under the guise of investigative journalism. However, the site has mostly deferred to unsubstantiated allegations from anonymous sources.
Supporters contend that CalCoastNews’ Karen Velie personally threatened to expose Ray supporters over stealing campaign signs without offering any evidence to back her claims. Shortly after filing with the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) against the Compton campaign on May 20, Ray supporter Ed Eby received a call from Velie, who told Eby that she had photos, implicating him in theft of Compton yard signs. Eby recalled the phone conversation with Velie. “Since I have never touched a Compton sign, I demanded she show me the photos,” Eby wrote on CalCoastNews on June 2. “She then backed off and said the photos didn’t clearly show they were Compton signs. Of course not. It didn’t happen.”
Velie has reportedly harassed other Ray supporters, accusing them of sign thievery: a common theme on CalCoastNews. But when supporters demanded to know where she heard the accusations from, Velie replied, “Compton told me.”
Another related supporter of Compton in this dubious network is the Arroyo Grande Police Officers Association, which is part of the ongoing independent investigation involving Arroyo Grande City Manager Steve Adams and Community Development Director Teresa McClish. The Association, whose role in the investigation and credibility have been questioned as a result of their adversarial relationship with Adams during heated contract negotiations with the city, has collaborated with CalCoastNews to help force Adams’ termination, unseat AG Mayor Tony Ferrara in the coming election, and replace him with a write-in candidate that the website is also promoting. Adams was forced to resign amid a string of allegations, although he denied any sexual misconduct took place in the late-night encounter with police in City Hall—as promoted but, as usual, unsubstantiated by CalCoastNews.
Compton will not be alone philosophically if she wins the seat. Supervisor Debbie Arnold, a sister property rights advocate from North County, voted consistently against a Paso Robles Water District. Compton has drawn considerable financial support from North County vineyard owners such as Cindy Steinbeck of Steinbeck Vineyards, who is leading the lawsuit against the county and any sort of groundwater management in North County, plus another suit to try to stop the urgency ordinance, and Steinbeck expects Compton to fight recently-enacted legislation establishing the district, which will attempt to equitably regulate how much water is allotted to vineyard operators, property owners and businesses. Vintners have a huge interest in controlling the Board of Supervisors and avoiding water regulation of any kind. Arnold has aligned with Compton, while fellow Republican supervisor Frank Mecham has for the most part stayed neutral on crucial water issues.
In an interesting regional angle with a national footnote, Kevin McCarthy, the new majority whip in the House of Representatives, representing District 23—Bakersfield, Kern and Tulare in the Central Valley—has donated $1,000 to Compton’s campaign. Why? Because this election is all about taking over the BOS, and Compton fits the GOP’s current right-wing leadership profile.
Other large contributors reflect Compton’s array of reactionary supporters. H.D. Perrett, who tried to secede from the county, to be annexed by Santa Barbara so he could develop his land—which would have been a huge loss of tax dollars both for the county and the schools—has contributed $5,000. Etta Watterfield, a Tea Party conservative who ran against Katcho Achadjian for Assembly, and attacked him in the same way Compton has attacked Ray, especially on Proposition 13, a Howard Jarvis/Republican protectorate, has along with her husband contributed well over $10,000. The conservative Lincoln Club kicked in $5,000. Wing luminaries Matt Kokkonen, Ed Waage and Jeanne Helphenstine have also chipped in. The Republican Party has dropped $16,000 on her, but her biggest contributor so far has been Lynn Compton, propping up her campaign with over $42,000 in loans to herself, in addition to tens of thousands in in-kind donations, after having earlier failed to report the campaign expense of painting cars and trucks in her business fleet with her image, and spending $20,000 on deceptive “slate mailers” to every home in the district. This fiscal conservative has over-spent and gone into debt in her campaign to win the seat at any cost, outspending Ray in a landslide.
The Manchurian Candidate
While Compton enjoys legitimate support in the rural, unincorporated areas of the 4th district and in hardcore Republican circles, sooner or later she must face the fact that some of her supporters represent the most radical elements in the county and will hurt any attempt by her to build consensus on the board. So far, however, Compton shows no interest in consensus building. Her arrogance, combative style of non-diplomacy and Tea Party roots ensure she will only be the candidate for some of the people, sharing none of Ray’s crossover appeal to the broader community.
Unlike Ray, an experienced community leader, Compton has never served in the community on any level. She has made an appearance at the Board of Supervisors a few times for public comment and left before the board deliberated or voted. To fill the void, Compton has resorted to anger—anger that Gov. Brown didn’t have the decency to replace a Republican with a Republican, but instead chose a moderate Democrat; anger at Ray for usurping that seat, for her voting record and for taking donations from developers; anger mirrored and fomented at every turn by CalCoastNews to drive their feverish hate campaigns against Ray, Hill, Gibson, Torres, Ferrara, and other politicians, public figures, allies or family that get in the way of their extreme right-wing political agenda whose face is now Lynn Compton.
Backed by a coterie of right-wing extremists, Compton makes a compelling candidate for her base and presents a nice front. Attractive, well-spoken, assertive, Compton basically burst of nowhere, from the private sector, and that works well for her. She has no record, no government service and, apart from her own business and corporate life, no real leadership experience. At the same time, she is curiously robotic, as if she’s a contestant on “Jeopardy,” rather than a candidate for higher office. At least Sarah Palin was the Mayor of Wasilla before becoming Governor. And like Palin, what she believes—and doesn’t believe, like climate change, solar energy and air control—disqualify her from office. She has stated that SLO needs to loosen land-use policies to be more like Bakersfield, and that the problem in Oceano was “the Hispanics, and all the problems that go with that”—comments that are inherently dangerous to the advancement of serious public debate on issues vitally important to the future of the district, county and country.
Because she is “fresh out of Compton” with no track record to critique, voters know little about her closely-held views other than what’s in the neatly-scrubbed sketch offered on her website. However, each day more people discover that Compton’s business, Valley Farm Supply Inc., as homey as it sounds, is actually a wholesaler of environmentally dangerous pesticides and fertilizers, that she’s worked for pharmaceutical giants Monsanto, Pfizer and Merck, and is owned by Big Ag, Big Oil and Big Chemical, which is why she’s against water-protection regulations and ambiguous about her support for the Phillip 66 rail project in Nipomo. And more people are realizing that she’s not looking out for the little guy, no matter what she claims in her bitter, belligerent effort to win. The real question is, given her Manchurian candidacy, lack of substance and well-armed attack campaign, given what’s at stake in gallons of water lost and budgets for vital services slashed, how concerned should the taxpayers of the 4th district and the county be if Compton and her supporters get hold of the BOS?
Compton has a brief video on her website:
It announces: “In the life of every winner… There comes a moment of truth… Heroes will rise… Stars will fall… Let’s win one for the Gipper with Lynn.”
If stars fall when this hero rises, they should be very concerned.
The First Annual Surfboard Art Festival, organized and promoted by Morro Bay in Bloom, a volunteer-based 501 c(3) organization dedicated to the enhancement of public life in Morro Bay, runs through November with a month-long exhibition and gala-auction finale.
The First Annual Surfboard Art Festival, organized and promoted by Morro Bay in Bloom, a volunteer-based 501 c(3) organization dedicated to the enhancement of public life in Morro Bay, runs through November with a month-long exhibition and gala-auction finale.
The festival will spotlight 30 pieces of surfboard art, which will be displayed at public locations throughout Morro Bay during November, leading up to an auction of the art on Nov. 29 at the Inn at Morro Bay. Proceeds of the auction will be split between the artists, Project Surf Camp and Morro Bay in Bloom.
The festival features the works of renowned local artists and community groups such as the fifth-grade class of Del Mar Elementary School, three classes of students at Los Osos Middle School, and senior residents of Bayside Care Center and Casa de Flores.
Project Surf Camp, one of the beneficiaries of the auction, is a charitable organization designed to educate individuals with special needs. It uses the beach and surf as a context for helping people with special needs to build self-confidence.
The art pieces will be auctioned on Saturday, Nov. 29, at the Inn at Morro Bay from 2 p.m. until 5 p.m., with a VIP preview starting at 1 p.m.
Morro Bay in Bloom (MBIB) is a wholly volunteer 501 c (3) organization whose members are residents of Morro Bay. Approximately 50 members help to restore and maintain public spaces as part of the city’s “Adopt-a-Park” program, among other projects such as the Surfboard Art Festival. MBIB is an affiliate of the national America in Bloom (AIB) program, which sends expert judges to the city annually year to evaluate progress against standard nationwide criteria. The judges’ report constitutes a consulting report on the progress and opportunities of the city.
The 33rd Annual Morro Bay Harbor Festival will be held on Saturday and Sunday, October 4-5, on Morro Bay’s Embarcadero, once again filling the waterfront with thousands of visitors enjoying live music, seafood, beer and wine, and a weekend of family fun by the bay.
The 33rd Annual Morro Bay Harbor Festival will be held on Saturday and Sunday, October 4-5, on Morro Bay’s Embarcadero, once again filling the waterfront with thousands of visitors enjoying live music, seafood, beer and wine, and a weekend of family fun by the bay.
Headlining the Festival’s musical lineup will be Beatlemania, one of the most popular “fab four” bands in the country, performing Saturday at 1:30 p.m., and legendary blues-rockers, the Fabulous Thunderbirds featuring Kim Wilson, who take the Dan Reddell Stage Sunday at 2:00 p.m. Top local bands in the weekend spotlight include Meet the Foppers (Billy and Charlie Foppiano), Burnin’ James & the Funky Flames and Captain Nasty on Saturday, and Vodu Lounge, R. Buckle Road and the Zongo All-Stars on Sunday.
The Festival will also again feature popular events like the oyster-eating contest, as well as shopping at art and crafts booths, the kids cove, and a wide variety of food treats including famous Morro Bay barbecued albacore kabobs, local wine and beer.
Tickets can be purchased in advance at a discount on the Festival’s website for $10 per adult, $5 for children ages 6-12, free for children 5 and under. Tickets purchased at the gate during the Festival will cost an additional $2 per ticket.
Sponsors, food vendors, vendors of art and crafts, memorabilia and maritime-themed gifts can participate this year by contacting the Festival office at (805) 772-1155 or by email: email@example.com.
Festival proceeds benefit more than 30 nonprofit organizations throughout San Luis Obispo County who contribute volunteers to crew the event.
There are more than seven bands, clans, and several individuals that still populate the traditional Chumash territory which consists of the area from about Ragged Point down to about the bay of Santa Monica including the Channel Islands, and goes as far inland as the Tejon Mountains. Within each of these bands and clans are systems of recognized Chiefs, Medicine Peoples, Spiritual Leaders, Tribal Leaders and Elders that have gone through methods of trainings and teachings that have been passed from one generation to the next.
Some of the bands also have business councils which have elected Chair peoples. These positions are not self-appointed. This can be a misconception with literature printed with statements such as “the Chumash once lived” or when a government does not recognize a tribe. This is the case when only one tribe in Chumash Country is recognized by the federal government and owns a casino. Not many people realize or respect that they walk the same ground as our ancestors or have their homes, stores, streets, and parks over our dead.
Though these tribes are not recognized by the federal government they are still sovereign. These tribes have rights and responsibility to steward their ancestral lands and waters that comes from creator and pre-dates state, federal, and international laws. This practice has been done for many generations which are one of the reasons why the people of today can live on such a beautiful coast. The perfect example is the occupation of Point Conception. Where the diligence of some of our strongest-willed people lived for about a year and a half on Point Conception to prevent LNG, Liquefied Natural Gas, from desecrating a sacred place.
In the height of public awareness of Climate Change (and the retreat of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) including Well Stimulation also called Fracking creeping across Turtle Island, that is now known as the United States, has many tribes and Indigenous Nations armed to the teeth with state, federal, and international laws to protect our beloved land and waters.
During this time of threat a few people of the Chumash Nation that call themselves Northern Chumash Tribal Council had made arrangements to use the name of “Chumash Heritage National Sanctuary” without including the rest of the bands, clans, and individuals. There was finally a meeting amongst tribal leaders where NOAA had clearly stated that a sanctuary would not stop threats such as Fracking and oil drilling but can make exceptions. This raises a flag for some of the Chumash leaders for the true motivation of a Sanctuary.
Seeing a meeting called SLO Coast National Marine Sanctuary Panel hosted by certain environmental groups where it was plainly stated that the Monterey National Marine Sanctuary did not stop oil drilling, but the rock formation prevented the drilling, and the lack of the tribes being included in the Central California Marine Protected Areas process in the beginning, it has become apparent there is no reason for us to participate in creating a Sanctuary, and it has not come to consensus to use the Chumash name.
We suggest to the ones that are participating in creating a “Chumash Sanctuary” to go back to farming and let the Chumash Fisherman that still hold the traditions keep their eyes on the water. We are patiently awaiting the next Chumash meeting pertaining to the purposed Sanctuary.
No way is anything in this response to the article, “Chumash Marine Sanctuary Sailing for NOAA Nomination – without Fisherman on Board,” intended to disrespect any environmentalist or commercial fisherman, but to clear the air of some misinformation and much gratitude to THE ROCK for letting our side of the story be told.
“The Chumash Peoples have fished, hunted, and gathered upon the ocean for thousands of years. Our interest is purely to take care of the waters that take care of us.” –Chief Wan Sak, Owl Clan.
Ironically, the fate of the proposed Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary off the Central Coast may well be decided fishermen to fishermen—the heirs of ancient Chumash fishermen that once ruled the ocean versus the working fishermen and harbors of today—and their ability to untangle crossed lines, repair burned bridges and guarantee local control.
By ED OCHS
For more than two decades, creating a Central Coast National Marine Sanctuary has been a major goal of environmentalists seeking to fill the gap between the southern end of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary at Cambria and the northern end of the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary at Santa Barbara.
Now, ironically, the fate of the proposed Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary off the Central Coast may well be decided fishermen to fishermen—the heirs of ancient Chumash fishermen that once ruled the bays versus the working fishermen and harbors of today—and their ability to untangle crossed lines, repair burned bridges and guarantee local control.
A well-organized grassroots campaign led by the Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club, the San Luis Obispo Chapter of the Surfrider Foundation and their other partners and participants in the Marine Sanctuary Alliance to establish a marine sanctuary between the Channel Islands and Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuaries has propelled their proposal toward nomination for possible future designation as a national sanctuary by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
At the same time, regulation-weary Morro Bay fishermen have decided not to support the proposed Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary, even though sanctuary proponents seek no additional regulations on fishing. As a result, though, lack of support by the local fishing community, which has a long and bitter history with the Monterey Bay Sanctuary designation process, could prove to be a critical factor in determining whether the sanctuary is accepted for nomination and seriously considered for future designation.
“We don’t feel another layer of government restrictions in any form is necessary,” Tom Hafer, president of the Morro Bay Commercial Fishermen’s Organization (MBCFO) told The ROCK. “The fishermen of Morro Bay and Avila do not want or need or are in favor of any new sanctuary in the area.”
There have been several unsuccessful efforts over the years to establish a marine sanctuary off the Central Coast by extending the Monterey Bay Sanctuary southward, the Channel Islands Sanctuary northward, or creating of an entirely new, separate sanctuary in the middle that basically connects the two.
Obviously it’s not as simple as it sounds or it would have happened decades ago. Why hasn’t time changed minds? Because, as appealing it may sound to some, as easy as it is for ocean sentinels to embrace, the idea of extending the sanctuaries to the Central Coast belies a host of legal and governmental complications and complexities that threaten to make the journey of the Chumash sanctuary though the NOAA nominating process a stormy passage.
When the Monterey Bay Sanctuary (MBNMS) was up for designation in 1992, talks were going on locally and nationally whether to designate it or not. At the time, there was overwhelming opposition to it by the communities of Monterey and Santa Cruz and the commercial fishermen and their organizations, along with those that relied on commercial fishing—unless the sanctuary was going to stay out of the business of fishery management.
Whenever the Monterey Bay Sanctuary designation history is mentioned, based on their years of hard experience,fishermen refer to “The Promise.”
“We were once told by [then-Congressmen] Leon Panetta that there would be no new regulations by the establishment of the MBMS,” said MBCFO director Mark Tognazinni, “but history became an agreed-upon fable and promises have and always will be broken when it comes to sanctuaries.
“So what is the real purpose of this purpose of this proposal? How does it really benefit the Chumash? It is as if there is a need to make the entire ocean some kind of MPA. Just follow the money. It always leads to the truth,” said Tognazinni. “With one exception fishing is NOT ‘unregulated,’ and at least for my 45 years on the ocean, fishing is one of the most heavily regulated businesses in the country.”
When the Monterey Bay Sanctuary was designated, a fairly unanimous consensus was sought amongst all the stakeholders. The fishermen and community where brought on board with “the promise” that the Monterey Bay Sanctuary would not get involved in fishery management or fishery regulation.
“With new efforts being made by some community members to gather support for an expanded Monterey Sanctuary (MBNMS), or a new ‘central coast sanctuary,’ claims have been heard that the MBNMS has never broken the well-remembered promise made to us fishermen that it would not create regulations that affect us, or otherwise threaten our livelihoods. Central coast fishermen have always wanted a mutually trusting and respectful relationship with the MBNMS, but we have so far been disappointed.
“Has the sanctuary kept this promise over the past 20 years? Most fishermen think that it has not. In recent times high level MBNMS officials have suggested, at public meetings, that fishermen were somehow ‘confused’ by what they heard in the early ’90s. This makes us wonder if NOAA always intended to try and get around the agreement, as soon as the sanctuary was created. Sanctuary officials have also repeatedly claimed that they have never created a fishing regulation, or otherwise harmed the fishing community. Incredibly, this is said during the same time period that the MBNMS called for additional MPAs—fishing closures.
“Fishermen from the west coast and in other parts of the nation have observed what has unfolded with the Monterey Sanctuary’s relationship with the fishing community. It is safe to say that nearly 100% are extremely suspicious and resistive of sanctuary designations for their areas because of these factors. The MBNMS is widely seen as an agency that either doesn’t base its decisions on science, or cherry-picks the science, has significant issues in its public processes, and has broken its promise made to us, in the spirit it was made.”
“The bottom line,” Roff told The ROCK, “is the sanctuary director can change and so do the priorities.”
“Historically, over the years,” said Morro Bay Harbor Director Eric Endersby, “the (Monterey Bay) sanctuary superintendents, and there have been a few of them, have dabbled in fishery management as much as they can and tried to establish marine protected areas and fishery restrictions, and basically, in the words of the fishermen, break the promise.
“The big fear we have as a community and as a fishing community is the affect on commercial fishermen,” Endersby said. “The commercial fishermen are so highly regulated, we are the most regulated fishery pretty much on the planet, with marine protected areas and all the seasons and closed areas, lots of layers of protection both by the state out to three miles, and by the federal government through its regional fishery management councils.”
The other part of ‘the promise,’ according to Endersby, was that the harbors would have a “carve-out,” and wouldn’t be considered in the sanctuary because of industrial activity such as dredging and disposal going on within sanctuary waters “that’s not necessarily in tune with what the sanctuary’s protections typically are. … The sanctuary has historically been another relatively difficult hurdle to get over during the planning and permitting processes, so it’s been a rocky relationship with the sanctuary governance up there and the local fishermen and communities.
“Unfortunately, it’s kind of poisoned the sanctuary waters here on the west coast, and one of the reasons why our fishermen down here in our community have historically stood up so adamantly against sanctuary designations in our waters because we saw the sort of promise getting broken or getting stretched or ignored up north, and basically we didn’t trust the sanctuary governance to keep its promise.”
Fred Collins, tribal administrator of the Northern Chumash Tribal Council based in San Luis Obispo, met with Hafer, MDCFO director Jeremiah O’Brien and Endersby earlier this year about the Chumash Heritage Sanctuary. To gain their support, Collins proposed that the fishers and harbors protect their interests by writing their own parts in the sanctuary bylaws, but it remains unclear, said Enderby, whether that could “functionally” be done under sanctuary designation and the National Marine Sanctuaries Act.
“Fred Collins and his group seem to think absolutely it can. I just don’t know. I haven’t been deep enough into it,” said Endersby. “From what I understand of it, the designation documents can’t be contrary to the National Marine Sanctuary Act. Whether you can write in ‘the sanctuary shalt not ever do fishery regulation’ or not is (unknown) and that’s the concern, and that’s where the fishermen were looking for an answer, so to speak, and us as a community as well, as a harbor.
“Can the designation documents be crafted in such a way that the harbors remain an isolated entity, that (we maintain) our normal activities like boating and everything we do in the water that may be somewhat in conflict with the national marine sanctuary goals, which is basically trying to keep certain industrial and other uses out of the ocean waters and the ecosystem, that may be in conflict with the act?
“Short of some sort of legal ruling and really exploring what it would mean and how that could be done, it’s tough to say whether Fred’s vision of a sanctuary could occur in the way he thinks it can and we would hope it would be.”
In September 2012, in a rare partnership of odd bedfellows, fishermen, environmentalists and concerned individuals joined forces to form C.O.A.S.T.—Citizens Opposed to Acoustic Seismic Testing. Fishermen and environmentalists don’t usually sit at the same table, but stopping seismic testing brought all sides together under one umbrella. The grassroots effort paid off.
In November 2012, the California Coastal Commission denied energy giant PG&E a permit to conduct high-energy seismic surveys off the Central Coast to detail earthquake fault lines around the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Facility in Avila Beach. Perhaps the most compelling argument against permitting—openly acknowledged by a majority of the Commissioners—came from Fred Collins, who eloquently educated them on Chumash heritage on and off the Central Coast and Native-American rights.
With PG&E in retreat, the essential C.O.A.S.T. Alliance of fishermen and environmentalists broke up, but the remaining members continued to oppose acoustic seismic testing, high or so-called low energy. Concerned that PG&E or some major energy entity might attempt a return to local waters, they coalesced around the Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary, which bans seismic testing and energy exploration including fracking.
“This whole thing started with the threat of high-intensity seismic testing by PG&E,” said MBCFO’s Hafer. “This got the Chumash Indians very involved with protecting the coastline.
“However, prior to this threat we have had several years of protections put in place including the marine protected areas of which we have 27 just on the Central Coast, as well as the rock cod conservation areas, the essential fish habitat on top of draconian quotas, trip limits and catch shares that the Chumash were minimally engaged in.”
Said Endersby: “It became pretty evident that sanctuary designation is a great tool to quickly address those bigger, sort of non-fishing threats, but there’s always the fishing in the background, and the way the Monterey Sanctuary has acted over the decades, they’ve basically burned all the bridges with the fisherman, to a degree with the communities, and the trust that they won’t get into fishery regulation, because they’ve tried and tried and tried, and it’s unfortunate that the trust bridge has been burned.”
“What happens when we try to put a boat yard in or try to get dredging in the harbor?” asked Hafer. “Anything will need permission from yet another unnecessary government entity. There is more to having a sanctuary in the area than just the worry of more fishing restrictions.”
Since the National Marine Sanctuaries Act is by definition a national act, the Chumash Heritage National Sanctuary would be federally, not locally, controlled.
“Making the leap from federal control to local control,” questioned Endersby, “I don’t know how that would functionally work.”
A Work in Progress
The nominations are now open for the federal government to consider new sanctuaries, and it’s nationwide. There are months to go in NOAA’s nominating and review process and several years to go before sanctuary designation. There are nominating criteria and considerations that have to be met, and only a very limited number of those sanctuaries nominated get designated.
The proposed Chumash Heritage Sanctuary includes submerged sacred Chumash sites between 10,000 to 20,000 years old extending from six to 13 miles offshore, as well as contiguous onshore coastal sites such as villages, religious grounds and solstice alignments. Within the sanctuary are whale and dolphin feeding and gathering areas, three major upwellings, a 10,000-foot-deep submarine canyon, prime California sea otter habitat, a plethora of pinnipeds, a rich diversity and density of fish, seabirds and mammals, and timeworn migration lanes. No seismic testing allowed. No oil or gas drilling allowed. And according to Chumash Sanctuary literature: “No regulation of harbors, or recreational or commercial fishing.”
“The way Fred terms it, the Chumash are the original commercial fishermen and, yeah, they were, looking at it in that sense—it’s an interesting way of looking at it. So they have a stake in preserving things, too, in not affecting their brothers and sisters that are out doing it for a living. Definitely the intentions with Fred and his group are good. Whether the concerns of the fishermen and the community can get alleviated or spoken to through the process, I don’t have the answer to that.”
On June 17 President Obama announced that, by executive order, he intends to make a vast stretch of the Pacific Ocean the world’s largest marine sanctuary.
Launching a broad campaign to address significant maritime issues such as overfishing and pollution, on June 17 President Obama announced that, by executive order, he intends to make a vast stretch of the Pacific Ocean the world’s largest marine sanctuary—off limits to fishing, energy exploration and other activities. The administration also plans to create a mechanism to allow the public to nominate new marine sanctuaries off U.S. coasts.
The proposal, which will take effect later this year, calls for the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument to expand from about 87,000 square miles to almost 782,000 square miles. The designated ocean area encompasses a remote, uninhabited region adjacent to islands and atolls controlled by the U.S. and extends up to 200 nautical miles offshore from these territories.
The proposal faces the objection of the U.S. tuna fleet that operates in the region. Up to 3% of the annual U.S. tuna catch is caught in the western and central Pacific. When the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument was created by President George W. Bush in 2009, sport fishing was exempted to counter industry opposition. If the protected area expands, recreational fishing interests will probably seek to retain the existing exemption to avoid setting a precedent, even though sport fishing activity in the expanse is scarce.
A public comment period this summer will provide the Departments of Commerce and Interior with up-to-date information on the level of commercial activity in the area and make any necessary modifications.
The potential expanded area would include a five-fold increase in the number of protected underwater mountains, halt tuna fishing, and shelter dozens of species of marine mammals, endangered sea turtles, as well as a variety of sharks and other predatory species, and protect some of the world’s most pristine and biologically rich marine ecosystems.
As part of the administration’s increased focus on maritime issues, the President will also direct federal agencies to develop a comprehensive program to fight seafood fraud and the worldwide black-market fish trade, and review of steps the U.S. can take to stop illegal fishing, which does untold damage to marine ecosystems and to coastal nations around the world.
Obama has also been advised to consider expanding the borders of the monuments Bush created in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands and the Marianas Trench.
Other countries are also creating marine reserves. The British government is moving to protect the area around the Pitcairn Islands in the Pacific, and the small Pacific island of Kiribati plans to close an area roughly the size of California to commercial fishing by year’s end.
“The President’s proposed action is a huge step forward for the ocean,” said Frances Beinecke, President of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). “Expanding these protections will provide a safe haven for coral gardens, seamounts, and the rich waters that support hundreds of species of fish, sea turtles, giant clams, dolphins, whales and sharks, conserving them for future generations. This represents a commitment to the kind of bold action needed to restore the failing health of our ocean, on which we all depend, and continues the bipartisan tradition of ocean protection. We hope it sets the stage for taking similar action to protect key areas of our ocean around the U.S. and the world.”
International, national and local forces are mobilizing up and down the East Coast, and pressure is being placed on President Obama to stop offshore drilling in the Atlantic
While ocean blasting was banished from Central Coast waters (for now) by the California Coastal Commission in 2012, the East Coast hasn’t been so lucky. Fortunately, international, national and local forces are mobilizing up and down the East Coast, and pressure is being placed on President Obama to stop offshore drilling in the Atlantic.
Oceana, the Washington, D.C.-based environmental advocacy organization, recently announced that 110 local elected officials and 155 conservation and animal welfare organizations have joined the mounting opposition against seismic-airgun use along the East Coast.
Six coastal towns have also passed local resolutions opposing or voicing concern with their use (Cocoa Beach, FL, Carolina Beach, NC, Caswell Beach, NC, Nags Head, NC, Bradley Beach, NJ and Red Bank, NJ.), with more local communities expected to join the stand against encroaching oil and gas companies.
In February, the United States government released a final proposal that would allow the use of this controversial technology to look for oil and gas deposits deep below the ocean floor in an area twice the size of California, stretching from Delaware to Florida. According to the Department of the Interior (DOI), these blasts could injure and possibly kill up to 138,200 marine mammals such as dolphins and whales, while disrupting the necessary activities of millions more.
One species of particular concern is the North Atlantic right whale, the rarest large whale species, of which there are only approximately 500 left worldwide.
Local officials from Maine to Florida are voicing their concerns:
“The use of airguns to conduct these seismic tests threatens fish populations and profitable fisheries. In fact, airgun noise has been shown to decrease catch rates of certain fisheries. Commercial and recreational fishing off the mid and south Atlantic generate billions annually and support hundreds of thousands of jobs. The Department of the Interior’s assessment ignores the economic impacts the proposed seismic testing will have on fisheries and the fishermen who rely on the oceans for their livelihoods.”
Conservation and animal welfare organizations, including Oceana, Surfrider Foundation, International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Clean Ocean Action (COA) and Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE), also sent a letter with the following statement:
“Seismic airgun testing is the first step towards deep-water drilling, which would inevitably bring the Atlantic coast one step closer to the same practice that brought us the Deepwater Horizon oil spill disaster. While proposed seismic airgun testing would span from Delaware to Florida, an oil spill the size of that which flowed from the Deepwater Horizon oil rig would harm sea life, ecosystems, fisheries and coastal economies along the entire East Coast. Furthermore, expanding offshore drilling to the Atlantic will only deepen our dependence on oil and gas, and worsen the impacts of climate change and ocean acidification.”
“When it comes to offshore drilling in the U.S. one overarching theme stands out – Drill, Spill, Repeat,” said Claire Douglass, campaign director at Oceana. “Offshore drilling is no safer than it was four year ago, yet President Obama is taking steps to expand this dirty and dangerous industry to the Atlantic. If the President would simply stop to listen, he would hear that coastal communities have no interest in turning the East Coast into a blast zone.”
The Seismic Challenge
An Oceana report released last year outlined the threats of seismic airgun use and offshore drilling to marine life and coastal economies along the East Coast, including the potential danger to commercial and recreational fisheries, as well as tourism and coastal recreation, which puts more than 730,000 jobs at risk in the blast zone.
In February, more than 100 scientists called on President Obama and his administration to wait on new acoustic guidelines for marine mammals, which are currently in development by the National Marine Fisheries Service. These guidelines are 15 years in the making and aim to provide a better understanding of how marine mammals are impacted by varying levels of manmade sound as well as demonstrate the measures that are needed to protect them. Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and eight additional U.S. senators also sent a letter to DOI Secretary Sally Jewell urging her to hold off on issuing the recent administrative decision until all of the best available science, including these new acoustic guidelines, can be incorporated.
Oceana has also delivered more than 100,000 petitions opposing seismic airguns to the director of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management. The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, as well as approximately 50 members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, also called on President Obama to stop the use of seismic airguns last year.
Seismic airguns create one of the loudest man-made sounds in the ocean, each 100,000 times more intense than what one would experience if standing near a jet engine. The dynamite-like blasts occur every 10 seconds, for days to weeks at a time. Seismic airguns are loud enough to kill small animals like fish eggs and larvae at close ranges and can disrupt the behavior of large animals like whales and dolphins from up to 100 miles away.
Oceana is the largest international advocacy group working solely to protect the world’s oceans. Oceana wins policy victories for the oceans using science-based campaigns. Since 2001, Oceana have protected over 1.2 million square miles of ocean and innumerable sea turtles, sharks, dolphins and other sea creatures. Oceana has more 600,000 supporters worldwide, and offices in North, South and Central America and Europe. For more information about Oceana and its global efforts visit www.oceana.org and www.stopthedrill.org.
Photo: To commemorate the four-year anniversary of the BP oil spill, the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history, Oceana conducted a three-day nighttime-visual-projection demonstration on government buildings in Washington, D.C. from April 14th to 16th. The image series called on President Obama and Secretary Jewell to stop offshore drilling in the Atlantic before it starts.