The Call To Expand Oregon’s Marine Reserves
Cascade Head near Lincoln City. Photo by NOAA Commander Bruce Hillard.
Saying our coast ecology is under deep stress, Environment Oregon is calling for a major expansion of the state’s system of marine reserves.
Marine reserves are sort of like state parks in the ocean. They’re areas where most major commercial activity, such as fishing and energy development are banned. But recreation activities, such as diving, boating and surfing, are allowed. So far, Oregon has set aside two areas off the coast as marine reserves and four other locations are being studied.
But Environment Oregon argues that much more needs to be done. It says establishing a larger system of marine reserves will help coastal areas recover faster from overfishing, climate change, and the impact of those summer “dead zones”. The group says that in other parts of the world, marine reserves have a proven record of increasing the population of marine plants, fish and animals.
Here’s a look at what Environment Oregon wants to see happen.
It says the legislature should move forward to establish marine reserves at the four areas still being studied. This includes Cape Falcon south of Cannon Beach, Cascade Head near Lincoln City, Cape Perpetua south of Yachats, and Cape Arago – Seven Devils near Coos Bay.
Then it suggests three other areas as future marine reserves. On that list is Three Arch Rocks, home to a colony of tufted puffins. Next is Orford Reef, where a large kelp forests provides habitat for the red sea urchin. Finally, it wants to include Mack Reef, home to a wide variety of marine species including almost a dozen types of seabirds.
Marine reserves have been a tough sell on the coast. Commercial fishermen are worried about being locked out of prime fishing grounds as more ocean territory is set aside for reserves, and offshore energy projects such as wave and tidal energy and offshore wind farms.
For more information see Environment Oregon’s report, Oregon’s Marine Treasures: The Case For Conservation.
[...] [...]
In the opening paragraphs activities such as diving,boating, and surfing are described as recreational activities. Why is recreational fishing not given equal status?? Recreational fishing is an activity enjoyed by millions of people every year. It contributes billions of dollars to the economy and truly connects people with the natural world. Recreational fisherman are much like small farmers. Many have led the way in establishing strict harvest limits to ensure a sustainable resource. Like the farmer, we have long understood the importance of being good stewards of our resource.
The environmental community has a habit of failing to distinguish recreational fishing from commercial fishing. This is a shame. With a slight change of policy the recreational fishing community would fight side by side with the environmental community. Instead we are treated as adversaries and destroyers of the resource.
A very good point. The Environment Oregon report is vague on the issue of recreational fishing. I’m getting in touch with them to get a clarification.
Meanwhile, the rules are still being worked out over what exactly will be allowed in Oregon’s two approved reserves. As usual with this kind of issue, there’s no easy answer. Draft rules by ODFW call for prohibiting recreational fishing at both marine reserves at Otter Rock and Redfish Rocks. But… it would allow recreational crabbing in an area known as the Redfish Rocks Marine Protected Area. The MPA is much larger than the reserve.
You can read ODFW’s draft rules at this link: (Opens a PDF file)
http://www.oregonmarinereserves.net/images/mr_odfw_draft_rules_10-2-09.pdf
“diving, boating, and surfing are described as recreational activities. Why is recreational fishing not given equal status?”
Obviously, because the first three are not inherently extractive. They cause disturbance, which has an unknown effect on feeding and reproduction, but do not kill fauna outright. Fishing directly removes fauna from the system, and hence is inherently different. You could argue there is some level of extraction which does not affect the longterm viability of a population inside the designated area, but the point of a reserve is not just to keep numbers of fish and associated fauna up IN THE RESERVE, but to serve as a source of surplus to repopulate adjoining areas.
Extractive activities are generally precluded from true reserves for this reason. If you allow fishing, even limited fishing, you don’t have a reserve … you have a marine protected area. Different animal altogether.
Updating my earlier note. Environment Oregon does want to prohibit recreational fishing inside marine reserves. They believe that leaving these areas off-limits to all fishing will help boost fish numbers outside of the reserves.
However, there’s another level of protection called a Marine Protection Area. EO supports recreational fishing in MPAs.