Marine reserves fifth session draws more questions

By Susan Chambers, Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 27, 2008 | 2 comment(s)

Font Size: Shrink Font Enlarge Font | Submit your news
REEDSPORT — Most of the comments had been made before.

“You’re putting the cart before the horse.”

“Our whole coast is basically a marine protected area.”

“This is ridiculous. ... You can’t put state police on the highways. How are you going to patrol the ocean?”

“Wouldn’t a pilot project be cheaper?”

Oregon Sea Grant Extension agents Ginny Goblirsch and Jeff Feldner listened patiently Tuesday night as a packed room of interested people shared their thoughts on the governor’s plan to establish a system of no-take marine reserves in Oregon’s territorial sea. It was the fifth session the two, with Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Marine Resources Program Manager Patty Burke and Oregon State University Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Associate Professor Selina Heppell, conducted in coastal communities over the past few days.

As in the other sessions, such as the one held in North Bend, Burke provided a background and overview of marine reserves and Oregon’s process for establishing them. Heppell provided a scientific context for marine reserves, detailing what can and cannot be learned from marine reserves and discussing past studies and how they might relate to Oregon’s proposed system.

But it wasn’t like the audience to sit quietly and simply listen. Many fishermen — both sport and commercial — asked many questions, voiced several opinions.

One woman wanted to know how many people in the room were supportive of marine reserves so she could write the answer down on one of the provided comment cards.

Fewer than three of the 70 or so people tentatively raised their hands, but before more folks could answer, Feldner interrupted. The five specific questions posed to the audience were designed to get honest answers, he said.

“We didn’t want just a yes or no,” Feldner said. “We wanted your thoughts.”

A few in the audience have become accustomed to working through local and state processes on other issues, such as the potential for wave energy. Comments centered around discussions about wave energy were repeated at the Reedsport meeting, but in reverse: Is the marine reserves process also considering the cumulative effects of wave energy? And what about potential restricted areas due to liquefied natural gas tankers or container ships?

Burke and Feldner both said that currently, all those issues are taking different tracks, working through separate processes.

The Ocean Policy Advisory Council, which provides advice to the governor about ocean issues, has started work on studies to consider the cumulative impacts of different ocean uses. It also is considering updating Oregon’s Territorial Sea Plan so that these issues can be considered comprehensively. But it’s still in the working stages.

One question often repeated was: Can the governor do this on his own?

“No,” Feldner said.

First, after public nominations are reviewed, the Department of State Lands would have to come up with boundaries for specific areas. The State Land Board — comprising the governor, the secretary of state and the state treasurer — would have to approve the sites.

Then the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife would come up with regulations regarding fishing in those areas. The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission — a citizen commission, Feldner said — would have to approve the regulations.

Burke said other agencies also may become involved, depending on other criteria, but in no way does the governor have the sole say in establishing reserves.

One overwhelming question was why?

“The general public down here doesn’t want marine reserves,” sport fisherman Wayne Hildebrand said. “It’s all being pushed by the governor.”

Heppell said some people may be under the impression marine reserves may be science driven, but they’re not. Instead, it’s the general public’s concern about the oceans. Television shows may show trouble with the world’s oceans, but that’s on a completely different level, she said. That’s worldwide, broad scale.

This is local — and there aren’t the same threats to territorial sea waters there are in other places.

“There’s this disconnect that’s happening,” Heppell said.
Previous
Next

Have you checked out The World Link Forums?

Comments

The comments below are from users of theworldlink.com and do not necessarily represent the views of The World or Lee Enterprises. Participation Guidelines

Note: There is a maximum of 200 words per comment. If you wish to post more, please visit our forum.
Comment Policy

The World welcomes your comments about stories, and we encourage a robust dialogue on this site. All comments must meet reasonable standards of decency and civility.

Please follow these basic rules:

  • No defamatory comments about individuals or businesses.
  • No deliberately false information.
  • No obscenity or racially offensive language.
  • No harassment, verbal abuse, threats or personal attacks.
  • No information that invades another person's privacy.
  • No business solicitations or charitable solicitations.
Comments that violate these standards will not be posted. Users with repeated violations may be banned from future posting.

Comments will be approved throughout the day during business hours. After hours and weekend comments may not appear until the following business day. It may take a couple of hours before comments are approved.

The World generally does not edit comments, but we reserve the right to edit any comment that does not meet our standards.

Close Guidelines

Lloyd wrote on Feb 27, 2008 1:07 PM:

Gene wrote: "I think most people are missing the object of these meetings. The people who are calling for them are paid by grants and state funds. Get the point?"
No, I DON'T get your point, Gene. Are you claiming that the folks hosting the meetings have a vested interest? Nope. I believe Ginny came out of retirement to host the Oregon Sea Grant outreach meetings. She obviously has no financial interest whatsoever in whether or not marine reserves are established. She simply knows it's the right thing to do.

Sounds to me like YOU have quite a bit of financial interest in it, Gene. Had you ever considered that "fewer than 10" marine reserves in Oregon territorial waters would probably result in MORE rockfish and salmon, for YOU to catch in the future? Perhaps you need to remove your reading glasses and get a long-range view.

However, I must say I agree with the person who said, “You’re putting the cart before the horse.” It's nuts to ask us citizens to be able to suggest areas suitable for marine reserves. That's what the scientists are for. Seems like it'd make more sense for the experts to propose a couple dozen of the (scientifically) best sites up and down the coast, and then let the citizens and fishers and tour guides pick 8 or 9 out of those.

Gene wrote on Feb 27, 2008 11:48 AM:

I think most people are missing the object of these meetings. The people who are calling for them are paid by grants and state funds. Get the point?


*Member ID:
*Password:
 

Not already registered?

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!



*Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
*E-mail Address:
*Year of Birth:
 

(children under 13 cannot register)

*First Name:
*Last Name:
Would you like to be added to our mailing lists?
Daily Headlines
Breaking News
Special Offers
 
Advanced Search
Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH

Blogroll

Most Popular

Polls

» View Past Poll Results
» Suggest a Poll

Marketplace

Special Sections

More Special Sections