FLORENCE — People are afraid. They’re not afraid of marine reserves, per se. Rather some are scared about reprisals and other fear losing their livelihoods, environmentalists and fishermen told the Ocean Policy Advisory Council in Florence.

The council listened to state agencies’ reviews of 20 marine reserves proposals Thursday. Today, the council is listening to public testimony.

More than 100 people filled the Florence Events Center meeting room, but the delineation between those for the marine reserves and those against was apparent.

Much of the debate centers around whether the closure of fishing — sport or commercial or, more specifically, what kinds of commercial fishing — would have a significant effect on local communities.

The fishing industry has resented implications that fish stocks are depleted in nearshore waters. Fishermen say state and federal regulations are successfully rebuilding populations of fish. Fishery management plans are working.

Environmentalists, though, say management isn’t enough. Marine reserves are a way to ensure survival of populations of fish to breed and repopulate depleted species. Reserves also can guard against climate change, increased human populations and development near coastal areas, and act as comparison areas.

The two sides can’t seem to meet in the middle. At least, in the case of marine reserves in Oregon.

Two marine reserve sites — one near Port Orford and one near Depoe Bay — have been developed using a high level of community involvement, reviewers said, and would be good candidates for pilot projects. There is sufficient fishing industry buy-in there as well. 

Those stand in stark contrast to a site proposed for Cape Arago where a community backlash grew overnight.

The Pew Environment Group-backed Our Ocean, a coalition of conservation groups, proposed a network of eight marine reserves. Fishermen on the South Coast were surprised to see a 5.5-mile area between Cape Arago and Whisky Run on their list.

Our Ocean Director Susan Allen admitted Thursday that Coos  Bay and Charleston have been a tough sell.

“In lieu of a publicly-supported outreach process, we have really made strong strides and put as many meetings as we can in a very small period of time,” she said. “… there are some communities more comfortable talking about this. … There are some communities that are more reticent. I think the Coos  Bay area, the Charleston area, reflects the least comfortable community of all the communities we talked to.”

Allen said then-South Coast coordinator Gus Gates tried to reach out to as many people in the community as he could.

Robin Hartmann, a member of Oregon  Shores, which is a member of Our Ocean, said at least three meetings were held in Bandon since July and that Gates tried to get meetings as early as April in Coos  Bay. She chose Bandon because Oregon Shores had a strong membership in that area.

A September meeting was particularly scary, she said, when she and other Our Ocean members walked into a room full of about 30 fishermen in Bandon.

Earlier, Ocean Policy council members requested the names or associations of supporters some of the groups and individuals said they talked to.

Our Ocean’s North Coast Coordinator Bob Rees said no way.

“I don’t want to subject those people to that kind of response,” Rees said. “… I’m not sure it’s a safe environment yet.”

OPAC vice chairman Jim Good tried to diffuse the situation with humor.

“The state police are here,” he said, to which everyone laughed.

But that didn’t solve it.

“We’re trying to protect people involved in the process,” Hartmann said. “There are some people who don’t want to be associated with us who sat down to talk. People are afraid. People are really afraid.”

Jim Pex, the South Coast recreational fishing representative on OPAC, challenged her.

You talk of the fear of people to respond and the fear of people who disagree, he said, “but is it possible you’re holding these meetings and people just disagreed?”

At the same time, Our Ocean representatives also admitted to not doing any local interviews specific to the Siltcoos proposal, a sandy stretch between Siltcoos River and Tahkenitch Creek.

Fishermen said outside of the meeting it’s little wonder the industry is concerned.

Pex pointed out during the Cape Arago presentation that Our Ocean should have done more work. Had it done so, it would have found out why the proposed site is so controversial: It’s prime fishing ground for both sport and commercial fishermen. 

“This is devastating to communities,” Pex said.