Marine reserves: Passions burn on both sides

By Susan Chambers, Staff Writer
Saturday, October 25, 2008 | 7 comment(s)

Font Size: Shrink Font Enlarge Font |
Buy this photo
Previous Next
Photo 1 of 1
FLORENCE — Seven boats on trailers lined the east side of Quince Street in Florence on Friday.

There were signs on some of the boats and the trucks.

“Outside interests want to take control of Oregon’s ocean,” said one.

“No fishing = no jobs and poor local economic forecast. Save our coast. No marine reserves,” another one read.

At the end of the row, Lakeside resident Bill Hargis, with a yellow “I fish, I vote — Oregon Anglers” button pinned to his shirt, stood guard.

Sometimes the trucks, the boats may get keyed, he said, as he watched for suspicious activity outside the Florence Events Center. Inside the center, the Ocean Policy Advisory Council was listening to public testimony on proposals for 20 marine reserves and a smaller number of marine protected areas.

“It happens,” he said. “Some people don’t like us.”

For Hargis, that’s somewhat difficult to understand. He owns a 16-foot boat. There are few days with weather that will allow him to drop a line in his favorite fishing spot near Cape  Arago.

It’s the proposed reserve at the cape south of Charleston he is most concerned about. If it is implemented as designed, he couldn’t fish there. He would have to run farther south — and if the weather comes up, it would be a risk for him to get back to the jetties in time. It also would cost him more for fuel.

Current fishery management is sufficient, Hargis said.

“They’ve dropped the bag limit to five fish,” he said. “That should take care of it.”

Hargis’ comments were echoed by other sport and commercial guys gathered at the front of the row of boats.

It also underscored the deep division separating the supporters of marine reserves and those against — and the passion on both sides of the issue.

Supporting reserves

Charlotte Mills, of Tidewater, east of Waldport, is one of the people supporting marine reserves — but she’s weary of the controversy.

She sat in a row of chairs at the edge of the meeting room during lunch. On her lap were three books: “Between Pacific Tides,” by noted marine scientist and friend of John Steinbeck, Ed Ricketts; “The Edge of the Sea,” by Rachel Carson; and “The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life on Earth,” by E.O. Wilson.

This is the bible, she said, referring to the thick book, “Between Pacific Tides.”

Though it was published in 1939, it remains a scientific tome that is now in its fifth edition.

Mills noted that Ricketts visited Yachats as part of his sweep through Oregon to study animals in the intertidal areas.

She referred to his work as some of the most important ever done. The nearshore areas should be protected for both nearshore fish and shellfish and those that roam the waters offshore as well.

Still, the controversial nature of marine reserves is not lost on her.

“My heart goes out to them,” she said of the fishermen who testified against a network of marine reserves.

Mills knows fishermen. She knows the fishing industry. Just a few years ago, the retired history and journalism teacher was the oldest woman working in the belly of a commercial opilio crab boat that traveled the Bering Sea, catching and processing crab in Alaska.

The contrast between Mills and the fishermen was analogous to the messages being delivered by both sides. Instead of flannel shirts, hooded sweatshirts or work clothes, she wore khakis, a pink sweater that matched the hue of her cheeks and a lightweight black vest. Her platinum blond, short curly hair was in contrast to the short, straight hair often covered by baseball caps worn by fishermen who opposed reserves.

 She’s softspoken but passionate and not afraid to get involved. As a member of Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition, she walks a mile near Yachats, helping clean the beach. She is a member of the Yachats Coastal Action Team that helped design the Heceta Head and Cape Perpetua Marine Reserve proposal.

Marine reserves go beyond rebuilding fish stocks, she said. The tidal areas are rich, productive areas that must be protected from runoff and development, too.

“We need marine reserves … which will address shoreland protections and protect our giant kelp forests which appear mostly within the three-mile offshore area where marine reserves are proposed,” she said in written testimony.
Previous Email this story to yourself or a friend Print this story 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

Terry wrote on Nov 14, 2008 1:53 AM:

Just a few years ago we were asked to conserve everything from energy to coffee. Then we were asked to clean up our planet, our way of life - most of us complied either by choice or by force. Change was at a huge cost and sacrifice but for the most part, this change brought good to our planet and to life in general. Many lost their jobs and for some it meant the loss of their entire way of life. Even though most of us complied with that “call to arms” to save our plane we are now asked to sacrifice more – we are to travel miles off our own shores to work or even play. If these areas are actually implemented as they are now proposed, it would be prohibitive for us to even walk the tides, fish off the beach or just boat the shoreline. I believe we have learned huge lessons in what happens to our eco system with human intervention. They always mean well but seem to do more harm than good every time. No need for government or special interest group intervention.

Terry wrote on Nov 14, 2008 1:50 AM:

Just a few years ago we were asked to conserve everything from energy to coffee. Then we were asked to clean up our planet, our way of life - most of us complied either by choice or by force. Change was at a huge cost and sacrifice but for the most part, this change brought good to our planet and to life in general. Many lost their jobs and for some it meant the loss of their entire way of life. Even though most of us complied with that “call to arms” to save our planet, we are now asked to sacrifice more – we are to travel miles off our own shores to work or even play. If these areas are actually implemented as they are now proposed, it would be prohibitive for us to even walk the tides, fish off the beach or just boat the shoreline. I believe we have learned huge lessons in what happens to our eco system with human intervention. They always mean well but seem to do more harm than good every time. No need for government or special interest group intervention.

DAVE wrote on Oct 27, 2008 6:57 AM:

tHE GREED of the commercial fishermen brought on the need for this kind of action...Had they took less year,s ago instead of all they could get then we wouldn,t need this program..

contractor wrote on Oct 26, 2008 8:25 PM:

the only good sportfishing is to the south. why not make your reserve to the north where nobody cares. sink a ship or something to make your reefes and make new habatat. we will have to run to far south in small boats to be safe.
leave glass house alone.

Liberty freak wrote on Oct 26, 2008 5:57 PM:

I see "The World" is just another socialist rag that won't allow free speach.

yout wrote on Oct 26, 2008 7:04 AM:

"We need marine reserves … which will address shoreland protections and protect our giant kelp forests which appear mostly within the three-mile offshore area where marine reserves are proposed,” she said in written testimony.

How long until you need our homes and property?How long until you need our labor?How long until you need our freedom?How long until someone stands up for OUR rights as people?

Liberty Freak wrote on Oct 25, 2008 12:56 PM:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Look what has happened to your salmon fishery since the "marine mammal act", the population of sea lions has increased tremendously and has decimated the salmon and other fish populations. I say through the liberal socialists out.


*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