NO-ZONES LAYER NO-FISHING RESERVES ON RISE IN ATTEMPT TO PRESERVE SPECIES.

Byline: Bill Becher Special to the Daily News

Some in the sport-fishing industry might be feeling as if they have been hit by a tsunami after the decision last week by the California Fish and Game Commission to approve 10 new nonfishing marine reserves and two limited-fishing marine-conservation areas at the Channel Islands.

But hang on - more no-fishing zones are coming. Ocean reserves are the wave of the future.

In a single stroke, the commission increased California's total marine reserves from less than 8 to 140 square nautical miles by adding new no-fishing zones off of San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, Anacapa and Santa Barbara Islands. The commission also established two marine-conservation areas totaling 10 square miles at Santa Cruz and Anacapa islands, where limited fishing will be allowed.

Proponents of the reserves say they are needed to help stem declines in fish stocks caused by over-fishing and the cascading affect the decline of one species has on another. Stocks of Bocaccio near California are estimated to be fewer than 5 percent of their unfished numbers. And other rockfish stocks have been severely depleted.

Marine reserves are part of a new ecosystem-based approach that is revolutionizing fisheries management. In the past, fisheries were managed species-by-species using season, gear and bag limits.

But that simplistic method ignored the complex interrelations in the ocean environment, according to John Ugoretz, a senior marine biologist with the California Department of Fish and Game.

For example, over-harvesting of large red urchins, sheephead and lobster at the Channel Islands removed predators of purple urchins. Areas of the ocean bottom now are covered with purple urchins, preventing kelp from growing. When kelp forests are ripped out during El Nino storms, they do not grow back. Fish species that depend on the kelp for food and protection disappear.

Ironically, at one time some of the water near the Channel Islands was a marine reserve protected by the National Park Service.

But the State of California, prodded by lobster fishermen, took the federal government to court, saying the water and creatures that swam in it within 3 miles of the islands are state property. The court agreed, and in 1978 the federal protection was virtually eliminated.

``In the 24 years since that protection was lifted, 80 percent of the kelp forest at Channel Islands National Park has disappeared,'' said Gary Davis, a scientist with the National Parks Service.

Now California has gone the other way.

Four years ago, the Channel Islands Marine Resource Restoration Committee, a group of recreational anglers and divers, asked the Fish and Game Commission to set aside 20 percent of the water within the Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary as a no-fishing zone. The anglers, some of whom were also scuba divers, had seen the size and number of fish at the islands plummet.

The group's pleas came before the state legislature enacted a series of laws that will fundamentally alter the way fishing will be regulated in the future.

The Marine Life Management Act requires the DFG develop comprehensive ecosystem-based fishery management plans. The companion Marine Life Protection Act creates a framework for marine reserves to be used as a fishery management tool.

The DFG decided to continue to pursue the Channel Islands reserves separately from the overall process required by the new laws because so much work already had been done, and to serve as a model for future reserves.

``It's a test case for the Marine Life Protection Act in the sense it's our first real coherent network of marine reserves in California,'' Ugoretz said.

The next step at the Channel Islands will be to expand the no-take reserves into the contiguous federal waters.

The DFG recommended expanding the no-take reserves by an additional 190 square nautical miles in waters controlled by the Channel Island National Marine Sanctuary, a unit of the federal government.

Matt Pickett, manager of the sanctuary, said he helped develop the DFG reserve recommendations and supports their expansion. In 2003, the sanctuary will start the long regulatory process to add the federal reserves. The state process will, in essence, be repeated, with public hearing and input, environmental documents and a review of alternatives.

``I think it was a courageous decision, and I believe it's a win-win scenario for all users of the ocean,'' said Pickett about California's action. ``I think in five years everyone will be extremely happy about this decision.''

Many sport anglers are not happy today.

``What we're seeing now is the theoretical fervor for marine-protected areas getting far ahead of the scientific evidence to support such measures,'' said Mike Nussman, president of the American Sportfishing Association, an advocacy group for the sport-fishing industry.

Though the process took four years and seven hearings by the Fish and Game Commission, some have accused the commission of rushing.

``The commission went blasting ahead with a ready, fire, aim approach. ... California anglers have just been knocked flat by the train leaving the station. Other states need to take notice because they're next,'' said Tom Raftican, president of the United Anglers of Southern California, an advocacy group for ocean fishermen.

Some in the sport-fishing industry have hinted California scientists had a vested interest in obtaining grant money if reserves were approved.

Mark Hixon, a marine scientist at Oregon State University, said at the commission hearing he was testifying specifically because he was not involved in the California process. According to Hixon, the vast majority of 80 marine reserves studied worldwide have produced positive results. On average there are twice as many fish in the reserves, and they are bigger.

``Old, fat females,'' are the key to fish reproduction success, Hixon said. He cited one example where a 2-foot female produced as many eggs as several hundred smaller females. Biologists say reserves will protect these large brood-stock fish from anglers.

The reserves will be closed to fishing for pelagic fish; those that live in the open ocean. Although they might not permanently inhabit the reserve areas, they do interact with the ecosystems by eating or being eaten by resident fish. Areas of the reserves also might provide breeding areas for some of the pelagic fish.

Scientists agree their knowledge of the ocean's creatures is inexact and say this is one of the reasons to create reserves. Reserves will provide a baseline to measure the rest of the ocean. If fish do not recover after fishing pressure is removed, the scientists will have a better chance of understanding what is affecting the fish - climate changes, pollution or unknown factors.

The marine biologists also point out the reserves will serve as an insurance policy against the consequences of imperfect scientific knowledge. The ``best available science'' is used to set fishing quotas, but ``best'' doesn't necessarily mean ``good'' or even ``adequate.'' Fish species can be over-fished before scientists figure out what's going on.

Is there any good news for the sport anglers who oppose the reserves?

Biologists say the Channel Island reserves eventually will provide excellent fishing opportunities nearby.

In Florida, where closed areas long have been in effect near Cape Canaveral, world-record-size fish now are caught at the boundaries of the closed zones.

Marine reserves also help reseed the oceans by providing a protected spawning and nursery area, which provides a spillover effect to unprotected water.

Florida's experience with marine protected areas at the Tortugas Reserve might provide a glimpse of California's future. When a marine sanctuary first was proposed there 11 years ago, many were opposed, and the sanctuary superintendent was burned in effigy. But now commercial and sport fishermen have come to support a reserve, which, at 191 square nautical miles, is larger than California's new reserves.

``When we first heard about marine reserves, there was a lot of fear,'' said commercial fisherman Tony Iarocci at the reserve's dedication ceremony in 2001. ``But once people got involved in the Tortugas project, the fear started to fade away. I'm now convinced that the Tortugas Reserve will help deal with over fishing and protect a critical breeding ground for the fish.''

NEW FISHING ZONES

Here are some of the most frequently asked questions regarding the no-fish zones:

--Where are the reserves?

The 10 reserves extend from the shoreline out various distances up to 3 nautical miles at San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, Anacapa and Santa Barbara Islands, and Richardson Rock. Only portions of the area surrounding the islands will be in the reserves.

--What are Marine Conservation areas?

There are two conservation areas at the Channel Islands. Painted Cave at Santa Cruz allows recreational catch of lobster and certain pelagic species. A conservation area on the northeast side of Anacapa Island will allow commercial and recreational lobster take and limited recreational fishing for some pelagic species.

--When do the reserves and conservation areas take effective?

January 1, 2003, subject to completion of the administrative law process.

--Can I fish catch-and-release in the reserves?

No. Fishing or take of any marine species is not allowed in the reserves.

--Can I transit reserves with fish on board or anchor in reserves?

Yes, but all fishing gear must be stowed.

--How do I find out the exact dimensions of the reserves and conservation areas?

The DFG will post the boundaries of the reserves with GPS coordinates on the official department Web site (www.dfg.ca.gov). Nautical-chart updates and overlays eventually will show the boundaries.

--Can I dive in the reserves?

Yes, but no spear fishing or take of shellfish or other species is allowed.

--What government agencies are involved in managing the Channel Islands?

The National Park Service manages parklands and nearshore waters at San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, Anacapa and Santa Barbara islands.

The Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary extends 6 nautical miles around San Miguel, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, Anacapa and Santa Barbara islands.

The California Fish and Game Commission sets fishing regulations within state-regulated waters up to 3 nautical miles off the five islands, which are enforced by the California Department of Fish and Game.

Other agencies also provide input, including the Pacific Fisheries Management Council, which makes recommendations for fishing regulations in federal waters.

CAPTION(S):

2 photos, box, map

Photo:

(1) Members of the California Department of Fish and Game will be enforcing new no-fishing marine reserves at the Channel Islands with constant patrolling of the area.

(2) The Swordfish, the California Department of Fish and Game's new 58-foot catamaran, will patrol no-fishing zones.

Bill Becher/Special to the Daily News

Box:

NEW FISHING ZONES (see text)

Map:

NEW FISHING ZONES

SOURCE: California Fish and Game Commission