<div>The California Fish and Game Commission has advanced a proposal to establish a new marine protected area off Carpinteria, moving forward a plan supported by the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians but opposed by some local fishermen and recreational ocean users.In a 3-2 vote on Oct. 15, commissioners agreed to advance the proposed Mishopshno State Marine Conservation Area for further consideration, despite a recommendation from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife to deny the petition.The decision does not establish a new marine protected area or immediately change fishing regulations. The proposal must undergo additional environmental review and rulemaking before any restrictions could take effect.The proposed conservation area would encompass approximately nine square miles of coastal waters off Carpinteria, including Carpinteria Reef. If ultimately approved in its proposed form, it would prohibit most recreational and commercial fishing within its boundaries, including fishing from boats, spearfishing and lobster harvesting. Recreational hook-and-line fishing from shore would remain permitted.Swimming, surfing, kayaking and other non-extractive recreational activities would also remain allowed.The proposal was submitted by the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians in partnership with the Natural Resources Defense Council and Environmental Defense Center. Supporters say the designation would protect ecologically important marine habitat while recognizing the area’s cultural significance to the Chumash people.Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians Chairman Kenneth Kahn urged commissioners to advance the proposal, emphasizing the tribe’s ancestral connection to the ocean and its responsibility to protect marine resources for future generations.“Our connection to the ocean is a living relationship stretching back thousands of years, carrying with it a responsibility to protect these waters and the life they sustain,” Kahn told commissioners.Kahn described Mishopshno as an important ancestral coastal village connected to Chumash maritime traditions, including the construction of tomols, traditional plank canoes, and the sacred story of the Rainbow Bridge connecting the Chumash people to the Channel Islands.He also acknowledged the differing assessments of the proposal by state agencies.The California Department of Fish and Wildlife recommended denying the petition following its evaluation, while the California Ocean Protection Council supported advancing it, citing potential ecological connectivity and cultural benefits.Kahn said the commission should consider both the scientific record and the area’s cultural importance.The tribe already participates in marine conservation efforts, including co-management of the Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary and the Tribal Marine Stewards Network. Kahn said the proposed designation would provide another opportunity to combine traditional ecological knowledge with modern science.Fishing community raises concernsAmong those opposing the proposal is Carpinteria resident Jaime Diamond, who owns Stardust Sportfishing with her husband, Capt. Jason Diamond. Their Santa Barbara-based business operates the Stardust and Coral Sea fishing boats, which provide recreational fishing trips along the South Coast.Diamond, who has been involved in opposition to the proposal, said the commission’s decision was particularly disappointing because the Department of Fish and Wildlife had recommended denial.“It was very clear that the approval of this in a 3-2 vote was not about the science in the petition,” Diamond said in an email to Coastal View News.She said the proposed restrictions could eliminate fishing opportunities around Carpinteria Reef for charter boats, recreational anglers, spearfishers and people who harvest seafood for their families.“If this petition makes it through rulemaking, Carpinteria Reef, Horseshoe Rock, Horseshoe Kelp, and everything from the mouth of the estuary to Loon Point will be closed to fishing except hook and line from shore,” Diamond said.“For a community so rooted in its connection to the land and food sources, this causes far more harm than good.”Carpinteria resident Ian Thomas, a longtime recreational fisherman, spearfisherman and diver, also opposed the proposal. Thomas said he has spent much of his life fishing and diving around Carpinteria Reef and testified at two commission meetings.“What upsets me is that honestly it felt as if the vote was set before the information was presented,” Thomas told CVN. He said he believed some commissioners had already made up their minds before hearing all the testimony.Thomas also expressed concern about the potential effects on Fish for Life, a program that provides fishing trips for children with special needs and disabilities. He said the reef’s proximity to shore makes it an important destination for participants who may be uncomfortable traveling farther offshore.He fears that restrictions on boat fishing could eliminate that option for some participants, although no changes to the program have been announced.Tribal harvesting provisions draw questionsThe proposed designation has also raised questions about tribal harvesting rights and whether exemptions would be available to members of other tribes.Natalie Landreth, an attorney representing the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians and a citizen of the Chickasaw Nation, addressed those concerns during the commission hearing.Landreth said the tribe’s request for a harvesting exemption relies on existing California regulations that provide a process for members of federally recognized tribes to harvest marine resources within certain protected areas.She disputed assertions that the proposal would create an exclusive new right for the Santa Ynez tribe, explaining that other federally recognized tribes may also petition for harvesting exemptions.Landreth said the tribe is pursuing a co-management agreement that would allow representatives of non-federally recognized tribes to participate in marine resource management, although that arrangement would not itself establish harvesting exemptions for those groups.Thomas said he remains concerned about equal access, particularly for Carpinteria residents and members of tribes that lack federal recognition.More review requiredThe commission’s October vote was a preliminary procedural decision, not final adoption of the Mishopshno Marine Protected Area.The proposal will undergo additional review, including consideration of environmental and socioeconomic effects under the California Environmental Quality Act, followed by a formal rulemaking process with opportunities for public comment.Diamond said she expects the process could take 18 months to two years, although no official implementation date has been announced.“What does this mean today? Nothing,” Diamond said. “Nothing has changed from last week to this week.”For now, fishing regulations around Carpinteria Reef remain unchanged as the state begins the next phase of consideration.</div>

Block Source: Coastal View

Misinformation

Clickbait

Old or repetitive news

Explicit content

Location not relevant

The California Fish and Game Commission has advanced a proposal to establish a new marine protected area off Carpinteria, moving forward a plan supported by the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians but opposed by some local fishermen and recreational ocean users. In a 3-2 vote on Oct. 15, commissioners...

Carpinteria Reef marine protection proposal advances

NewsBreak

The California Fish and Game Commission has advanced a proposal to establish a new marine protected area off Carpinteria, moving forward a plan supported b

Carpinteria Reef marine protection proposal advances

Comments / 1