Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series MSD-01-2

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

National Ocean Service

Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management

Marine Sanctuaries Division

May 2001

A Review of Marine Zones in the

 Monterey Bay

National Marine Sanctuary
About the Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrationís Marine Sanctuary Division (MSD)

administers the National Marine Sanctuary Program. Its mission is to identify, designate,

protect and manage the ecological, recreational, research, educational, historical, and aesthetic

resources and qualities of nationally significant coastal and marine areas. The existing marine

sanctuaries differ widely in their natural and historical resources and include nearshore and

open ocean areas ranging in size from less than one to over 5,000 square miles. Protected

habitats include rocky coasts, kelp forests, coral reefs, sea grass beds, estuarine habitats, hard

and soft bottom habitats, segments of whale migration routes, and shipwrecks.

Because of considerable differences in settings, resources, and threats, each marine sanctuary

has a tailored management plan. Conservation, education, research, monitoring and

enforcement programs vary accordingly. The integration of these programs is fundamental to

marine protected area management. The Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series reflects and

supports this integration by providing a forum for publication and discussion of the complex

issues currently facing the National Marine Sanctuary Program. Topics of published reports

vary substantially and may include descriptions of educational programs, discussions on

resource management issues, and results of scientific research and monitoring projects. The

series will facilitate integration of natural sciences, socioeconomic and cultural sciences,

education, and policy development to accomplish the diverse needs of NOAAís resource

protection mandate.
A Review of Marine Zones in the

Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

Jennifer A. Brown1

1

Department of Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz

U.S. Department of Commerce

Donald Evans, Secretary

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Scott B. Gudes, Acting Under Secretary

Silver Spring, Maryland National Ocean Service

May 2001 Margaret Davidson, Assistant Administrator
DISCLAIMER

Report content does not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the National Marine

Sanctuary Program or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, nor does

the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or

recommendation for use.

REPORT AVAILABILITY

Electronic copies of this report may be downloaded from the National Marine Sanctuaries

Program web site at www.sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov. Hard copies may be available from

the following address:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Marine Sanctuaries Division

SSMC 4, N/ORM62

1305 East-West Highway

Silver Spring, MD 20910

SUGGESTED CITATION

Brown, Jennifer. 2001. A Review of Marine Zones in the Monterey Bay National

Marine Sanctuary. Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series MSD-01-2. U.S. Department

of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Marine Sanctuaries

Division, Silver Spring, MD. 137pp.
i

A REVIEW OF MARINE ZONES IN THE MONTEREY

BAY NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. i

LIST OF FIGURESÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ iii

LIST OF TABLES.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 1

ABSTRACT.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 9

INTRODUCTIONÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ...ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 11

EXISTING ZONES

National Marine SanctuaryÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 13

Jade CollectionÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 19

Dredge Material DisposalÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ.. 22

Restricted Overflight ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 26

Motorized Personal WatercraftÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 29

Shark Attraction ProhibitedÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ.. 32

Military..ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 35

Vessel Traffic.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 38

No Harvest

Hopkins Marine Life Refuge ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 42

Pt. Lobos Ecological ReserveÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 46

Pt. Lobos State Reserve.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 49

Big Creek Marine Resources Protection Act Ecological ReserveÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ53

Limited Harvest

James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ.. 58

AÒo Nuevo State Reserve.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 61

Elkhorn Slough Ecological Reserve.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ.. 64

Carmel Bay Ecological ReserveÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ.. 64

Pacific Grove Marine Refuge.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 69

Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge..ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 71
ii

Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park/Underwater Park.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ.. 73

Recreational

Golden Gate National Recreation AreaÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ76

State BeachesÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ.. 81

(including sites: Grey Whale Cove SB, Montara SB, Half Moon Bay

SB, San Gregorio SB, Pomponio SB, Pescadero SB, Bean Hollow SB,

Natural Bridges SB, Twin Lakes SB, Seacliff SB, New Brighton SB,

Manresa SB, Sunset SB, Zmudowski SB, Moss Landing SB, Salinas

River SB, Marina SB, Monterey SB, Asilomar SB, Carmel River SB,

William Randolph Hearst Memorial SB, and San Simeon SB)

Wildlife Enhancement and Protection

Moss Landing Wildlife Area ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ.. 85

Elkhorn Slough National Ecological Research Reserve..ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 89

California Sea Otter Game RefugeÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ.. 92

Water Quality Protection

Areas of Special Biological Significance..ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ.. 94

(including sites: James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve ASBS, AÒo

Nuevo Point and Island ASBS, Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish

Refuge and Hopkins Marine Life Refuge ASBS, Carmel Bay ASBS,

Point Lobos Ecological Reserve ASBS, Julia Pfeiffer Burns

Underwater Park ASBS, and Ocean Area Surrounding the Mouth of

Salmon Creek ASBS)

POTENTIAL FUTURE ZONES

Limited Harvest

Ed Ricketts ParkÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 97

APPENDICES

Appendix I: Summary of the Marine Reserve Literature.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 101

Appendix II: Marine Reserve References.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 108

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ129
iii

List of Figures

FIGURE 1 Summary of Zoning in the Monterey Bay National Marine SanctuaryÖÖÖÖ. 3

FIGURE 2 Location of Jade Collection ZoneÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ......... 21

FIGURE 3 Location of Dredge Material Disposal ZonesÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 25

FIGURE 4 Location of Restricted Overflight Zones.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 28

FIGURE 5 Location of Motorized Personal Watercraft ZonesÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 31

FIGURE 6 Location of Shark Attraction Prohibited ZoneÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 34

FIGURE 7 Location of Military Zones.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ. 37

FIGURE 8 Location of Vessel Traffic Zones.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 41

FIGURE 9 Location of No Harvest Zones.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 45

FIGURE 10 Location of Limited Harvest Zones.ÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 60

FIGURE 11 Location of Recreational ZonesÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 80

FIGURE 12 Location of Wildlife Enhancement and Protection ZonesÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ.88

FIGURE 13 Location of Water Quality Protection ZonesÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 96

FIGURE 14 Location of Potential Future ZoneÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 99
iv

List of Tables

TABLE 1 Total Area and Percent of MBNMS Encompassed By Each Marine

Zone Type and By Each SiteÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ.ÖÖ 4

TABLE 2 Level of Government Agencies Responsible for Establishment

and Management of Sites Within Each Zone TypeÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖÖ 6
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

1

Executive Summary

The Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) is the largest marine protected area in

the United States, spanning nearly 400 miles of the California coastline and encompassing over

5,300 square miles (Fig. 1). The MBNMS is famous for its scenic coastline, beautiful beaches,

and diverse array of intertidal and subtidal plant and animal life. These characteristics make the

Sanctuary a popular location for both local inhabitants and tourists to engage in a variety of

commercial and recreational activities, such as boating, fishing, tidepooling, kayaking,

snorkeling and SCUBA diving. The MBNMS is also a nationally recognized center for marine

biological and oceanographic research, with over twenty research institutions located within a

few miles of the coastline. Such a high intensity of human activity within the Sanctuary can have

negative impacts on its sensitive physical and biological resources. Over the past century local,

State, and Federal agencies have attempted to protect these resources by designating areas (e.g.,

Marine Life Refuges, Dredge Material Disposal sites) in which human activities are controlled.

The purpose of this report is to identify and review these legislated areas and preliminarily

evaluate their effectiveness in protecting resources within the MBNMS.

The MBNMS contains 72 sites in which specific human activities, both commercial and

recreational, are either restricted or promoted (Fig. 1). For the purpose of this report, these sites

are grouped into 13 categories (Table 1) - hereafter referred to as marine zones - which can be

described as follows:

1) National Marine Sanctuary Zone. National Marine Sanctuaries are areas of special national

significance due to their resource and human-use values. Their designation is intended to

facilitate the coordinated and comprehensive conservation and management of the area. Zone

regulations serve to protect the conservation, recreational, ecological, historical, research,

educational, and esthetic resources in the area. Regulations restrict exploring for oil, gas, and

minerals, modifying the seafloor, attracting white sharks, altering the natural water quality,

and operating certain motorized vessels. The Sanctuary does not regulate commercial or

recreational fishing.

2) Jade Collection Zones. Jade collection zones are areas in which traditional small-scale

collection of loose jade is allowed in the MBNMS. Previous to the formation of jade

collection zones, all such collection was prohibited within the Sanctuary. Zone regulations

allow small-scale collection to support the local artisan industry while protecting the mineral

resources of the Sanctuary from degradation.

3) Dredge Material Disposal Zones. Dredge material disposal zones are areas specifically

designated as disposal sites for dredged material. Dredged material is sediment that has been

removed from the sea floor, by means of suction or scooping. Dredging is often conducted to

widen harbors and channels - therefore, the sediments can be contaminated with pollutants,

such as industrial chemicals, oil, and gasoline. Dredge material disposal zones allow the

disposal of certain types of dredge material while minimizing the possible negative impacts to

the marine environment.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

2

4) Restricted Overflight Zones. Restricted overflight zones are intertidal and subtidal areas over

which motorized aircraft are restricted from flying below 1000 feet (305 meters). These zones

often encompass areas with high densities of marine mammals or seabirds, such as pupping

grounds and nesting sites. Restricted overflight zones do allow overflight below 1000 feet in

cases of emergency, for law enforcement, and by the Department of Defense.

5) Motorized Personal Watercraft Zones. Motorized personal watercraft zones are areas

specifically designated for the recreational use of motorized personal watercraft (MPWC).

MPWC (e.g., jet skis) are motorized vessels that are less than 15 ft long, capable of exceeding

15 knots, and can carry only two or fewer people. The purpose of MPWC zones is to allow

this form of recreation while protecting nearshore marine life from disturbance or injury and

minimizing conflicts with other recreational users, such as SCUBA divers and kayakers.

6) Shark Attraction Prohibited Zones. Shark attraction prohibited zones are areas in which the

attraction of white sharks is prohibited. Attraction is defined as the conduct of any activity

that lures or may lure white sharks by using food, bait, chum, dyes, acoustics, or any other

means, except the mere presence of human beings (e.g., swimmers, divers, surfers, kayakers,

boaters). The purpose of zone regulations is to prevent the possible negative impacts of shark

baiting or attraction events, such as conflicts among various user groups and behavioral

changes in the attracted species (e.g., feeding and migration).

7) Military Zones. Military zones are areas of the Sanctuary in which military training operations

are routinely conducted by the Department of Defense. Information about military zones,

including the location of the zone and advisories to civilian users, are included on nautical and

aeronautical charts. The purpose of military zones is to allow military training while avoiding

interference from and harm to civilian vessels and aircraft.

8) Vessel Traffic Zones. Vessel traffic zones serve to manage large vessel traffic in such a way

as to maximize protection of the physical and biological resources of the surrounding waters

while allowing safe and efficient vessel operation. Vessel traffic zones apply primarily to the

following vessel types: tankers, hazmat ships, barges, and large commercial vessels (LCVs).

9) No Harvest Zones. No harvest zones are intertidal and subtidal areas in which it is unlawful to

take or possess any plants or animals. These areas are intended to provide habitat for the

permanent residence of local marine life and possibly to replenish surrounding areas.

Scientific research is allowed, and often encouraged, in no harvest zones because these areas

represent a more "natural" state that can be compared to adjacent exploited habitats. With the

appropriate permits, collection of plants or animals is allowed for the purpose of scientific

research. Often access to the site or activities within the site are limited to decrease the

potential negative impacts of ecotourism.
$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T $T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

^(^(

^(

^(

^(

^(

^(

^( Dredge Material Disposal Zones

$T Recreational Zones

Potential Future Zones

Limited Harvest Zones

Water Quality Protection Zones

No Harvest Zones

Jade Collection Zone

Motorized Personal Watercraft Zones

Wildlife Enhancement & Protection Zones

Restricted Overflight Zones

Military Zones

Shark Attraction Prohibited Zone

Vessel Traffic Zones 20 0 20 40 60 Kilometers

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

38°30' 38°30'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

3

FIGURE 1. Summary of zoning in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

4

Table 1. Total area and percent of MBNMS encompassed by each marine zones type (bold) and

by each site (italics). Sites are listed in order from north to south. N/A = not applicable;

these are designated points, not areas.

Name of Sites Area %

(km2 ) MBNMS

EXISTING ZONES

National Marine 13705.99

Sanctuary (MBNMS)

Jade Collection Zone 4.15 0.030

Dredge Material N/A N/A

Disposal SF-12 N/A N/A

SF-14 0.97 0.007

Beach Replenishment N/A N/A

Subtidal Disposal N/A N/A

Beach Decant N/A N/A

Restricted Overflight 1251.91 8.971

Site 1 - Coastline north of Point Santa Cruz 332.86 2.429

Site 2 - Offshore of Moss Landing 86.14 0.628

Site 3 - Elkhorn Slough 2.91 0.021

Site 4 - Coastline south of Carmel River 830.00 5.893

Motorized Personal 48.34 0.353

Watercraft Site 1 - Offshore of Pillar Point Harbor 2.15 0.016

Site 2 - Offshore of Santa Cruz Harbor 16.55 0.121

Site 3 - Offshore of Moss Landing Harbor 13.18 0.096

Site 4 - Offshore of Monterey Harbor 16.46 0.120

Shark Attraction 2036.87 14.861

Prohibited

Military 5220.79 38.091

"U1" Submerged Submarine Operating Area 210.29 1.534

"U2" Submerged Submarine Operating Area 181.85 1.327

"U5" Submerged Submarine Operating Area 704.67 5.141

Warning Area 285 3559.33 25.969

Naval Operating Area 138.64 1.012

Hunter Military Operations Area 426.00 3.108

Vessel Traffic∗ 5599.14 40.852

 

∗

 Area encompassed by lanes and approaches was estimated by calculating the area of the region between the eastern

most vessel track (LCV northbound track) and the Sanctuary boundary.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

5

Table 1 (con't). Total area and percent of MBNMS encompassed by each marine zones type

(bold) and by each site (italics). Sites are listed in order from north to south. N/A = not

applicable; these are designated points, not areas.

Name of Sites Area %

(km2 ) MBNMS

EXISTING ZONES

No Harvest+ 6.95 0.050

Hopkins Marine Life Refuge 0.33 0.002

Point Lobos Ecological Reserve 2.79 0.020

Point Lobos State Reserve 2.79 0.020

Big Creek MRPA Ecological Reserve 3.83 0.028

Limited Harvest+ 27.95 0.204

James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve 1.98 0.014

AÒo Nuevo State Reserve 2.04 0.015

Elkhorn Slough Ecological Reserve 5.90 0.043

Pacific Grove Marine Refuge 1.96 0.014

Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge 4.09 0.030

Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve 6.41 0.047

Julia Pfeiffer Burns Underwater Park 7.05 0.051

Recreational N/A N/A

Golden Gate National Recreation Area 5.35 0.039

State Beaches N/A N/A

Wildlife Enhancement 831.64 5.911

and Protection Moss Landing Wildlife Area 2.60 0.019

Elkhorn Slough NERR 5.90 0.043

California Sea Otter Game Refuge 823.14 5.849

Water Quality 82.98 0.605

Protection James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve ASBS 4.52 0.033

AÒo Nuevo Point and Island ASBS 54.84 0.400

PGMG Fish Refuge and Hopkins MLR ASBS 1.90 0.014

Carmel Bay ASBS 6.41 0.047

Point Lobos Ecological Reserve ASBS 2.79 0.020

Julia Pfeiffer Burns Underwater Park ASBS 7.05 0.051

Ocean Area Surrounding the Mouth of 5.47 0.040

 Salmon Creek ASBS

POTENTIAL FUTURE

ZONES

Limited Harvest Ed Ricketts Park 0.49 0.004

 

+

 Cumulative area of the zone type (bold) was calculated by summing the area of all sites (italicized) and subtracting

areas of overlap.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

6

10) Limited Harvest Zones. Limited harvest zones are intertidal and subtidal areas in which the

take of certain species of plants and animals is limited. For example, zone regulations may

protect all species of invertebrates and plants, but allow certain species of finfish to be taken

within the designated area. Limited harvest zones also include sites in which the harvesting of

plants or animals is limited to certain methods of take or during specific periods of time. For

example, zone regulations may allow the taking of finfish by hook and line only. Limited

harvest zones are intended to protect the natural resources of an area while allowing limited

use.

11) Recreational Zones. Recreational zones are intertidal and subtidal habitats specifically

designated to provide areas of open space for recreational uses, such as swimming, boating,

fishing, and picnicking. These sites have regulations that limit the degradation of natural

resources in order to maintain those resources for future enjoyment. The taking of plants and

animals is allowed within recreational zones with some limitations on species, numbers,

timing, and(or) method of take.

Table 2. Government agencies responsible for establishment, management, and number of sites

in each marine zone type.

Federal State Local Federal and Federal Federal, State State

International and State and Local And Local

EXISTING ZONES

National Marine Sanctuary 1

Jade Collection 1

Dredge Material Disposal 9

Restricted Overflight 4

Motorized Personal 4

Watercraft

Shark Attraction Prohibited 1

Military 6

Vessel Traffic 1

No Harvest 2 2

Limited Harvest 6 1

Recreational 22 1

Wildlife Enhancement 2 1

and Protection

Water Quality Protection 7

POTENTIAL FUTURE ZONES

Limited Harvest 1
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

7

12) Wildlife Enhancement and Protection Zones. Wildlife enhancement and protection zones are

intertidal and subtidal areas that are established to minimize human disturbance to especially

sensitive wildlife populations and their habitats. Regulations governing access to the areas

are designed to protect endangered or threatened species or their habitats. The protected sites

often include bird nesting areas, marine mammal pupping grounds, and fish spawning and

nursery habitats. Restrictions on recreational access may include no-access buffer zones or

time periods. Research is often encouraged in wildlife enhancement and protection zones to

determine the population dynamics and habitat requirements of the target species.

13) Water Quality Protection Zones. Water quality protection zones are established to protect the

specified marine habitats from undesirable changes in water quality. The protected areas

serve as habitat for certain species or biological communities that are deemed especially

sensitive to changes in water quality.

A variety of federal, state, and local government agencies are responsible for establishing and

managing the 72 sites within the MBNMS (Table 2). Federal agencies, including the National

Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Coast Guard, and U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, are responsible for managing the zones that were created by

the formation of the MBNMS. These agencies appear to be effectively managing the national

marine sanctuary, dredge material disposal, jade collection, shark attraction prohibited, and

vessel traffic zones. Effective management of the motorized personal watercraft and restricted

overflight zones has been hampered by delays in regulation implementation due to lawsuits or

interagency disagreements.

Many of the zones managed by state and local agencies fall under the title "marine reserve".

Marine reserves have recently received attention due to their potential for: improving the status

of exploited species; protecting marine habitats from degradation; protecting biodiversity;

facilitating scientific research and fisheries management; and increasing ecotourism. However,

reserves must be well designed and managed to achieve this potential. A well designed and

managed reserve will have clearly defined goals, scientifically-based design, proper enforcement

of regulations, rigorous evaluation, and the potential for adaptive management. Based on these

criteria, few of the marine reserves in California are well designed or managed. Many sites

suffer from poorly defined goals, confusing regulations, lack of enforcement, and (or) no

scientific evaluation. However, a few sites in the MBNMS (e.g., Pt. Lobos State/Ecological

Reserve, Hopkins Marine Life Refuge, Big Creek MRPA Ecological Reserve) appear to be fairly

effective. Research to date suggests that these sites are achieving their purpose - to protect

marine plant and animal populations - at least for certain species. The success of these sites

appears to stem from community involvement and on-site enforcement and education.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

8
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

9

Abstract

This report reviews marine zoning in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS).

The 72 zoned areas in the MBNMS are of 13 different zone types. Each marine zone type has

associated regulations that restrict or promote specific activities. For example, recreational

activities such as boating, fishing, tidepooling, snorkeling, and SCUBA diving are limited in

some zones. Scientific research is allowed at all sites, with appropriate permits, and is

specifically promoted in a few sites. In addition, motorized personal watercraft use, dredge

material disposal, large vessel traffic, jade collection, and aircraft overflight are allowed only in

specific zones. The effectiveness of the marine zoning in the MBNMS is difficult to determine

for two reasons. Firstly, many of the zones lack a clearly stated purpose or have confusing

regulations. Secondly, the majority of the zones have not been evaluated formally by the

managing agencies. Of the zones that have been evaluated, such as Dredge Material Disposal

zones, Big Creek MRPA Ecological Reserve, and Pt. Lobos State/Ecological Reserve, the

majority appear to be achieving their mandated purpose to some extent.

Many of the zones in the MBNMS fall under the title ìmarine reserve.î Marine reserves have

recently received significant attention internationally, nationally, and in California due to their

potential for: improving the status of exploited species; protecting marine habitats and

ecosystems from degradation; facilitating scientific research and fisheries management; and

increasing ecotourism. However, reserves must be well designed and managed to reach this

potential. A well designed and managed reserve will have clearly defined goals, scientificallybased design, proper enforcement of regulations, rigorous evaluation of the reserveís

effectiveness, and adaptive management. Based on these criteria, the majority of the marine

reserves in California are not well designed or managed. However, the State of California has

recognized this problem and is in the process of re-evaluating the California system of marine

managed areas.

Keywords: marine zones, marine reserves, marine protected areas, regulations, Monterey Bay

National Marine Sanctuary, Central California.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

10
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

11

Introduction

The Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) is the largest marine protected area in

the United States ñ approximately 5,300 square miles. It contains 13 different marine zone types

comprised of 72 zoned areas. Of these 72 zoned areas, 60 encompass areas of coastline with

adjacent marine habitats and are managed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, Department of Defense, California Department of Fish and Game, California

Department of Parks and Recreation, State and Regional Water Control Boards, National Park

Service, and local government agencies. The 12 remaining zoned areas encompass offshore

marine habitat and are managed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Army

Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Defense, and U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency.

The purpose of this report is to identify and describe the 13 marine zone types that exist within

the boundaries of the Sanctuary. A marine zone is defined as an area in which human activities,

both commercial and recreational, are either restricted or promoted. The names given to zones in

this report attempt to describe the human activities that are restricted or promoted. This report is

organized into sections by zone type. One or more sites may occur within each zone type. For

each site the following information is given:

a) Type of zone;

b) Legislated title of the site(s);

c) Location and name of each site;

d) Date of establishment for each site;

e) The regulatory agency or legislative body and, when available, the name of the legislation

or regulations that established the site(s);

f) Agency (or agencies) responsible for management of the site(s);

g) The legally mandated purpose of the site(s);

h) Regulations, both general and site specific;

i) A brief evaluation of the effectiveness of the site including regulation enforcement and

research conducted within the site;

j) A list of the sites with boundaries that overlap those of the site(s); and

k) References.

This report focuses on regulations that potentially affect activities within the MBNMS.

Regulations that apply to the entire California coast are not included in the report. These statewide regulations are available from the California Department of Fish and Game or other

managing agencies. In addition, this report does not include regulations that apply to: 1)

terrestrial areas outside the Sanctuary boundaries; or 2) activities that do not impact the

Sanctuary. All regulations included in this report are listed as written in the regulatory code to

avoid improper interpretation of the regulations by the author of this report.

Many of the sites listed in this report have overlapping boundaries. For example the Point Lobos

area has three overlapping marine sites: Point Lobos Ecological Reserve ASBS, Point Lobos

Ecological Reserve, Point Lobos State Reserve. In addition, the Point Lobos area falls within the

boundaries of the MBNMS, California Sea Otter Game Refuge, Shark Attraction Prohibited

zone, and one of the four Restricted Overflight zones. The reader must examine the regulations

of all overlapping sites to accurately understand the restrictions that apply to any specific site.

Two Appendices follow the main body of this report. Appendix I is a summary of the existing

literature on marine reserves, focusing on research conducted either in the Monterey Bay

National Marine Sanctuary or in temperate regions. Appendix II is a listing of the marine reserve
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

12

literature from both tropical and temperate regions and including the literature cited in Appendix

I.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

13

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: National Marine Sanctuary

Location of Zone

See Figure 1 for exact location.

Marin, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Monterey, and San Luis Obispo Counties

1) Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

Year Established

1992

Established By

National Marine Sanctuaries Act; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

U.S. Department of Commerce

Agency Responsible

National Marine Sanctuaries Program, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce

Purpose

In accordance with the standards set forth in title III of the Marine Protection, Research, and

Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended, also known as the National Marine Sanctuaries Act, the

mission of the National Marine Sanctuary Program is to identify, designate, and manage areas of

the marine environment of special national, and in some cases international, significance due to

their conservation, recreational, ecological, historical, research, educational, or aesthetic qualities

(15 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 922.2, Subpart A).

The goals of the Program are to carry out the mission to: (15 CFR, Part 922.2, Subpart A)

1) Identify and designate as National Marine Sanctuaries areas of the marine environment which

are of special national significance;

2) Provide authority for comprehensive and coordinated conservation and management of these

marine areas, and activities affecting them, in a manner which complements existing

regulatory authorities;

3) Support, promote, and coordinate scientific research on, and monitoring of, the resources of

these marine areas, especially long-term monitoring and research of these areas;

4) Enhance public awareness, understanding, appreciation, and wise use of the marine

environment;

5) Facilitate to the extent compatible with the primary objective of resource protection, all

public and private uses of the resources of these marine areas not prohibited pursuant to other

authorities;

6) Develop and implement coordinated plans for the protection and management of these areas

with appropriate Federal agencies, State and local governments, Native American tribes and

organizations, international organizations, and other public and private interests concerned

with the continuing health and resilience of these marine areas;

7) Create models of, and incentives for, ways to conserve and manage these areas;

8) Cooperate with global programs encouraging conservation of marine resources; and

9) Maintain, restore, and enhance living resources by providing places for species that depend

upon these marine areas to survive and propagate.

Regulations

General Regulations
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

14

15 CFR, Part 922, Subparts A-E

Site Specific Regulations (15 CFR, Part 922.132, Subpart M)

a) Except as specified in paragraphs (b) through (f) of this section, the following activities are

prohibited and thus unlawful for any person to conduct or cause to be conducted:

1) Exploring for, developing, or producing oil, gas, or minerals within the Sanctuary except:

jade may be collected (meaning removed) from the area bounded by the 35 ̊55'20" N

latitude parallel, the 35 ̊53'20" N latitude parallel, and from the mean high tide line

seaward to the 90-foot isobath (the "authorized area") provided that:

i) Only jade already loose from the seabed may be collected;

ii) No tool may be used to collect jade except:

A) A hand tool (see Sec. 922.131) to maneuver or lift the jade or scratch the surface

of a stone as necessary to determine if it is jade;

B) A lift bag or multiple lift bags with a combined lift capacity of no more than two

hundred pounds; or

C) A vessel (except for motorized personal watercraft) (see paragraph (a)(7) of Sec.

922.132) to provide access to the authorized area;

iii) Each person may collect only what that person individually carries.

[See Figure 3 for exact location of jade collection zones.]

2)(i) Discharging or depositing, from within the boundary of the Sanctuary, any material or

other matter except:

A) Fish, fish parts, chumming materials or bait used in or resulting from traditional

fishing operations in the Sanctuary;

B) Biodegradable effluent incidental to vessel use and generated by marine sanitation

devices approved in accordance with Section 312 of the Federal Water Pollution

Control Act, as amended, (FWPCA), 33 U.S.C. 1322 et seq.;

C) Water generated by routine vessel operations (e.g., cooling water, deck wash

down and graywater as defined by Section 312 of the FWPCA), excluding oily

wastes from bilge pumping;

D) Engine exhaust; or

E) Dredged material deposited at disposal sites authorized by the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) (in consultation with the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers (COE)) prior to the effective date of Sanctuary designation (January 1,

1993), provided that the activity is pursuant to, and complies with the terms and

conditions of, a valid Federal permit or approval existing on January 1, 1993.

[See Figure 4 for exact location of dredged material disposal zones.]

(ii) Discharging or depositing, from beyond the boundary of the Sanctuary, any material or

other matter that subsequently enters the Sanctuary and injures a Sanctuary resource or

quality, except those listed in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) (A) through (D) of this section and

dredged material deposited at the authorized disposal sites, provided that the dredged

material disposal is pursuant to, and complies with the terms and conditions of, a valid

Federal permit or approval.

3) Moving, removing, or injuring, or attempting to move, remove, or injure, a Sanctuary

historical resource. This prohibition does not apply to moving, removing, or injury

resulting incidentally from kelp harvesting, aquaculture, or traditional fishing operations.

4) Drilling into, dredging, or otherwise altering the seabed of the Sanctuary; or constructing,

placing, or abandoning any structure, material, or other matter on the seabed of the

Sanctuary, except as an incidental result of:

i) Anchoring vessels;

ii) Aquaculture, kelp harvesting, or traditional fishing operations;

iii) Installation of navigational aids;

iv) Harbor maintenance in the areas necessarily associated with Federal Projects in

existence on January 1, 1993, including dredging of entrance channels and repair,

replacement, or rehabilitation of breakwaters and jetties; or
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

15

v) Construction, repair, replacement, or rehabilitation of docks or piers.

5) Taking any marine mammal, sea turtle, or seabird in or above the Sanctuary, except as

permitted by regulations, as amended, promulgated under the Marine Mammal Protection

Act (MMPA), as amended, 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq., the Endangered Species Act (ESA), as

amended, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq., and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA), as

amended, 16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.

6) Flying motorized aircraft, except as necessary for valid law enforcement purposes, at less

than 1,000 feet above any of the four zones within the Sanctuary.

[See Figure 5 for the exact location of these four zones.]

7) Operating motorized personal watercraft within the Sanctuary except within the four

designated zones and access routes within the Sanctuary.

[See Figure 6 for the exact location of these four zones.]

8) Possessing within the Sanctuary (regardless of where taken, moved, or removed from),

except as necessary for valid law enforcement purposes, any historical resource, or any

marine mammal, sea turtle, or seabird taken in violation of regulations, as amended,

promulgated under the MMPA, ESA, MBTA.

9) Interfering with, obstructing, delaying, or preventing an investigation, search, seizure, or

disposition of seized property in connection with enforcement of the National Marine

Sanctuaries Act or any regulation or permit issued under the Act.

10) Attracting any white shark in that part of the Sanctuary out to the seaward limit of State

waters. For the purposes of this prohibition, the seaward limit of State waters is a line

three nautical miles distant from the coastline of the State, where the coastline is the line

of ordinary low water along the portion of the coast in direct contact with the open sea.

The coastline for Monterey Bay, which is inland waters, is the straight line marking the

seaward limit of the Bay, determined by connecting the following two points: 36°57'6"N,

122°01'45"W and 36°38'16"N, 121°56'3"W.

[See Figure 7 for the exact location of this zone.]

b) The prohibitions in paragraphs (a)(2) through (10) of this section do not apply to activities

necessary to respond to emergencies threatening life, property or the environment.

c)(1) All Department of Defense activities shall be carried out in a manner that avoids to the

maximum extent practicable any adverse impacts on Sanctuary resources and qualities.

The prohibitions in paragraphs (a)(2) through (9) of this section do not apply to existing

military activities carried out by the Department of Defense, as specifically identified in

the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Management Plan for the Proposed

Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (NOAA, 1992). New activities may be

exempted from the prohibitions in paragraphs (a)(2) through (9) of this section by the

Director after consultation between the Director and the Department of Defense.

[See Figure 8 for the exact location of military zones.]

 (2) In the event of threatened or actual destruction of, loss of, or injury to a Sanctuary

resource or quality resulting from an untoward incident, including but not limited to spills

and groundings, caused by the Department of Defense, the cognizant component shall

promptly coordinate with the Director for the purpose of taking appropriate actions to

respond to and mitigate the harm and, if possible, restore or replace the Sanctuary

resource or quality.

Evaluation of Effectiveness

For evaluation of the Sanctuary regulations pertaining to jade collection, dredge material

disposal, restricted overflight, motorized personal watercraft, shark attraction prohibited, and

military zones refer to pages 16, 19, 23, 26, 29, and 32, respectively.

Enforcement of Regulations

Enforcement of Sanctuary regulations is accomplished by cooperative agreements and

coordination efforts among several federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies such as

the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG), National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

16

Service, U.S. Customs Service, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Bureau of

Investigations, California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), California Department of

Parks and Recreation, California Highway Patrol, and local harbormasters and police. The

USCG and CDFG conduct regular patrols within the Sanctuary from the land, sea, and air.

State Parks Rangers conduct beach patrols. The Sanctuary conducts sea and air surveillance

patrols to monitor permitted activities and to investigate incidents within the Sanctuary. In

many cases, violation of Sanctuary regulations includes violation of other federal and state

laws and carries the potential for additional penalties.

The following are informal estimates of the level of enforcement for each Sanctuary

regulation (based on comments from Scott Kathey MBNMS):

Regulation (a)(1): This regulation is very effective - see Jade Collection Zone for details.

Regulation (a)(2)(i): This regulation is approximately 50% effective. No primary sewage is

discharged into the Sanctuary and dredge material is only disposed of in EPA approved

sites. There is still some discarding of plastics and discharging from bilge pumps and

septic tanks into Sanctuary waters. This regulation requires voluntary compliance by

boaters because it is impossible to police all boating activity in the Sanctuary.

Regulation (a)(2)(ii): The MBNMS personnel have successfully used this regulation as a tool

to decrease the discharge of materials that will enter Sanctuary waters. For example, the

MBNMS has decreased the dumping of harmful materials into the Sanctuary watershed

and sediment into coastal waters during roadwork.

Regulation (a)(3): This regulation has not been effectively enforced because the term

ìhistorical resourceî is not clearly defined. The current working definition is "anything

that is either greater than 50 years old or of national significance."

Regulation (a)(4): This regulation has been successfully enforced. Part of the success is due

to the California Coastal Commissionís requirement that any developer proposing to drill

or alter the seabed must get MBNMS permission. In addition, this regulation gives the

MBNMS the power to force the owners of grounded vessels to remove them.

Regulation (a)(5): This regulation is not enforced directly by the MBNMS. The MMPA,

ESA and MBTA are enforced by the National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, U.S. Coast Guard, and California Department of Fish and Game. There

is a good level of compliance with the ESA regulations in the MBNMS. However, there

is a lower level of compliance with the MMPA and MBTA regulations in the Sanctuary.

Problem areas include a regional fishery that is catching migratory birds and marine

mammals in its nets and incidents of marine mammal, specifically pinniped, shootings

(Roy Torres, NMFS, pers. comm.). This MBNMS regulation adds additional fines for

violations of the MMPA, ESA, and MBTA in the Sanctuary and may aid in the

prosecution of these cases.

Regulation (a)(6): Currently, enforcement of this Sanctuary regulation is limited - see

Restricted Overflight Zone for details.

Regulation (a)(7): These regulations are effectively enforced - see Motorized Personnel

Watercraft Zone for details.

Regulation (a)(8): This regulation adds additional penalties for violating the MMPA, the

ESA, and the MBTA in the Sanctuary (see (a)(5) above).

Regulation (a)(9): This regulation levies penalties for obstructing an investigation.

Regulation (a)(10): This regulation is 100% effective - see Shark Attraction Prohibited Zone

for details.

Regulation (c): Though military activities are difficult to monitor, it appears that this

regulation has had a significant impact on Department of Defense (DOD) activities in the

Sanctuary. For example, the DOD had advised military aircraft to stay above 1,000 feet

when flying along the Big Sur coast. In addition, the DOD consults with the Sanctuary

about its amphibious landing exercises in order to minimize impacts on Sanctuary

resources. It appears that the DOD will consult with the MBNMS when it is planning
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

17

high-profile nearshore activities, but rarely consults with the Sanctuary when the

activities are farther offshore.

Achievement of Purpose

The Sanctuary Advisory Council (SAC) was formed to help direct MBNMS activities

towards achieving its goal of supporting, promoting, and coordinating research, education,

and conservation efforts in the Sanctuary. The SAC has three Working Groups to help

accomplish these goals. These three groups are the Research Activity Panel (RAP), the

Sanctuary Education Panel (SEP), and the Conservation Working Group (CWG).

The RAP is presently composed of representatives from 21 research institutions and

organizations. It meets approximately eight times per year to discuss a variety of topics

including:

1) Setting research priorities that are primarily related to management of the MBNMS;

2) Promoting, encouraging, and reviewing research projects in the Sanctuary;

3) Providing scientific advice and objective information to the Sanctuary Council and

Sanctuary management;

4) Reviewing and advising on research permits in the Sanctuary;

5) Assisting in the coordination of the annual MBNMS Currents Symposium; and

6) Assisting Sanctuary management with the organization and dissemination of information

on research activities within the Sanctuary.

The SEP membership includes educators from aquariums, universities, conservation

organizations and agencies, as well as classroom teachers. The SEP meets monthly to: 1)

review program proposals; 2) advise on educational priorities; and 3) assist in the

implementation of programs to increase understanding and stewardship of the MBNMS.

The CWG is composed of representatives from local and national conservation organizations.

The roles of the CWG include:

1) Serving as a forum for identification and discussion of Sanctuary-specific resource

protection issues;

2) Collaborating in building a well-informed and supportive constituency for the Sanctuary

through education, public and media outreach, and citizen involvement activities;

3) Providing advice and factual information on resource protection, Sanctuary management,

and other issues;

4) Identifying resource protection and management needs and making recommendations on

related priorities, strategies, and policies;

5) Promoting communication and coordination among conservation organizations and other

groups throughout the Sanctuary community.

The MBNMS, through SAC and its working groups, has started programs responsible for

coordinating research and education efforts within the Sanctuary. Research programs have:

significantly increased the connectivity between research institutions located along the

Sanctuary coastline; encouraged collaborative research between these institutions; and helped

to bring more funding for marine research into the region. The Sanctuary has started

education programs which work with local schools to integrate information about marine

ecosystems and the MBNMS into the curriculum. In addition, the MBNMS educates the

general public about the Sanctuary and marine conservation through flyers, posters, booths at

community events, and news stories (both on television and in newspapers). The National

Marine Sanctuary designation has significantly helped to focus national and international

attention on the central California coast. For example, the MBNMS has been featured in

National Geographic and was the backdrop for the ìNational Ocean Conferenceî held in

Monterey in June, 1998.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

18

Overlapping Sites

ï Jade Collection

ï Dredge Material Disposal

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Motorized Personal Watercraft

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Military

ï Vessel Traffic

ï Hopkins Marine Life Refuge

ï Pt. Lobos Ecological Reserve

ï Pt. Lobos State Reserve

ï Big Creek Marine Resources Protection Act Ecological Reserve

ï James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve

ï AÒo Nuevo State Reserve

ï Elkhorn Slough Ecological Reserve and Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve

ï Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge

ï Pacific Grove Marine Reserve

ï Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park/Underwater Park

ï Golden Gate National Recreation Area

ï Grey Whale Cove SB, Montara SB, Half Moon Bay SB, San Gregorio SB, Pomponio

SB, Pescadero SB, Bean Hollow SB, Natural Bridges SB, Twin Lakes SB, New

Brighton SB, Seacliff SB, Manresa SB, Sunset SB, Zmudowski SB, Moss Landing SB,

Salinas River SB, Marina SB, Monterey SB, Asilomar SB, Carmel River SB, William

Randolph Hearst Memorial SB, and San Simeon SB

ï Moss Landing Wildlife Area

ï Elkhorn Slough National Ecological Research Reserve

ï California Sea Otter Game Refuge

ï James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve ASBS, AÒo Nuevo Point and Island ASBS, Pacific

Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge and Hopkins Marine Life Refuge ASBS, Carmel Bay

ASBS, Point Lobos Ecological Reserve ASBS, Julia Pfeiffer Burns Underwater Park

ASBS, and Ocean Area Surrounding the Mouth of Salmon Creek ASBS

ï Ed Ricketts Park

References

National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 1992. Final Environmental

Impact Statement and Management Plan for the Proposed Monterey Bay National Marine

Sanctuary. Sanctuary and Reserves Division, NOAA, U.S. Dept. of Comm., Washington,

D.C.

Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary website. http://bonita.mbnms.nos.noaa.gov
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

19

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Jade Collection

Location of Site

See Figure 2 for exact location

San Luis Obispo County

1) Jade Cove

Year Established

1998

Established By

National Marine Sanctuaries Act (Regulatory Amendment #2); NOAA, U.S. Department of

Commerce

Agency Responsible

MBNMS, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce

Purpose

To allow traditional small-scale collection of loose jade in the Jade Cove area - an activity that

was previously prohibited by the regulations of the MBNMS.

Regulations

The following activity is prohibited or otherwise restricted under [MBNMS] regulations (15

CFR, Part 922.132 (a)(1))

1) Exploring for, developing or producing oil, gas or minerals within the Sanctuary except: jade

may be collected (meaning removed) from the area bounded by the 35 ̊55'20" N latitude

parallel (coastal reference point: beach access stairway at south Sand Dollar Beach), the

35 ̊53'20" N latitude parallel (coastal reference point: westernmost tip of Cape San Martin),

and from the mean high tide line seaward to the 90-foot isobath (depth line) (the "authorized

area") provided that:

i) Only jade already loose from the seabed may be collected;

ii) No tool may be used to collect jade except:

A) A hand tool (see Sec. 922.131) to maneuver or lift the jade or scratch the surface of a

stone as necessary to determine if it is jade;

B) A lift bag or multiple lift bags with a combined lift capacity of no more than two

hundred pounds; or

C) A vessel (except for motorized personal watercraft) (see paragraph (a)(7) of Sec.

922.132) to provide access to the authorized area;

iii) Each person may collect only what that person individually carries.

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Jade collection activities are not monitored currently in the Sanctuary. However, the

MBNMS has not received any reports of regulatory abuses in the collection of jade from

Sanctuary waters (Scott Kathey, MBNMS, pers. comm.).

Achievement of Purpose
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

20

Jade collection continues in the Jade Cove area. Area collectors welcome the access to loose

jade resources. The regulation appears to have successfully achieved the intended purpose

(Scott Kathey, MBNMS, pers. comm.).

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï California Sea Otter Game Refuge

References

None
20 0 20 40 60 80 Kilometers

Cape San Martin

Jade Cove

100 m contour intervals

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

21

FIGURE 2. Location of Jade Collection Zone
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

22

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Dredge Material Disposal

Location of Sites

See Figure 3 for exact locations

Santa Cruz County

1) Santa Cruz Harbor - subtidal disposal site

2) Twin Lakes State Beach - beach replenishment site

Monterey County

1) Moss Landing / Zmudowski State Beach - beach replenishment site

2) Moss Landing north jetty - beach replenishment site

3) Moss Landing south jetty - beach replenishment site

4) SF-12

i) center location: 36°48.05'N, 121°47.22'W

ii) radius: none (pipeline discharge)

iii) water depth: 48 feet

5) SF-14

i) center location: 36°47.53'N, 121°49.04'W

ii) radius: 500 yards

iii) water depth: 600 feet

6) Monterey Harbor Wharf 2 - proposed subtidal disposal site

7) Monterey Harbor Wharf 2 - beach decant site

Year Established

1972-1993∗

Established By

Army Corps of Engineers (COE)

Agencies Responsible

Army Corps of Engineers

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

MBNMS, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce

California Coastal Commission (CCC)

California Department of Parks and Recreation

California State Lands Commission

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG)

Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Central Coast Region

Purpose

To provide clean sandy sediments for beach replenishment and to protect Sanctuary resources

from the harmful effects of dredge material disposal, such as harmful changes in water quality,

unnatural disturbance to benthic communities, and disposal of contaminated sediment that fails

federal or state regulatory criteria.

 

∗

 All dredge material disposal sites were established after enactment of the Clean Water Act in 1972 and before

establishment of the MBNMS on January 1, 1993.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

23

Beach replenishment sites are areas above mean high water (MHW) where clean, sandy, dredge

material is deposited to replace sand lost by natural erosion.

Subtidal disposal sites are areas where fine, clean, dredge material is deposited when the dredge

material is determined, due to certain characteristics, not to be appropriate for beach

replenishment.

Beach decant sites are areas where dredge material containing a large amount of water is

deposited. Depending on the site, decant water is either separated and then returned to the ocean

or allowed to percolate into the sand.

Regulations

1) Except as specified in paragraphs (b) through (f) of this section, the following activities are

prohibited and thus unlawful for any person to conduct or cause to be conducted:

(i) Discharging or depositing, from within the boundary of the Sanctuary, any material or other

matter except: dredged material deposited at disposal sites authorized by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (in consultation with the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers (COE)) prior to the effective date of Sanctuary designation (January 1, 1993),

provided that the activity is pursuant to, and complies with the terms and conditions of, a

valid Federal permit or approval existing on January 1, 1993 (15 CFR 922.132(a)(2)(i)(E)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Sanctuary regulations pertaining to the disposal of dredge material are enforced within the

MBNMS in the same manner as all other dredge material disposal sites managed by the COE'

s San Francisco District. Any discharge of dredge material into the water, including beach

replenishment, requires a permit issued by the COE and approved by the EPA, MBNMS,

RWQCB, and CCC. In addition, CDFG reviews all permits to evaluate impacts to state

biological resources and issues permits for disposal on state beaches.

Achievement of Purpose

Past Research

Previous research (Oliver and Slattery 1976; Oliver et al. 1977) examined the shallow water

ecological impacts of the disposal of dredged material at site SF-12. These studies found no

significant changes in ecosystem or community structure in the shallow water areas

surrounding SF-12. The communities surrounding SF-12 are adapted to periodic disturbance

because it is an area of naturally high sediment movement, therefore, the fauna at this site

responds to the disposal of dredge material as if it were a natural disturbance. In addition,

these studies found that the pollutants in the dredge material had no significant effect on

benthic communities because the chemicals were rapidly diluted to undetectable levels.

Proposed Research

Stacy Kim of Moss Landing Marine Labs, in conjunction with researchers from MBARI,

MLML, UCSC, CSUMB, CDFG, Texas A&M, University of Alaska, and the EPA, is

proposing to assess the effects of the dumping of dredge material on deep water communities

within the Monterey Submarine Canyon. The dredge material will be dumped at site SF-12

which is located at the head of the submarine canyon. The proposed research will measure:

sediment chemistry, the volume of dredge material dumped, natural sediment movement

patterns in the canyon, dredge material movement patterns in the canyon, chemical

concentrations of both dredge material and natural sediments at the disposal site and in the

canyon, and the short and long-term ecological impacts of dredge disposal on communities in

the canyon.

Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA)
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

24

An ecological risk assessment is being developed for Moss Landing harbor sediments.

Federal and state agency representatives, academic scientists, consultants, and the Moss

Landing Harbor District are all working together to design the ERA.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Motorized Personal Watercraft

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Twin Lakes SB and Moss Landing SB

References

Oliver, J.S. and P.N. Slattery. 1976. Effects of dredging and disposal on the benthos in Monterey

Bay, California. Tech. Paper 76-15, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Coastal Engineering

Research Center, Va.

Oliver, J.S., P.N. Slattery, L.W. Hulberg, and J.W. Nybakken. 1977. Patterns of succession in

benthic infaunal communities following dredging and dredge spoil disposal in Monterey Bay,

California. Tech. Rept. D-77-27. Dredged Material Research Program, U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. 186 p.

Environmental Protection Agency website, Laws and Regulations homepage.

http://www.epa.gov/epahome/laws.htm
U%U%

U%

^(

^(

^(

$TU%

U%

$T

U%^(

San Lorenzo River

Wharf

Point Santa Cruz

Twin Lakes State Beach

Replenishment Site

Subtidal

Disposal SIte

Santa Cruz

Moss Landing

Monterey

10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Kilometers

Dredge Material Disposal Zones $T Beach Decant Site

^( Beach Replenishment Site

U% Sub-tidal Disposal Site

Proposed Subtidal

DisposalSite

Beach Decant Site

Monterey Harbor

a

b

c

a

c

b

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

38°30' 38°30'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

U%

U%

^(

^(

^(

Zmudowski/Moss Landing 

State Beach Replenishment Site

North and South Jetty

Replenishment Sites

SF-12

SF-14

100 m contour intervals

10 m contour intervals

10 m contour intervals

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

25

FIGURE 3. Location of Dredge Material Disposal Zones
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

26

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Restricted Overflight

Location of Sites

See Figure 4 for exact locations

San Mateo and Santa Cruz Counties

1) Site 1 - From mean high water out to three nautical miles between a line extending from

Point Santa Cruz on a southwesterly heading of 220° and a line extending from 2.0

nautical miles north of Pescadero Point on a southwesterly heading of 240°.

Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties

1) Site 2 - From mean high water and within a five nautical mile arc drawn from a center

point at the end of Moss Landing Pier.

2) Site 3 - Over the waters of Elkhorn Slough east of the Highway One bridge to Elkhorn Rd.

Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties

1) Site 4 - From mean high water out to three nautical miles between a line extending from

the Carmel River mouth on a westerly heading of 270° and a line extending due west

along latitude 35°33'17.5612î off of Cambria.

Year Established

1992

Established By

National Marine Sanctuaries Act; NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce

Agency Responsible

MBNMS, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce

Purpose

To limit potential visual, physical, and noise impacts, particularly those that might startle hauledout seals and sea lions, sea otters, or birds nesting along the coastal margins of the MBNMS.

Regulations∗

1) Except as specified in paragraphs (b) through (f) of this section, the following activities are

prohibited and thus unlawful for any person to conduct or cause to be conducted:

i) Flying motorized aircraft, except as necessary for valid law enforcement purposes, at less

than 1,000 feet above any of the four zones within the Sanctuary (15 CFR 922.132(a)(6)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

NOAA has had difficulty enforcing the restricted overflight zone regulations because the

current Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) aeronautical charts improperly list the

MBNMS regulations. The FAA charts recommend a minimum overflight altitude of 2,000

 

∗ This prohibition does not apply to overflights that:

1) Are necessary to respond to an emergency threatening life, property or the environment;

2) Are necessary for valid law enforcement purposes; or

3) Are conducted by the Department of Defense and specifically exempted by NOAA after consultation with that

Department.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

27

feet for the entire Sanctuary. NOAA and the FAA have come to an agreement to correct this

discrepancy and, in the future, charts will contain an advisement of NOAA's restricted

overflight zone regulations. As of January 2000, aeronautical charts have not been changed

to correctly reflect Sanctuary regulations (Scott Kathey, MBNMS, pers. comm.).

Achievement of Purpose

The effectiveness of the restricted overflight regulations to minimize the impacts of aircraft

on marine mammal and seabird populations in the MBNMS has not yet been evaluated.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Jade Collection

ï Dredge Material Disposal

ï Motorized Personal Watercraft

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Military

ï Pt. Lobos Ecological Reserve

ï Pt. Lobos State Reserve

ï Big Creek Marine Resources Protection Act Ecological Reserve

ï AÒo Nuevo State Reserve

ï Elkhorn Slough Ecological Reserve and Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve

ï Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park/Underwater Park

ï Pomponio SB, Pescadero SB, Bean Hollow SB, Natural Bridges SB, Sunset SB,

Zmudowski SB, Moss Landing SB, Salinas River SB, Carmel River SB, William Randolph

Hearst Memorial SB, and San Simeon SB

ï Moss Landing Wildlife Area

ï Elkhorn Slough National Ecological Research Reserve

ï California Sea Otter Game Refuge

ï AÒo Nuevo Point and Island ASBS, Carmel Bay ASBS, Point Lobos Ecological Reserve

ASBS, Julia Pfeiffer Burns Underwater Park ASBS, and Ocean Area Surrounding the

Mouth of Salmon Creek ASBS

ï Ed Ricketts Park

References

None
20 0 20 40 60 Kilometers

Zone 4

Point Santa Cruz

Pescadaro Point

Moss Landing

Monterey

35°30' 35°30'

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

38°30' 38°30'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

Zone 1

100 m contour intervals

Zone 3

Zone 3

Zone 2

Zone 2

Moss Landing

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

28

FIGURE 4. Location of Restricted Overflight Zones
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

29

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Motorized Personal Watercraft∗

Location of Sites

See Figure 5 for exact locations

San Mateo County

1) Site One - approximately 1.0 square nautical mile area off of Pillar Point Harbor

Santa Cruz County

1) Site Two - approximately 5.0 square nautical mile area off of Santa Cruz Harbor

Monterey County

1) Site Three - approximately 6.0 square nautical mile area off of Moss Landing Harbor

2) Site Four - approximately 5.0 square nautical mile area off of the U.S. Coast Guard Pier

Year Established

1992

Established By

National Marine Sanctuaries Act; NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce

Agency Responsible

MBNMS, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce

Purpose

To allow the continuation of this form of recreation while:

1) enhancing resource protection by prohibiting the operation of MPWC in areas of high marine

mammal and seabird concentrations, kelp forest areas, river mouths, estuaries, lagoons and

other areas where sensitive marine resources are concentrated and most vulnerable to

disturbance and injury from MPWC;

2) minimizing conflicts with other recreational users; and

3) reducing esthetic disturbance.

Regulations

1) Except as specified in paragraphs (b) through (f) of this section, the following activities are

prohibited and thus unlawful for any person to conduct or cause to be conducted:

i) Operating motorized personal watercraft within the Sanctuary except within the four

designated zones and access routes within the Sanctuary (15 CFR 922.132(a)(7)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

A formal evaluation of the effectiveness of the MPWC regulations has not been conducted

primarily due to delays in regulation implementation. The delays were caused by:

1) The MBNMS regulations restricting the use of MPWC were struck down by the U.S. District

Court for the District of Columbia in 1993, in a lawsuit brought by the Personal Watercraft

Industry Association (PWIA). NOAA appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals

 ∗

 Motorized Personal Watercraft (MPWC) - any motorized vessel that meets all the following criteria:

1) is less than 15 ft in length (as manufactured);

2) is capable of exceeding a speed of 15 knots (17.27 mph); and

3) has the capacity to carry not more than two people while in operation.

Examples include: jet skis, wet bikes, surf jets, miniature speed boats, air boats, and hovercraft.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

30

which, in 1995, reversed the district court's judgment. The Sanctuary regulations were

reinstated in 1995.

2) Due to delays from the lawsuit and appeal, the buoys required to mark the boundary of the

MPWC zones were not installed until the summer and fall of 1996.

3) Approximately half of the buoys that were installed during 1996 parted from their moorings

during the two subsequent winter storm periods. These buoys were replaced in 1998.

4) Of the approximately 21 buoys deployed, three (2 in Santa Cruz and 1 in Moss Landing) are

currently off station (as of January 2000) due to parted mooring lines. They will be replaced.

Enforcement of Regulations

Enforcement of MPWC regulations began in 1998. Enforcement of MPWC zone regulations

is conducted by the U.S. Coast Guard and the California Department of Fish and Game on an

ongoing basis. MPWC operators can be issued a summary settlement (ticket) by enforcement

officers for violation of MPWC regulations. As of January 2000, tickets have been issued to

MPWC operators maneuvering outside of the zone boundaries in Monterey and Moss

Landing. Several verbal warnings have been issued to individuals operating MPWC outside

the zones. The regulations appear to be effective and few violations have been reported

(Scott Kathey, MBNMS, pers. comm.).

The Santa Cruz Harbor Patrol and Santa Cruz Police Department have commented that there

has been a significant decrease in the use of MPWC in the Santa Cruz area (Scott Kathey,

MBNMS, pers. comm.). The harbor patrol and police attribute the decline in MPWC to a

general dislike of the offshore zones by MPWC users. The undesirable nature of the offshore

zones appears to be acting as a deterrent to MPWC use in the MBNMS.

Achievement of Purpose

The effectiveness of the MPWC regulations to improve resource protection while reducing

esthetic disturbance and conflict with other recreational users of the MBNMS has not yet

been evaluated rigorously.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Dredge Material Disposal

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Military

References

None
20 0 20 40 60 Kilometers

a

Pillar Point Harbor

1

a

b Santa Cruz

Monterey

Moss Landing

2

3

4

b

35°30' 35°30'

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

38°30' 38°30'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

500 m contour intervals

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

31

FIGURE 5. Location of Motorized Personal Watercraft Zones
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

32

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Shark Attraction Prohibited

Location of Site

See Figure 6 for exact location

Marin, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties

1) Any part of the MBNMS out to the seaward limit of State waters. The seaward limit of

State waters is a line three nautical miles distant from the coastline of the State, where the

coastline is the line of ordinary low water along the portion of the coast in direct contact

with the open sea. The coastline for Monterey Bay, which is inland waters, is the straight

line marking the seaward limit of the Bay, determined by connecting the following two

points: 36°57'6"N, 122°01'45"W and 36°38'16"N, 121°56'3"W.

Year Established

1997

Established By

National Marine Sanctuaries Act (Regulatory Amendment #1); NOAA, U.S. Department of

Commerce

Agency Responsible

MBNMS, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce

Purpose

To prohibit the attraction of white sharks by any means, within State territorial waters, where

state law prohibits the take of white sharks. The zone protects white sharks from behavioral

changes resulting from baiting or attraction events and Sanctuary users (e.g., surfers, divers, and

swimmers) from increased risk of shark attack.

Regulations

1) Except as specified in paragraphs (b) through (f) of this section, the following activities are

prohibited and thus unlawful for any person to conduct or cause to be conducted:

i) Attracting∗

 any white shark in that part of the Sanctuary out to the seaward limit of State

waters. For the purposes of this prohibition, the seaward limit of State waters is a line three

nautical miles distant from the coastline of the State, where the coastline is the line of

ordinary low water along the portion of the coast in direct contact with the open sea. The

coastline for Monterey Bay, which is inland waters, is the straight line marking the seaward

limit of the Bay, determined by connecting the following two points: 36°57'6"N,

122°01'45"W and 36°38'16"N, 121°56'3"W (15 CFR 922.132(a)(10)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Commercial shark attraction activities occurring prior to the rulemaking have stopped within

the affected zone. No violations have been reported (Scott Kathey, MBNMS, pers. comm.).

 

∗ Attract or attracting means the conduct of any activity that lures or may lure white sharks by using food, bait, chum,

dyes, acoustics or any other means, except the mere presence of human beings (e.g., swimmers, divers, boaters,

kayakers, surfers).
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

33

Achievement of Purpose

The zone appears to have successfully achieved the intended purpose of halting shark

attraction activities in the nearshore waters of the MBNMS.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Jade Collection

ï Dredge Material Disposal

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Motorized Personal Watercraft

ï Military

ï Hopkins Marine Life Refuge

ï Pt. Lobos Ecological Reserve

ï Pt. Lobos State Reserve

ï Big Creek Marine Resources Protection Act Ecological Reserve

ï James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve

ï AÒo Nuevo State Reserve

ï Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve

ï Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge

ï Pacific Grove Marine Reserve

ï Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park/Underwater Park

ï Golden Gate National Recreation Area

ï Grey Whale Cove SB, Montara SB, Half Moon Bay SB, San Gregorio SB, Pomponio SB,

Pescadero SB, Bean Hollow SB, Natural Bridges SB, Twin Lakes SB, New Brighton SB,

Seacliff SB, Manresa SB, Sunset SB, Zmudowski SB, Moss Landing SB, Salinas River SB,

Marina SB, Monterey SB, Asilomar SB, Carmel River SB, William Randolph Hearst

Memorial SB, and San Simeon SB

ï California Sea Otter Game Refuge

ï James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve ASBS, AÒo Nuevo Point and Island ASBS, Pacific

Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge and Hopkins Marine Life Refuge ASBS, Carmel Bay

ASBS, Point Lobos Ecological Reserve ASBS, Julia Pfeiffer Burns Underwater Park

ASBS, and Ocean Area Surrounding the Mouth of Salmon Creek ASBS

ï Ed Ricketts Park

References

None
20 0 20 40 60 Kilometers 500 m contour intervals

Santa Cruz

Moss Landing

Monterey

35°30' 35°30'

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

38°30' 38°30'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

34

FIGURE 6. Location of Shark Attraction Prohibited Zone
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

35

 Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Military

Location of Sites

See Figure 7 for exact locations

1) ìU1î Submerged Submarine Operating Area

2) ìU2î Submerged Submarine Operating Area

3) ìU5î Submerged Submarine Operating Area

4) Warning Area 285

5) Naval Operating Area

6) Hunter Military Operations Area

Year Established

N/A

Established By

U.S. Department of Defense

Agency Responsible

U.S. Department of Defense

Purpose

U1, U2, and U5 Submerged Submarine Operating Areas:

The U.S. Navy uses these areas for submarine operations. As submarines may be operating

in these areas, vessels should proceed with caution. During non-explosive torpedo practice

firing, all vessels are cautioned to keep clear of Naval Target Vessels flying a large red flag

from the highest masthead (NOAA 1992).

Warning Area 285:

This area is in frequent use for both air and surface training by the U.S. Navy. Air activities

include aircraft carrier takeoffs and landings, and low-level air combat maneuvering. This

activity results in the expenditure of smoke markers, sonobuoys and non-explosive ordnance

in the Warning Area (NOAA 1992).

Naval Operating Area:

An area used by the U.S. Navy for mine sweeping practice maneuvers. Mine hunting training

is conducted by Navy minesweeping ships in this section of Monterey Bay eight times a year;

each exercise lasts about one week. Inert metal shapes are placed (or moored) on the bay

floor and area located only by sonar; nothing is dragged through the water during these

training exercises and all objects are recovered after completion. On occasion, U.S. Marines

practice amphibious landings on the beaches adjacent to this area (NOAA 1992).

Hunter Military Operations Area:

This area is used for helicopter tactical training operations by the U.S. Army (Scott Kathey,

MBNMS, pers. comm.).

Regulations

U1, U2, and U5 Submerged Submarine Operating Areas:
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

36

As submarines may be operating in these areas, vessels should proceed with caution.

During non-explosive torpedo practice firing, all vessels are cautioned to keep clear of

Naval Target Vessels flying a large red flag from the highest masthead (NOAA Nautical

Chart 18-680).

Warning Area 285:

This area has flight restrictions for civilian aircraft because it is used for naval air operations

including low level fighter jet and helicopter operations.

Naval Operating Area:

The Naval Operating Area will be used for training in various phases of mine warfare

operations. During the period from August 1 to February 15, inclusive each year, no

operations will be carried out which will involve placing any obstructions in the water nor

will any operations be carried out at night. During the period from February 16 to July 31,

inclusive each year, operations may be carried out which will involve laying exercise mines

and other moored or bottom obstructions. In each case, when moored or bottom obstructions

are laid, a notice to mariners will be issued giving notice of their approximate location within

the danger zone, and vessels shall keep clear (NOAA 1995).

Hunter Military Operations Area:

This area has flight restrictions for civilian aircraft because it is used for helicopter tactical

training operations by the U.S. Army.

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Information regarding the effectiveness of this zone was not available.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Motorized Personal Watercraft

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Vessel Traffic

ï Big Creek MRPA Ecological Reserve

ï Seacliff SB, Manresa SB, Sunset SB, William Randolph Hearst Memorial SB, and San

Simeon SB

ï California Sea Otter Game Refuge

ï Ocean Area Surrounding the Mouth of Salmon Creek ASBS

References

National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 1995. United States Coast

Pilot. Pacific Coast: California, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii. 30th Edition. Sanctuary

and Reserves Division, NOAA, U.S. Dept. of Comm., Washington, D.C.

National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 1992. Final Environmental

Impact Statement and Management Plan for the Proposed Monterey Bay National Marine

Sanctuary. Sanctuary and Reserves Division, NOAA, U.S. Dept. of Comm., Washington,

D.C.
20 0 20 40 60 Kilometers

Hunter Military 

Operations Area (MOA)

Warning Area 285

Naval Operating Area

"U1" Submerged Submarine Operating Area

"U5" Submerged Submarine Operating Area

"U2" Submerged Submarine Operating Area

Santa Cruz

Monterey

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

38°30' 38°30'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

37

FIGURE 7. Location of Military Zone
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

38

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Vessel Traffic

Location of Zones

See Figure 8 for location of the routes for tankers, barges, hazmat ships, and large commercial

vessels (LCVs) that were proposed by NOAA and the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) after

development with the MBNMS Vessel Traffic Work Group.

Year Established

Proposed Routes - 2000

Established By

Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA), USCG, U.S. Department of Transportation

National Marine Sanctuaries Act, NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce

Agencies Responsible

USCG, U.S. Department of Transportation

NOAA, U.S. Department of Commerce

International Maritime Organization (IMO), United Nations

Purpose

Provide a vessel traffic management system that maximizes protection of Sanctuary resources

while allowing for the continuation of safe, efficient, and environmentally sound transportation.

Prevention of spills of oil or other hazardous materials is a key goal of the zone.

Zone management focuses primarily on four categories of vessels in transit between key ports in

San Francisco Bay and Los Angeles/Long Beach. The four categories are defined as follows:

ï Tankers: Any self-propelled laden tank vessel carrying crude oil, black oil, or other persistent

liquid cargo in bulk.

ï Hazmat ships: Any self-propelled vessel carrying hazardous materials in bulk, including

explosives/munitions, ore concentrates, chemicals, liquefied natural gas, distillates, or other

non-persistent liquid cargo.

ï Barges: Any tank barges (and their associated tugs) carrying oil or hazardous material cargoes

in bulk.

ï LCVs: Vessels over 300 gross tons including, but not limited to container ships, vehicle

carriers, bulk carriers, freighters, passenger ships, and tankers with non-hazardous cargoes.

Regulations

Current Regulations

Current vessel management measures in the approaches to San Francisco Bay are:

1) San Francisco Traffic Separation Scheme (SF TSS): The existing SF TSS consists of three

offshore approaches, a circular precautionary area, and a single approach into and out of

the San Francisco Bay. The SF TSS is formally recognized by the International Maritime

Organization (IMO), a body under the United Nations, and marked on NOAA's nautical

charts. The precautionary area has a radius of 6 nm, with a center located 8.75 nm west

southwest of the Bay entrance. Each of the three approaches is oriented so as to provide a

minimum of 4 nm separation from adjacent approaches.

2) San Francisco Vessel Traffic Service (VTS): The existing VTS covers the entire SF TSS

area, including the northern third of the Sanctuary, and is managed by the USCG using

VHF radio communications and direct radar surveillance. Vessels that enter the SF TSS

are required to communicate with the VTS. Vessels are monitored to and from Pigeon
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

39

Point via the Offshore Vessel Movement Reporting System (OVMRS) which includes

waters within approximately a 30 nm radius of the San Francisco Sea Buoy.

3) Local Pilotage: Local pilots board vessels and guide the vessels through the Golden Gate

and into port which relieves foreign vessel masters from the burden of navigating the

unfamiliar waters of the San Francisco Bay. The pilot boarding area is approximately a

mile from the center of the circular precautionary area of the SF TSS.

+ Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA): Per industry agreement 1990, operators of

tankers carrying crude oil from Alaska who are members of WSPA have voluntarily kept

laden vessels a minimum of 50 nm (nautical miles) from shore.

Proposed Additional Regulations

1) Distance from Shore: (Distance from Point Sur and Pigeon Point - the two most

prominent westerly points of land in the MBNMS):

ï Tankers: 50 nm

ï Barges: 25 nm northbound / 30 nm southbound

ï Hazmat Ships: 25 nm northbound / 30 nm southbound

ï LCV: Off Pigeon Point - 12.7 nm northbound / 16 nm southbound

Off Point Sur - 15 nm northbound / 20 nm southbound

2) Traffic Separation Schemes:

i) Shifting the southern approach of the SF TSS to the west to reduce the risk of

groundings along the San Mateo coastline and to improve north-south alignment with

the proposed recommended route for LCVs. This shift has been pre-approved by the

IMO in 1990, but not yet implemented.

ii) Implementing an 18 nm extension of the Santa Barbara Channel traffic lanes to Point

Arguello. This extension would connect with the proposed route for LCVs across the

Sanctuary's southern boundary and aid mariners in tracking a course offshore of Point

Sur. This extension was previously adopted by the IMO in 1985, but has not yet been

implemented.

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Section 102(d) of Public Law 102-368 and section 2203(d) of the National Marine Sanctuaries

Program Amendments Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-587) mandated that the Secretary of

Commerce and the Secretary of Transportation report to Congress on measures for regulating

vessel traffic in the MBNMS. To fulfill this mandate, NOAA and the USCG conducted a

comprehensive study of vessel traffic along a large portion of the California coast. This study

found that Sanctuary resources are sensitive to spilled oil and that oil tankers and other large

vessels carrying significant amounts of bunker fuel operate within the Sanctuary thereby

potentially placing Sanctuary resources at risk. NOAA and the USCG concluded that the current

vessel management regulations should be further studied to identify potential ways to minimize

the risk of spilled oil or other hazardous materials in the Sanctuary. Therefore, NOAA and the

USCG established a working group of key stakeholders in the issue, including Federal, State and

local governments, environmental groups, and industry, to review existing practices and risks.

The objective of this working group was to recommend a vessel management system that would

maximize protection of the Sanctuary resources while allowing for the continuation of vessel

transport along the California coast.

The final recommendations (taking into account public comments) were compiled by NOAA and

the USCG and submitted to the Navigation Safety Advisory Council (NAVSAC) in October

1998. In June 1999 the proposal was formally cleared by NOAA, the USCG, the Department of

 

+ Although the WSPA agreement does not apply to foreign tankers, limited spot checks by the USCG indicate that

90% of all crude oil tankers are complying voluntarily.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

40

Defense and the State Department. TSS changes will be implemented in 2000. The proposal

was approved by IMOís navigation subcommittee in September 1999. Final IMO approval is

expected in May 2000, with implementation approximately six months later.

The effectiveness of the new regulations will ultimately be evaluated by an Automated

Information System (AIS). An AIS is an automatic, electronic system that transmits the real-time

position of a vessel to a shore-based station, such as the VTS. The AIS will be an international

requirement and it is expected to be in place in the next 2 years. California needs to build the

shore-based capacity to accept and analyze this data to track the effectiveness of these measures.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Military

References

U.S. Coast Guard and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1997. Report to

Congress on Regulating Vessel Traffic in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. 80

pp.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 1998. Monterey Bay National

Marine Sanctuary Vessel Management Final Report. NOAA, U.S. Dept. of Comm.,

Washington D.C. 41 pp.

Vessel management work group produces concrete proposal. Fall 1998. Page 3 In J. Carless

(ed.). News From the Monterey National Marine Sanctuary Newsletter.

Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary website, Sanctuary Vessel Traffic Management page.

http://bonita.mbnms.nos.noaa.gov/vt/index.html
36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

10 0 10 20 30 40 50 Kilometers

Vessel Traffic Zones

Barges & Hazmat Vessels, North

Barges & Hazmat Vessels, South

Large Commercial Vessels, North

Large Commercial Vessels, South

Approaches

Precautionary Area

 

Tankers

Pigeon Point

Point Sur

12.7 nmi.

16 nmi.

25 nmi.

30 nmi.

15 nmi.

20 nmi.

25 nmi.

30 nmi.

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

41

FIGURE 8. Location of Vessel Traffic Zones
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

42

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: No Harvest

Legislated Title of Site: Marine Life Refuge

Location of Site

See Figure 9 for exact location

Monterey County

1) Hopkins Marine Life Refuge

Year Established

1931∗

Established By

State Legislature

Agencies Responsible

Hopkins Marine Life Refuge Director

Fish and Game Commission

California Department of Fish and Game

Purpose

No legally mandated purpose accompanies the marine life refuge designation.

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Except under a permit or specific authorization, it is unlawful: to take or possess any

invertebrate or specimen of marine plant life in a marine life refuge (Fish and Game

Code 10500(f)).

2) Non-commercial Use of Invertebrates. Tidal invertebrates may not be taken in any

tidepool or other areas between the high tide mark (defined as Mean Higher High Tide)

and 1,000 feet seaward and lateral to the low tide mark (defined as Mean Lower Low

Water) except as follows: In all other areas, except where prohibited within marine life

refuges or other special closures: Abalone, limpets, moon snails, turban snails, chiones,

clams, cockles, mussels, rock scallops, native oysters, octopuses, squid, crabs, lobsters,

shrimp, sand dollars, sea urchins and worms may be taken (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

29.05(b)(2)).

3) Commercial Use of Invertebrates. No mollusks, crustaceans or other invertebrates may

be taken in Marine Life Refuges (14 Cal. Code of Reg. 123(f)(2)(a)).

4) Non-commercial use of Marine Plants. Marine aquatic plants may not be cut or harvested

in marine life refuges, marine reserves, ecological reserves, national parks or state

underwater parks (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 30.00(b)).

Site Specific Regulations

 

∗

 The HMLR was established by the State of California in 1931 to protect the waters and shoreline immediately

adjacent to the Hopkins Marine Station of Stanford University. Legal statutes regulating human activities within

the HMLR were established in 1984.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

43

1) The director [of the Fish and Game Commission] may appoint the Director of the

Hopkins Marine Life Refuge. The Director of the Hopkins Marine Life Refuge may

issue a permit to any person under which the person may enter the Hopkins Marine

Life Refuge for the purpose of taking fish or marine plants under the conditions that

the department determines necessary for the protection and propagation of fish and

wildlife and related scientific purposes in the refuge (Fish and Game Code 10502.5).

2) A person may be permitted by the Director of the Hopkins Marine Life Refuge to enter

the Hopkins Marine Life Refuge under a permit (Fish and Game Code 10657(a)).

3) The Director of the Hopkins Marine Life Refuge, or any person to whom the Director

has issued a permit under Section 10502.5, may take, for scientific purposes, any fish

or specimen of marine plant life under the conditions prescribed by the department

under Section 10502.5 (Fish and Game Code 10657(b)).

4) Except as expressly provided in this division, it is unlawful to enter Hopkins Marine

Life Refuge for the purpose of taking or possessing any fish or marine plant or to take

or possess any fish or marine plants in the Hopkins Marine Life Refuge. Section 10657

and this section do not prohibit or restrict navigation in the Hopkins Marine Life

Refuge pursuant to federal law (Fish and Game Code 10657.5).

5) Snorkeling and SCUBA diving is limited to persons with legitimate scientific or

educational purposes. Divers must check with the Hopkins/Stanford Diving Safety

Officer (Hopkins Marine Life Refuge Guidelines).

6) Use of boats in the HMLR must have prior approval from the Refuge Manager

(Hopkins Marine Life Refuge Guidelines).

7) The only part of the HMLR which may be accessed without prior approval is the

continuous sandy area of Agassiz beach (Hopkins Marine Life Refuge Guidelines).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Regulations at Hopkins Marine Life Refuge are enforced by the California Department of

Fish and Game wardens. Enforcement is intermittent and subject to warden availability.

In addition to enforcement by CDFG wardens, regulations at HMLR are strictly enforced

by the Director of the refuge and by the faculty, staff, and students of Hopkins Marine

Station.

Achievement of Purpose

Evaluation of this zone is difficult because it lacks a legally mandated purpose. However,

the following research demonstrates that regulations which limit activities, specifically

fishing, in "no harvest" marine life refuges can help protect the animal resources in the

refuges from human-induced degradation.

Paddack, M.J. 1996. SUMMARY: The influence of marine protected areas on population

structure (density and size structure) of kelp forest fishes was assessed by counting and

measuring the size of reef fishes within diver-swum transects inside and outside three

marine reserves in central California [Hopkins Marine Life Refuge, Pt. Lobos Ecological

Reserve, and Big Creek MRPA Ecological Reserve]. There were no significant

differences in benthic fish density between reserve and non-reserve areas, although there

was a trend of increased fish density within each of the reserves. The average length of

rockfish (genus Sebastes) was significantly greater in 2 of the 3 reserve sites [Hopkins

Marine Life Refuge and Pt. Lobos Ecological Reserve], and populations contained a

greater proportion of larger fish in the reserve sites than they did in adjacent, non-reserve

sites. These density and size differences combined to produce substantially greater

reproductive potential for these reserve areas. The magnitude of these effects seems to be

influenced by age of the reserve and fishing pressure in nearby areas. These findings

demonstrate that existing levels of fishing pressure impact populations of kelp forest

rockfishes; suggest that marine reserves help to sustain these populations; and provide
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

44

empirical support for the use of marine reserves in developing conservation strategies of

nearshore fishes. However, the magnitude of these effects remains uncertain because the

spatial scale of both larval and adult dispersal relative to the size of existing reserves is

unknown.

Pollard, S. 1990. SUMMARY: Red abalone population characteristics were found to be

markedly different between areas subject to sea otter predation, areas where

recreational fishing pressure was relatively high, and reserve sites. Abalone densities

were higher at the two central coast reserve sites [Hopkins Marine Life Refuge and Pt.

Lobos Ecological Reserve] than at adjacent non-reserve sites. These local abalone

populations may have grown in size since their initial decline following

recolonization of the area by sea otters, as is indicated by the apparent increase in

density reported in this study at HMLR, as compared to previous density estimates.

This study suggests that marine reserves, which prohibit recreational fishing, can

support increased densities of red abalone even in areas subject sea otter predation.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Pacific Grove Marine Reserve

ï Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge and Hopkins Marine Life Refuge ASBS

References

McArdle, D. A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California

Sea Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.

Paddack, M.J. 1996. The influence of marine reserves upon rockfish populations in central

California kelp forests. M.S. Thesis. University of California, Santa Cruz. 40 pp.

Pollard, S. 1990. Red abalone, Haliotis rufescens; relative impacts of recreational fisheries

and sea otter predation on the abundance, size frequency and microhabitat distribution of

red abalone populations in central and northern California. M.S. Thesis. University of

California, Santa Cruz. 67 pp.

Stanford University, Hopkins Marine Station, Hopkins Marine Life Refuge website.

http://www-marine.stanford.edu/
20 0 20 40 60 80 Kilometers

Hopkins Marine Life Refuge

50 m contour intervals

Lover's Point

Point Lobos Ecological Reserve

100 m contour intervals

Gamboa 

Point

100 m contour intervals

Big Creek MRPA 

Ecological Reserve

a

b

c

c

b

a

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

45

FIGURE 9. Location of No Harvest Zones
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

46

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: No Harvest

Legislated Title of Site: Ecological Reserve

Location of Site

See Figure 9 for exact location

Monterey County

1) Point Lobos Ecological Reserve

Year Established

1973

Established By

Ecological Reserve Act, State Legislature

Agencies Responsible

Fish and Game Commission

California Department of Fish and Game

Purpose

Ecological reserves are established to provide protection for rare, threatened, or endangered

native plants, wildlife, aquatic organisms and specialized terrestrial or aquatic habitat types (14

Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0).

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Non-commercial Use of Marine Plants. Marine aquatic plants may not be cut or harvested

in marine life refuges, marine reserves, ecological reserves, national parks or state

underwater parks (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 30.00(b)).

2) Commercial Use of Invertebrates. In and offshore [between the high tide mark and 1,000

feet beyond the low tide mark] of all other state ecological reserves, state parks, state

reserves, national parks, national monuments, or national seashores, only the following

invertebrates may be taken: crabs, ghost shrimp, jackknife clams, sea urchins, squid, and

worms, except that no worms may be taken in any mussel bed, nor may any person pick

up, remove, detach from the substrate any other organisms, or break up, remove or destroy

any rocks or other substrate or surfaces to which organisms are attached (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 123(f)(4)).

3) Protection of Resources. No person shall mine or disturb geological formations or

archaeological artifacts, or take or disturb any bird, or nests or eggs thereof, or any plant,

mammal, fish, mollusk, crustacean, amphibian, reptile, or any other form of plant or

animal life except at provided in subsections 630.0 (a)(2) and (a)(8). The department may

implement enhancement and protective measures to assure proper utilization and

maintenance of ecological reserves (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(1)).

4) Fishing. Fishing shall be allowed in accordance with the general fishing regulations of the

commission, except that the method of taking fish shall be limited to angling from shore.

No person shall take fish for commercial purposes, except by permit from the commission

(14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(2)).

5) Collecting. No collecting shall be done in an ecological reserve except by permit issued

pursuant to section 650 of these regulations. Any person applying for a permit must have a
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

47

valid scientific collecting permit issued pursuant to part 3 of this title (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 630.0(a)(3)).

6) Swimming. No person shall swim, wade, dive, or use any diving equipment within an

ecological reserve except as authorized under the terms of a permit issued pursuant to

subsection (3) (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(5)).

7) Boating. No person shall launch or operate a boat or other floating device within an

ecological reserve except by permit from the commission (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

630.0(a)(6)).

8) Firearms. No person shall fire or discharge any firearm, bow and arrow, air or gas gun,

spear gun, or any other weapon of any kind within or into an ecological reserve or possess

such weapon within an ecological reserve, except law enforcement personnel and as

provided for in individual area regulations that allow for hunting (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

630.0(a)(8)).

9) Ejection. Employees of the department may eject any person from an ecological reserve

for violation of any of these rules or regulations or for any reason when it appears that the

general safety of the ecological reserve or persons thereon is endangered (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 630.0(a)(9)).

10) Public Entry. Public entry may be restricted on any area at the discretion of the

department to protect the wildlife, aquatic life, or habitat. No person, except state and

local law enforcement officers, fire suppression agencies and employees of the

department in the performance of their official duties or persons possessing written

permission from the department, may enter any ecological reserve, or portion thereof,

which is closed to public entry. No person may enter any ecological reserve between

sunset and sunrise except with written permission from the department, which may be

granted for purposes including night fishing in accordance with subsection 630.0(a)(2)

from designated shore areas only (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(10)).

11) Introduction of Species. Unless authorized by the commission, the release of any fish or

wildlife species, including domestic or domesticated species, or the introduction of any

plant species, is prohibited. The department may reintroduce endemic species on

ecological reserves for management purposes (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(11)).

12) Feeding of Wildlife. The feeding of wildlife is prohibited (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

630.0(a)(12)).

13) Pesticides. The use of pesticides is prohibited on any ecological reserve unless

authorized by the commission (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(13)).

14) Litter. No person shall deposit, drop, or scatter any debris on any ecological reserve

except in a receptacle or area designated for that purpose. Where no designated

receptacles are provided, any refuse resulting from a person's use of an area must be

removed from that area by such person (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(14)).

15) Aircraft. No person shall operate any aircraft or hovercraft within a reserve, except as

authorized by a permit from the commission (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(17)).

16) Pets. Pets, including dogs and cats, are prohibited from entering reserves unless they are

retained on a leash of less than ten feet or are inside a motor vehicle (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 630.0(a)(18)).

17) Fires. No person shall light fireworks or other explosive or incendiary devices, or start or

maintain any fire on or in any reserve, except for management purposes as provided in

subsection (a)(1) (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(19)).

18) Vandalism. No person shall tamper with, damage or remove any property not his own

when such property is located within an ecological reserve (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

630.0(a)(21)).

Site Specific Regulations

1) Commercial Use of Invertebrates. No mollusks, crustaceans or other invertebrates may be

taken in Point Lobos Ecological Reserve (14 Cal. Code of Reg. 123(f)(2)(c)).

2) All fishing is prohibited (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(b)(13)(A)).
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

48

3) Swimming, boating, and other aquatic sports are permitted. Boats may be launched and

retrieved only in designated areas and may be anchored within the reserve only during

daylight hours (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(b)(13)(B)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Pt. Lobos Ecological Reserve overlaps in area with the Pt. Lobos State Reserve. Both

state reserve and ecological reserve regulations are enforced by on-site State Park rangers.

Park rangers give tickets to individuals who are caught violating the regulations. Park

volunteer naturalists (docents) are trained to report any violations to park rangers. In

addition, park rangers may call California Department of Fish and Game wardens for

assistance with violations occurring offshore. (Jerry Loomis, State Park Ranger, pers.

comm.)

Enforcement of park regulations pertaining to the subtidal portion of the reserve appears to be

very effective. There is a low incidence of poaching in the reserve and human impacts on

natural resources appears to be low (Jerry Loomis, pers. comm.).

Achievement of Purpose

The following research projects examined the effectiveness of the ecological reserve to

protect animal populations. These studies demonstrate that reserves which limit fishing may

help protect animal resources in the reserves from human-induced degradation.

Paddack, M.J. 1996. A summary of this research can be found on page 40.

Pollard, S. 1990. A summary of this research can be found page 41.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Pt. Lobos State Reserve

ï California Sea Otter Game Refuge

ï Point Lobos Ecological Reserve ASBS

References

California Department of Fish and Game, Fish and Game Laws and Regulations website.

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/regs.html

McArdle, D. A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California

Sea Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.

Paddack, M.J. 1996. The influence of marine reserves upon rockfish populations in central

California kelp forests. M.S. Thesis. University of California, Santa Cruz. 40 pp.

Pollard, S. 1990. Red abalone, Haliotis rufescens; relative impacts of recreational fisheries

and sea otter predation on the abundance, size frequency and microhabitat distribution of

red abalone populations in central and northern California. M.S. Thesis. University of

California, Santa Cruz. 67 pp.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

49

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: No Harvest

Legislated Title of Site: State Reserve

Location of Site

See Figure 9 for exact location

Monterey County

1) Point Lobos State Reserve

Year Established

1963

Established By

State Parks and Recreation Commission

Agencies Responsible

Department of Parks and Recreation

State Parks and Recreation Commission

California Department of Fish and Game

State Lands Commission

Purpose

The purpose of a state reserve is to preserve native ecological associations, unique faunal and

floral characteristics, geological features, and scenic qualities in a condition of undisturbed

integrity (Public Resources Code 5019.65).

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Living and non-living resources contained within state reserves shall not be disturbed

or removed for other than scientific or management purpose (Public Resources Code

5019.65).

2) Non-commercial Use of Invertebrates. Tidal invertebrates may not be taken in any

tidepool or other areas between the high tide mark (defined as Mean Higher High Tide)

and 1,000 feet seaward and lateral to the low tide mark (defined as Mean Lower Low

Water) except as follows: In state parks, state beaches, state recreation areas, state

underwater parks, state reserves, national parks, national monuments or national

seashores: Only abalones, chiones, clams, cockles, rock scallops, native oysters, crabs,

lobsters, ghost shrimp and sea urchins may be taken. Worms may be taken except that no

worms may be taken in any mussel bed, unless worms are taken incidental to the

harvesting of mussels. Mussels may be taken in all areas except in state park system

reserves or natural preserves (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 29.05(b)(1)).

3) Commercial Use of Invertebrates. In and offshore [between the high tide mark and 1,000

feet beyond the low tide mark] of all other state ecological reserves, state parks, state

reserves, national parks, national monuments, or national seashores, only the following

invertebrates may be taken: crabs, ghost shrimp, jackknife clams, sea urchins, squid, and

worms, except that no worms may be taken in any mussel bed, nor may any person pick

up, remove, detach from the substrate any other organisms, or break up, remove or destroy

any rocks or other substrate or surfaces to which organisms are attached (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 123(f)(4)).
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

50

4) Aircraft. No person shall parachute into, fly an aircraft, ultralight vehicle, or hand

glider over, or parasail or balloon over any State Park unit at an altitude of less than

500 feet unless authorized by the Department by posted order in accordance with

Section 4301(i) (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4304).

5) Animals. No person shall molest, hunt, disturb, injure, trap, take, net, poison, harm,

kill, feed, touch, tease, or spotlight any kind of animal or fish, or so attempt, except

that fish and bait may be taken other than for commercial purposes in accordance with

the state laws and regulations, provided, however, that no person shall use or discharge

a spear or bow and arrow in units under control of the Department (except in

underwater parks or on designated archery ranges). This section does not apply to

activities undertaken by the Department in conjunction with its resource management

activities (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4305(a)).

6) Driftwood. No person may gather more than 50 pounds or one piece of driftwood each

day in the State Park System...Use of tools, vehicles, and equipment for the collection

of driftwood is prohibited. Upon a finding that it will be in the interest of the

Department of Parks and Recreation, the District Superintendent may, by posting,

authorize the collection of driftwood from specified units on a temporary basis, either

by the general public or by commercial operators, if necessary, in quantities, for

purposes, and by means other than as specified by this section (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

4306).

7) Geological Features. No person shall destroy, disturb, mutilate, or remove earth, sand,

gravel, oil, minerals, rocks, paleontological features, or features of caves except

rockhounding may be permitted as defined and delineated in Sections 4610 through

4610.10 (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4307).

8) Archaeological Features. No person shall remove, injure, disfigure, deface, or destroy

any object of archaeological, or historical interest or value (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

4308).

9) Litter. No person shall leave, deposit, drop, or scatter bottles, broken glass, ashes,

waste paper, cans or other litter in a unit except in a receptacle designated for that

purpose, and no person shall import any litter, or import and deposit any litter into or

in any unit from other places (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4310).

10) Dogs. No person shall bring a dog into, permit a dog to enter or remain, or possess a

dog in units under control of Department of Parks and Recreation unless the dog is on

leash of no more than six feet in length and under the immediate control of a person or

confined in a vehicle (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4312(a)). No person shall bring a dog

into, permit a dog to enter or remain, or possess a dog on any beach adjacent to any

body of water in any unit except in portions of units designated for dogs (14 Cal. Code

of Regs. 4312(c)).

11) Weapons and Traps. No person shall carry, possess or discharge across, in or into any

portion of any unit any weapon, firearm, bow and arrow, trap, net, or device capable of

injuring, or killing any person or animal, or capturing any animal, or damaging any

public or private property, except where the Department of Parks and Recreation finds

that it is in its best interests (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4313).

Site Specific Regulations

1) Hand launchable boats, royak, and kayaks are permitted, but there are areas and

beaches where boats cannot come ashore: including, but not limited to, Headland

Cove, Bluefish Cove, and the beach at Whalers Cove (Pt. Lobos State Reserve Rules

and Regulations).

2) Skin, free, and SCUBA diving in Whalers Cove and Bluefish Cove is allowed pursuant

to the following regulations: (Pt. Lobos State Reserve Rules and Regulations)

i) Diving permits are limited to 15 teams on any one day, with each team consisting of

2 or 3 divers.

ii) All SCUBA divers must have a device capable of maintaining positive buoyancy.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

51

iii) Divers may enter and exit water only at the access ramp at Whalers Cove parking

lot.

iv) No teams will be permitted to register with less than two hours prior to the

Reserve's posted closing time (5 P.M. winter, 7 P.M. summer).

3) No fishing equipment or collecting tools are permitted in the Reserve (Pt. Lobos State

Reserve Rules and Regulations).

4) It is unlawful to fly any aircraft, including any airplane or helicopterÖless than 1,000 feet

above water or land over the Point Lobos State ReserveÖexcept for rescue operations, in

case of any emergency, or for scientific or filmmaking purposes under a permit issued by

the department after a review of potential biological impacts (Fish and Game Code

10501.5(a)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Pt. Lobos State Reserve overlaps in area with the Pt. Lobos Ecological Reserve. Both

state reserve and ecological reserve regulations are enforced by on-site State Park rangers.

Park rangers give tickets to individuals who are caught violating the regulations. Park

volunteer naturalists (docents) are trained to report any violations to park rangers. In

addition, park rangers may call California Department of Fish and Game wardens for

assistance with violations occurring offshore. (Jerry Loomis, State Park Ranger, pers.

comm.)

Enforcement of regulations pertaining to the marine portion of the reserve appears to be

very effective. There is a low incidence of poaching in the reserve and human impacts on

natural resources appears to be low (Jerry Loomis, State Park Ranger, pers. comm.).

Achievement of Purpose

The following research projects examined the effectiveness of the state reserve to protect

animal populations. These studies demonstrate that reserves which limit fishing may help

protect animal resources in the reserves from human-induced degradation.

Paddack, M.J. 1996. A summary of this research can be found on page 40.

Pollard, S. 1990. A summary of this research can be found page 41.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Pt. Lobos Ecological Reserve

ï California Sea Otter Game Refuge

ï Point Lobos Ecological Reserve ASBS

References

McArdle, D. A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California

Sea Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.

Paddack, M.J. 1996. The influence of marine reserves upon rockfish populations in central

California kelp forests. M.S. Thesis. University of California, Santa Cruz. 40 pp.

Pollard, S. 1990. Red abalone, Haliotis rufescens; relative impacts of recreational fisheries

and sea otter predation on the abundance, size frequency and microhabitat distribution of

red abalone populations in central and northern California. M.S. Thesis. University of

California, Santa Cruz. 67 pp.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

52

Pt. Lobos State Reserve website. http://www.pt-lobos.parks.state.ca.us/
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

53

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: No Harvest

Legislated Title of Site: Marine Resources Protection Act Ecological Reserve

Location of Site

See Figure 9 for exact location

Monterey County

1) Big Creek Marine Resources Protection Act Ecological Reserve

Year Established

1994

Established By

Marine Resources Protection Act (MRPA), State Legislature

Agencies Responsible

Fish and Game Commission

California Department of Fish and Game

U.C. Santa Cruz Reserve Manager

Purpose

To provide for scientific research related to the management and enhancement of marine

resources (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5).

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Protection of Resources. No person shall disturb the geological formations or

archaeological artifacts, or take or disturb any plant, animal, or habitat of any plant or

animal, within an MRPA ecological reserve, except as authorized in conjunction with

scientific research approved by the department (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5(a)(1)).

2) Conditioning Research. Scientific research approved within an MRPA ecological

reserve may be conditioned by the department to avoid adverse effects to the reserve

and other research underway within the reserve, and to assure that activities are

compatible with the research purposes of the reserve and activities adjacent to the

reserve (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5(a)(2)).

3) Fishing. Fishing is prohibited within an MRPA ecological reserve, except as

authorized pursuant to scientific research approved by the department (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 630.5(a)(3)).

4) Collecting. No collecting shall be done, except as authorized pursuant to scientific

research approved by the department. Any person collecting within an MRPA

ecological reserve must have a valid scientific collecting permit issued pursuant to

Subdivision 3 of this title commencing with Section 650 (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

630.5(a)(4)).

5) Swimming. No person shall swim, wade, dive, or use any diving equipment in an

MRPA ecological reserve, except as authorized pursuant to scientific research

approved by the department (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5(a)(5)).

6) Boating. No person shall launch or operate a boat or other floating device within an

MRPA ecological reserve except to pass through the area during the normal course of
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

54

vessel transit along the coast, to avoid inclement weather, or pursuant to scientific

research approved by the department (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5(a)(6)).

7) Firearms. No person shall possess, fire, or discharge any firearm, bow and arrow, air

or gas gun, spear gun, or any other weapon of any kind within, or into an MRPA

ecological reserve except as authorized pursuant to scientific research approved by the

department (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5(a)(7)).

8) Ejection. Employees of the department may eject any person from an MRPA

ecological reserve for violation of any of these rules or regulations or for any reason

when it appears that the general safety or welfare of the ecological reserve, persons

thereon, or scientific research being conducted in the reserve are endangered (14 Cal.

Code of Regs. 630.5(a)(8)).

9) Public Entry. Public entry into an MRPA ecological reserve may be restricted at the

discretion of the department to protect the wildlife, aquatic life, or habitat. No person,

except state and local law enforcement officers, fire suppression agencies and

employees of the department in the performance of their official duties or persons

possessing written permission from the department, or institution or agency entering

into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the department, may enter an area

which is closed to public entry (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5(a)(9)).

10) Introduction of Species. The release of any fish or wildlife species, including

domestic or domesticated species, or the introduction of any plant species into an

MRPA ecological reserve, is prohibited unless authorized pursuant to scientific

research approved by the department (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5(a)(10)).

11) Feeding of Wildlife. The feeding of fish or wildlife is prohibited except as authorized

pursuant to scientific research approved by the department (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

630.5(a)(11)).

12) Pesticides, Herbicides, and Other Regulated Chemicals. The use of pesticides,

herbicides, and other regulated chemicals is prohibited in MRPA ecological reserves

except as authorized pursuant to scientific research approved by the department.

Where such chemicals are intended to be used as a part of any research program, any

necessary authorizations and/or permits required to dispense such chemicals into state

waters or tide and submerged lands shall be obtained prior to final approval of the

research by the department (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5(a)(12)).

13) Litter. No person shall deposit, drop, or scatter any debris on any MRPA ecological

reserve. Any refuse resulting from a person's use of an area must be removed from that

area by such person (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5(a)(13)).

14) Aircraft. No person shall operate any aircraft or hovercraft within an MRPA

ecological reserve, except as authorized pursuant to scientific research approved by the

department (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5(a)(14)).

15) Pets. Pets, including but not limited to, dogs and cats, are prohibited from entering an

MRPA ecological reserve unless authorized by the department (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

630.5(a)(15)).

16) Research. Research related to the management and enhancement of marine resources

may be approved within an MRPA ecological reserve by the department (14 Cal. Code

of Regs. 630.5(a)(16)).

17) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The department may enter into MOU's with

colleges, universities, and other bonafide research organizations, including

Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB), to conduct marine-related research within an

MRPA Ecological Reserve (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5(a)(17)).

Site Specific Regulations

1) The Department shall only approve research within the Big Creek MRPA Ecological

Reserve which is compatible with research underway within the reserve area prior to

its establishment by the commission, such research compatibility to be determined by
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

55

contacting the Reserve Manager for the Landels-Hill Big Creek Reserve prior to

authorizing research within the reserve (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.5(b)(2)(A)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

CDFG wardens are responsible for enforcing regulations. CDFG wardens are aided by

John Smiley, the UC Santa Cruz reserve manager, who notifies wardens when poaching

or other violations are seen in the reserve. Local fisherman have begun to notify John

Smiley or CDFG wardens when they see poachers in the reserve (John Smiley, pers.

comm.).

In the past few years, the incidence of poaching in the reserve has declined significantly.

Most of the initial poaching incidents were unintentional because fishermen were

unfamiliar with the reserves boundaries. The decrease in poaching over the last few years

is probably due to increased awareness of the reserve boundaries and increased local

enforcement of regulations (John Smiley, pers. comm.).

Achievement of Purpose

The purpose of this zone is to provide a location for scientific research related to the

management and enhancement of marine resources. The following research projects

illustrate that this zone appears to be achieving its purpose.

Paddack, M.J. 1996. A summary of this research can be found on page 40.

Pomeroy, C. and J. Beck. 1998. SUMMARY: To determine the effectiveness of Marine

Ecological Reserves (MERs) in protecting and enhancing fishery resources it is essential

to allocate resources and develop mechanisms for monitoring them over time. This,

however, requires financial and personnel resources that may or may not be readily

available from the state. An alternative or complement lies in the possibility of involving

local fishermen in the collection of data and other management tasks. Big Creek

Ecological Reserve, is unique among the four MERs in that such a system of cooperative

management had emerged well before its formal establishment. Since 1991, the manager

of the adjacent terrestrial reserve and local fishermen have mapped and systematically

collected data on rockfish catches at sites near the marine reserve in an attempt to monitor

the effects of local fishing on the MER and vice verse. This research explores the Big

Creek arrangement, its history and evolution, as well as current efforts to refine and

enhance the system so that it may better serve research and management needs. The

cooperative arrangement is discussed in connection with its benefits for both local fishers

and managers including: 1) the provision of low cost, high quality fishery-dependent data

to the MER and local fisheries; and 2) the maintenance of ongoing communication

among local fishermen, researchers and managers. Taken together, these elements may

enhance the effectiveness of the MER.

VenTresca, D.A., M.L. Gingras, J. Ugoretz, A. Voss, S. Blair, J. Plant, R. Hornady, and C.

Yoshiyama. 1998. SUMMARY: The establishment of the Big Creek Ecological Reserve

(BCER), approximately 50 miles south of Monterey, California, presents a unique

opportunity to evaluate the effects of a marine reserve on central Californiaís rockfish

resource. Obtaining baseline information on species composition, densities, and length

frequencies of rockfish populations within and adjacent to BCER is the crucial first step

for determining change in population parameters and future benefits to adjacent and

distant fisheries. This information will allow resource managers to evaluate marine

reserves as an alternative management tool for rockfish populations. Population

parameters of selected fish species in nearshore habitats within and adjacent to BCER

have been assessed visually (densities) by SCUBA divers and recorded with an
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

56

underwater video camera equipped with paired lasers (length frequencies) along

permanent and random transects. Preliminary analysis of the data suggest that: 1) the

mean count of rockfish/permanent transect was significantly greater in BCER than in

adjacent areas; and 2) mean length of gopher rockfish was significantly greater in BCER

than in adjacent areas.

Yoklavich, M., R. Starr, J. Steger, H.G. Greene, F. Schwing, C. Malzone. 1997.

SUMMARY: Characterizations of benthic fish habitat and coastal ocean circulation

patterns are critical steps in evaluating the effectiveness of the Big Creek Ecological

Reserve at protecting and enhancing coastal fishery resources. With the coordinated

efforts of geologists, biologists, and physical oceanographers, geophysical and

oceanographic data were collected during a 4-day (3-6 June 1996) research cruise

onboard the NOAA ship McArthur. Maps of bottom types were made using side scan

sonar to survey 24.6 km2

 of the continental shelf along the Big Sur coast in water

depths from 30 to 200 m. Eight types of potential benthic habitats were identified and

quantified. About eight percent of the survey area, both inside and outside the

reserve, was made up of complex rock bottom types with relatively high relief; these

areas appeared to be suitable habitats for many benthic species of rockfishes. These

habitat characterizations will help direct future efforts to assess fishes and their

habitat associations within the reserve.

Patterns of ocean circulation over the continental shelf and upper slope to a distance

of 40 km offshore were also characterized. Upwelling and substantial offshore

transport off Point Sur and Lopez Point were evident in temperature, salinity, and

current data collected at sea and in satellite sea surface temperature (SST) imagery. A

coherent 10-20 km-wide coastal current was found flowing northward at a rate of 8-

15 cm/sec through the Big Creek Ecological Reserve and extending from the surface

to 200 m in depth. This information will help define the physical processes that affect

the distribution, transport, and survival of young fishes, and clarify expectations for

recruitment from the reserve to nearby unprotected areas.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Military

ï California Sea Otter Game Refuge

References

California Department of Fish and Game website, Fish and Game Laws and Regulations

homepage. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/regs.html

McArdle, D. A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California

Sea Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.

Paddack, M.J. 1996. The influence of marine reserves upon rockfish populations in central

California kelp forests. M.S. Thesis. University of California, Santa Cruz. 40 pp.

Pomeroy, C. and J. Beck. 1998. Cooperative management of the stateís Marine Ecological

Reserves: Preliminary evidence from Big Creek. Pages 105-116 In O.T. Magoon, H.

Converse, B. Baird, and M. Miller-Henson, eds. California and the World Ocean í97. Taking

a Look at Californiaís Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future. ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

VenTresca, D.A., M.L. Gingras, J. Ugoretz, A. Voss, S. Blair, J. Plant, R. Hornady, and C.

Yoshiyama. 1998. The potential of marine reserves to enhance fisheries. Pages 400-411 In
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

57

O.T. Magoon, H. Converse, B. Baird, and M. Miller-Henson, eds. California and the World

Ocean í97. Taking a Look at Californiaís Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future.

ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

Yoklavich, M., R. Starr, J. Steger, H.G. Greene, F. Schwing, C. Malzone. 1997. Mapping

Benthic Habitats and Ocean Currents in the Vicinity of Central Californiaís Big Creek

Ecological Reserve. U.S. Dept. of Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TMNMFS-SWFSC-245. 52 pp.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

58

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Limited Harvest

Legislated Title of Site: Marine Life Refuge

Location of Site

See Figure 10 for exact location

San Mateo County

1) James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve

Year Established

1969

Established By

State Legislature

Agency Responsible

California Department of Fish and Game

Purpose

No legally mandated purpose accompanies the marine life refuge designation.

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Except under a permit or specific authorization, it is unlawful: to take or possess any

invertebrate or specimen of marine plant life in a marine life refuge (Fish and Game

Code 10500(f)).

2) Non-commercial Use of Invertebrates. Tidal invertebrates may not be taken in any

tidepool or other areas between the high tide mark (defined as Mean Higher High Tide)

and 1,000 feet seaward and lateral to the low tide mark (defined as Mean Lower Low

Water) except as follows: In all other areas, except where prohibited within marine life

refuges or other special closures: Abalone, limpets, moon snails, turban snails, chiones,

clams, cockles, mussels, rock scallops, native oysters, octopuses, squid, crabs, lobsters,

shrimp, sand dollars, sea urchins and worms may be taken (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

29.05(b)(2)).

3) Non-commercial Use of Marine Plants. Marine aquatic plants may not be cut or harvested

in marine life refuges, marine reserves, ecological reserves, national parks or state

underwater parks (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 30.00(b)).

Site Specific Regulations

1) In the James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve, the following fish and mollusks may be

taken under the authority of a sportfishing license, as authorized by this code: abalone,

rockfish (Sebastes), lingcod, surfperch (Embiotocidae), monkeyface eel, rock eel,

white croaker, halibut, cabezon (Scopaenichthys marmoratus), kelp greenling

(Hexogrammos decagrammus), and smelt (Osmeridae and Antherinidae). No such fish

having fins may be taken except by hook and line or by spearfishing. All other fish and

forms of aquatic life are protected and may not be taken without a written permit from

the department (Fish and Game Code 10666).

2) Commercial Use of Invertebrates. No mollusks, crustaceans or other invertebrates may

be taken in Marine Life Refuges, except the James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

59

pursuant to subsection 8305.5(b), Fish and Game Code (14 Cal. Code of Reg.

123(f)(2)(a)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Reserve regulations are enforced by reserve staff and volunteers, CDFG wardens, and the

San Mateo County sheriffís department. Currently, approximately 90% of enforcement is

by reserve staff and volunteers due to their frequent presence in the reserve while leading

educational and monitoring programs. The frequent (approximately 25% of daylight

hours), yet unpredictable, presence of staff and volunteers in the reserve may act to deter

poaching in the reserve. In addition, having regulations posted at every entrance to the

reserve appears to help educate visitors about activities that are restricted in the reserve

(Bob Breen, supervising naturalist, James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve).

Achievement of Purpose ñ (based on comments from Bob Breen, supervising naturalist,

James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve)

Evaluation of this zone is difficult because it lacks a legally mandated purpose. However,

there are a number of ongoing programs at the reserve that act to monitor biological

resources, educate visitors, and involve the community in management.

Seashore Docents. The seashore docents program began in 1972 and currently has 55

adult volunteers. Docents act as roving naturalist interpreters on weekends. In addition,

docents lead field trips for children (grades 3 ñ12). Approximately 4,000 school children

attend field trips in the reserve each year.

High School Naturalists. The high school naturalist program began in 1995. Each year

29 juniors and seniors from Half Moon Bay High School attend classes in the fall and

winter to learn the natural history of central California marine habitats. In the spring

these students lead tidepool discovery walks for visiting children (grades 3-12).

Friends of the Fitzgerald Marine Reserve. Friends of the Fitzgerald Marine Reserve is a

non-profit organization that began in 1985. This organization publishes a newsletter,

financially supports the reserveís education programs, and acts as a political advocate for

the reserve at the city, county, and state level.

S.E.A.L.S. The S.E.A.L.S. program monitors harbor seals and sea otters to determine if

human activities impact the behavior of these animals. Determining changes in the

animalís reproductive behavior is the major focus of this program. The S.E.A.L.S.

program is run through the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary.

Junior Naturalists. The junior naturalist program, which began in 1992, teaches junior

high school students how to assist reserve staff with ongoing projects that monitor human

impacts on the plants and animals in the reserve.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Montara SB

ï James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve ASBS

References

McArdle, D. A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California

Sea Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.
20 0 20 40 60 Kilometers

James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve

Half Moon Bay

Elkhorn Slough Ecological Reserve

Año Nuevo State Reserve

Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve

Pacific Grove Marine Garden Fish Refuge

Pacific Grove Marine Reserve

Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park/

Underwater Park

a

a

b

b

c c

d

d

e

e

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

38°30' 38°30'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

100 m contour intervals

50 m contour intervals

100 m contour intervals

50 m contour intervals

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

60

FIGURE 10. Location of Limited Harvest Zones
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

61

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Limited Harvest

Legislated Title of Site: State Reserve

Location of Site

See Figure 10 for exact location

Santa Cruz County

1) AÒo Nuevo State Reserve

Year Established

1958

Established By

State Parks and Recreation Commission

Agencies Responsible

Department of Parks and Recreation

State Parks and Recreation Commission

California Department of Fish and Game

State Lands Commission

Purpose

The purpose of a state reserve is to preserve native ecological associations, unique faunal and

floral characteristics, geological features, and scenic qualities in a condition of undisturbed

integrity (Public Resources Code 5019.65).

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Living and non-living resources contained within state reserves shall not be disturbed

or removed for other than scientific or management purpose (Public Resources Code

5019.65).

2) Non-commercial Use of Invertebrates. Tidal invertebrates may not be taken in any

tidepool or other areas between the high tide mark (defined as Mean Higher High Tide)

and 1,000 feet seaward and lateral to the low tide mark (defined as Mean Lower Low

Water) except as follows: In state parks, state beaches, state recreation areas, state

underwater parks, state reserves, national parks, national monuments or national

seashores: Only abalones, chiones, clams, cockles, rock scallops, native oysters, crabs,

lobsters, ghost shrimp and sea urchins may be taken. Worms may be taken except that no

worms may be taken in any mussel bed, unless worms are taken incidental to the

harvesting of mussels. Mussels may be taken in all areas except in state park system

reserves or natural preserves (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 29.05(b)(1)).

3) Commercial Use of Invertebrates. In and offshore [between the high tide mark and 1,000

feet beyond the low tide mark] of all other state ecological reserves, state parks, state

reserves, national parks, national monuments, or national seashores, only the following

invertebrates may be taken: crabs, ghost shrimp, jackknife clams, sea urchins, squid, and

worms, except that no worms may be taken in any mussel bed, nor may any person pick

up, remove, detach from the substrate any other organisms, or break up, remove or destroy

any rocks or other substrate or surfaces to which organisms are attached (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 123(f)(4)).
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

62

4) Aircraft. No person shall parachute into, fly an aircraft, ultralight vehicle, or hand

glider over, or parasail or balloon over any State Park unit at an altitude of less than

500 feet unless authorized by the Department [of Parks and Recreation] by posted

order in accordance with Section 4301(i) (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4304).

5) Animals. No person shall molest, hunt, disturb, injure, trap, take, net, poison, harm,

kill, feed, touch, tease, or spotlight any kind of animal or fish, or so attempt, except

that fish and bait may be taken other than for commercial purposes in accordance with

the state laws and regulations, provided, however, that no person shall use or discharge

a spear or bow and arrow in units under control of the Department [of Parks and

Recreation] (except in underwater parks or on designated archery ranges). This section

does not apply to activities undertaken by the Department in conjunction with its

resource management activities (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4305(a)).

6) Driftwood. No person may gather more than 50 pounds or one piece of driftwood each

day in the State Park System...Use of tools, vehicles, and equipment for the collection

of driftwood is prohibited. Upon a finding that it will be in the interest of the

Department of Parks and Recreation, the District Superintendent may, by posting,

authorize the collection of driftwood from specified units on a temporary basis, either

by the general public or by commercial operators, if necessary, in quantities, for

purposes, and by means other than as specified by this section (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

4306).

7) Geological Features. No person shall destroy, disturb, mutilate, or remove earth, sand,

gravel, oil, minerals, rocks, paleontological features, or features of caves except

rockhounding may be permitted as defined and delineated in Sections 4610 through

4610.10 (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4307).

8) Archaeological Features. No person shall remove, injure, disfigure, deface, or destroy

any object of archaeological, or historical interest or value (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

4308).

9) Litter. No person shall leave, deposit, drop, or scatter bottles, broken glass, ashes,

waste paper, cans or other litter in a unit except in a receptacle designated for that

purpose, and no person shall import any litter, or import and deposit any litter into or

in any unit from other places (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4310).

10) Dogs. No person shall bring a dog into, permit a dog to enter or remain, or possess a

dog in units under control of Department of Parks and Recreation unless the dog is on

leash of no more than six feet in length and under the immediate control of a person or

confined in a vehicle (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4312(a)). No person shall bring a dog

into, permit a dog to enter or remain, or possess a dog on any beach adjacent to any

body of water in any unit except in portions of units designated for dogs (14 Cal. Code

of Regs. 4312(c)).

11) Weapons and Traps. No person shall carry, possess or discharge across, in or into any

portion of any unit any weapon, firearm, bow and arrow, trap, net, or device capable of

injuring, or killing any person or animal, or capturing any animal, or damaging any

public or private property, except where the Department of Parks and Recreation finds

that it is in its best interests (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4313).

Site Specific Regulations

1) Tidal invertebrates may not be taken in any tidepool or other areas between the high tide

mark (defined as Mean Higher High Tide) and 1,000 feet seaward and lateral to the low

tide mark (defined as Mean Lower Low Water) except as follows: Special Closure. No

invertebrates shall be taken on the mainland shore within the boundaries of AÒo Nuevo

State Reserve between the high tide mark and 100 feet beyond the low tide mark between

November 30 and April 30 (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 29.05(b)(3)).

2) It is unlawful to fly any aircraft, including any airplane or helicopterÖless than 1,000 feet

above water or land over the AÒo Nuevo State ReserveÖexcept for rescue operations, in

case of any emergency, or for scientific or filmmaking purposes under a permit issued by
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

63

the department after a review of potential biological impacts (Fish and Game Code

10501.5(a)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Regulations are enforced by on-site State Park rangers. Park rangers give tickets to

individuals who are caught violating reserve regulations. Park volunteer naturalists

(docents) are trained to report any regulation violations to park rangers. In addition, park

rangers may call CDFG wardens for assistance with violations occurring offshore (Jerry

Loomis, State Park Ranger, pers. comm.).

Achievement of Purpose

No research to date has examined the effectiveness of the state reserve regulations to

preserve native ecological associations, unique faunal and floral characteristics,

geological features, and scenic qualities in a condition of undisturbed integrity.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï AÒo Nuevo Point and Island ASBS

References

AÒo Nuevo State Reserve website. http://www.anonuevo.org

McArdle, D. A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California

Sea Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

64

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Limited Harvest

Legislated Title of Sites: Ecological Reserve

Location of Sites

See Figure 10 for exact locations

Monterey County

1) Elkhorn Slough Ecological Reserve

2) Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve

Year Established

Elkhorn Slough Ecological Reserve - 1980

Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve - 1976

Established By

Ecological Reserve Act, State Legislature

Agencies Responsible

Fish and Game Commission

California Department of Fish and Game

Purpose

Ecological reserves are established to provide protection for rare, threatened, or endangered

native plants, wildlife, aquatic organisms and specialized terrestrial or aquatic habitat types (14

Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0).

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Non-commercial Use of Marine Plants. Marine aquatic plants may not be cut or harvested

in marine life refuges, marine reserves, ecological reserves, national parks or state

underwater parks (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 30.00(b)).

2) Commercial Use of Invertebrates. In and offshore [between the high tide mark and 1,000

feet beyond the low tide mark] of all other state ecological reserves, state parks, state

reserves, national parks, national monuments, or national seashores, only the following

invertebrates may be taken: crabs, ghost shrimp, jackknife clams, sea urchins, squid, and

worms, except that no worms may be taken in any mussel bed, nor may any person pick

up, remove, detach from the substrate any other organisms, or break up, remove or destroy

any rocks or other substrate or surfaces to which organisms are attached (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 123(f)(4)).

3) Protection of Resources. No person shall mine or disturb geological formations or

archaeological artifacts, or take or disturb any bird, or nests or eggs thereof, or any plant,

mammal, fish, mollusk, crustacean, amphibian, reptile, or any other form of plant or

animal life except at provided in subsections 630.0 (a)(2) and (a)(8). The department may

implement enhancement and protective measures to assure proper utilization and

maintenance of ecological reserves (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(1)).

4) Fishing. Fishing shall be allowed in accordance with the general fishing regulations of the

commission, except that the method of taking fish shall be limited to angling from shore.

No person shall take fish for commercial purposes, except by permit from the commission

(14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(2)).
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

65

5) Collecting. No collecting shall be done in an ecological reserve except by permit issued

pursuant to section 650 of these regulations. Any person applying for a permit must have a

valid scientific collecting permit issued pursuant to part 3 of this title (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 630.0(a)(3)).

6) Swimming. No person shall swim, wade, dive, or use any diving equipment within an

ecological reserve except as authorized under the terms of a permit issued pursuant to

subsection (3) (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(5)).

7) Boating. No person shall launch or operate a boat or other floating device within an

ecological reserve except by permit from the commission (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

630.0(a)(6)).

8) Firearms. No person shall fire or discharge any firearm, bow and arrow, air or gas gun,

spear gun, or any other weapon of any kind within or into an ecological reserve or possess

such weapon within an ecological reserve, except law enforcement personnel and as

provided for in individual area regulations that allow for hunting (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

630.0(a)(8)).

9) Ejection. Employees of the department may eject any person from an ecological reserve

for violation of any of these rules or regulations or for any reason when it appears that the

general safety of the ecological reserve or persons thereon is endangered (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 630.0(a)(9)).

10) Public Entry. Public entry may be restricted on any area at the discretion of the

department to protect the wildlife, aquatic life, or habitat. No person, except state and

local law enforcement officers, fire suppression agencies and employees of the

department in the performance of their official duties or persons possessing written

permission from the department, may enter any ecological reserve, or portion thereof,

which is closed to public entry. No person may enter any ecological reserve between

sunset and sunrise except with written permission from the department, which may be

granted for purposes including night fishing in accordance with subsection 630.0(a)(2)

from designated shore areas only (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(10)).

11) Introduction of Species. Unless authorized by the commission, the release of any fish or

wildlife species, including domestic or domesticated species, or the introduction of any

plant species, is prohibited. The department may reintroduce endemic species on

ecological reserves for management purposes (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(11)).

12) Feeding of Wildlife. The feeding of wildlife is prohibited (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

630.0(a)(12)).

13) Pesticides. The use of pesticides is prohibited on any ecological reserve unless

authorized by the commission (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(13)).

14) Litter. No person shall deposit, drop, or scatter any debris on any ecological reserve

except in a receptacle or area designated for that purpose. Where no designated

receptacles are provided, any refuse resulting from a person's use of an area must be

removed from that area by such person (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(14)).

15) Aircraft. No person shall operate any aircraft or hovercraft within a reserve, except as

authorized by a permit from the commission (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(17)).

16) Pets. Pets, including dogs and cats, are prohibited from entering reserves unless they are

retained on a leash of less than ten feet or are inside a motor vehicle (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 630.0(a)(18)).

17) Fires. No person shall light fireworks or other explosive or incendiary devices, or start or

maintain any fire on or in any reserve, except for management purposes as provided in

subsection (a)(1) (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(a)(19)).

18) Vandalism. No person shall tamper with, damage or remove any property not his own

when such property is located within an ecological reserve (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

630.0(a)(21)).
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

66

Site Specific Regulations

Elkhorn Slough Ecological Reserve:

1) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(1), (3), (5), (6), and (12), the

department may issue permits to conduct biological research projects with the reserve.

Such projects shall be compatible with the primary purposes of the reserve (14 Cal

Code of Regs. 630.0(b)(37)(A)).

2) Fishing shall be conducted from only those specific areas of the reserve designated by

the Department (14 Cal Code of Regs. 630.0(b)(37)(B)).

3) Hunting shall be permitted in accordance with the general hunting regulations, but only

at such times and in specific areas as designated by the Department (14 Cal Code of

Regs. 630.0(b)(37)(C)).

4) Grazing shall be allowed under permit from the department. The department may

restrict the use of horses by grazing permittees (14 Cal Code of Regs.

630.0(b)(37)(D)).

5) All designated public access trails are opened to foot access only (14 Cal Code of

Regs. 630.0(b)(37)(E)).

6) The causing of excessive noise especially that amplified electronically is prohibited (14

Cal Code of Regs. 630.0(b)(37)(F)).

7) Picnicking shall be conducted in only those areas designated by the Department (14

Cal Code of Regs. 630.0(b)(37)(G)).

Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve:

1) Commercial Use of Invertebrates. No mollusks, crustaceans or other invertebrates may

be taken in Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve (14 Cal. Code of Reg. 123(f)(2)(c)).

2) Sport fishing with hook and line, spear gun or hand-held implements shall be permitted

from boats as well as from shore. No invertebrates may be taken, possessed or

destroyed (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(b)(26)(A)).

3) Swimming, boating, surfing, skin and SCUBA diving are permitted (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 630.0(b)(26)(B)).

4) Within Stillwater Cove kelp may be removed at any time to allow the passage and

mooring of boats between Pescadero Rocks and Arrowhead Point (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 630.0(b)(26)(C)).

5) If, at any time, the director of the department finds that the harvesting of kelp will tend

to destroy or impair any kelp bed or beds, or parts thereof, or tend to impair or destroy

the supply of any food for fish or wildlife, the director shall serve on every person

licensed to harvest kelp a 48-hour advance, written notice that the kelp bed, or a part

thereof, will be closed to the harvesting of kelp for a period not to exceed one year.

After service of such a notice the person upon whom notice is served may appeal to the

commission for a hearing to reopen the kelp bed or part thereof (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

630.0(b)(26)(D)).

6) Not more than five percent (5%) of the total weight of kelp harvested in any one day

shall consist of Nereocystis (bull kelp) (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(b)(26)(E)).

7) Any licensed person or company intending to harvest kelp within the ecological

reserve shall give the department's regional manager of the Marine Resources Region,

or his designee, atleast 48-hours oral notice of the intention to harvest. At the option of

the department, an observer selected by the department may accompany the harvester

during such a harvesting (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(b)(26)(F)).

8) Not more than 50 percent of the kelp within Bed 219 shall be harvested in any fourmonth period (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 630.0(b)(26)(G)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

67

The regulations of the Elkhorn Slough and Carmel Bay ecological reserves are enforced by

California Department of Fish and Game wardens. Enforcement is intermittent and subject to

warden availability.

Achievement of Purpose

The following research projects have examined the effectiveness of the regulations to protect

plant and animal populations. These studies demonstrate that regulations limiting activities,

such as fishing or hiking, within marine zones can help protect plant and animal resources

from human-induced degradation.

Elkhorn Slough Ecological Reserve

Woolfolk, A. 1999. SUMMARY: The effects of human trampling on Salicornia virginica

assemblages in Elkhorn Slough, California were experimentally tested using 9 levels of

trampling intensity over 6 months, then allowing plots to recover for 1 year. Responses

to cattle grazing also were examined. Human trampling at all levels decreased S.

virginica height and flower production. Percent cover of S. virginica remained high

(~90%) in intermediate and lightly trampled plots, but bare ground dominated in heavily

trampled areas. Once trampling ceased, open space was first colonized by non-native

upland plants or algae, and later, S. virginica. After 1 year of recovery, S. virginica in

heavily trampled areas was shorter than untrampled controls, bare patches remained in

some plots, and there were significant differences between invertebrates present in

heavily trampled areas and controls. Actively grazed cattle pasture was characterized by

high percentages of bare ground and Distichlis, while ungrazed marsh was comprised of

~100% S. virginica. However, plants responded quickly to the removal of cattle. After

15 months of recovery, Distichlis and bare ground declined, and S. virginica increased.

Overall, trampling and grazing can decrease S. virginica abundance, lead to changes in

community organization, promote invasions by introduced species, and contribute to loss

of marsh habitat.

Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve

Schlining, K. L. (in progress). SUMMARY: Due to a recent 5-fold increase in spot prawn

(Pandalus platyceros) landings, data were collected at sea to establish the current status

of the Carmel Canyon trap fishery. Prawn traps were set within the boundaries of the

Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve and in the neighboring fishing grounds in order to

quantify the importance of the reserve relative to spot prawns. Significant differences

were found inside the reserve compared to outside the reserve including: higher mean

catch-per-unit-effort (kg per trap), higher male to female sex ratio, and differences in

mean carapace lengths. The Carmel Canyon spot prawn resource appears to be in healthy

condition overall. However, monitoring should be continued in the future if catches

continue to increase.

Overlapping Sites

Elkhorn Slough Ecological Reserve

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Elkhorn Slough National Ecological Research Reserve

Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Carmel River SB

ï California Sea Otter Game Refuge

ï Carmel Bay ASBS
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

68

References

California Department of Fish and Game website, Fish and Game Laws and Regulations

homepage. http://www.dfg.ca.gov/regs.html

McArdle, D. A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California

Sea Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.

Schlining, K. L. (in progress). The spot prawn Pandalus platyceros trap fishery in Carmel

submarine canyon, CA. M.S. Thesis. Moss Landing Marine Laboratories.

Woolfolk, A. 1999. The effects of human trampling and cattle grazing on salt marsh

assemblages in Elkhorn Slough, California. M.S. Thesis. Moss Landing Marine Laboratories.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

69

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Limited Harvest

Legislated Title of Site: Marine Refuge

Location of Site

See Figure 10 for exact location

Monterey County

1) Pacific Grove Marine Refuge (PGMR)

Year Established

1952

Established By

City Ordinance, Pacific Grove City Council∗

Agencies Responsible

Pacific Grove City Manager

Pacific Grove Public Works Department

Pacific Grove Police Department

Pacific Grove City Council, Natural Resources Committee

Purpose

To protect certain kinds of marine life and to provide a marine garden for the City of Pacific

Grove (Pacific Grove City Code, Chapter 14.04.010).

Regulations

General Regulations

None

Site Specific Regulations

1) Unlawful Acts. Anyone taking specimens of marine plant life, or who willfully disturbs,

injures of destroys marine animal habitats or who removes sand, gravel, or rocks therefrom

shall be guilty of a misdemeanor (PG City Code, Chapter 14.04.020).+

2) Removal of Certain Material Permitted. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section

14.04.020, nonliving animals or portions thereof, detached plants, pebbles, flotsam and

jetsam may be removed for noncommercial purposes and reduced to possession, but the

quantity of nonliving animals and pebbles that may be taken shall not exceed the

possession of one handful. The marine refuge shall not be subject to habitat destruction by

the relocation and repositioning of large rocks. The city manager or his or her delegated

 

∗

 A 1931 act of the California Legislature granted to the City of Pacific Grove all the right, title, interest, and estate

of the lands from the mean high tide line to the 60 foot depth contour between the southeasterly corporate limit

line and the westerly corporate limit line of the city. The City of Pacific Grove has authority to regulate

disposition of substrate within its land holdings, including the PGMR.

+

 The California Department of fish and Game (CDFG) has authority to regulate all living marine resources (animal

and plants) within the sovereign waters of the State of California, including the PGMR. The City cannot restrict

the take of marine plants unless such restriction is consistent with regulations imposed by the State. The State

allows take of most marine plants within the area of the PGMR (see Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge

regulations).
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

70

authority may issue permits for scientific collecting of specific organisms or objects in

specific quantities within the Marine Preserve of the city of Pacific Grove (PG City Code,

Chapter 14.04.020). ∇

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Enforcement of the PGMR regulations is difficult to assess independently of the Pacific

Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge and the Hopkins Marine Life Refuge, which have

overlapping boundaries with the PGMR. For a summary of enforcement in the Hopkins

Marine Life Refuge and the Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge see pages 40 and 67,

respectively.

Achievement of Purpose

Evaluation of the PGMR is difficult because its boundaries overlap with those of the Pacific

Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge and the Hopkins Marine Life Refuge. Please refer to the

Hopkins Marine Life Refuge and the Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge evaluation

sections on pages 40 and 67, respectively.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Hopkins Marine Life Refuge

ï Asilomar SB

ï Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge

ï Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge and Hopkins Marine Life Refuge ASBS

References

None

 

∇ State regulations prohibit collection of shells or other parts of invertebrates (except sand dollars, sea urchins, and

worms) within the PGMR (see Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge regulations)
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

71

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Limited Harvest

Legislated Title of Site: Fish Refuge

Location of Site

See Figure 10 for exact locations

Monterey County

1) Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge

Year Established

1963

Established By

State Legislature

Agencies Responsible

Fish and Game Commission

California Department of Fish and Game

Purpose

No legally mandated purpose accompanies the fish refuge designation.

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Except under a permit or specific authorization, it is unlawful to take or possess any

species of fish or amphibian, or part thereof, in any fish refuge, or to use or have in

possession in such refuge any contrivance designed to be used for catching fish (Fish

and Game Code 10500(c)).

Site Specific Regulations

1) In the Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge, fish, other than mollusks and

crustaceans, may be taken under the authority of a sportfishing license as authorized by

this code (Fish and Game Code 10660(a)).

2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, holders of scientific collectors'

permits issued by the commission, or students working under their direction, may take

marine life for scientific purposes in this refuge (Fish and Game Code 10660(b)).

3) In this refuge, sardines, mackerel, anchovies, squid, and herring may be taken by ring

net, lampara net, or bait net as authorized by this code (Fish and Game Code

10660(c)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Regulations are enforced primarily by California Department of Fish and Game wardens.

Enforcement is intermittent and subject to availability of wardens. The City of Pacific

Grove Police Department helps the CDFG wardens enforce fish and game regulations.

Officers patrol the Pacific Grove coastline daily and, through their presence, act as a

deterrent to poaching activity in the refuge. The are five levels of action that a police

officer may take when a violation is observed (actions are listed in order of decreasing

frequency): 1) issue a verbal warning; 2) issue a warning citation; 3) detain individual(s)
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

72

for CDFG wardens; 4) issue a citation; or 5) make an arrest. Violation of the fish and

game code is a misdemeanor offense (Captain Carl Miller, Pacific Grove Police

Department, pers. comm.).

A local organization - The Coalition to Preserve and Protect Pacific Grove Tidepools - is

attempting to increase the protection of plant and animal populations in the Pacific Grove

Marine Gardens Fish Refuge.

Achievement of Purpose

Evaluation of this site is difficult because it lacks a legally mandated purpose. No

research to date has examined the effectiveness of the fish refuge regulations to protect

invertebrate and fish populations from over-exploitation.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Pacific Grove Marine Reserve

ï Asilomar SB

ï Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge and Hopkins Marine Life Refuge ASBS

References

McArdle, D. A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California

Sea Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

73

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Limited Harvest

Legislated Title of Site: State Park

Location of Site

See Figure 10 for exact location

Monterey County

1) Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park/State Underwater Park

Year Established

1970

Established By

State Parks and Recreation Commission

Agencies Responsible

Department of Parks and Recreation

Parks and Recreation Commission

California Department of Fish and Game

State Lands Commission

Purpose

The purpose of state parks shall be to preserve outstanding natural, scenic, and cultural

values, indigenous aquatic and terrestrial fauna and flora, and the most significant examples

of such ecological regions (Public Resources Code 5019.53). Underwater parks are leased by

the State Parks Service from the State Lands Commission as underwater extensions of

existing classified park units.

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Non-commercial Use of Invertebrates. Tidal invertebrates may not be taken in any

tidepool or other areas between the high tide mark (defined as Mean Higher High Tide)

and 1,000 feet seaward and lateral to the low tide mark (defined as Mean Lower Low

Water) except as follows: In state parks, state beaches, state recreation areas, state

underwater parks, state reserves, national parks, national monuments or national

seashores: Only abalones, chiones, clams, cockles, rock scallops, native oysters, crabs,

lobsters, ghost shrimp and sea urchins may be taken. Worms may be taken except that no

worms may be taken in any mussel bed, unless worms are taken incidental to the

harvesting of mussels. Mussels may be taken in all areas except in state park system

reserves or natural preserves (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 29.05(b)(1)).

2) Non-commercial Use of Marine Plant. Marine aquatic plants may not be cut or harvested

in marine life refuges, marine reserves, ecological reserves, national parks or state

underwater parks (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 30.00(b)).

3) Commercial Use of Invertebrates. In and offshore [between the high tide mark and 1,000

feet beyond the low tide mark] of all other state ecological reserves, state parks, state

reserves, national parks, national monuments, or national seashores, only the following

invertebrates may be taken: crabs, ghost shrimp, jackknife clams, sea urchins, squid, and

worms, except that no worms may be taken in any mussel bed, nor may any person pick

up, remove, detach from the substrate any other organisms, or break up, remove or destroy
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

74

any rocks or other substrate or surfaces to which organisms are attached (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 123(f)(4)).

4) No person shall enter an underwater park unit or scenic or scientific reserve for the

purpose of engaging in underwater activities, including skin, free and SCUBA diving,

other than through an established water entry point for underwater activities (14 Cal.

Code of Regs. 4664(c)).

5) No person shall take or disturb any marine plant or geological feature within the

boundaries of an underwater park or scenic or scientific reserve (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

4664(d)).

6) Aircraft. No person shall parachute into, fly an aircraft, ultralight vehicle, or hand

glider over, or parasail or balloon over any State Park unit at an altitude of less than

500 feet unless authorized by the Department [of Parks and Recreation] by posted

order in accordance with Section 4301(i) (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4304).

7) Animals. No person shall molest, hunt, disturb, injure, trap, take, net, poison, harm,

kill, feed, touch, tease, or spotlight any kind of animal or fish, or so attempt, except

that fish and bait may be taken other than for commercial purposes in accordance with

the state laws and regulations, provided, however, that no person shall use or discharge

a spear or bow and arrow in units under control of the Department [of Parks and

Recreation] (except in underwater parks or on designated archery ranges). This section

does not apply to activities undertaken by the Department in conjunction with its

resource management activities (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4305(a)).

8) Driftwood. No person may gather more than 50 pounds or one piece of driftwood each

day in the State Park System...Use of tools, vehicles, and equipment for the collection

of driftwood is prohibited. Upon a finding that it will be in the interest of the

Department of Parks and Recreation, the District Superintendent may, by posting,

authorize the collection of driftwood from specified units on a temporary basis, either

by the general public or by commercial operators, if necessary, in quantities, for

purposes, and by means other than as specified by this section (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

4306).

9) Geological Features. No person shall destroy, disturb, mutilate, or remove earth, sand,

gravel, oil, minerals, rocks, paleontological features, or features of caves except

rockhounding may be permitted as defined and delineated in Sections 4610 through

4610.10 (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4307).

10) Archaeological Features. No person shall remove, injure, disfigure, deface, or destroy

any object of archaeological, or historical interest or value (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

4308).

11) Litter. No person shall leave, deposit, drop, or scatter bottles, broken glass, ashes,

waste paper, cans or other litter in a unit except in a receptacle designated for that

purpose, and no person shall import any litter, or import and deposit any litter into or

in any unit from other places (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4310).

12) Dogs. No person shall bring a dog into, permit a dog to enter or remain, or possess a

dog in units under control of Department of Parks and Recreation unless the dog is on

leash of no more than six feet in length and under the immediate control of a person or

confined in a vehicle (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4312(a)). No person shall bring a dog

into, permit a dog to enter or remain, or possess a dog on any beach adjacent to any

body of water in any unit except in portions of units designated for dogs (14 Cal. Code

of Regs. 4312(c)).

13) Weapons and Traps. No person shall carry, possess or discharge across, in or into any

portion of any unit any weapon, firearm, bow and arrow, trap, net, or device capable of

injuring, or killing any person or animal, or capturing any animal, or damaging any

public or private property, except where the Department of Parks and Recreation finds

that it is in its best interests (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4313).

Site Specific Regulations
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

75

None

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Regulations are enforced by Department of Parks and Recreation rangers and California

Department of Fish and Game wardens. Enforcement is subject to warden or ranger

availability.

Achievement of Purpose

No research to date has examined the effectiveness of the state park regulations to protect

plant, invertebrate, and fish populations and other natural resources in Julia Pfeiffer Burns

State Park/State Underwater Park from over-exploitation.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï California Sea Otter Game Refuge

ï Julia Pfeiffer Burns Underwater Park ASBS

References

McArdle, D. A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California

Sea Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

76

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Recreational

Legislated Title of Site: National Recreation Area

Location of Site

See Figure 11 for exact location

Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo County

1) Golden Gate National Recreation Area

Year Established

1972

Established By

U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service

Agencies Responsible

U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service

California Department of Fish and Game

Purpose

National parks are designed to conserve scenery, natural and historic objects, and wildlife,

and to provide for the enjoyment of those resources in a manner that will leave them

unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations (36 Code of Fed. Regs. 1.1). Specifically,

National Recreation Areas preserve and provide areas for the maintenance of recreational

open space necessary to the urban environment and for land use planning.

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Non-commercial Use of Invertebrates. Tidal invertebrates may not be taken in any

tidepool or other areas between the high tide mark (defined as Mean Higher High Tide)

and 1,000 feet seaward and lateral to the low tide mark (defined as Mean Lower Low

Water) except as follows: In state parks, state beaches, state recreation areas, state

underwater parks, state reserves, national parks, national monuments or national

seashores: Only abalones, chiones, clams, cockles, rock scallops, native oysters, crabs,

lobsters, ghost shrimp and sea urchins may be taken. Worms may be taken except that no

worms may be taken in any mussel bed, unless worms are taken incidental to the

harvesting of mussels. Mussels may be taken in all areas except in state park system

reserves or natural preserves (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 29.05(b)(1)).

2) Non-commercial Use of Marine Plant - Marine aquatic plants may not be cut or harvested

in marine life refuges, marine reserves, ecological reserves, national parks or state

underwater parks (30.00(b)).

3) Commercial Use of Invertebrates. In and offshore [between the high tide mark and 1,000

feet beyond the low tide mark] of all other state ecological reserves, state parks, state

reserves, national parks, national monuments, or national seashores, only the following

invertebrates may be taken: crabs, ghost shrimp, jackknife clams, sea urchins, squid, and

worms, except that no worms may be taken in any mussel bed, nor may any person pick

up, remove, detach from the substrate any other organisms, or break up, remove or destroy

any rocks or other substrate or surfaces to which organisms are attached (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 123(f)(4)).
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

77

3) Preservation of natural, cultural and archeological resources. Except as otherwise

provided in this chapter, the following is prohibited: (36 CFR 2.1)

i) Possessing, destroying, injuring, defacing, removing, digging, or disturbing from its

natural state:

a) Living or dead wildlife or fish, or the parts or products thereof, such as antlers or

nests.

b) Plants or the parts or products thereof.

c) Nonfossilized and fossilized paleontological specimens, cultural or archeological

resources, or the parts thereof.

d) A mineral resource or cave formation or the parts thereof.

ii) Introducing wildlife, fish or plants, including their reproductive bodies, into a park

area ecosystem.

iii) Unauthorized removal of natural products from the park area.

iv) Sale or commercial use of natural products.

4) Fishing: (36 CFR 2.3)

(i) Except in designated areas or as provided in this section, fishing shall be in accordance

with the laws and regulations of the State within whose exterior boundaries a park area

or portion thereof is located. Nonconflicting State laws are adopted as a part of these

regulations.

(ii) The following are prohibited:

a) Commercial fishing, except where specifically authorized by Federal statutory law.

b) Fishing by the use of drugs, poisons, explosives, or electricity.

c) Digging for bait, except in privately owned lands.

d) Failing to return carefully and immediately to the water from which it was taken a

fish that does not meet size or species restrictions or that the person chooses not to

keep. Fish so released shall not be included in the catch or possession limit:

provided that, at the time of catching, the person did not possess the legal limit of

fish.

e) Fishing from motor road bridges, from or within 200 feet of a public raft or float

designated for water sports, or within the limits of locations designated as

swimming beaches, surfing areas, or public boat docks, except in designated areas.

5) Weapons, traps and nets: (36 CFR 2.4)

i) Weapons, traps or nets may be carried, possessed or used:

a) At designated times and locations in park areas where:

1) The taking of wildlife is authorized by law in accordance with Sec. 2.2 of this

chapter;

2) The taking of fish is authorized by law in accordance with Sec. 2.3 of this part.

ii) The superintendent may issue a permit to carry or possess a weapon, trap or net under

the following circumstances:

a) When necessary to support research activities conducted in accordance with Sec.

2.5.

6) Research specimens: (36 CFR 2.5)

i) A specimen collection permit may be issued only to an official representative of a

reputable scientific or educational institution or a State or Federal agency for the

purpose of research, baseline inventories, monitoring, impact analysis, group study, or

museum display when the superintendent determines that the collection is necessary to

the stated scientific or resource management goals of the institution or agency and that

all applicable Federal and State permits have been acquired, and that the intended use

of the specimens and their final disposal is in accordance with applicable law and

Federal administrative policies. A permit shall not be issued if removal of the

specimen would result in damage to other natural or cultural resources, affect

adversely environmental or scenic values, or if the specimen is readily available

outside of the park area.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

78

ii) A permit to take an endangered or threatened species listed pursuant to the Endangered

Species Act, or similarly identified by the States, shall not be issued unless the species

cannot be obtained outside of the park area and the primary purpose of the collection is

to enhance the protection or management of the species.

iii) In park areas where the enabling legislation prohibits the killing of wildlife, issuance

of a collecting permit for wildlife or fish or plants, is prohibited.

7) Boating and Water Use Activities. The following are prohibited: (36 CFR 3.6)

i) Failing to observe restrictions established by a regulatory marker.

ii) Operating a vessel in excess of 5 mph or creating a wake:

a) In areas so designated; or

b) Within 100 feet of a diver's marker, downed water skier or swimmer.

iii) Operating a vessel not propelled by hand within 500 feet of a location designated as a

swimming beach. This prohibition does not apply in locations such as rivers, channels,

or narrow coves where passage is restricted to less than 500 feet. In such restrictive

locations, the operation of a vessel in excess of 5 mph or creating a wake is prohibited.

iv) Using trailers to launch or recover vessels, except at designated launching sites.

v) Launching a vessel propelled by machinery at other than designated launch sites.

vi) Operating a vessel propelled by machinery on waters not directly accessible by road.

vii) Launching or operating airboats.

vii) Operating a vessel in excess of designated size, length or width restrictions.

8) Swimming and bathing: (36 CFR 3.21)

i)The following are prohibited:

a) Swimming or bathing in locations designated as closed.

b) Swimming or bathing in violation of designated restrictions.

c) Swimming from vessels which are underway, except in circumstances where a

capable operator is on board and all propulsion machinery is off and/or sails are

furled.

9) Surfing. The use of surfboards and similar rigid devices within locations designated as

swimming beaches is prohibited (36 CFR 3.22).

10) SCUBA and snorkeling. The following are prohibited: (36 CFR 3.23)

i) SCUBA diving and snorkeling within locations designated as swimming, docking, or

mooring areas, except in accordance with conditions which may be established by the

superintendent.

ii) Diving in waters open to the use of vessels, other than those propelled by hand,

without displaying a standard diver flag.

Site Specific Regulations

None

Evaluation of Effectiveness:

Enforcement of Regulations

Regulations are enforced by law enforcement rangers and park police officers, both

employees of the National Park Service. In addition, park naturalist volunteers (docents)

report violations to rangers or officers. Boat patrol is not available to GGNRA staff for

enforcement, therefore, regulations are enforced along the shoreline only. Shoreline

enforcement focuses on violations of fishing regulations, such as illegal take of crabs and

abalone. CDFG wardens may enforce fishing regulations in some portions of the

GGNRA. The USCG enforces boating regulations throughout the marine portions of the

GGNRA. The incidence of poaching in the GGNRA is low (Gill Soper, GGNRA head

ranger, pers. comm.).

Achievement of Purpose
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

79

No research to date has examined the effectiveness of the GGNRA regulations to

conserve scenery, natural and historical objects, and wildlife, while providing recreational

open space for the public.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

References

McArdle, D. A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California

Sea Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.
$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T $T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

$T

20 0 20 40 60 80 Kilometers $T

Gray Whale Cove SB Montara SB

Half Moon Bay SB

San Gregorio SB Pomponio SB Pescadaro SB Bean Hollow SB

Natural Bridges 

Beach State Park

Twin Lakes SB New Brighton SB Seacliff SB

Manresa SB Sunset SB

Zmudowski Beach

State Park Moss Landing

Salinas SB

Marina SB Monterey SB Asilomar SB

Carmel River SB

William Randolph Hearst

Memorial SB

San Simeon Beach State Park

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

38°30' 38°30'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

Golden Gate National

Recreation Area

Golden Gate National Recreation Area

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

80

FIGURE 11. Location of Recreational Zones
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

81

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Recreational

Legislated Title of Sites: State Beach (SB)

Location of Sites

See Figure 11 for exact locations

San Mateo County

1) Grey Whale Cove SB

2) Montara SB

3) Half Moon Bay SB

4) San Gregorio SB

5) Pomponio SB

6) Pescadero SB

7) Bean Hollow SB

Santa Cruz County

1) Natural Bridges SB

2) Twin Lakes SB

3) New Brighton SB

4) Seacliff SB

5) Manresa SB

6) Sunset SB

Monterey County

1) Zmudowski SB

2) Moss Landing SB

3) Salinas River SB

4) Marina SB

5) Monterey SB

6) Asilomar SB

7) Carmel River SB

San Luis Obispo County

1) William Randolph Hearst Memorial SB

2) San Simeon SB

Year Established

Not Available

Established By

State Parks and Recreation Commission

Agencies Responsible

Department of Parks and Recreation

State Parks and Recreation Commission

California Department of Fish and Game

State Lands Commission
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

82

Purpose

Areas with frontage on the ocean or bays designed to provide swimming, boating, fishing,

and other beach-oriented activities (Public Resources Code 5019.56).

Regulations

General Regulations (14 Cal. Code of Regs.)

1) Non-commercial Use of Invertebrates. Tidal invertebrates may not be taken in any

tidepool or other areas between the high tide mark (defined as Mean Higher High Tide)

and 1,000 feet seaward and lateral to the low tide mark (defined as Mean Lower Low

Water) except as follows: In state parks, state beaches, state recreation areas, state

underwater parks, state reserves, national parks, national monuments or national

seashores: Only abalones, chiones, clams, cockles, rock scallops, native oysters, crabs,

lobsters, ghost shrimp and sea urchins may be taken. Worms may be taken except that no

worms may be taken in any mussel bed, unless worms are taken incidental to the

harvesting of mussels. Mussels may be taken in all areas except in state park system

reserves or natural preserves (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 29.05(b)(1)).

2) Commercial Use of Invertebrates. In and offshore [to 1,000 feet offshore] of all other state

ecological reserves, state parks, state reserves, national parks, national monuments, or

national seashores, only the following invertebrates may be taken: crabs, ghost shrimp,

jackknife clams, sea urchins, squid, and worms, except that no worms may be taken in any

mussel bed, nor may any person pick up, remove, detach from the substrate any other

organisms, or break up, remove or destroy any rocks or other substrate or surfaces to

which organisms are attached (14 Cal. Code of Reg. 123(f)(4)).

3) Aircraft. No person shall parachute into, fly an aircraft, ultralight vehicle, or hand

glider over, or parasail or balloon over any State Park unit at an altitude of less than

500 feet unless authorized by the Department [of Parks and Recreation] by posted

order in accordance with Section 4301(i) (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4304).

4) Animals. No person shall molest, hunt, disturb, injure, trap, take, net, poison, harm,

kill, feed, touch, tease, or spotlight any kind of animal or fish, or so attempt, except

that fish and bait may be taken other than for commercial purposes in accordance with

the state laws and regulations, provided, however, that no person shall use or discharge

a spear or bow and arrow in units under control of the Department [of Parks and

Recreation] (except in underwater parks or on designated archery ranges). This section

does not apply to activities undertaken by the Department in conjunction with its

resource management activities (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4305(a)).

5) Driftwood. No person may gather more than 50 pounds or one piece of driftwood each

day in the State Park System...Use of tools, vehicles, and equipment for the collection

of driftwood is prohibited. Upon a finding that it will be in the interest of the

Department of Parks and Recreation, the District Superintendent may, by posting,

authorize the collection of driftwood from specified units on a temporary basis, either

by the general public or by commercial operators, if necessary, in quantities, for

purposes, and by means other than as specified by this section (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

4306).

6) Geological Features. No person shall destroy, disturb, mutilate, or remove earth, sand,

gravel, oil, minerals, rocks, paleontological features, or features of caves except

rockhounding may be permitted as defined and delineated in Sections 4610 through

4610.10 (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4307).

7) Archaeological Features. No person shall remove, injure, disfigure, deface, or destroy

any object of archaeological, or historical interest or value (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

4308).

8) Litter. No person shall leave, deposit, drop, or scatter bottles, broken glass, ashes,

waste paper, cans or other litter in a unit except in a receptacle designated for that

purpose, and no person shall import any litter, or import and deposit any litter into or

in any unit from other places (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4310).
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

83

9) Dogs. No person shall bring a dog into, permit a dog to enter or remain, or possess a

dog in units under control of Department of Parks and Recreation unless the dog is on

leash of no more than six feet in length and under the immediate control of a person or

confined in a vehicle (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4312(a)). No person shall bring a dog

into, permit a dog to enter or remain, or possess a dog on any beach adjacent to any

body of water in any unit except in portions of units designated for dogs (14 Cal. Code

of Regs. 4312(c)).

10) Weapons and Traps. No person shall carry, possess or discharge across, in or into any

portion of any unit any weapon, firearm, bow and arrow, trap, net, or device capable of

injuring, or killing any person or animal, or capturing any animal, or damaging any

public or private property, except where the Department of Parks and Recreation finds

that it is in its best interests (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4313).

Site Specific Regulations

1) Units Open for Rockhounding. Rockhounding may be practiced in the following units

or portions of units: (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 4610.1)

i) San Simeon State Beach - Department jurisdiction within the wave action zone.

ii) William Randolph Hearst Memorial State Beach - Department jurisdiction within

the wave action zone.

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Regulations enforced by Department of Parks and Recreation rangers. Enforcement is

intermittent and subject to availability of rangers.

Achievement of Purpose

No research to date has examined the effectiveness of the state beach regulations to

protect natural resources within state beaches from overexploitation while promoting

swimming, boating, fishing, and other beach-oriented activities. However, the following

research examined the effects of human trampling on rocky intertidal communities

adjacent to a state beach. This research suggests that high levels of recreational use of the

rocky intertidal surrounding a state beach can have negative impacts on animal and plant

resources.

Natural Bridges SB

Beauchamp, K.A. and M. M. Gowing. 1982. SUMMARY: The density and diversity of

algae and invertebrates in the rocky marine intertidal were studied at three sites

differing in degree of human trampling. Quantitative sampling showed that (1) a

general pattern of higher density and diversity occurred at the less trampled sites, (2)

the densities of trampled site [adjacent to Natural Bridges State Beach],

the brown alga Pelvetiopsis limitata was absent and the small bivalves Lasaea spp.

were found in lower densities.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Dredge Material Disposal

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Military

ï James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve

ï Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve

ï California Sea Otter Game Refuge

ï James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve ASBS, Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge and

Hopkins Marine Life Refuge ASBS, and Carmel Bay ASBS
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

84

References

Beauchamp, K.A. and M. M. Gowing. 1982. A quantitative assessment of human trampling

effects on a rocky intertidal community. Marine Environmental Research. 7:279-293.

California State Parks website. http://cal-parks.ca.gov/

Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary web site, Visitor Information homepage.

http://bonita.mbnms.nos.noaa.gov/Visitor/Access/beach.html
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

85

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Wildlife Enhancement and Protection

Legislated Title of Site: Wildlife Area

Location of Site

See Figure 12 for exact location

Monterey County

1) Moss Landing Wildlife Area

Year Established

1984

Established By

California Department of Fish and Game

Agency Responsible

California Department of Fish and Game

Purpose

The Moss Landing Wildlife Area (MLWA) was acquired to preserve and enhance the

saltmarsh/saltpond ecosystem for resident and migratory water-associated birds, including

shorebirds (sandpipers, plovers and allies), other waders such as herons and egrets, as well as

waterfowl and wetland-associated songbirds and raptors. The acquisition provides important

foraging, resting, and breeding habitat for many species of wildlife, especially the waterassociated birds mentioned above (excerpt from MLWA management plan).

Multiple recreational use of wildlife management areas is desirable and that use shall be

encouraged by the commission. Except for hunting and fishing purposes, only minimum

facilities to permit other forms of multiple recreational use, such as camping, picnicking, boating,

or swimming, shall be provided (Fish and Game Code 1528).

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Motor Driven Vehicles. No person shall drive, operate, leave, place, or stop any motor

driven vehicle on any State wildlife area except on public or established roads or on

designated jeep trails and such other areas as designated by the Department (14 Cal. Code

of Regs. 550(b)(2)(A)).

2) Boats.

(i) The department may restrict the use and operation of boats on State wildlife areas,

department administered national wildlife refuges, and State recreation areas to protect

natural resources or provide for the orderly operation of hunting and fishing programs

on these areas. Boating restrictions my include, but not be limited to, limiting boat

speeds, limiting motor size and type, or prohibiting the use of motors (14 Cal. Code of

Regs. 550(b)(4)(A)).

(ii) Except as prohibited in subsection 551(q), boats may be used under the following

regulations on State wildlife areas, department administered national wildlife refuges,

and State recreation areas: (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 550(b)(4)(B)(1-4))

a) When launch sites are designated by the department, all boats must be launched

and removed from those sites.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

86

b) All persons shall remove their boats from the waters when instructed to do so by an

employee of the department.

c) The use of boats may be restricted to certain zones designated by the department.

d) Boat speeds shall not exceed five miles per hour.

3) Vandalism and Litter. No person shall leave, deposit, drop, bury, or scatter bottles, broken

glass, feathers, hides, wastepaper, cans, sewage, or other rubbish in any State wildlife

areas except in a receptacle or area designated for that purpose, and no person shall import

and deposit any rubbish or toxic substance into State wildlife areas from other places (14

Cal. Code of Regs. 550(b)(5)(B)).

4) Trees and Minerals: (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 550(b)(6)(A-B))

(i) No person shall dig up, cut, damage, or remove from a wildlife area any trees, shrubs,

vines, plants, or wood, except that vegetation may be cut and used for the purpose of

building blinds, unless otherwise directed by the area manager.

(ii) No person shall dig up or remove any humus, soil, sand, gravel, or rock.

5) Bottle and Artifact Collecting. No person shall collect or remove bottles or artifacts, or

dig or otherwise disturb the soil to locate or remove bottles or artifacts, from any Wildlife

Area (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 550(b)(7)).

6) Pesticide Use. No person, other than authorized federal, state, or local employee

conducting a pest control program approved by the department, shall apply any pesticide

in any State wildlife area (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 550(b)(11)).

7) Fish and Frogs. Frogs may not be taken for commercial purposes (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

550(b)(13)).

8) Hunting and Trapping. Hunting and trapping shall be allowed on State wildlife areas

during the regular open season [subject to use regulations]. The department may limit the

number of persons hunting or trapping on areas during any period for safety reasons, to

reduce crowding, to provide for the limited take of a species, or may close areas entirely to

hunting or trapping to protect a species (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 550(b)(14)).

* See Fish and Game Code 551 for specific hunting regulations.

9) Except in accordance with the regulations of the commission, it is unlawful to enter upon

any wildlife management areas or public shooting grounds established under the

provisions of this article, or to take therein any bird or the nest or eggs thereof, or any

mammal (Fish and Game Code 1530).

Site Specific Regulations

1) Method of Take Restrictions: No rifles or pistols may be used or possessed (14 Cal. Code

of Regs. 551(q)(43)(A)).

2) Hunt Days: Saturdays, Sundays, and Wednesdays during open seasons for authorized

species (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 551(q)(43)(B)).

3) Authorized Species: Waterfowl, coots, and moorhens (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

551(q)(43)(C)).

4) Camping and Trailers: Not allowed (14 Cal. Code of Regs. 551(q)(43)(D)).

5) Special Regulations: The Salt Ponds are closed to hunting (14 Cal. Code of Regs.

551(q)(43)(E)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Regulations enforced by California Department of Fish and Game wardens. Enforcement is

intermittent and subject to warden availability.

Achievement of Purpose

The Point Reyes Bird Observatory (PRBO) has been studying the nesting success of

snowy plovers in the Monterey Bay area since 1984 and in the MLWA salt ponds since

1988. Preliminary results from 1997 show a consistent increasing trend in the number of

nests, clutch rate, the number of chicks, and the number of juveniles in the MLWA since
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

87

1988. These increasing trends may be due to current management practices that are

specific to the needs of the snowy plover, such as altering salt pond water levels,

decreasing human use, and removing predators (Gary Page, PRBO, pers. comm.).

This is the only research to date that has examined the effectiveness of the Elkhorn

Slough Wildlife Area regulations to preserve and enhance the saltmarsh/saltpond

ecosystem for resident and migratory water-associated birds.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

References

Moss Landing Wildlife Areas Management Plan. State of California, Department of Fish and

Game.

Page, G.W., J.S. Warriner, J.C. Warriner, and L.E. Stenzel. 1997. Nesting Success of Snowy

Plover on Monterey Bay in 1997. Point Reyes Bird Observatory Preliminary Report. 10

pp.
20 0 20 40 60 Kilometers

California Sea Otter R efuge

Moss Landing Wildlife Area 

& Elkhorn Slough Reserve

Elkhorn Slough National 

Estuarine Research Reserve 

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

38°30' 38°30'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

88

FIGURE 12. Location of Wildlife Enhancement and Protection Zones
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

89

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Wildlife Enhancement and Protection

Legislated Title of Site: National Estuarine Research Reserve

Location of Site

See Figure 12 for exact location

Monterey County

1) Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve

Year Established

1979

Established By

Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), U.S. Congress

Agencies Responsible

U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources and National

Estuarine Research Reserve System (OCRM-NERRS)

California Department of Fish and Game

Purpose

The mission of the National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR) program is: The establishment,

through Federal-state cooperation, of a national system of estuarine research reserves

representative of the various regions and estuarine types in the United States. NERRs are

established to provide long-term research, education, and interpretation. The goals of the NERR

System are to:

1) Ensure a stable environment for research through long-term protection of NERR resources.

2) Address coastal management issues identified as significant through coordinated estuarine

research within the System.

3) Enhance public awareness and understanding of estuarine areas and provide suitable

opportunities for public education and interpretation.

4) Promote Federal, State, public, and private use of one or more reserves within the System

when such entities conduct estuarine research.

5) Conduct and coordinate estuarine research within the System, gathering and making available

information necessary for improved understanding and management of estuarine areas.

Regulations

General Regulations (CZMA 315)

1) Estuarine Research Guidelines. The Secretary [of Commerce] shall develop guidelines for

the conduct of research within the System that shall include:

i) a mechanism for identifying, and establishing priorities among, the coastal management

issues that should be addressed through coordinated research within the System;

ii) the establishment of common research principles and objectives to guide the

development of research programs within the System;

iii) the identification of uniform research methodologies which will ensure comparability

of data, the broadest application of research results, and the maximum use of the

System for research purposes;
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

90

iv) the establishment of performance standards upon which the effectiveness of the

research efforts and the value of reserves within the System in addressing the coastal

management issues identified in subsection (1) may be measured; and

v) the consideration of additional sources of funds for estuarine research than the funds

authorized under this Act, and strategies for encouraging the use of such funds within

the System, with particular emphasis on mechanisms established under subsection (d).

In developing the guidelines under this section, the Secretary shall consult with

prominent members of the estuarine research community.

2) Promotion and Coordination of Estuarine Research. The Secretary [of Commerce] shall

take such action as is necessary to promote and coordinate the use of the System for

research purposes including:

i) requiring that the NOAA, in conducting or supporting estuarine research, give priority

consideration to research that uses the System; and

ii) consulting with other Federal and State agencies to promote use of one or more

reserves within the System by such agencies when conducting estuarine research.

3) Evaluation of System Performance.

i) The Secretary [of Commerce] shall periodically evaluate the operation and management

of each national estuarine reserve, including education and interpretive activities, and

the research being conducted within the reserve.

ii) If evaluation under paragraph (1) reveals that the operation and management of the

reserve is deficient, or that the research being conducted within the reserve is not

consistent with the research guidelines developed under subsection (c), the Secretary

may suspend the eligibility of that reserve for financial assistance under subsection (e)

until the deficiency or inconsistency is remedied.

iii) The secretary may withdraw the designation of an estuarine area as a national

estuarine reserve if evaluation under paragraph (1) reveals that:

a) the basis for any one or more of the findings made under subsection (b)(2)

regarding that the area no longer exists; or

b) a substantial portion of the research conducted within the area, over a period of

years, has not been consistent with the research guidelines developed under

subsection (c).

Site Specific Regulations

None (see Elkhorn Slough Ecological Reserve site regulations on page 60 of this report)

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Section 312 of the CZMA requires NOAA to conduct continuing reviews of the overall

management of each NERR site. These program evaluations are conducted by the Office of

Ocean and Coastal Resource Management's (OCRM) Policy Coordination Division (PCD),

with participation by program staff from the NERRS. Evaluations are generally conducted

every 3 years, but may vary depending on the severity of management problems at any given

site. Specific evaluation criteria established by NERRS and section 312 regulations include:

the adequacy of the state's implementation of the Final Management Plan; staff roles;

research plan; education and interpretation plan; public access; facility development plan;

acquisition plan; resource protection plan; and inter-governmental Memorandums of

Understanding with NOAA.

Achievement of Purpose

The Elkhorn Slough NERR is achieving its mandated purpose of providing long-term

research, education, and interpretation through the following programs:

Education
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

91

Elkhorn Slough NERR's education program has cultivated tremendous interest and support

among teachers, school children and other groups. Interpretive programs offered at the

Reserve's visitor center are coordinated through the CDFG. The Reserve's visitor center is the

hub for education programs, displays and special classes. Natural history presentations and

tours are also offered by the Reserve.

Research

Research and monitoring activities at Elkhorn Slough NERR are guided by national plans and

a local advisory committee to ensure the availability of scientific information to be used in

making management decisions pertinent to the stewardship of the estuarine ecosystem. The

Elkhorn Slough NERR maintains close working relationships with numerous universities and

research institutions, but especially with Moss Landing Marine Laboratories, the Elkhorn

Slough Foundation, the University of California at Santa Cruz, Hopkins Marine Station, and

the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. Current research projects in Elkhorn Slough

NERR include:

MONITORING: To monitor non-point source pollution, a long term local water quality

sampling program has been developed and maintained since 1988 on a monthly sampling

schedule of temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, pH, and some nutrients (e.g.

NO3, NH3-N, ortho PO4-P). High resolution infrared aerial photographic records of the

watershed have been gathered since 1980 and will be incorporated into a regional

geographic information system.

PESTICIDES: High levels of pesticides measured in Slough shellfish by the California

Mussel Watch Program has focused concern on the persistence and transport of pesticides

in the watershed. A study is underway to determine how best to improve agricultural

practices in the area to minimize erosion from the surrounding hills and sediment

deposition in the wetlands (a major source of pesticides). Additional studies are being done

to determine the levels and effects of pesticides on natural communities in the Slough.

EROSION: Erosion and loss of mudflats and marshland in the Slough is a major concern

due to the increased tidal scouring caused by the construction of a direct line opening to the

ocean in 1946. There is an ongoing study monitoring long term patterns of wetland erosion

and possible mitigating factors.

RESTORATION: Restoration, enhancement, and monitoring of critical Slough habitats is

accompanied by studies on the biology and ecology of important slough species and a close

look at the ecological values of introduced species. Included here is the need to study the

relationship between salt marsh restoration and ground water contaminant/salt water

intrusion, as well as a close look at the wildlife value of transitional wetlands (areas where

fresh water marsh is periodically inundated with salt water).

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Elkhorn Slough Ecological Reserve

References

Elkhorn Slough Foundation website. http://www.elkhornslough.org/

Elkhorn Slough NERR website. http://inlet.geol.sc.edu/ELK/home.html

Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management website. http://www.nos.noaa.gov/ocrm/
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

92

Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Wildlife Enhancement and Protection

Legislated Title of Site: Game Refuge

Location of Site

See Figure 12 for exact location

Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties

1) California Sea Otter Game Refuge

Year Established

1959

Established By

Fish and Game Code 10840, State Legislature

Agencies Responsible

Fish and Game Commission

California Department of Fish and Game

Purpose

No legally mandated purpose accompanies the game refuge designation

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Except under a permit or specific authorization, it is unlawful:

i) To take or possess any bird or mammal, or part thereof, in any game refuge (Fish

and Game Code 10500(a)).

ii) To use or possess in a game refuge, any firearm, or bow and arrow, or any trap or

other contrivance designed to be, or capable of being, used to take birds or

mammals, or to discharge any firearm or to release any arrow into any game refuge

(Fish and Game Code 10500(b)).

2) Nothing in this code prohibits the possession of firearms or bows and arrows by

persons when traveling through any game refuges when the firearms are taken apart or

encased and unloaded and the bows are unstrung. When the traveling is done on a

route other than a public highway or other public thoroughfare or right of way, notice

shall be given to the department at least twenty-four (24) hours before such traveling.

The notice shall give the name and address of the person intending to travel through

the refuge, the name of the refuge, the approximate route, and the approximate time

when such person intends to travel through the refuge (Fish and Game Code 10506).

Site Specific Regulations

1) It is unlawful to fly any aircraft, including any airplane or helicopterÖless than 1,000 feet

above water or land over the California Sea Otter Game RefugeÖexcept for rescue

operations, in case of any emergency, or for scientific or filmmaking purposes under a

permit issued by the department after a review of potential biological impacts (Fish and

Game Code 10501.5(a)).

2) In the California Sea Otter Game Refuge, the lawful occupant of privately owned land,

or the employees of such occupants, may possess firearms and traps and may take on
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

93

such lands any non-protected bird or mammal, and no permit is required for such

taking (Fish and Game Code 10659).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

Regulations enforced by California Department of Fish and Game wardens. Enforcement

intermittent and subject to availability of wardens.

Achievement of Purpose

Evaluation of this zone is difficult because it lacks a legally mandated purpose. No

research to date has examined the effectiveness of the game refuge regulations to protect

seabird or marine mammal populations from exploitation. It would be difficult to

determine the effectiveness of the California Sea Otter Game Refuge regulations because

most marine mammals and seabirds are also protected by the Marine Mammal Protection

Act, the Endangered Species Act, and/or Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Jade Collection

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Military

ï Pt. Lobos Ecological Reserve

ï Pt. Lobos State Reserve

ï Big Creek Marine Resources Protection Act Ecological Reserve

ï Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve

ï Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park/Underwater Park

ï Carmel River SB, William Randolph Hearst Memorial SB, and San Simeon SB

ï Carmel Bay ASBS, Point Lobos Ecological Reserve ASBS, Julia Pfeiffer Burns Underwater

Park ASBS, and Ocean Area Surrounding the Mouth of Salmon Creek ASBS

References

McArdle, D. A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California Sea

Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

94

 Existing Zones

Type of Zone: Water Quality Protection

Legislated Title of Sites: Area of Special Biological Significance (ASBS)

Location of Sites

See Figure 13 for exact locations

San Mateo County

1) James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve ASBS

2) AÒo Nuevo Point and Island ASBS

Monterey County

1) Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge and Hopkins Marine Life Refuge ASBS

2) Carmel Bay ASBS

3) Point Lobos Ecological Reserve ASBS

4) Julia Pfeiffer Burns Underwater Park ASBS

5) Ocean Area Surrounding the Mouth of Salmon Creek ASBS

Year Established

1974

Established By

Water Quality Control Plan for Control of Temperature in the Coastal and Interstate Waters and

Enclosed Bays and Estuaries of California, State Water Resources Control Board

Water Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters of California, State Water Resources Control

Board

Agencies Responsible

State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB)

Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)

California Department of Fish and Game

Purpose

To protect the specified area from undesirable changes in natural water quality. The ASBS

designation is based on the presence of certain species or biological communities that because of

their value or fragility deserve special protection consisting of preservation and maintenance of

natural water quality conditions to the extent practicable (Water Resources Control Board and

California Regional Water Quality Control Board Administrative Procedures, September 24,

1970, Section XI and Miscellaneous Rev. 7-9/1/72).

Regulations

General Regulations∗

1) The discharge of elevated temperature wastes in a manner that would alter water quality

conditions from those occurring naturally is prohibited.

2) The discharge of discrete, point-source sewage or industrial process wastes in a manner

that would alter water quality conditions from those occurring naturally is prohibited.

 

∗

 The regulations accompanying the ASBS designation are not applicable to vessel wastes, dredging control, or the

disposal of dredge spoil.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

95

3) The discharge of waste from non-point sources, including but not limited to storm water

for waste from non-point sources, Regional Boards will give high priority to areas

tributary to ASBSs.

Site Specific Regulations

None

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Enforcement of Regulations

During the ASBS designation process, point-source discharges were phased out in all ASBS

sites in the MBNMS except for Carmel Bay ASBS. New point-source discharges into

ASBSs are strictly prohibited. Along the coast between Monterey and San Francisco,

perspective point-source dischargers are required by the SWRCB to show, through

techniques such as mathematical modeling, that there will be no deleterious effects of the

new discharge on the water quality of nearby ASBSs. The Carmel Bay discharge was

allowed to continue pursuant to the following conditions: the effects of this discharge on

water quality must be monitored (by the state mussel watch program) and the discharger must

submit periodic reports to the RWQCB (Ray Dunham, SWRCB, pers. comm.).

Due to funding constraints, the monitoring of ASBSs for non-point source pollution is a low

priority for the RWQCB. The RWQCB is currently attempting to develop new programs to

monitor areas for non-point source pollution (Karen Wooster, RWQCB, pers. comm.).

Achievement of Purpose

No research to date has monitored the water quality in ASBSs to determine the effectiveness

of the ASBS regulations to protect these sites from undesirable changes in natural water

quality.

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Restricted Overflight

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

ï Military

ï Hopkins Marine Life Refuge

ï Pt. Lobos Ecological Reserve

ï Pt. Lobos State Reserve

ï James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve

ï AÒo Nuevo State Reserve

ï Carmel Bay Ecological Reserve

ï Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Fish Refuge

ï Pacific Grove Marine Reserve

ï Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park/Underwater Park

ï Montara SB and Carmel River SB

ï California Sea Otter Game Refuge

References

McArdle, D. A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California Sea

Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.

University of California Davis, Information Center for the Environment, The Guide to California

Programs for Biodiversity Conservation, State Water Resources Control Board webpage.

http://ice.ucdavis.edu/guide_to_california_programs_for_biodiversity_conservation/swrcb/sw

rcb.htm
James V. Fitzgerald 

Marine Reserve ASBS

Half Moon Bay

Cascade 

Creek

Año Nuevo Point 

& Island ASBS

Pacific Grove Marine Gardens Refuge & Hopkins

Marine Life Refuge ASBS

Carmel Bay 

ASBS Pt. Lobos Ecological 

Reserve

Julia Pfeiffer Burns Underwater Park

ASBS

Salmon Creek

Mouth of Salmon 

Creek ASBS

a

a

b

c

d

35°30' 35°30'

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

38°30' 38°30'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

b

c

d

e

e

30 0 30 60 Kilometers

50 m contour intervals

500 m contour intervals

50 m contour intervals

50 m contour intervals

100 m contour intervals

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

96

FIGURE 13. Location of Water Quality Protection Zones
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

97

Potential Future Zones

Type of Zone: Limited Take

Legislated Title of Site: City Park and Recreation Area

Location of Site

See Figure 14 for exact location

Monterey County

1) Ed Ricketts Park*

Year Proposed

1998

Proposed By

Monterey City Council

Agencies Responsible

City of Monterey Recreation and Community Services Department

City of Monterey Police Department

Purpose

Ed Ricketts Park was established to serve as an underwater park and recreational facility

(Monterey City Code Sec. 23-30).

Regulations

General Regulations

1) Regulations in all Recreation Areas. It shall be unlawful for any person to:

a) Engage in commercial activity of any kind, except under lease, concession or permit

from the City (Monterey City Code Sec. 23-3(h)).

b) Allow or permit any person under the age of six under their custody, jurisdiction or

control, to enter or remain without providing adequate supervision (Monterey City

Code Sec. 23-3(i)).

c) Leave, drop, place, or deposit any trash; expect in receptacles provided for trash.

Glass containers are not allowed on beaches under the control of the City (Monterey

City Code Sec. 23-3(k)).

d) Willfully or negligently pick, dig up, cut, mutilate, destroy, injure, disturb, move,

molest, burn or carry away any tree or plant or portion thereof, whether alive or dead

(Monterey City Code Sec. 23-3(l)).

e) Conduct or participate in an assembly or public demonstration without a permit

issued jointly by the Chief of Police and the Recreation & Community Services

Director pursuant to Sections 32-4 and 32-5 of this Code (Monterey City Code Sec.

23-3(m)).

f) Remain at an assembly or public demonstration after having been requested to leave

by a peace officer (Monterey City Code Sec. 23-3(n)).

 

*

 The legal status of the Ed Ricketts Park regulations is currently being decided in court. The City of Monterey

asserts that it has jurisdiction over both physical and biological resources contained within the park boundaries.

Some members of the local community, specifically kelp harvesters, disagree and have taken the City to court.

These individuals assert that the California Department of Fish and Game has jurisdiction over the biological

resources within the parks boundaries, not the City of Monterey. The State of California appears to support the

kelp harvesters in this matter.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

98

2) Alcoholic Beverages Prohibited: Exceptions. It shall be unlawful for any person to

consume or have in their possession an open container of any alcoholic beverage in

any park or recreation area, except as follows:

a) Alcoholic beverages are permitted on all public beaches during the hours of 6:00 a.m.

to 10:00 p.m., and are prohibited after 10:00 p.m. and before 6:00 a.m. except by

valid written permit issued by the Director. The term "public beach" is defined as

any beach area used for recreational purposes which is owned, operated or controlled

by the City, State, or State or local agency, or any unimproved beach area privately

owned but used by the public for recreational purposes with or without permission of

the property owner (Monterey City Code Sec. 23-4(b)).

Site Specific Regulations

1) It shall be unlawful to spearfish within the park (Monterey City Code Sec. 23-32(a)).

2) Recreational fishing by hook and line is permitted subject to California Department of

Fish and Game rules and regulations (Monterey City Code Sec. 23-32(b)).

3) Commercial fishing by net is permitted in the area as long as kelp beds are not

disturbed (Monterey City Code Sec. 23-32(c)).

4) Kelp harvesting is allowed by persons acquiring a permit from the City and who

possess a valid kelp harvesting permit from the California Department of Fish and

Game. Kelp permit regulations will be established by Resolution, and the City

Council may, by Resolution, restrict or prohibit the harvesting of kelp within all or

portions of the park to facilitate scientific studies, to protect against overharvesting of

kelp, or to otherwise protect this natural resource. It shall be unlawful to harvest kelp

in violation of this section or any Resolution establishing a zone of prohibition

(Monterey City Code Sec. 23-32(d)).

5) Collection or harvesting of marine life within the park is permitted only with written

permission from the City based on a recommendation from an oversight committee of

the City which shall be established by Resolution and which will consist of members

from the scientific community, the conservation community, the California

Department of Fish and Game, the diving community, the business community, the

commercial fishing industry, the kelp harvesting industry, and a City representative,

whom shall be appointed by the City (Monterey City Code Sec. 23-32(e)).

Evaluation of Effectiveness

Not Available

Overlapping Sites

ï Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

ï Shark Attraction Prohibited

References

None
20 0 20 40 60 80 Kilometers

10 m contour intervals

Point Cabrillo

Monterey Bay Aquarium

Coast Guard Breakwater

60' depth

Ed Ricketts Park

35°30' 35°30'

36°00' 36°00'

36°30' 36°30'

37°00' 37°00'

37°30' 37°30'

38°00' 38°00'

38°30' 38°30'

123°00'

123°00'

122°30'

122°30'

122°00'

122°00'

121°30'

121°30'

Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

99

FIGURE 14. Location of Potential Future Zones
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

100
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

101

Appendices

Appendix I: Summary of the Marine Reserve Literature

Foreword

Many of the marine zones reviewed in this report fall under the title "marine reserve".

The following is a brief summary of the marine reserve literature. This summary is not meant to

be a comprehensive review of the available literature, but instead is designed to acquaint the

reader with the current issues relevant to marine reserves. Though the general content of this

summary is applicable to marine reserves in both temperate and tropical regions, this summary

will focus on the current literature from temperate systems and it will use examples from the

marine zones in this report whenever possible. Many comprehensive reviews of the marine

reserve literature have been published over the past three decades (e.g., Bjorkland 1974; Davis

1981; Randall 1982; Rigney 1990; Roberts and Polunin 1991, 1993c; Rowley 1992, 1994; Dugan

and Davis 1993a; Jones et al. 1993). These reviews should be consulted for an in-depth

discussion of the issue summarized here.

A number of reviews of California marine reserves are being synthesized currently. The

Resource Agency of California has assembled an interagency working group that is in the process

of evaluating the California system of marine managed areas (State Interagency Marine Managed

Areas Workgroup 1999). A draft of this group's report is available on the agency's website (see

below for website address). In response to the stateís review and to two bills passed by the State

Legislature in August 1998*

, the Pacific Ocean Conservation Network (POCN) organized a

scientific advisory panel to analyze the potential of marine reserves to improve fisheries and

marine conservation, with an emphasis on the Pacific Coast of the United States. The paper that

resulted from this panel's discussions was published in 1999 in the journal Fisheries (Murray et

al. 1999). The Environmental Defense Fund, a member of the POCN, has also completed its

own review of the potential of no-take marine reserves to rebuild the Pacific coast groundfish

fishery (see Fujita et al. 1997). This paper was submitted to the Pacific Fisheries Management

Council's Alternative Groundfish Management Committee in 1997. Finally, the National Marine

Fisheries Service (NMFS) sponsored the Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish

Workshop in September 1997. The objectives of this workshop were to: 1) assess the current and

future needs, benefits, and implementation of harvest refugia to protect and manage rockfish

populations; and 2) develop recommendations for establishing and monitoring rockfish refugia

on the west coat. A summary of the finding of this workshop are currently available on the

NOAA/NMFS Pacific Fisheries Environmental Laboratory website (see below for website

address). The proceedings of the workshop, including papers on plenary presentations,

conclusions and recommendations from the working groups, and related abstracts, have been

published as a NOAA Technical Memorandum (see Yoklavich 1998) and can be downloaded

from the website. These reviews should be consulted for an in-depth discussion of issues

relevant to marine reserves in California.

Websites:

Resource Agency of California. http://ceres.ca.gov/cra

Pacific Ocean Conservation Network, Scientific Advisory Panel on Marine Reserves.

http://www.biology.ucsc.edu/MarReservSAP

 

*

 Bill AB 1241 ñ the Marine Life Management Act - was signed by Governor Wilson. However, Bill AB 2404 ñ the

Sea Life Conservation Act - was not signed by the Governor.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

102

National Marine Fisheries Service, Pacific Fisheries Environmental Laboratory, Marine Harvest

Refugia For West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop.

http://www.pfeg.noaa.gov/events/workshops/refugia/refugia_index.html

Introduction

A marine reserve (= marine protected area), as defined by the Fourth World Wilderness

Congress and later adopted by the World Conservation Union (IUCN), is "any area of intertidal

or subtidal terrain, together with its overlying water and associated flora and fauna, historical and

cultural features, which has been reserved by law or other effective means to protect part or all of

the enclosed environment (McArdle 1998a)î. Sites which fit this definition have been given a

variety of names that are derived from terrestrial protected areas, such as ìsanctuariesî, ìparksî,

and ìpreservesî. The majority of existing marine reserves were established primarily to preserve

habitats and communities for conservation and research (Dugan and Davis 1993a; Roberts and

Polunin 1993c; Gubbay 1995). Additionally, some marine reserves have been established

primarily for fisheries enhancement (Davis 1989; Plan Development Team 1990; Armstrong et al

1993; Tegner 1993). These areas are given names, such as ìfishery reservesî, and ìharvest

refugiaî, that reflect their purpose, which is to help sustain or enhance harvested populations.

For the last three decades, marine reserves have been a tool for the management of coastal

marine habitats (Jones et al. 1993; Gubbay 1995). Recently marine reserves have received great

attention from conservationists, fisheries and resource managers, and ecologists primarily

because of their potential to improve two of the major problems in marine ecosystems: 1)

fisheries overexploitation (Davis 1989; Dugan and Davis 1993a; Carr and Reed 1993); and 2)

habitat and ecosystem degradation (Roberts and Polunin 1991, 1993c).

Fisheries Overexploitation

Currently, two-thirds of the world's marine fishery populations are fully exploited,

overexploited, or depleted (Botsford et al.1997; Roberts 1997b). Specifically, on the Pacific

coast of the United States many groundfish and invertebrate stocks are in jeopardy due to intense

fishing pressure (Davis 1989). One striking example of groundfish stock declines on the west

coast is Pacific rockfish. Some rockfish stocks, such as Pacific ocean perch (Sebastes alutus),

bocaccio (S. paucispinis), and canary rockfish (S. pinniger) have experienced precipitous

declines over the past three decades and are currently below 10% of their unfished biomass

(Pacific Fisheries Management Council 1995; Ralston 1999). Several nearshore invertebrate

fisheries have shown similar declines during the last four decades (Davis 1989). For example,

since the 1960's the abalone (Haliotis spp.) fishery has been reduced from a five species statewide commercial and recreational fishery to a one species (H. rufescens) recreational fishery

open only north of San Francisco (Dugan and Davis 1993a; Tegner 1993). These two examples

demonstrate that current fisheries management strategies have not been sufficiently effective for

some species and that improved fisheries management techniques are needed to prevent

depletion of at least some exploited fish stocks.

Certain types of marine reserves (e.g., fishery reserves or harvest refugia) are being

strongly recommended as a fisheries management strategy that may help sustain or even enhance

exploited fish and invertebrate populations (Dugan and Davis 1993a; Roberts et al. 1995; Fujita

et al. 1997). There are many possible fisheries benefits of marine reserves. For example, the

density of large, reproductively mature fish and invertebrates tends to increase in no-take reserves

(Roberts and Polunin 1991; Bohnsack 1996a ,1996b; for examples from the MBNMS see Pollard

1992; Paddack 1996, 1998) and these individuals may act as sources of larvae to replenish both

reserve populations and adjacent exploited populations (Carr and Reed 1993, Quinn et al. 1993,

Roberts 1997a). A build-up of biomass in reserves also can cause a spill-over of individuals into

adjacent fishing grounds due to the emigration of juveniles and adults (Dugan and Davis 1993a;

McClanahan and Kaunda-Arara 1996; Russ and Alcala 1996a). In addition to supplying

individuals to exploited populations, no-take reserves protect a portion of the fishery stock from
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

103

negative changes in population structure caused by selective fishing mortality, such as altered

genetic composition, sex ratios, and size structure (Roberts and Polunin 1991; Roberts et al.

1995; Bohnsack 1998). As important as all the above perceived benefits, no-take reserves may

serve as insurance against uncertainty. In other words, reserves can act as buffers against stock

collapse caused by unanticipated events, such as environmental change, management errors, high

additional fishing mortality through bycatch, and catastrophic events (Lauck et al. 1998; Carr and

Raimondi 1999; Murray et al. 1999).

Prohibiting harvest does not ensure that all species will recover to pre-harvest levels

within the reserve and begin to replenish adjacent exploited populations. A number of

researchers have found no difference in the abundance and sizes of some target species between

reserve and exploited areas (Buxton and Smale 1989; Russ and Alcala 1989; Cole et al. 1990).

These results were attributed to a variety of reasons, including animal behavior and movement

patterns. Target species may move outside the reserve to forage or spawn where they may be

harvested. No-take reserves are highly unlikely to benefit highly migratory species such as tuna

and salmon.

Habitat and Ecosystem Degradation

Over the last couple of decades marine habitats and ecosystems have experienced

accelerated rates of degradation (Suchanek 1994; Vitousek et al. 1997). Marine habitat and

ecosystem degradation has a variety of causes. The development of waterfront property and

other land-based activities adversely affect marine ecosystems through the loss or modification of

coastal habitats (Dahl et al. 1991) and through the discharge of sediments, nutrients, and

pollutants into the ocean (Samoilys 1988; Agardy 1997; Vitousek et al. 1997). Coastal recreation

activities can also have negative impacts on shoreline communities. There is increasing evidence

that tidepooling, swimming, snorkeling, and SCUBA diving can adversely affect coastal

ecosystems (Ghazanshahi et al. 1983; Hawkins and Robert 1992; for examples from the

MBNMS see Beauchamp and Gowing 1982; Schaeffer and Foster 1998). For example,

Schaeffer and Foster (1998) demonstrated that recreational SCUBA divers caused a variety of

disturbances to kelp forests, including contacting the substrate, handling of animals, and

detachment of algal blades.

Recreational and commercial fishing can have multiple negative impacts on marine

ecosystems. Fishing practices, such a trawling and dredging disturb and alter seafloor habitats,

which can modify the species composition and trophic structure of benthic communities (Dayton

et al. 1995; Engel and Kvitek 1998). Many commercial fishing practices cause mortality of nontarget species as bycatch or through ghost fishing by abandoned gear (Dayton et al. 1995; Roberts

et al. 1995). In addition, fishing is selective and can remove a specific predator or consumer

from an ecosystem potentially changing species interactions and perhaps the biodiversity of a

community (Roberts and Polunin 1991; Dugan and Davis 1993a; Jones et al. 1993). These

examples demonstrate that land-based development and both extractive and non-extractive uses

of marine resources are having significant negative impacts on marine habitats and ecosystems.

Marine reserves that prohibit the discharge of pollutants (such as Areas of Special

Biological Significance) and restrict potentially damaging extractive and recreational uses (such

as Hopkins Marine Life Refuge and Pt. Lobos State Reserve) can be used to protect marine

habitats and ecosystems. These reserves can be established to protect areas that are fairly pristine

from future degradation. Conversely, reserves located in formerly perturbed areas can allow the

recovery of habitats and ecosystems by eliminating damaging fishing practices, discharge of

pollutants, or by limiting or prohibiting certain recreational activities.

Additional Benefits

The majority of the marine reserve literature focuses on the two benefits of marine

reserves discussed above; enhancing overexploited fisheries and protecting habitats and
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

104

ecosystems from degradation. However, marine reserves offer many additional social and

economic benefits.

Scientific Understanding

One additional benefit of marine reserves is an increase in scientific knowledge and

understanding of marine ecosystems and their management (for example Big Creek MRPA

Ecological Reserve). Protected areas can act as 'control' sites against which scientists can

measure changes due to natural and human-induced disturbance (Jones et al. 1993; Agardy 1994;

Lindeboom 1995). Comparisons between exploited and control sites can help scientists

determine which population changes are due to human disturbances and which changes are due

to natural variability (Rowley 1992; Bohnsack 1996a, 1998). Baseline data from reserve

populations may supply better estimates of intrinsic population parameters, such as growth rates,

sex ratios, and size structure, leading to more accurate fishery models and better fisheries

management (Bohnsack 1996a). In addition, scientists will be able to study community level

processes (e.g., species interactions) in a relatively undisturbed habitat (Bohnsack 1998).

Social and Economic Benefits

There are social and economic benefits that can be gained from establishing minimally

disturbed marine areas. In fact, it has been shown in some cases that the social and economic

benefits gained from establishing marine reserves can exceed the social and economic costs of

losing extractive or other human uses of the area (Dixon and Sherman 1990a, 1990b; Dixon et al.

1993; Gubbay 1995). One potential economic benefit is an increase in local and regional

ecotourism (Bloomstein 1985; Dixon and Sherman 1990b). For example, many tourist visit

marine reserves because they are an ideal location for tidepooling, snorkeling, SCUBA diving,

kayaking, and photography (Gubbay 1995; Murray et al. 1999). Reserves that allow limited

recreational use, while maintaining ecosystem health (e.g., Pt Lobos State Reserve), tend to be

popular destinations for tourists (Causey 1995; Gubbay and Welton 1995). One potential

economic benefit of fishery reserves is improved yields in local recreational and commercial

fisheries (Alcala 1988; White 1988). Social benefits of reserves include increased aesthetic

quality of the coastal region and sites for scientific and environmental education (Novaczek

1995; Bohnsack 1998).

Marine Reserve Design and Management

Due to the many benefits that can be derived from marine reserves, many countries have

established or are in the process of establishing marine reserves (Gubbay 1995; Jones et al.

1993). However, many of the world's existing marine reserves are not effective due to improper

goals and poor site selection, design, enforcement, management, and evaluation (Gubbay 1995;

McArdle 1997b, 1998a). California's system of marine reserves is a prime example of these

problems. California has over 100 marine reserves which are usually poorly designed, with

unclear or inappropriate goals, and inadequate management, enforcement, and evaluation

(McArdle 1997a, 1997b, 1998a; Starr and Johnson 1998). Most existing marine reserves provide

very limited protection from extractive uses, recreational uses, or negative changes in water

quality and often the same area of coastline has multiple designations with conflicting regulations

(McArdle 1997a). Many of the marine zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

have some, if not all, of these problems, which is evident from this report.

Recently, researchers and managers have acknowledged the need to improve marine

reserve design and to unify reserve goals and management (Gubbay 1995; Starr and Johnson

1998; Murray et al. 1999; State Interagency Marine Managed Areas Workgroup 1999). The topic

of proper reserve design and management has been the focus of numerous recent papers (Carr

and Reed 1993; Dugan and Davis 1993a; Ballentine 1997a; Starr 1998; Murray et al 1999). The

general consensus of these papers is that the establishment of any marine reserve or system of

marine reserves, regardless of geographic location, should follow a set of guidelines to maximize
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

105

success. These guidelines include: proper design, effective enforcement, evaluation of

effectiveness, and adaptive management.

Design

Determining the optimal size and placement of a marine reserve will depend on the goals

of the reserve. Therefore, the first step in reserve design should be to clearly identify the

purpose, goals, and expectations of a reserve (Salm and Price 1995; Starr and Johnson 1998;

Murray et al. 1999). Individual reserves within a network can have different individual goals, but

in aggregate should form a system with clearly defined, network-wide goals and expectations

(McArdle 1997b; Murray et al. 1999). Reserve design will be determined specifically by the

species, communities, and habitats being protected. For example, if the goal of the reserve is to

protect and sustain one or more species, then reserve size will be influenced by the mobility and

density of the species targeted for protection (Rowley 1992; Dugan and Davis 1993a). Reserves

must be at least as large as the average size of the target speciesí home range (Armstrong 1993;

Starr and Johnson 1998) and should contain enough individuals to guarantee a high probability of

population sustainability (Dugan and Davis 1993a). This will guard against edge effects,

facilitate enforcement, and help sustain populations following local catastrophic events (Murray

et al. 1999). Habitat type, distribution, and quality - both inside and outside of a reserve's

boundary - should be considered when locating individual reserves (Davis 1989; Starr and

Johnson 1998). Surrounding a reserve with habitat of appropriate type and quality is especially

important when the goal of the reserve is to enhance fishing stocks adjacent to the reserve

(Rowley 1992; Carr and Reed 1993; DeMartini 1993).

The above design criteria applies to the design of both individual, isolated reserves and a

regional system of reserves. Establishing individual reserves is currently the most common

approach in reserve establishment (McArdle 1997b, 1998a). However, isolated reserves are

probably not as effective as a network of interconnected reserves because a network can be

designed to link a variety of environmental conditions and ecological processes (Ballantine 1991;

Jones et al. 1993; Roberts 1997a). Marine populations often depend on larval recruitment from

distant populations for replenishment, therefore reserves within a network should be connected

through larval dispersal (via ocean currents) to insure the maintenance of both reserve and

exploited local populations (Roberts and Polunin 1991; Rowley 1992; Roberts 1997a). Creating

a network of reserves also serves as a form of risk management against isolated stochastic events

that destroy a population or habitat within one of the system's reserves (Lauck et al. 1998).

Within a network, individual reserve size and placement should take into account spawning and

nursery habitat location and oceanographic features, such as the location of eddies or areas of

upwelling, which may be important for larval dispersal or recruitment (Rowley 1992; Carr and

Reed 1993; Dugan and Davis 1993a).

Enforcement

Determining reserve regulations and how these regulations will be effectively enforced is

a key feature in establishing an effective marine reserve system (Causey 1995). The potential for

reserves to serve as effective resource management tools can only be realized if social and

economic concerns are taken into account during the reserve designation process (Salm and Price

1995; Wells and White 1995). Regulations restricting commercial or recreational activities are

often resisted by resource users (see the Motorized Personal Watercraft Zone for an example).

Often the positive social and economic benefits of marine reserves are not effectively explained

by the groups supporting reserve formation nor are these benefits fully understood by the users

who are opposing reserve establishment (Agardy 1994; Gubbay 1995). Distinguishing the real

from the perceived costs and weighing short- vs. long-term costs and benefits, are issues that

must be addressed during the regulation establishment process (Dugan and Davis 1993a; Murray

et al. 1999).

Reserve success depends on compliance once regulations are established. However,

regulation enforcement is often weak or non-existent leading to "paper parks" which allow

continued resource degradation (Causey 1995; McArdle 1998a). Weak enforcement often results
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

106

when reserves are created without the allocation of funds to support proper enforcement and

management (Gubbay 1995; McArdle 1998a). For example, most of the marine reserves in

California are not established with appropriations for management (McArdle 1998a). The

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) is responsible for the enforcement of all

regulations pertaining to living marine resources, however, the CDFG has limited resources to

that end. As a result, most reserves do not have effective site enforcement (McArdle 1997b,

1998a). These economic barriers to proper enforcement may be diminished, in some instances,

by assessing visitor fees (Dixon et al. 1993; Pt. Lobos State Reserve is an example).

Fostering participation and support from local communities and visitors is important for

successful management and enforcement of regulations (Cava and Power 1989; Causey 1995;

Wells and White 1995). To promote voluntary compliance, regulations must be clearly stated

and easily accessible to reserve visitors (Kaza 1995). Starting a volunteer naturalist program,

such as the docent programs in James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve and AÒo Nuevo and Pt.

Lobos State Reserves, can help to increase local support for marine reserves (Clark et al. 1989;

Wells and White 1995). A system by which local residents, conservation groups, and volunteers

can report poaching and other violations, such as the CDFG CalTIP hotline, is another way to

involve the local community in reserve management and regulation enforcement (Causey 1995;

Wells and White 1995).

Evaluation

Proper evaluation of a reserve's effectiveness is vital to the creation of a successful system

of marine reserves. Carr and Raimondi (1999) argue that inadequately or inaccurately evaluated

reserves can jeopardize both the health of the resources being protected and the future of a

reserve program. For example, an inaccurate evaluation of a poorly designed harvest refuge

could show that the refuge is having positive impacts on a fish stock. This false information

could lead to an increase in fishing pressure on adjacent fishing grounds or a relaxation of current

fishing regulations, thus potentially jeopardizing the size or sustainability of the fish stock and

the fishing industry. Conversely, an inadequate evaluation of a properly designed reserve could

fail to demonstrate the reserve's effectiveness. This inability to demonstrate a reserveís

effectiveness could jeopardize the future of that reserve and possibly the future of a regional

reserve program. Thus, to achieve the desired goals of a reserve or reserve network, the reserves

must be properly and rigorously evaluated (Carr and Raimondi 1999, Murray et al. 1999). In

addition, its likely that some marine reserves will not effectively achieve their goals, even when

they are well designed. Marine reserves are only one of many resource management strategies,

therefore, identification of situations in which marine reserve are an ineffective management tool

will allow managers to implement other, hopefully more effective, strategies.

Rigorous scientific evaluation of reserve effectiveness can be challenging. High spatial

and temporal variability can greatly reduce a study's ability to detect an effect (Roberts and

Polunin 1993c; Jones et al. 1993; Parma et al. 1998). This problem emphasizes the need for

scientists and fisheries managers to develop stronger analytical and empirical approaches for

evaluation of reserve success (Murray et al. 1999). In addition, the evaluation of fishery reserves

is very difficult due to our inability to accurately predict larval transport and subsequent

recruitment (Robert and Polunin 1991, 1993c; Dugan and Davis 1993a). This problem

emphasizes the need for integrated research programs involving fisheries biologists, larval

ecologists, and oceanographers (Rowley 1992; Carr and Raimondi 1999).

Adaptive Management

The last step in reserve implementation, and a fairly new idea in the marine reserve

literature, is the need for adaptive management (Agardy 1994; Carr and Raimondi 1999; Murray

et al. 1999). Adaptive management requires a feedback loop between scientist and managers so

that reserve design and management can be modified as new scientific information becomes

available (Parma et al. 1998). Reserves that are shown to be ineffective may need different

boundaries, new regulations, better enforcement, or a completely different location (Murray et al.

1999). Failing to fix ineffective marine reserves is a waste of money that could be better spent
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

107

on maintaining effective reserves, establishing new reserves, or instating other management

practices (Carr and Raimondi, 1998).

Conclusions

Declining trends in the health of the world's fishery populations and marine ecosystems

despite existing fishery management and conservation practices, underscores the need for new

management approaches. Marine reserves have received much recent attention, and have been

identified as having the potential to be powerful resource management tools. Marine reserves

offer opportunities to improve the status of exploited populations, benefit fisheries management,

protect habitats and ecosystems, and increase understanding of marine ecosystems. However, for

marine reserves to reach these potential objectives, they must be properly designed and managed.

Identifying the goals of a reserve should be the critical first step in reserve establishment.

Determining the optimal size, location, and management strategy of the reserve will follow based

on these goals. For networks of marine reserves, each reserve may have unique goals, but the

network must have a unifying goal that will determine the overall design and management of the

system. Effective management of marine reserves includes: fostering participation and support

from local residents, allocating funds to support regulation enforcement, rigorously evaluating a

reserve's effectiveness, and employing adaptive management. Proper evaluation and adaptive

management are especially important because marine reserves may not be effective management

tools in all situations. Therefore, marine reserves should be used as a management tool to

supplement rather than replace existing management strategies.

Literature Cited

The following are references that were cited in Appendix I that are not found in Appendix II.

Botsford, L.W., J.C. Castilla, and C.H. Peterson. 1997. The management of fisheries and marine

ecosystems. Science 277:509-515.

Dahl, T.E., C.E. Johnson, and W.E. Frayer. 1991. Status and trends of wetlands in the

coterminous United States mid-1970's to mid-1980's. U.S. Department of Interior, Fisheries

Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.

Dayton, P.K., S.F. Thrush, M.T. Agardy, and R.J. Hofman. 1995. Environmental effects of

marine fishing. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 5:205-232.

Pacific Fishery Management Council. 1995. Status of the Pacific coast groundfish fishery

through 1995 and recommended biological catches for 1996: Stock assessment and fishery

evaluation. Pacific Fishery Management Council, 2130 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 224,

Portland, OR 97201.

Suchanek, T.H. 1994. Temperate coastal marine communities: biodiversity and threats. American

Zoologist 34:100-114.

Vitousek, P.M., H.A. Mooney, J. Lubchenco, and J.M. Melillo. 1997. Human domination of

earthís ecosystems. Science 277:494-499.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

108

Appendix II: List of Marine Reserve References

Agardy, M.T. 1994. Advances in marine conservation: The role of marine protected areas.

Trends in Ecology and Evolution 9:267-270.

Agardy, M.T. 1997. Marine Protected Areas and Ocean Conservation. Academic Press, San

Diego, California.

Alcala, A.C. 1988. Effects of marine reserves on coral fish abundance and yield of Philippine

coral reefs. Ambio 17:194-199.

Alcala, A.C. and G.R. Russ. 1990. A direct test of the effects of protective management on

abundance and yield of tropical marine resources. J. Cons. Int. Explor. Mer. 46:40-47.

Alcala, A.C. 1998. Community-based coastal resource management in the Philippines: A case

study. Ocean & Coastal Management 38(2):179-186.

Alder, J. 1996. Costs and effectiveness of education and enforcement, Cairns Section of the

Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Environmental Management 20:541-551.

Allison, G.W., J. Lubchenco, and M.H. Carr. 1998. Marine reserves are necessary but not

sufficient for marine conservation. Ecological Applications 8(1) Supplement:S79-S92.

Anonymous. 1995. Florida's marine waters: "One big replenishment zone". Florida Sportsman

Magazine. December 1995.

Arias-Gonzalez, J.E. 1998. Trophic models of protected and unprotected coral reef ecosystems in

the south of the Mexican Caribbean. Journal of Fish Biology 53(Suppl. A):236-255.

Armstrong, D.A., T.C. Wainwright, G.C. Jensen, P.A. Dinnel, and H.B. Andersen. 1993. Taking

refuge from bycatch issues: Red king crab (Paralithodes camtschaticus) and trawl fisheries in

the Eastern Bering Sea. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50:1993-2000.

Attwood, C.G. and B.A. Bennett. 1995. Modeling the effect of marine reserves on the

recreational shore-fishery of the south-western Cape, South Africa. South African Journal of

Marine Science 16:227-240.

Auster, P.J. 1997. Fishery reserves. Pages 159-166 In J. Boreman, et al., eds. Northwest

Atlantic groundfish: Perspectives on a fishery collapse. American Fisheries Society,

Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Auster, P.J. 1998. Trials and tribulations of attempting to establish an experimental deep-water

no-fishing zone in a National Marine Sanctuary. Pages 113-117 In M. M. Yoklavich, ed.

Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S. Dept. Comm. NOAA

Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-255.

Auster, P.J. and R.W. Langton. 1999. The effects of fishing on fish habitat. In L. Benaka, ed.

Fish Habitat: Essential Fish Habitat and Rehabilitation. American Fisheries Society,

Bethesda, Maryland.

Auster, P.J. and R.J. Malatesta. 1994. Assessing the role of non-extractive reserves for enhancing

harvested populations in temperate and boreal marine systems. In J. Lien, N. Shackell and J.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

109

H. M. Willison, eds. Marine Protected Areas and Sustainable Fisheries. Science and

Management of Protected Areas Association, Wolfville, Nova Scotia.

Auster, P.J., R.J. Malatesta, R.W. Langton, and L. Watling. 1996. The impacts of mobile fishing

gear on seafloor habitats in the Gulf of Maine: Implications for conservation of fish

populations. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 77(3) Suppl. Part 2:349.

Auster, P.J., C. Michalopoulos, P.C. Valentine, and R.J. Malatesta. 1998. Delineating and

monitoring habitat management units in a temperate deep-water marine protected area. Pages

169-185 In N.W. Munro and J.H.M. Willison, eds. Linking Protected Areas with Working

Landscapes, Conserving Biodiversity. SAMPAA, Wolfville, Nova Scotia.

Ballantine, W.J. 1989. Marine reserves: lessons form New Zealand. Progress in Underwater

Science 13:1-14.

Ballantine, W.J. 1991. Marine reserves - the need for networks. New Zealand Journal of Marine

and Freshwater Research 25:115-116.

Ballantine, W.J. 1993. Marine reserves and coastal conservation. In W. Doak, ed. The New

Zealand Diver's Handbook.

Ballantine, W.J. 1994. The practicality and benefits of a marine reserve network. Pages 205-223

In K. L. Gimbel, ed. Limiting Access to Marine Fisheries: Keeping the Focus on

Conservation. Center for Marine Conservation and World Wildlife Fund, Washington, DC.

Ballantine, W.J. 1995. Networks of "no-take" marine reserves are practical and necessary. Pages

13-20 In N. L. Shackell and J. H. M. Willison, eds. Marine Protected Areas and Sustainable

Fisheries. Science and Management of Protected Areas Association, Wolfville, Nova Scotia.

Ballantine, W.J. 1997a. Design principles for systems of 'no-take' marine reserves. In The

Design and Monitoring of Marine Reserves. University of British Columbia Fisheries Center

Research Reports, Vol. 5, No. 7.

Ballantine, W.J. 1997b. Education in 'no-take' marine reserves. MESA Conference:1-10.

Ballantine, W.J. 1997c. 'No-take' marine reserve networks support fisheries. Pages 702-706 In D.

A. Hancock, D. C. Smith, A. Grant and J. P. Beumer, eds. Developing and Sustaining World

Fisheries Resources: The State and Management. 2nd World Fisheries Congress, Brisbane,

Australia.

Barnard, P., C.J. Brown, A.M. Jarvis, A. Robertson, and L. van Rooyen. 1998. Extending the

Namibian protected area network to safeguard hotspots of endemism and diversity.

Biodiversity and Conservation 7(4):531-547.

Barnes, J.C. 1995. Save our sealife or save our seafood?: A case study of conflict in the

management of Florida's marine resources. Pages 69-91 In D. Suman, M. Shivlani, and M.

Villanueva, eds. Urban Growth and Sustainable Habitats: Case Studies of Policy Conflicts in

South Florida's Coastal Environment. University of Miami, Miami, Florida.

Barr, B. 1995. The U.S. National Marine Sanctuary Program and its role in preserving

sustainable fisheries. Pages 165-173 In N. Shackell and J.H.M. Willison, eds. Marine

Protected Areas and Sustainable Fisheries. Science and Management of Protected Areas

Association, Wolfville, Nova Scotia.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

110

Barr, B.W. and S.R. Thornton. 1998. Marine protected areas, ecosystem management, and ocean

governance: Making pieces of different puzzles fit together (without a hammer). Pages 62-73

In O. T. Magoon, H. Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson, eds. California and the

World Ocean '97. Taking a Look at California's Ocean Resource: An Agenda for the Future.

ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

Barrett, N. E., and J. P. Barrett. 1997. Reserve design and the new conservation theory. Pages

236-251 In S. T. A. Pickett, R. S. Ostfeld, M. Shachak and G. E. Likens, eds. The Ecological

Basis of Conservation: Heterogeneity, Ecosystems, and Biodiversity. Chapman & Hall, New

York, New York.

Barrett, N.S. 1995. Short- and long-term movement patterns of six temperate reef fishes

(Families Labridae and Monacanthidae). Marine and Freshwater Research 46:853-860.

Barry, W.J. and J.W. Foster. 1997. California underwater parks and reserves planning and

management. Pages 25-36 In D. A. McArdle, ed. Marine Protected Areas of California.

University of California Sea Grant publication.

Barry, W.J. and J.W. Foster. 1998. California underwater parks and reserves planning and

management. Pages 86-97 In O. T. Magoon, H. Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson,

eds. California and the World Ocean '97. Taking a Look at California's Ocean Resource: An

Agenda for the Future. ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

Beatley, T. 1991. Protecting biodiversity in coastal environments. Coastal Management 19:1-19.

Beauchamp, K.A. and M.M. Gowing. 1982. A quantitative assessment of human trampling

effects on a rocky intertidal community. Marine Environmental Research 7:279-293.

Beets, J. and A. Friedlander. 1999. Evaluation of a conservation strategy: A spawning

aggregation closure for red hind, Epinephelus guttatus, in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Environmental Biology of Fishes 55:91-98.

Bell, J.D. 1983. Effects of depth and marine reserve fishing restrictions on the structure of a

rocky reef fish assemblage in the north-western Mediterranean Sea. Journal of Applied

Ecology 20:357-369.

Benaka, L. 1999. Fish Habitat: Essential Fish Habitat and Rehabilitation. American Fisheries

Society, Bethesda, MD. 459 pp.

Bennett, B.A. and C.G. Attwood. 1991. Evidence for recovery of a surf-zone fish assemblage

following the establishment of a marine reserve on the southern coast of South Africa.

Marine Ecology Progress Series 75:173-181.

Bennett, B.A. and C.G. Attwood. 1993. Shore-angling catches in De Hoop Nature Reserves,

South Africa, and further evidence for the protective value of marine reserves. South African

Journal of Marine Science 13:213-222.

Bjorklund, M.I. 1974. Achievements in marine conservation, I. Marine parks. Environmental

Conservation 1:205-223.

Bloomstein, E. 1985. Tourism and the Environment: An Overview of the Eastern Caribbean.

Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago: Economic Commission for Latin America and the

Caribbean.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

111

Bohnsack, J.A. 1981. Effects of piscivorous fish removal on coral reef fish community structure.

Pages 258-267 In G. M. Caillet and C. A. Simenstad, eds. Gutshop '81: Fish Food Habits and

Studies. Washington Seagrant Publication, University of Washington, Seattle.

Bohnsack, J.A. 1992. Reef resource habitat protection: The forgotten factor. Marine Recreational

Fisheries 14:117-129.

Bohnsack, J.A. 1993. Marine reserves: They enhance fisheries, reduce conflicts, and protect

resources. Oceanus 36:63-71.

Bohnsack, J.A. 1994. How marine fishery reserves can improve fisheries. Proc. Gulf Carib.

Fish. Inst. 43:217-241.

Bohnsack, J.A. 1996a. Maintenance and recovery of reef fishery productivity. Pages 283-313 In

N. V. C. Polunin and C. M. Roberts, eds. Management of Reef Fisheries. Chapman & Hall,

London.

Bohnsack, J.A. 1996b. Marine reserves, zoning, and the future of fishery management. Fisheries

21:14-16.

Bohnsack, J.A. 1997. Consensus development and the use of marine reserves in the Florida

Keys, U.S.A. Proceedings of the 8th International Coral Reef Symposium 2:1922-1930.

Bohnsack, J.A. 1998. Application of marine reserves to reef fisheries management. Australian

Journal of Ecology 23(3):298-304.

Bohnsack, J.A. 1998. Marine Reserves: Lessons from Florida. Pages 89-99 In M.M. Yoklavich,

ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S. Dept. Comm.

NOAA Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-255.

Bohnsack, J.A. and J.S. Ault. 1996. Management strategies to conserve marine biodiversity.

Oceanography 9:73-82.

Botsford, L.W., J.F. Quinn, S.R. Wing, and J.G. Brittnacher. 1993. Rotating spatial harvest of a

benthic invertebrate, the red sea urchin, Strongylocentrotus franciscanus. Pages 409-428 In

G. Kruse, D.M. Eggers, R.J. Marasco, C. Pautzke, and T.J. Quinn II, eds. Proceedings of the

International Symposium on Management for Exploited Fish Populations. Alaska Sea Grant

College Program.

Broadus, J.M. 1987. The Galapagos Marine Resources Reserve and tourism development.

Oceanus 30:9-15.

Brock, R.E. 1994. Beyond fisheries enhancement: Artificial reefs and ecotourism. Bulletin of

Marine Science 55:1181-1188.

Bruckhorst, D.J. and P.B. Bridgewater. 1995. Marine bioregional planning: A strategic

framework for identifying marine reserve networks, and planning sustainable use and

management. In N.L. Shackell and J.H.M. Willison, eds. Marine Protected Areas and

Sustainable Use. Science and Management of Protected Areas Association.

Bushing, W.W. 1997. GIS-based gap analysis of an existing marine reserve network around

Santa Catalina Island. Marine Geodesy 20:97-113.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

112

Buxton, C.D. 1993. Life-history changes in exploited reef fishes on the east coast of South

Africa. Environmental Biology of Fishes 36:47-63.

Buxton, C.D. and M.J. Smale. 1989. Abundance and distribution patterns of three temperate

marine reef fish (Teleostei: Sparidae) in exploited and unexploited areas off the southern

Cape coast. Journal of Applied Ecology 26:441-451.

Cairns, D.K. and R.D. Elliot. 1987. Oil spill impact assessment for seabirds: The role of refugia

and growth centres. Biological Conservation 40:1-9.

Carr, M.H. and P.T. Raimondi. 1999. Marine protected areas as a precautionary approach to

management. California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations Reports 40: 71-76.

Carr, M.H. and P.T. Raimondi. 1998. Concepts relevant to harvest refuges for rockfish. Pages

27-31 In M.M. Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A

Workshop. U.S. Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC255.

Carr, M.H. and D.C. Reed. 1993. Conceptual issues relevant to marine harvest refuges: Examples

from temperate reef fishes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50:2019-

2028.

Cassano, E.R. 1998. International recognition and protection for United State National Marine

Sanctuaries. Pages 98-104 In O. T. Magoon, H. Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson,

eds. California and the World Ocean '97. Taking a Look at California's Ocean Resources: An

Agenda for the Future. ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

Castilla, J.C. and R. H. Bustamante. 1989. Human exclusion from rocky intertidal of Las Cruces,

central Chile: Effects on Durvillaea antartica (Phaeophyta, Durvilleales). Marine Ecology

Progress Series 50:203-214.

Castilla, J.C. and L.R. Dur·n. 1985. Human exclusion from the rocky intertidal zone of central

Chile: The effects on Concholepas concholepas (Gastropoda). Oikos 45:391-399.

Causey, B.D. 1995. Enforcement in marine protected areas. Pages 119-148 In S. Gubbay, ed.

Marine Protected Areas: Principles and Techniques for Management. Chapman & Hall,

London.

Cava, F. and D.M. Power. 1989. Environmental information, the public, and the Channel Islands

National Marine Sanctuary. Pages 2665-2677 In O. T. Magoon, H. Converse, D. Miner, L. T.

Tobin and D. Clark, eds. Coastal Zone '89: Proceedings of the 6th Symposium on Coastal and

Ocean Management. ASCE, Charleston, New York.

Chapman M.R. and D.L. Kramer. 1999. Gradients in coral reef fish density and size across the

Barbados Marine Reserve boundary: Effects of reserve protection and habitat characteristics.

Marine Ecology Progress Series 181:81-96.

Childress, M.J. 1997. Marine reserves and their effects on lobster populations: Report from a

workshop. Marine and Freshwater Research 48:1111-1114.

Cho, G. 1998. Conservation and management in Jervis Bay, Australia. Aquatic Conservation

8(5):701-717.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

113

Clark, C.W. 1996. Marine reserves and the precautionary management of fisheries. Ecological

Applications 6:369-370.

Clark, J.R., B. Causey, and J.A. Bohnsack. 1989. Benefits from coral reef protection: Looe Key

Reef, Florida. Pages 3076-3086 In O.T. Magoon, H. Converse, D. Miner, L.T. Tobin and D.

Clark, eds. Coastal Zone '89: Proceedings of the 6th Symposium on Coastal and Ocean

Management. ASCE, Charleston, New York.

Cocklin, C., M. Craw, and I. McAuley. 1998. Marine Reserves in New Zealand: Use rights,

public attitudes, and social impacts. Coastal Management 26(3):213-231.

Cole, R.G., T.M. Ayling, and R.G. Creese. 1990. Effects of marine reserve protection at Goat

Island, northern New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research

24:197-210.

Conan, G. 1986. Summary of session 5: Recruitment enhancement. Canadian Journal of

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 43:2384-2388.

Costanza, R., F. Andrade, P. Antunes, M. van den Belt, D. Boersma, D.F. Boesch, F. Catarino, S.

Hanna, K. Limburg, B. Low, M. Molitor, J.G. Pereira, S. Rayner, R. Santos, J. Wilson, and

M. Young. 1998. Principles for sustainable governance of the oceans. Science 281:198-199.

Craik, G.J.S. 1981. Underwater survey of coral trout Plectropomus leopardus (Serranidae)

populations in the Capricorn section of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Proceedings of

the 4th International Coral Reef Symposium 1:53-58.

Creese, R.G. and A. Jeffs. 1993. Biological research in New Zealand marine reserves. Pages 15-

22 In C. N. Battershill, D. R. Schiel, G. P. Jones, R. G. Creese and A. B. MacDiarmid, eds.

Proceedings of the 2nd International Temperate Reef Symposium. NIWA Marine,

Wellington, New Zealand.

Culley, M. and M. Romeril. 1993. Working towards a marine nature reserve in Jersey. Aquatic

Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 3:233-238.

Dahl, A.L. 1987. Review of the protected areas system in Oceanea. IUCN Conservation

Monitoring Unit, Cambridge. 239 pp.

Davidson, R.J., and W.L. Chadderton. 1994. Marine reserve site selection along the Abel

Tasman National Park coast, New Zealand: Consideration of subtidal rocky communities.

Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 4:153-167.

Davis, G.E. 1977. Effects of recreational harvest on a spiny lobster, Panulirus argus, population.

Bulletin of Marine Science 27:223-236.

Davis, G.E. 1981. On the role of underwater parks and sanctuaries in the management of coastal

resources in the southeastern United States. Environmental Conservation 8:67-70.

Davis, G.E. 1989. Designated harvest refugia: The next stage of marine fishery management in

California. California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations Reports 30:53-58.

Davis, G.E. and J.W. Dodrill. 1980. Marine parks and sanctuaries for spiny lobster fisheries

management. U.S. Fishery Bulletin 78:979-984.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

114

Davis, G.E. and J.W. Dodrill. 1989. Recreational fishery and population dynamics of spiny

lobster, Panulirus argus, in Florida Bay, Everglades National Park, 1977-1980. Bulletin of

Marine Science 44:78-88.

Davis, G.E. and C. Pillsbury. 1983. The role of marine parks and sanctuaries in multiple use

management of coastal resources. Pages 385-397 In Proceedings of the Ocean Studies

Symposium. California Coastal Commission and Department of Fish & Game, Asilomar,

California.

Davis, G.E., P.L. Haaker, and D.V. Richards. 1998. The perilous condition of white abalone

Haliotis sorenseni. Journal of Shellfish Research 17(3):871-875.

DeMartini, E.E. 1993. Modeling the potential of fishery reserves for managing Pacific coral reef

reserves. U.S. Fishery Bulletin 91:414-427.

DeMartini, E.E. 1998. How might recruitment research on coral-reef fishes help manage tropical

reef fisheries? Australian Journal of Ecology 23(3):305-310.

Dewees, C.M. 1997. Sustaining ocean fisheries poses challenge for resource managers.

California Agriculture 51:27-35.

Dixon, J.A., L.F. Scura, and T. van't Hof. 1993. Meeting ecological and economic goals: Marine

parks in the Caribbean. Ambio 22:117-125.

Dixon, J.A. and P.B. Sherman. 1990a. Economics of Protected Areas: A New Look at Benefits

and Costs. Earthscan Publications Ltd., London. 234 pp.

Dixon, J.A. and P.B. Sherman. 1990b. Economics of Protected Areas: Approaches and

Applications. Island Press, Washington, DC. 234 pp.

Done, T.J. and R.E. Reichelt. 1998. Integrated coastal zone and fisheries ecosystem management:

Generic goals and performance indices. Ecological Applications 8(1):S110-S118.

Dugan, J.E. and G.E. Davis. 1993a. Applications of marine refugia to coastal fisheries

management. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50:2029-2042.

Dugan, J.E. and G.E. Davis. 1993b. Introduction to the international symposium on marine

harvest refugia. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50:1991.

Dugan, J.E. and G.E. Davis. 1998. Marine fishery refugia and coastal fishery management. Pages

393-394 In O.T. Magoon, H. Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson, eds. California and

the World Ocean '97. Taking a Look at California's Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the

Future. ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

Duran, L.R. and J.C. Castilla. 1989. Variation and persistence in the middle rocky intertidal

community of central Chile, with and without human harvesting. Marine Biology 103:555-

562.

Duran, L.R., J.C. Castilla, and D. Oliva. 1987. Intensity of human predation on rocky shores at

Las Cruces in central Chile. Environmental Conservation 14:143-149.

Dye, A.H., T.A. Lasiak, and S. Gabula. 1997. Recovery and recruitment of the brown mussel,

Perna perna (L.), in Transkei: Implications for management. South African Journal of

Zoology 32(4):118-123.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

115

Edgar, G.J. and N.S. Barrett. 1997. Short term monitoring of biotic change in Tasmanian marine

reserves. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 213:261-279.

Emanuel, B.P., R.H. Bustamante, G.M. Branch, S. Eekhout, and F.J. Odendaal. 1992. A

zoogeographic and functional approach to the selection of marine reserves on the west coast

of South Africa. South African Journal of Marine Science 12:341-354.

Engel, J. and R. Kvitek. 1998. Effects of otter trawling on a benthic community in Monterey Bay

National Marine Sanctuary. Conservation Biology 12(6):1204-1214.

English, D.B.K., W. Kriesel, V.R. Leeworthy, and P.C. Wiley. 1996. Economic Contribution of

Recreating Visitors to the Florida Keys/Key West. NOAA. Silver Springs, Maryland.

Environment Australia. 1997. Developing a nationwide system of marine protected areas.

Biodiversity - Broadening the Debate 2:56-71.

Fairweather, P.G. 1991. Implications of "supply-side" ecology for environmental assessment and

management. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 6:60-63.

Farrow, S. 1996. Marine protected areas: Emerging economics. Marine Policy 20:439-446.

Ferreira, B.P. and G.R. Russ. 1995. Population structure of the leopard coral grouper,

Plectropomus leopardus, on fished and unfished reefs off Townsville, Central Great Barrier

Reef, Australia. U.S. Fishery Bulletin 93:629-642.

Fiske, S.J. 1992. Sociocultural aspects of establishing marine protected areas. Ocean and Coastal

Management 17:25-46.

Fogarty, M.J. 1999. Essential habitat, marine reserves and fishery management. Trends in

Ecology & Evolution 14(4):133-134.

Fujita, R. 1998. Marine Reserves: An environmentalistís perspective. Pages 86-88 In M. M.

Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S. Dept.

Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-255.

Fujita, R.M., T. Foran, and K. Honey. 1997. Can no-take marine reserves help rebuild and

sustain the Pacific coast groundfish fishery? Pacific Fisheries Management Council,

Alternative Groundfish Management Committee.

Funicelli, N.A., D.R. Johnson, and D.A. Meineke. 1988. Assessment of the effectiveness of an

existing fish sanctuary within the Kennedy Space Center. Special Purpose Report to the

Marine Fisheries Commission of Florida. 54pp.

GarcÌa-Rubies, A. and M. Zabala. 1990. Effects of total fishing prohibition on the rocky fish

assemblages of Medes Islands marine reserve (NW Mediterranean). Scientia Marina 54:317-

328.

Ghazanshahi, J., T.D. Huchel, and J.S. Devinny. 1983. Alteration of southern California rocky

shore ecosystems by public recreational use. Journal of Environmental Management 16:379-

394.

Gitschlag, G.R. 1986. Movement of pink shrimp in relation to the Tortugas sanctuary. North

American Journal of Fisheries Management 6:328-338.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

116

Godoy, C. and C.A. Moreno. 1989. Indirect effect of human exclusion from the rocky intertidal

in southern Chile: A case of cross-linkage between herbivores. Oikos 54:101-106.

Grossman, G.D., G.P. Jones, and W.J. Seaman Jr. 1997. Do artifical reefs increase regional fish

production? A review of existing data. Fisheries 22:17-23.

Gubbay, S. 1995. Marine Protected Areas: Principles and Techniques for Management. Chapman

& Hall, London. 232 pp.

Gubbay, S. and S. Welton. 1995. The voluntary approach to conservation of marine areas. Pages

199-227 In S. Gubbay, ed. Marine Protected Areas: Principles and Techniques for

Management. Chapman & Hall, London.

Guenette, S., T. Lauck, and C. Clark. 1998. Marine reserves: from Beverton and Holt to the

present. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 8(3):251-272.

Guenette, S. and T.J. Pitcher. 1999. An age-structured model showing the benefits of marine

reserves in controlling overexploitation. Fisheries Research 39(3):295-303.

Gunderson, D.R. 1997. Spatial patterns in the dynamics of slope rockfish stocks and their

implications for management. U.S. Fishery Bulletin 95:219-230.

Hall, S.J. 1998. Closed areas for fisheries management - the case consolidates. Trends in Ecology

and Evolution 13:297-298.

Harmelin, J., F. Bachet, and F. Garcia. 1995. Mediterranean marine reserves: Fish indices as tests

of protection efficiency. Marine Ecology 16:233-250.

Hastings, A. and L.W. Botsford. 1999. Equivalence in yield from marine reserves and traditional

fisheries management. Science 284:1537-1538.

Hawkins, J.P. and C.M. Roberts. 1992. A direct test of the effects of protective management on

abundance and yield of tropical marine resources. J. Conseil Int. l'Explor. Mer. 47:40-47.

Hockey, P.A.R. and G.M. Branch. 1994. Conserving marine biodiversity on the African coast:

Implications of a terrestrial perspective. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater

Ecosystems 4:345-362.

Holland, D.S. and R.J. Brazee. 1996. Marine reserves for fisheries management. Marine

Resource Economics 11:157-171.

Holloway, M. 1991. Hol Chan: Marine parks benefit commercial fisheries. Scientific American

May:32.

Horwood, J.W., J.H. Nichols, and S. Milligan. 1998. Evaluation of closed areas for fish stock

conservation. Journal of Applied Ecology 35(6):893-903.

Hourigan, T.F. 1998. Marine harvest refugia: An international policy perspective. Pages 84-85

In M. M. Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop.

U.S. Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-255.

Huntsman, G.R. 1994. Endangered marine finfish: Neglected resources or beasts of fiction?

Fisheries 19:8-15.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

117

Inglis, G. 1993. Ambiguities in the identification and selection of representative marine reserves.

Pages 23-28 In C. N. Battershill, D. R. Schiel, G. P. Jones, R. G. Creese and A. B.

MacDiarmid, eds. Proceedings of the 2nd International Temperate Reef Symposium. NIWA

Marine, Wellington, New Zealand.

Jackson, T. 1998. Integrated coastal management: A concept in practice in central California

through the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. Pages 594-599 In O. T. Magoon, H.

Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson, eds. California and the World Ocean '97. Taking

a Look at California's Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future. ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

Jennings, S. and N.V.C. Polunin. 1996. Effects of fishing effort and catch rate upon the structure

and biomass of Fijian reef fish communities. Journal of Applied Ecology 33:400-412.

Johannes, R.E. 1982. Traditional marine conservation methods and protected marine areas in

Oceania. Ambio 11:258-262.

Johannes, R.E. 1998. The case for data-less marine resource management: Examples from

tropical nearshore finfisheries. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13:243-246.

Jones, G.P., R.C. Cole, and C.N. Battershill. 1993. Marine reserves: Do they work? Pages 29-45

In C.N. Battershill, D.R. Schiel, G.P. Jones, R.G. Creese and A.B. MacDiarmid, eds.

Proceedings of the 2nd International Temperate Reef Symposium. NIWA Marine,

Wellington, New Zealand.

Jones, P.J.S. 1994. A review and analysis of the objectives of marine nature reserves. Ocean and

Coastal Management 24:149-178.

Kaza, S. 1988. Community involvement in marine protected areas. Oceanus 29:13-19.

Kaza, S. 1995. Marine education and interpretation. Page 174-198 In S. Gubbay, ed. Marine

Protected Areas: Principles and Techniques for Management. Chapman & Hall, London.

Kelleher, G.C. and R. Kenchington. 1992. Guidelines for Establishing Marine Protected Areas. A

Marine Conservation and Development Report. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 79 pp.

Kelleher, G.C., C. Bleakley, and S. Wells. 1995. A Global Representative System of Marine

Protected Areas. Volume 1. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, The World Bank, and

The World Conservation Union (IUCN).

Kennedy, A.D. 1990. Marine reserve management in developing nations: Midas Creek - a case

study. Ocean and Shoreline Management 14:105-132.

Klima, E.F., G.A. Matthews, and F.J. Patella. 1986. Synopsis of the Tortugas pink shrimp

fishery, 1960-1983, and the impact of the Tortugas Sanctuary. North American Journal of

Fishery Management 6:301-310.

Klima, E.F., T.W. Roberts, and A.C. Jones. 1986. Overview of the Tortugas sanctuary studies.

North American Journal of Fisheries Management 6:297-300.

Kronman, M. 1992. Can a no-fishing zone restore stocks? National Fisherman April:22-23.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

118

Lasiak, T. 1998. Multivariate comparisons of rocky intertidal macrofaunal assemblages from

replicate exploited and non-exploited localities on the Transkei coast of South Africa. Marine

Ecology Progress Series 167:15-23.

Lasiak, T. 1999. The putative impact of exploitation on rocky intertidal macrofaunal

assemblages: A multiple-area comparison. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of

the United Kingdom 79(1):23-34.

Lauck, T., C.W. Clark, M. Mangel, and G.R. Munro. 1998. Implementing the precautionary

principle in fisheries management through marine reserves. Ecological Applications 8(1)

Supplement:S72-S78.

Leaman, B.M. 1998. Experimental rockfish management and implications for rockfish harvest

refugia. Pages 17-26 In M.M. Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast

Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S. Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFSSWFSC-255.

Letourneur, Y. 1996. Responses of fish populations to marine reserves: The case of Mayotte

Island, western Indian Ocean. Ecoscience 3:442-450.

Lindeboom, H.J. 1995. Protected areas in the North Sea: An absolute need for future marine

research. Helgol‰nder Meeresunters 49:591-602.

Lubchenco, J. 1998. Entering the century of the environment: The need for a new social contract

for science. Science 279:491-497.

Lundberg, P. and N. Jonzen. 1999. Spatial population dynamics and the design of marine

reserves. Ecology Letters 2(3):129-134.

MacDiarmid, A.B. and P.A. Breen. 1993. Spiny lobster population change in a marine reserve.

Pages 47-56 In C.N. Battershill, D.R. Schiel, G.P. Jones, R.G. Creese and A.B. MacDiarmid,

eds. Proceedings of the 2nd International Temperate Reef Symposium. NIWA Marine,

Wellington, New Zealand.

Macpherson, E., F. Biagi, P. Francour, A. Garcia-Rubies, J. Harmelin, M. Harmelin-Vivien, J. Y.

Jouvenel, S. Planes, L. Vigliola, and L. Tunesi. 1997. Mortality of juvenile fishes of the

genus Diplodus in protected and unprotected areas in the western Mediterranean Sea. Marine

Ecology Progress Series 160:135-147.

Man, A., R. Law, and N.V.C. Polunin. 1995. Role of marine reserves in recruitment to reef

fisheries: A metapopulation model. Biological Conservation 71:197-204.

Mangel, M. 1998. No-take areas for sustainability of harvested species and a conservation

invariant for marine reserves. Ecology Letters 1(2):87-90.

Mangel, M., L.M. Talbot, G.K. Meefe, M.T. Agardy, D.L. Alverson, J. Barlow, D.B. Botkin, G.

Budowski, T. Clark, J. Cooke, R.H. Crozier, P.K. Dayton, D.L. Elder, C.W. Fowler, S.

Funtowicz, J. Giske, R.J. Hofman, S.J. Holt, S.R. Kellert, L.A. Kimball, D. Ludwig, K.

Magnusson, B.S. Malayang III, C. Mann, E.A. Norse, S.P. Northridge, W.F. Perrin, C.

Perrings, R.M. Peterman, G.B. Rabb, H.A. Regier, J.E. Reynolds III, K. Sherman, M.P.

Sissenwine, T.D. Smith, A. Starfield, R.J. Taylor, M.F. Tillman, C. Toft, J.R. Twiss Jr., J.

Wilen, and T.P. Young. 1996. Principles for the conservation of wild living resources.

Ecological Applications 6:338-362.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

119

Marine Reserves Task Group. 1997. Towards a new policy on marine protected areas for South

Africa. Report No 2. South African Network for Coastal and Oceanographic Research.

Marliave, J. and W. Palsson. 1996. Marine Protected Areas and Lingcod Stocks of Puget Sound

and the Straits of Georgia. Vancouver Aquarium, BC, Canada, and Washington Department

of Fish and Wildlife, Mill Creek, WA.

McArdle, D.A. 1997a. California Marine Protected Areas. Publication No. T-039. California Sea

Grant Publication, San Diego, CA. 268 pp.

McArdle, D.A. 1997b. Marine protected areas should be managed with greater integration.

California Agriculture 51:33-34.

McArdle, D.A. 1998a. The status of California marine protected areas. Pages 74-85 In O.T.

Magoon, H. Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson, eds. California and the World Ocean

'97. Taking a Look at California's Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future. ASCE,

Reston, Virginia.

McArdle, D.A. 1998b. Restrictions on rockfish fishing in existing California marine protected

areas. Pages 133-136 In M.M. Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast

Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S. Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFSSWFSC-255.

McClanahan, T.R. 1989. Kenyan coral reef-associated gastropod fauna: A comparison between

protected and unprotected reefs. Marine Ecology Progress Series 53:11-20.

McClanahan, T.R. 1994. Kenyan coral reef lagoon fish: Effects of fishing, substrate complexity,

and sea urchins. Coral Reefs 13:231-241.

McClanahan, T.R. 1995. Fish predators and scavengers of the sea urchin Echinometra mathaei in

Kenyan coral-reef marine parks. Environmental Biology of Fishes 43:187-193.

McClanahan, T.R. 1997. Primary succession of coral-reef algae: Differing patterns on fished

versus unfished reefs. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 218:77-102.

McClanahan, T.R. and B. Kaunda-Arara. 1996. Fishery recovery in a coral-reef marine park and

its effect on the adjacent fishery. Conservation Biology 10:1187-1199.

McClanahan, T.R. and N.A. Muthiga. 1988. Changes in Kenyan coral reef community structure

and function due to exploitation. Hydrobiologia 166:269-276.

McClanahan, T.R. and N.A. Muthiga. 1989. Pattern of predation on a sea urchin Echinometra

mathaei (de Blainville), in Kenyan coral reefs. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and

Ecology 126:77-94.

McClanahan, T.R. and D. Obura. 1995. Status of Kenyan coral reefs. Coastal Management

23:57-76.

McClanahan, T.R. and E. Sala. 1997. A Mediterranean rocky-bottom ecosystem fisheries model.

Ecological Modelling 104:145-164.

McClanahan, T.R., N.A. Muthiga, A.T. Kamukuru, H. Machano, and R.W. Kiambo. 1999. The

effects of marine parks and fishing on coral reefs of northern Tanzania. Biological

Conservation 89(2):161-182.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

120

McCormick, M.I. and J.H. Choat. 1987. Estimating total abundance of a large temperate-reef fish

using visual strip transects. Marine Biology 96:469-478.

McNeill, S.E. 1994. The selection and design of marine protected areas: Australia as a case

study. Biodiversity and Conservation 3:586-605.

McNeill, S.E. and P.G. Fairweather. 1993. Single large or several small marine reserves? An

experimental approach with seagrass fauna. Journal of Biogeography 20:429-440.

Mills, C.E. and J.T. Carlton. 1998. Rationale for a system of international reserves for the open

ocean. Conservation Biology 12:244-247.

Milon, J.W., D.O. Suman, M. Shivlani, and K.A. Cochran. 1997. Commercial Fishers'

Perceptions of Marine Reserves for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. Florida Sea

Grant Tech. Paper 89.

Moreno, C.A., K.M. Lunecke, and M.I. Lepez. 1986. The response of an intertidal Concholepas

concholepas (Gastropoda) population to protection from man in southern Chile and the

effects on benthic sessile assemblages. Oikos 46:359-364.

Morgan, L.E. and L.W. Botsford. 1998. The influence of larval transport and retention on

recruitment patterns and the design of harvest refugia for rockfish. Pages 41-49 In M.M.

Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S. Dept.

Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-255.

Murray, S.N. 1998. Effectiveness of marine life refuges on southern California shores. Pages

1453-1465 In O.T. Magoon, H. Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson, eds. California

and the World Ocean '97. Taking a Look at California's Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the

Future. ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

Murray, S.N., R.F. Ambrose, J.A. Bohnsack, L.W. Botsford, M.H. Carr, G.E. Davis, P.K.

Dayton, D. Gotshall, D.R. Gunderson, M.A. Hixon, J. Lubchenco, M. Mangel, A. MacCall,

D.A. McArdle, J.C. Ogden, J. Roughgarden, R.M. Starr, M.J. Tegner, and M.M. Yoklavich.

1999. No-take reserve networks: Sustaining fishery populations and marine ecosystems.

Fisheries 24:11-25.

National Research Council. 1997. Striking a Balance: Improving Stewardship of Marine Areas.

National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

Neis, B. 1995. Fishers' ecological knowledge and marine protected areas. Pages 265-272 In N.L.

Shackell and J.H.M. Willison, eds. Marine Protected Areas and Sustainable Fisheries.

Science and Management of Protected Areas Association, Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Novaczek, I. 1995. Possible roles for marine protected areas in establishing sustainable fisheries

in Canada. Pages 31-36 In N.L. Shackell and J.H.M. Willison, eds. Marine Protected Areas

and Sustainable Fisheries. Centre for Wildlife and Conservation Biology, Acadia University,

Wolfville, Nova Scotia, Canada.

OíConnell, V., W.W. Wakefield, and H.G. Greene. 1998. The use of a no-take marine reserve in

the eastern Gulf of Alaska to protect essential fish habitat. Pages 125-132 In M. M.

Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S. Dept.

Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-255.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

121

Ogden, J.C. 1988. The influence of adjacent systems on the structure and function of coral reefs.

Proceedings of the 6th International Coral Reef Symposium 1:123-129.

Ogden, J.C. 1997. Marine managers look upstream for connections. Science 278:1414-1415.

Oliva, D. and J.C. Castilla. 1986. The effect of human exclusion on population structure of keyhole limpets Fissurella crassa and F. limbata on the coast of central Chile. Marine Ecology

7:201-217.

Orensanz, J.M.L., J. Armstrong, D. Armstrong, and R. Hilborn. 1998. Crustacean resources are

vulnerable to serial depletion - the multifaceted decline of crab and shrimp fisheries in the

Greater Gulf of Alaska. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 8(2):117-176.

Paddack, M.J. 1996. The influence of marine reserves upon rockfish populations in central

California kelp forests. M.S. Thesis, University of California, Santa Cruz. 40 pp.

Paddack, M.J. 1998. Results of a temperate reef marine reserve study and implications for use of

marine reserves in nearshore fisheries management. Pages 395-399 In O.T. Magoon, H.

Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson, eds. California and the World Ocean '97. Taking

a Look at California's Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future. ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

Palsson, W.A. 1998. Monitoring the response of rockfishes to protected areas. Pages 64-73 In

M.M. Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S.

Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-255.

Palsson, W.A. and R.E. Pacunski. 1995. The response of rocky reef fishes to harvest refugia in

Puget Sound. Pages 224-234 In Puget Sound Research '95, Vol. I. Puget Sound Water

Quality Authority, Olympia, Washington.

Parma, A.M. and NCEAS Working Group on Population Management. 1998. What can adaptive

management do for out fish, forests, food, and biodiversity? Integrative Biology 1:16-26.

Plan Development Team. 1990. The potential of Marine Fishery Reserves for Reef Fish

Management in the U.S. Southern Atlantic. U.S. Dept. of Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech.

Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SEFC-261. 45pp.

Polacheck, T. 1990. Year around closed areas as a management tool. Natural Resource Modeling

4:327-353.

Pollard, S. 1992. Red abalone, Haliotis rufescens; relative impacts of recreational fisheries and

sea otter predation on the abundance, size frequency, and microhabitat distribution of red

abalone populations in central and northern California. M.S. Thesis. University of California,

Santa Cruz. 67 pp.

Polunin, N.V.C. 1990. Marine regulated areas: An expanded approach for the tropics. Resource

Management and Optimization 7:283-299.

Polunin, N.V.C. 1993. Greater biomass and value of target coral-reef fishes in two small

Caribbean marine reserves. Marine Ecology Progress Series 100:167-176.

Pomeroy, C. and J. Beck. 1998. Cooperative management of the state's Marine Ecological

Reserves: Preliminary evidence from Big Creek. Pages 105-116 In O.T. Magoon, H.

Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson, eds. California and the World Ocean '97. Taking

a Look at California's Ocean Resource: An Agenda for the Future. ASCE, Reston, Virginia.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

122

Preen, A. 1998. Marine protected areas and dugong conservation along Australia's Indian Ocean

coast. Environmental Management 22(2):173-181.

Pressey, R.L., H.P. Possingham, and J.R. Day. 1997. Effectiveness of alternative heuristic

algorithms for identifying indicative minimum requirements for conservation reserves.

Biological Conservation 80:207-219.

Proulx, E. 1998. The role of law enforcement in the creation and management of marine reserves.

Pages 74-77 In M. M. Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A

Workshop. U.S. Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC255.

Quinn, J.F. 1998. Considerations for marine protected areas: Sizing and spacing. Page 260 In

O.T. Magoon, H. Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson, eds. California and the World

Ocean '97. Taking a Look at California's Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future.

ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

Quinn, J.F., S.R. Wing, and L.W. Botsford. 1993. Harvest refugia in marine invertebrate

fisheries: Models and applications to the red sea urchin, Strongylocentrotus franciscanus. American Zoologist 33:537-550.

Rakitin, A. and D.L. Kramer. 1996. Effects of a marine reserve on the distribution of coral reef

fishes in Barbados. Marine Ecology Progress Series 131:97-113.

Ralston, S. 1998. The status of federally managed rockfish on the U.S. West Coast. Pages 6-16

In M.M. Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S.

Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-255.

Ramos-Espla, A.A. and S.E. McNeill. 1994. The status of marine conservation in Spain. Ocean

and Coastal Management 24:125-138.

Randall, J.E. 1982. Tropical marine sanctuaries and their significance in reef fisheries research.

Pages 167-178 In G.R. Huntsman, W.R. Nicholson and W.W.J. Fix, eds. The Biological

Bases for Reef Fishery Management. NOAA Tech. Memo.

Riegl, B. and A. Riegl. 1996. Studies on coral community structure and damage as a basis for

zoning marine reserves. Biological Conservation 77:269-277.

Rigney, H. 1990. Marine reserves - Blueprint for protection. Australian Fisheries December:18-

22.

Roberts, C.M. 1995. Rapid build-up of fish biomass in a Caribbean marine reserve. Conservation

Biology 9:816-826.

Roberts, C.M. 1997a. Connectivity and management of Caribbean coral reefs. Science 278:1454-

1457.

Roberts, C.M. 1997b. Ecological advice for the global fisheries crisis. Trends in Ecology and

Evolution 12:35-38.

Roberts, C.M. 1998. Sources, sinks, and the design of marine reserve networks. Fisheries 23:16-

19.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

123

Roberts, C.M., W.J. Ballantine, C.D. Buxton, P. Dayton, L.B. Crowder, W. Milon, M.K. Orbach,

D. Pauly, and J. Trexler. 1995. Review of the use of marine fishery reserves in the U.S.

southeastern Atlantic. U.S. Dept. of Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TMNMFS-SEFSC-376. 31 pp.

Roberts, C.M. and J.P. Hawkins. 1997. How small can a marine reserve be and still be effective?

Coral Reefs 16:150.

Roberts, C.M. and N.V.C. Polunin. 1991. Are marine reserves effective in management of reef

fisheries? Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 1:65-91.

Roberts, C.M. and N.V.C. Polunin. 1993a. Effects of marine reserve protection on northern Red

Sea fish populations. Proceedings of the 7th International Coral Reef Symposium:979-987.

Roberts, C.M. and N.V.C. Polunin. 1993b. How marine reserves can benefit reefs and fishers.

Sea Wind 7:2-6.

Roberts, C.M. and N.V.C. Polunin. 1993c. Marine reserves: Simple solutions to managing

complex fisheries? Ambio 22:363-368.

Rogers-Bennett, L., W.A. Bennett, H.C. Fastenau, and C.M. Dewees. 1995. Spatial variation in

red sea urchin reproduction and morphology: Implications for harvest refugia. Ecological

Applications 5(4):1171-1180.

Rogers-Bennett, L. 1998. Marine protected areas and the red urchin fishery. Pages 412-423 In

O.T. Magoon, H. Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson, eds. California and the World

Ocean '97. Taking a Look at California's Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future.

ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

Rowley, R.J. 1992. Impacts of marine reserves on fisheries: A report and review of the literature.

Department of Conservation, Wellington, New Zealand. 50 pp.

Rowley, R.J. 1994. Case studies and reviews: Marine reserves in fisheries management. Aquatic

Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 4:233-254.

Ruckelhaus, M.H. and C.G. Hays. 1998. Conservation and management of species in the sea.

Pages 112-156 In P.L. Fiedler and P.M. Kareiva, eds. Conservation Biology for the Coming

Decade. Chapman and Hall, New York.

Russ, G.R. 1985. Effects of protective management on coral reef fishes in the central

Philippines. Proceedings of the 5th International Coral Reef Congress 4:219-224.

Russ, G.R. 1989. Distribution and abundance of coral reef fishes in the Sumilon Island reserve,

central Philippines, after nine years of protection from fishing. Asian Marine Biology 6:59-

71.

Russ, G.R. and A.C. Alcala. 1989. Effects of intense fishing pressure on an assemblage of coral

reef fishes. Marine Ecology Progress Series 56:13-27.

Russ, G.R. and A.C. Alcala. 1996a. Do marine reserves export adult fish biomass? Evidence

from Apo Island, Central Philippine. Marine Ecology Progress Series 132:1-9.

Russ, G.R. and A.C. Alcala. 1996b. Marine reserves: Rates and patterns of recovery and decline

of large predatory fish. Ecological Applications 6:947-961.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

124

Russ, G.R. and A.C. Alcala. 1998a. Natural fishing experiments in marine reserves 1983-1993:

community and trophic responses. Coral Reefs 17(4):383-397.

Russ, G.R. and A.C. Alcala. 1998b. Natural fishing experiments in marine reserves 1983-1993:

roles of life history and fishing intensity in family responses. Coral Reefs 17(4):399-416.

Sala, E. 1997. Fish predators and scavengers of the sea urchin Paracentrotus lividus in protected

areas of the north-west Mediterranean Sea. Marine Biology 129(3):531-539

Saldanha, L. 1992. Marine fishes, habitats and conservation. Netherlands Journal of Zoology

42:190-199.

Salm, R.V. 1989. Marine and Coastal Protected Areas: A Guide for Planners and Managers. 2nd

edition. State Printing Company, Columbia, Southern Carolina. 302 pp.

Salm, R.V. and J.R. Clarke. 1984. Marine and Coastal Protected Areas: A Guide for Planners

and Managers. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 302 pp.

Salm, R.V. and A. Price. 1995. Selection of marine protected areas. Pages 15-31 In S. Gubbay,

ed. Marine Protected Areas: Principles and Techniques for Management. Chapman & Hall,

London.

Samoilys, M.A. 1988. Abundance and species richness of coral reef fish on the Kenyan Coast:

The effects of protective management and fishing. Proceedings of the 6th International Coral

Reef Congress 3:261-266.

Schaeffer, T.M. and M.S. Foster. 1998. Diver disturbance in kelp forests. Report to the Monterey

Bay National Marine Sanctuary. 10 pp.

Schroeder, R.E. 1987. Effects of patch reef size and isolation on coral reef fish recruitment.

Bulletin of Marine Science 41:441-451.

Schroeder, R.E. 1989. Enhancing fish recruitment through optimum reef design of artificial

structures and marine reserves. Tropical Coastal Area Management 4:6-8.

Scura, L.F. and T. van't Hof. 1993. Economic feasibility and ecological sustainability of the

Bonaire Marine Park. Environmental Department, The World Bank, Washington, DC.

Shepherd, S.A. and L.D. Brown. 1993. What is an abalone stock: Implications for the role of

refugia in conservation. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 50:2001-2009.

Shivlani, M.P. and D.O. Suman. 2000. Dive operator use patterns in the designated no-take zones

of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS). Environmental Management

25:647-659.

Silva, M.E., E.M. Gately, and I. Desilvestre. 1986. A bibliographic listing of coastal and marine

protected areas: a global survey. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Tech. Report WHOI86-11, Woods Hole, MA, USA.

Sladek Nowlis, J. and C.M. Roberts. 1997. You can have your fish and eat it, too: Theoretical

approaches to marine reserve design. Proceedings of the 8th International Coral Reef

Symposium 2:1907-1910.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

125

Sladek Nowlis, J. and M.M. Yoklavich. 1998. Design criteria for rockfish harvest refugia from

models of fish transport. Pages 32-40 In M.M. Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for

West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S. Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAATM-NMFS-SWFSC-255.

Smith, E.J. Jr. and T.H. Johnson. 1989. The Marine Life Refuges and Reserves of California.

California Department of Fish and Game Marine Resources Information Bulletin. No. 1. 63

pp.

Sobel, J. 1996. Marine reserves: Necessary tools for biodiversity conservation? Global

Biodiversity 6:8-17.

Soh, S.K., D.R. Gunderson, and D.H. Ito. 1998. Closed areas to manage rockfishes in the Gulf of

Alaska. Pages 118-125 In M.M. Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast

Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S. Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFSSWFSC-255.

Starr, R.M. 1998. Design principles for rockfish reserves on the U.S. West Coast. Pages 50-63 In

M.M. Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S.

Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-255.

Starr, R.M. and K.A. Johnson. 1997. Goal oriented marine reserves to enhance fisheries. Pages

68-78 In D. A. McArdle, ed. Marine Protected Areas of California. A summary of a

Conference Session. University of California Sea Grant publication.

Starr, R.M. and K.A. Johnson. 1998. Goal oriented marine reserves: A zoogeographic approach.

Pages 262-272 In O.T. Magoon, H. Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson, eds.

California and the World Ocean '97. Taking a Look at California's Ocean Resources: An

Agenda for the Future. ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

State Interagency Marine Managed Areas Workgroup. 1999. California's State Classification

System for Marine Managed Areas. Draft Report. Resource Agency of California. 127 pp.

Stoner, A.W. and M. Ray. 1996. Queen conch, Strombus gigas, in fished and unfished locations

of the Bahamas: Effects of a marine fishery reserve on adults, juveniles, and larval

production. U. S. Fishery Bulletin 94:551-565.

Sumaila, U.R. 1998. Protected marine reserves as fisheries management tools: A bioeconomic

analysis. Fisheries Research 37(1-3):287-296.

Suman, D.O. 1997. The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary: A case study of an innovative

federal-state partnership in marine resource management. Coastal Management 25(3):293-

324.

Suman, D.O. 1998. Stakeholder group perceptions of marine reserves in the Florida Keys

National Marine Sanctuary. Pages 100-112 In M.M. Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia

for West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S. Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo.

NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-255.

Tegner, M.J. 1993. Southern California abalone: Can stocks be rebuilt using marine harvest

refugia? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 50:2010-2018.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

126

Thomson, C. 1998. Evaluating marine harvest refugia: An economic perspective. Pages 78-83 In

M.M. Yoklavich, ed. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop. U.S.

Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-255.

Ticco, P.C. 1995. The use of marine protected areas to preserve and enhance marine biological

diversity: A case study approach. Coastal Management 23:309-314.

Tisdell, C. and J.M. Broadus. 1989. Policy issues related to the establishment and management of

marine reserves. Coastal Management 17:37-53.

Tupper, M. and F. Juanes. 1999. Effects of a marine reserve on recruitment of grunts (Pisces:

Haemulidae) at Barbados, West Indies. Environmental Biology of Fishes 55:53-63.

Usher, M.B. 1991. Habitat structure and the design of nature reserves. Pages 373-391 In S.S.

Bell, E.D. McCoy and H.R. Mushinsky, eds. Habitat Structure: The Physical Arrangement of

Objects in Space. Chapman and Hall, London.

VenTresca, D.A., M.L. Gingras, J. Ugotetz, A. Voss, S. Blair, J. Plant, R. Hornady, and C.

Yoshiyama. 1998. The potential of marine reserves to enhance fisheries. Pages 400-411 In

O.T. Magoon, H. Converse, B. Baird and M. Miller-Henson, eds. California and the World

Ocean '97. Taking a Look at California's Ocean Resources: An Agenda for the Future.

ASCE, Reston, Virginia.

Walls, K. and G. McAlpine. 1993. Developing a strategy for a network of marine reserves around

New Zealand - A manager's perspective. Pages 57-62 In C.N. Battershill, D.R. Schiel, G.P.

Jones, R.G. Creese and A.B. MacDiarmid, eds. Proceedings of the 2nd International

Temperate Reef Symposium. NIWA Marine, Wellington, New Zealand.

Walters, B.B. and M. Butler. 1995. Should we see lobster buoys bobbing in a marine park? Pages

205-213 In N. Shackell and J.H.M. Willison, eds. Marine Protected Areas and Sustainable

Fisheries. Science and Management of Protected Areas Association, Wolfville, Nova Scotia,

Canada.

Wantiez, L., P. Thollot, and M. Kulbicki. 1997. Effects of marine reserves on coral reef fish

communities from five islands in New Caledonia. Coral Reefs 16:215-224.

Wells, S. and A.T. White. 1995. Involving the community. Pages 61-84 In S. Gubbay, ed. Marine

Protected Areas: Principles and Techniques for Management. Chapman & Hall, London.

Wells, S.M. 1989. Progress in coral reef conservation. Progress in Underwater Science 13:207-

225.

White, A.T. 1986. Philippine marine park pilot site: Benefits and management conflicts.

Environmental Conservation 13:1-395.

White, A.T. 1988. The effect of community-managed marine reserves in the Philippines on their

associated coral reef fish populations. ICLARM Coastal Resources Management Project

Technical Report, Manila, Philippines.

Whitfield, A.K. 1997. Fish conservation in South African estuaries. Aquatic Conservation:

Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 7:1-11.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

127

Willis, T. 1996. Movement patterns and remote sampling of snapper (Pagrus auratus) and blue

cod (Parapercis colias) from Cape Rodney - Okakari Point marine reserve. Report to the

Ministry of Fisheries, Auckland, N. Z.

Wolfenden, J., F. Cram, and B. Kirkwood. 1994. Marine reserves in New Zealand: A survey of

community reactions. Ocean and Coastal Management 25:31-51.

Yoklavich, M., R. Starr, J. Steger, H.G. Greene, F. Schwing, and C. Malzone. 1997. Mapping

Benthic Habitats and Ocean Currents in the Vicinity of Central California's Big Creek

Ecological Reserve. U.S. Dept. of Comm. NOAA Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC245. 52 pp.

Yoklavich, M.M., ed. 1999. Marine Harvest Refugia for West Coast Rockfish: A Workshop.

U.S. Dept. Comm. NOAA/NMFS Tech. Memo. NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC-255. 159pp.

Zacharias, M.A. and D.E. Howes. 1998. An analysis of marine protected areas in British

Columbia, Canada, using a marine ecological classification. Natural Areas Journal 18:(1):4-

13.

Zeller, D.C. 1997. Home range and activity patterns of the coral trout Plectropomus leopardus

(Serranidae). Marine Ecology Progress Series 154:65-77.

Zeller, D.C. and G.R. Russ. 1998. Marine reserves: Patterns of adult movement of the coral trout

(Plectropomus leopardus (Serranidae)). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science

55:917-924.
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

128
Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary 

129

Acknowledgements

This report required the time of many people. I would especially like to thank the

following people who helped me assimilate the information in this report by phone, mail,

facsimile, and email: Scott Kathey, Pat Cotter, Lisa de Marignac, Aaron King, Holly Price,

Jennifer Makowka, Jamie Kum (Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary); Brian Ross

(Environmental Protection Agency); John Oliver, Stacey Kim, Kyra Schlining, and Andrea

Woolfolk (Moss Landing Marine Labs); Karen Worcester (Regional Water Quality Control

Board); Ray Dunham (State Water Resources Control Board); Steve Webster (Monterey Bay

Aquarium); Karen Huntington (City of Monterey Clerk's Office); Captain Carl Miller (Pacific

Grove Police Dept.); Pete Woodruff (City of Pacific Grove Clerk's Office); Michelle Paddack

(UC Santa Cruz); John Smiley (Big Creek MRPA Ecological Reserve Manager); Dave

Ventresca, Bruce Elliott, and Paul Reilly (California Department of Fish and Game); Martha

Nitzberg (Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve); Gill Soper (Golden Gate

National Recreation Area); Ken Gray (State Department of Parks and Recreation); Jerry Loomis

(Point Lobos State Reserve); Gary Page (Point Reyes Bird Observatory); Melissa Miller-Henson

(Resource Agency of California); Bob Breen (James V. Fitzgerald Marine Reserve); Roy Torres

(National Marine Fisheries Service) and Mark Ikenberry (Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park). I

would like to thank Kate Stanbury for her assistance with all the maps. The Sea Grant

Publication, California Marine Protected Areas, by Deborah McArdle was an invaluable

resource. In addition, I would like to thank Bill Douros, Andrew DeVogelaere, Pat Cotter, Scott

Kathey, Lisa de Marignac, Aaron King, Holly Price, Pete Raimondi, Mark Carr, and Irene Beers

for reviewing drafts of this report and providing helpful comments.