Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series ONMS-05-05 

U.S. Department of Commerce September 2005 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

National Ocean Service 

Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management 

Channel Islands 

Deep Water Monitoring Plan Development 

Workshop Report 

April 26-27, 2005 

University of California, Santa Barbara

Office of National Marine Sanctuaries 
About the Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series 

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Office of National Marine Sanctuaries 

(ONMS) 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 facilitates integration of natural sciences, socioeconomic and cultural sciences, education, 

and policy development to accomplish the diverse needs of NOAA’s resource protection 

mandate. 
Channel Islands 

Deep Water Monitoring Plan Development 

Workshop Report 

April 26-27, 2005 

University of California, Santa Barbara 

Sarah Fangman1, Steve Gittings2, Kathy Dalton2, Greg McFall3, Dave Lott2

1

NOAA/Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary 

113 Harbor Way, Suite 150 

Santa Barbara, CA 93109 

2

NOAA/National Marine Sanctuary Program

1305 East West Highway 

Silver Spring, MD 20910 

3

NOAA/Gray’sReef National Marine Sanctuary 

10 Ocean Science Circle 

Savannah, GA 31411 

Silver Spring, Maryland

September 2005

U.S. Department of Commerce 

Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

VADM Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr. (USN-ret.) 

Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere

National Ocean Service 

Richard W. Spinrad, Ph.D., Assistant Administrator 

Office of National Marine Sanctuaries 

Daniel J. Basta, Director 
DISCLAIMER 

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

Marine Sanctuaries 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

 Office of National Marine Sanctuaries

 SSMC4, N/ORM62 

 1305 East-West Highway 

Silver Spring, MD 20910 

COVER 

Satellite image illustrating the temperature variation in the Northern Channel Islands. 

Temperature ranges are represented as follows: blue = 44-52o F, green-yellow = 56-64o F, and 

orange-red = 65-72o F. Photo credit: Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary. 

SUGGESTED CITATION

Fangman, S., S. Gittings, K. Dalton, G. McFall, D. Lott. 2005. Channel Islands Deep Water 

Monitoring Plan Development Workshop Report. Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series 

ONMS-05-05. U. S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, Office of National Marine Sanctuaries, Silver Spring, MD. 38 pp. 

CONTACT

Dr. Steve Gittings 

Science Program Manager 

Office of National Marine Sanctuaries 

1305 East West Highway, 11th Floor 

Silver Spring, MD 20910 

(301) 713-7274 

Steve.Gittings@noaa.gov

1 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

TOPIC PAGE

Table of Contents.................................................................................................... i 

List of Figures and Tables....................................................................................... ii 

Abstract and Key Words......................................................................................... iii 

Background............................................................................................................. 1 

Process.................................................................................................................... 3 

Questions................................................................................................................. 4 

Requirements .......................................................................................................... 5 

Protocols ................................................................................................................. 8

Workshop Recommendations................................................................................. 10 

Next Steps............................................................................................................... 13 

Literature Cited ....................................................................................................... 14 

Appendix I – Workshop agenda ............................................................................. 15 

Appendix II – List of workshop participants and roles........................................... 17 

Appendix III – Question tables............................................................................... 18 

Appendix IV – Project templates............................................................................ 24 

Appendix V – Comments received from the CINMS Research Activities Panel... 37 

i i 
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

FIGURE/TABLE PAGE

Figure 1 – Map of CINMS, including both the state MPA network and the 

proposed, federal extensions................................................................. 2 

Figure 2 – Workshop breakout session................................................................... 5 

Table 1a – Requirements Matrix, part 1 ................................................................. 6 

Table 1b – Requirements Matrix, part 2 ................................................................. 7 

Table 2 – Prioritization of proposed projects.......................................................... 9

ii ii 
ABSTRACT 

In 2003, twelve marine protected areas were established in state waters (0-3 nmi) surrounding 

the Channel Islands. NOAA is considering extending this network (3-6 nmi) into deeper waters 

of the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary (CINMS). In order for effective long-term

management of the deep water reserves to occur, a well-structured monitoring program is 

required to assess effectiveness. The CINMS and the National Marine Sanctuary Program

(NMSP) hosted a 2-day workshop in April 2005 to develop a monitoring plan for the proposed 

federal marine reserves in that sanctuary. Conducted at the University of California at Santa 

Barbara, participants included scientists from academic, state, federal, and private research 

institutions. Workshop participants developed project ideas that could answer priority questions 

posed by the NMSP. This workshop report will be used to develop a monitoring plan for the 

reserves. 

KEY WORDS 

Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary, monitoring plan, deep water reserves 

iii iii 
iv 
1 1 

In 2003 twelve Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) were established in California state waters (0-3

nautical miles) surrounding the northern Channel Islands. NOAA is considering extending this 

network of marine reserves into deeper waters of the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary 

(roughly 3-6 nautical miles) (Figure 1). The goals of the proposed reserves are to:

On April 26-27, 2005 the National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) and the CINMS hosted a

Focus Group Meeting to develop the monitoring plan for the deep-water reserves. The goal of 

the workshop was to identify and prioritize requirements for monitoring the proposed reserves. 

During the workshop, invited experts discussed the key questions that would be used to evaluate 

reserve effectiveness. The group then identified projects and implementation strategies for

monitoring the proposed reserves.

In the spring of 2003 NOAA’s Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary (CINMS), the

California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the Channel Islands National Park (CINP) 

hosted a workshop to develop preliminary socioeconomic and biological monitoring plans for the 

shallower MPAs. The result of the workshop was a draft comprehensive monitoring plan that 

details programs (both existing and proposed activities) for both biological and socioeconomic

monitoring. Subsequent meetings and workshops held by Sea Grant and the CINMS Research

Activities Panel continued to refine the draft monitoring plan.

In order for effective long-term management of the deep-water marine reserves to occur, a wellstructured biological monitoring plan is required that identifies specific programs to assess

effectiveness.

BACKGROUND 

• Provide long-term protection of the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary (CINMS)

resources including natural habitats, populations of interest and ecological processes

• Restore and enhance natural habitats and the abundance, density, population age structure

and diversity of natural biological communities in the CINMS

• Provide, for research and education, undisturbed reference areas that include the full

spectrum of CINMS habitats where local populations exhibit a more natural abundance,

density, and age structure

• Set aside for intrinsic and heritage value, representative habitats and natural biological 

communities

• Create models of and incentives for ways to conserve and manage the resources of the 

CINMS
1 

Figure 1. Map of the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary, including both the state marine protected area (MPA) netwo

proposed, federal extensions.

2 
PROCESS 

Workshop participants consisted of sanctuary staff from the National Marine Sanctuary Program, 

the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary, and invited scientists from other marine 

sanctuaries, academic, federal, state, and private research institutions. All had experience or 

expertise with reserve establishment and monitoring (see Appendix II for list of participants and 

their affiliations). The group included scientists experienced with deep surveys of benthic 

invertebrates and fish, shallow diving survey techniques and technologies, intertidal, marine 

mammal, physical oceanography, contaminant chemistry, seafloor mapping, and information 

management. Each was asked to participate in breakout groups in which their knowledge and 

experience could best be applied. 

The goal of the workshop was to identify natural resource monitoring activities that could be 

used to determine whether the goals of the reserves are being reached. Five goals have been 

identified for the proposed reserves (see above). The two primary goals that relate to natural 

resources are 1) to ensure the long-term protection of the CINMS resources and 2) to restore 

natural habitats, populations and diversity in the sanctuary. 

Two major steps were used in the workshop, both of which are consistent with the process 

defined in the document “A Monitoring Framework for the National Marine Sanctuary System” 

(NMSP, 2004). The first step was to identify the requirements for monitoring, that is, the key 

resources to be assessed and the associated priority measurements (called “metrics” in this 

report). The second was to select or develop protocols to allow for the collection of data or 

information related to priority metrics. Each step is described in more detail below, in the 

sections titled “Requirements” and “Protocols.” 

In the introductory plenary session, participants first discussed the scope of the workshop with 

respect to depth and its relation to the shallow water reserve monitoring program already in 

place. The group agreed to focus on resources in depths greater than 20 m, because this is the 

maximum depth that the majority of current reserve effectiveness studies ends. Focusing on 

depths greater than 20 m will overlap with areas inside the boundaries of the proposed federal 

reserves. However, the group felt it important to monitor those areas at depths likely to respond 

to changes in fishing pressure, namely the seaward portion of kelp-dominated habitats, where 

considerable fishing occurs. 

Before the workshop, a series of general questions and more specific sub-questions were 

developed. They were derived from discussions and documents prepared during prior reserve 

design workshops. A draft set of questions was prepared by the planning committee for this 

workshop and modified by participants. The final list of questions was intended to focus the 

discussions, and is presented below: 

1 3 
QUESTIONS ADDRESSED DURING WORKSHOP 

Changes Within MPAs

1. Do populations, communities and species distributions change within, adjacent to, 

and distant from reserves? 

a. Is community structure in reserves different from that in otherwise equivalent 

non-protected areas? 

b. What changes occur among selected species? 

c. Do high-level carnivores change patterns of predation? 

Spillover

2. Does migration of adults and young enhance populations outside reserves, and if so, 

how far outside? 

a. What is the rate and magnitude of movement by selected species and size classes 

between MPAs and surrounding areas? 

b. Does spillover enhance adjacent populations? 

3. Do populations outside reserves increase as a result of increased larval recruitment? 

a. Are larvae produced inside MPAs transported into areas outside MPAs? 

Habitat and Ecosystem Effects

4. Do MPAs affect ecosystem structure and function, including trophic cascades? 

a. How does trophic structure change as a result of establishment of MPAs? 

5. Do changes in fishing effort affect habitats within and/or close to MPAs? 

a. Does the cessation of fishing effort in reserves alter natural biotic habitats? 

b. Does the cessation of fishing effort in reserves alter natural abiotic habitats? 

c. Does the cessation of prawn trapping alter biotic and abiotic habitats? 

6. Can observed changes within CINMS (and/or reserves) be attributed to large scale 

forcing and other factors independent of reserve establishment? 

a. Can observed changes in MPAs be attributed to sediment quality, water quality 

and other independent (uncontrolled) factors? 

b. Can observed changes within reserves be attributed to climate and oceanographic 

forcing? 

4 2 3 
4 3 5 

On the first day, the groups were asked to consider each question separately, and identify the

resources that would have to be assessed, and the specific metrics that would have to be 

measured to address each question. They first identified the key resources or environmental

attributes most relevant to the questions. For each resource, the potential responses stemming

from the establishment of reserves were identified, as were the metrics (measurement variables)

required to determine whether a response actually occurred. The groups also noted, to the extent 

possible, existing projects that might address each of the topics. It should be noted, however, 

that representatives were not completely familiar with some of the projects, and more work will 

be needed to determine if a project can in fact address a given topic. Finally, the groups listed, 

for each question, prospective projects or types of projects that could be part of a comprehensive 

monitoring program to assess the effectiveness of deep-water marine reserves.

Participants split into two breakout

groups to consider different but often 

overlapping questions. One group 

discussed the first three questions, 

which addressed information needs and 

monitoring related to changes that 

might occur with reserves (primarily at

the population and community level), 

the issues of spillover (juvenile and 

adult movement out of reserves) and 

export of biomass produced within 

reserves. The other group discussed 

Questions 4 through 6, which related to 

potential changes to habitats and 

ecosystems, as well as the need to 

understand environmental impacts 

caused by uncontrolled factors, such as 

large-scale oceanographic features and

climate change.

REQUIREMENTS

At the end of the first day, a “requirements matrix” was assembled based on the day’s

discussions. This is a matrix of priority resources and metrics, with the information in the cells

representing the question(s) to which each combination applies (Tables 1a and 1b). The matrix 

allows participants to see the entire list of resources considered relevant to each question, and 

associated measurement requirements. Decisions can then be made about which combinations 

are the most important based on the resources themselves or the number of questions addressed

by a specific resource-metric combination.

Figure 2. Workshop participants address key questions during a 

breakout session.
4 

Table 1a. Part 1 of the Requirements Matrix containing all species and measurements considered potentially impo

change caused by the establishment of reserves within the Channel Islands National Marine sanctuary. correspond to questions addressed by that resource-metric combination. Questions are listed in the text 

6 
Table 1

b. Part 2 of the Requirements Matrix containi

ng all s

pecies and measurements consi

dered

potentially import

change caused

b

y the establish

ment of reserves within the Channel Islands National Marine sanctuary. Nu

correspo

n

d to questions ad

dressed by t

hat resource-metric combination. Questions are listed i

n the text ab

5 

 7
PROTOCOLS 

On the second day of the workshop, participants were asked to build out project ideas. They 

prioritized the list of prospective projects generated in Day 1, and then used templates to indicate 

specific objectives, approaches, field requirements, potential partners and roles, likely costs, and 

other information (see Appendix IV). 

At the end of the second day, participants convened again in plenary to discuss each of the 

proposed projects. They prioritized the projects based on prior group discussions, comments 

raised in plenary, and a list of criteria that will be used by the CINMS to determine the ultimate 

program components. These selection criteria included: 

• Cost 

• Logistical feasibility 

• Duration 

• Stakeholder involvement 

• Urgency 

• Breadth (the number of questions addressed) 

• Geography (the number of reserves involved) 

• Effectiveness of ecosystem indicators

• Availability of historical data 

• Integration of other site-specific needs 

• Integration with state reserve monitoring plan 

• Application to other national marine sanctuaries 

The list of prioritized projects recommended by the participants is in Table 2. Though a showof-hands vote for three categories (high, medium, or low priority) was used during the workshop, 

the table presents five categories based on the number of votes received by each project. Note 

that the voting was based on prioritization in the context of monitoring reserve effectiveness, not 

on scientific merit alone. Thus, projects that might actually be very important to other sanctuary 

characterization or management needs may be ranked as lower priorities with regard to 

monitoring reserve effectiveness. It must also be noted that the group was not asked to apply the 

selection criteria in a consistent or rigorous manner in ranking process. This will happen during 

planning sessions conducted after the workshop and could result in changes in the order of 

prioritized projects. Finally, some projects were ranked low not because of their scientific merit 

or importance relative to monitoring reserve effectiveness, but simply because participants felt 

that the work was already being conducted. 

8 6 
Table 2. List of projects proposed to address information needs related to deep-water reserve effectiveness in 

the Channel Islands and their ranking by workshop participants. 

Priority Project Description Approaches

Deep visual surveys 

Benthic and fish fauna surveys 30-

340m Subs, ROV, camera sleds 

Shallow visual surveys 

Benthic and fish fauna surveys 20-

30m High Divers, ROV 

Trap Surveys Trapping, tagging (acoustic and

visual) to assess movement Commercial fishermen

High-Medium Impacts of prawn traps

Assess impacts of one of the only 

active fisheries ROV, subs 

Acoustic tracking Directly tracking the movement of 

individual fish 

Implanted transmitters and

downloadable seabed

receivers 

Model food web interactions 

Develop models of changing food

webs 

Use data from other 

studies to produce models

Foraging 

Document changes in feeding

patterns and locations of top level

carnivores 

Vessel, aircraft and landbased observations;

pinnipeds and seabirds 

Deep slope surveys 

Collections and observations below 

340m

NMFS? Trawling and

deep subs 

Water quality – sample and

data collection 

Document changes in uncontrolled

water quality variables 

Collections during other 

surveys, but not analysis 

Medium

Sediment quality – sample

and data collection

Document changes in uncontrolled

sediment quality variables 

Collections during other 

surveys, but not analysis 

Medium-Low Large Scale Physical 

Influences 

Correlate changes in reserves with 

large scale patterns in the ocean and 

climate 

Use existing information

Trawl surveys Collections of primary consumers 

for population and contaminants Trawling

Modeling larval transport Predicting larval transport 

Existing data on currents 

and larval duration for 

selected species 

Water quality - data analysis Document changes in uncontrolled

water quality variables 

Analysis of archived

samples 

Low 

Sediment quality - data

analysis 

Document changes in uncontrolled

sediment quality variables 

Analysis of archived

samples 

7 9 
WORKSHOP RECOMMENDATIONS 

Participants in the Deep Water Monitoring Plan Development Workshop developed a prioritized 

list of projects that they recommended for implementation to assess reserve effectiveness. This 

list of prioritized projects is provided in Table 2. This section briefly describes each project that 

was recommended. Further details for each project can be found in the Project Templates 

provided in Appendix IV. 

Three projects were ranked “High” by workshop participants: deep visual surveys, shallow 

visual surveys and trap surveys. Deep visual surveys were recommended to address the 

question: “How do deepwater (30 – 340m) marine populations, communities and trophic 

structure respond to marine protected area implementation?” The objectives of deep visual 

surveys are to quantify changes in community structure for conspicuous fishes and invertebrates 

inside and outside MPAs; quantify changes in population density and relative abundance for 

selected conspicuous fishes and invertebrates inside and outside of MPAs; and to quantify 

changes in trophic structure inside and outside MPAs. Deep visual surveys would be conducted 

using submersibles, remotely operated vehicles (ROVs), towed cameras and/or drop cameras. 

The second high priority project proposed by workshop participants was shallow visual surveys. 

The group recommended these surveys to address the question: “How do shallow water (20-

30m) marine populations, communities and trophic structure respond to MPA implementation?” 

The objectives of shallow visual surveys are to quantify changes in community structure for 

conspicuous fishes and invertebrates inside and outside of MPAs; quantify changes in population 

density and relative abundance for selected conspicuous fishes and invertebrates inside and 

outside of MPAs; and to quantify changes in trophic structure inside and outside of MPAs. 

Shallow visual surveys would be conducted by SCUBA divers. 

The final project ranked as a high priority for deep water monitoring was trap surveys. Trap 

surveys were recommended to address the questions: “How does catch per unit effort (CPUE) 

and size change inside and outside reserves?” and “Is there a spillover effect?” The objectives of

trap surveys in a deep water monitoring plan are to quantify changes in CPUE for rock crabs and 

lobsters inside and outside reserves; quantify changes in mean size and size frequency for rock 

crabs and lobster inside and outside reserves; and to discern if there is spillover of rock crabs and

lobster. Workshop participants recommended that lobster and crab fishermen be partners in 

conducting these trap surveys. 

One project was ranked “High-medium” priority by the group. Conducting a study to assess the 

impacts of prawn traps on habitats was recommended in response to observations made during 

deep visual surveys that suggest prawn traps may be damaging deep water habitats. 

Observations of tangled ropes and derelict traps intertwined with diseased and broken coral and 

sponges suggest that prawn trap fishing may damage essential fish habitat (EFH) in the CINMS. 

There are two related questions this project seeks to address: (1) Are there historical patterns in 

sponge/coral density and health between areas of high and low fishing intensity? (2) Are there 

changes in time in sponge/coral density, recruitment, growth and health inside and outside 

10 8 
MPAs? Undertaking this study would involve the use of a manned submersible to visually 

survey populations of sponges and corals inside and outside of MPAs and in areas of historically 

low and high fishing intensity. 

Six deep water monitoring projects were recommended as “Medium” priority. The first of these 

(ranking within categories was not conducted) was an acoustic tracking study. Acoustically 

tracking fishes was proposed to answer the question: “How is the movement of ecologically and 

commercially important fish and invertebrate species mediated by seafloor habitats?” The 

objectives of this type of project are to quantify the movement of fish and invertebrates species at 

multiple islands, inside and outside MPAs at Anacapa, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz and Santa 

Rosa islands. The Pfleger Institute of Environmental Studies (PIER) has an acoustic array in 

place at these islands, and has been tracking fishes at the Channel Islands since 1999. Workshop 

participants recommended continuing, and possibly expanding, this activity. 

A second project proposed as medium priority involved modeling food web interactions. 

Participants proposed this project to provide information on how trophic structure is changing as 

a result of marine protected area establishment. The group recommended that classification 

should involve taking densities of species, putting them in functional feeding groups/trophic 

analysis, and looking for changes in relative abundance over time. Participants recommended 

that for species that are fished, the responses of prey should be examined. And for species that 

are primary consumers, the changes in input (e.g. kelp) should be examined. 

The workshop participants recommended a high level carnivore foraging study as a medium

priority project for the reserves monitoring program. Such a study would provide information on 

the changes in abundance in prey resources over time within MPAs and whether this leads to 

changes in foraging patterns of high level carnivores. The objectives of this project would be to 

look at foraging patterns of carnivores throughout the Channel Islands and at changes in seabird 

nesting or pinniped haul out locations. 

Deep slope surveys were recommended as another medium priority project during the workshop. 

The goal of this project would be to determine how deep water (>340m) marine populations, 

communities and trophic structure respond to MPA implementation. The objectives of deep 

slope survey are to quantify changes in community structure for conspicuous fishes and 

invertebrates inside and outside MPAs; quantify changes in population density and relative 

abundance for selected conspicuous fishes and invertebrates inside and outside MPAs; and to 

quantify changes in trophic structure inside and outside of MPAs. Conducting deep slope 

surveys would require deep trawls, larger ROVs, deep water submersible and perhaps laser line 

scanning. 

Participants in the monitoring workshop recognized that water quality issues may impact reserve 

effectiveness and recommended that a water quality monitoring project be a medium priority 

component of the implementation plan. This project could answer the question: “Do changes in 

water quality affect benthic communities inside and around MPAs?” The objective of a water 

quality monitoring program would be to evaluate contaminants, oxygen level and other 

parameters in the water column. 

9 11 
The final medium priority project recommended by workshop participants was a sediment 

quality project, which could determine if contaminated sediments affect benthic communities. 

The objectives of such a study would be to determine the level of contamination (PCBs, DDTs, 

metals, etc.) in sediments. 

One project was identified as “Medium-Low” priority. A large scale physical influences project 

was recommended to consider whether there are changes in reserves that are attributable to large 

scale forcing. The objectives of such study would be to determine large scale factors that change 

benthic communities. 

Finally, four projects were identified as “Low” priority by participants. The first of these was 

trawl surveys, which were proposed to determine if there are changes in the trophic structure of 

the deepwater community and if contaminants affect benthic organisms. The objectives of trawl 

surveys would be to determine the community composition of benthic primary and secondary 

consumers; the contaminant levels in tissues of sanddabs; collect baseline inventory of the 

deepwater marine community; and determine recruitment of benthic communities. The 

advantages of trawl surveys were that scientists can make accurate species identifications and 

collect length and weight information. Samples collected by trawl can be examined for 

anomalies and sampled for contaminants, gut contents, and otoliths. Finally, small individuals 

are not identified well using visual surveys. 

A second project identified as low priority involved modeling larval transport. Recognizing that 

there is little knowledge about the extent of larval transport out of reserves, the objective of this 

project would be to model larval transport pathways. 

Water quality and sediment quality data analysis was also identified as a low priority project for 

a deep water marine reserves monitoring program. The proposed goal of such an effort would be 

to document changes in uncontrolled water and sediment quality variables. Conducting such a 

study would involve the analysis of archived samples. 

One project that the group recommended was not ranked. Workshop participants proposed a 

project to evaluate the recovery of seafloor habitat and associated taxa following the cessation of 

physical, anthropogenic disturbance. The purpose of such a study would be to answer the 

question: “What is the rate and direction of recovery of seafloor habitats and associated taxa in 

the CINMS, inside and outside of reserves, following the cessation of physical anthropogenic 

disturbance?” Conducting such a study would require ROV, AUV or towed cameras to conduct 

visual transects at control and impacted sites to quantify the recovery of seafloor habitats and 

associated taxa across a spectrum of habitat types inside and outside of marine reserves. 

12 10 
NEXT STEPS

The National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) and the Channel Islands National Marine 

Sanctuary, in collaboration with appropriate partners, will use the information provided at this 

Deep Water Monitoring Plan Development Workshop to draft a more detailed and complete 

reserves monitoring plan. In addition to providing further details on the monitoring projects 

themselves, the draft plan will include information on staffing, funding, information management 

and delivery, and implementation, including a timeline. The plan will incorporate ongoing 

investigations that can address portions of the identified priorities. The NMSP and CINMS will 

work with the State of California to coordinate with the plan already in existence for the State 

Marine Reserves. The Draft Deep Water Monitoring Plan will be made available for review and 

comment, updated based on those comments, and then finalized for implementation.

11 13 
LITERATURE CITED

National Marine Sanctuary Program. 2004. A Monitoring Framework for the National 

Marine Sanctuary System. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service. Silver Spring, MD. 22p. 

14 12 
Appendix I Workshop agenda 

Channel Islands Deep Water Monitoring Plan Development 

April 26-27, 2005 

University of California, Santa Barbara 

Meeting Agenda 

Day 1: April 26 

Goals: Background material, identify requirements

8:30 – 9:00 am Registration and light breakfast/coffee 

9:00 – 9:30 am Introductory Remarks 

 Chris Mobley, CINMS Manager 

9:30 – 10:30 am Deep water monitoring design process and requirements templates 

 Steve Gittings, NMSP Science Program Manager 

10:30 – 10:45 am Break 

10:45 – 11:15 am Review and verify questions 

 Steve Gittings

11:15-12:00 Breakout sessions – Begin Questions Tables 

3⁄4 Habitat and Ecosystem Effects 

Satie Airamé, PISCO Policy Coordinator 

3⁄4 Changes Within MPAs and Spillover 

Greg McFall, GRNMS Research Coordinator

12:00 – 1:00 pm Lunch (provided) 

1:00 – 2:30 pm Breakout sessions - Continue with Questions Tables 

2:30 – 2:45 pm Break 

2:45 – 4:30 Breakout sessions - Continue with Questions Tables 

4:30 – 5:00 pm Progress report 

 Steve Gittings

13 15 
Channel Islands Deep Water Monitoring Plan Development 

April 26-27, 2005 

University of California, Santa Barbara 

Day 2: April 27 

Goals: Short-listing; requirements matrix; project designs

8:30 – 9:00 am Bagels/coffee 

9:00 – 9:30 am Day 1 Output Review (requirements matrix and prioritization) 

 Steve Gittings 

9:30 – 10:30 am Breakout sessions – Begin Project Templates 

3⁄4 Habitat and Ecosystem Effects 

Satie Airamé, PISCO Policy Coordinator 

3⁄4 Changes Within MPAs and Spillover 

Greg McFall, GRNMS Research Coordinator

10:30-10:45 Break 

10:45-12:00 Breakout sessions – Continue Project Templates 

12:00 – 1:00 pm Lunch (provided) 

1:00 – 2:00 pm Breakout sessions – Finish Project Templates 

2:00 – 2:15 pm Break 

2:15 – 3:30 pm Plenary Prioritization Discussion 

 Steve Gittings

3:30 – 4:00 pm Wrap up

16 14 
15 17 

Appendix II List of workshop participants and roles 

Name Institution Working Group Role

Satie Airame UCSB Habitat and Ecosystem Effects/Spillover Facilitator

Jim Allen SCCWRP Habitat and Ecosystem Effects/Spillover Participant

Dennis Bedford DFG Habitat and Ecosystem Effects/Spillover Participant

Jackie Buhl CINMS Habitat and Ecosystem Effects/Spillover Participant

Kathy Dalton NMSP HQ Habitat and Ecosystem Effects/Spillover Note taker

Gary Davis NPS Changes Within MPAs Participant

Sarah Fangman CINMS Habitat and Ecosystem Effects/Spillover Note taker

Steve Gittings NMSP HQ Changes Within MPAs Participant

John Hunter NOAA Changes Within MPAs Participant

Jeff Hyland NOAA Changes Within MPAs Participant

Brian Keller FKNMS Changes Within MPAs Participant

James Lindholm PIER Habitat and Ecosystem Effects/Spillover Participant

Steve Lonhart MBNMS Habitat and Ecosystem Effects/Spillover Participant

Dave Lott NMSP HQ Changes Within MPAs Note taker

Milton Love UCSB Changes Within MPAs Participant

Greg McFall GRNMS Changes Within MPAs Facilitator

Chris Mobley CINMS Habitat and Ecosystem Effects/Spillover Participant

Dan Richards NPS Changes Within MPAs Participant

Dirk Rosen

Marine Applied

Research Changes Within MPAs Participant

Donna Schroeder UCSB Habitat and Ecosystem Effects/Spillover Participant

Natalie Senyk NOAA Changes Within MPAs Note taker

Chuck Valle DFG Changes Within MPAs Participant

Robert Warner UCSB Habitat and Ecosystem Effects/Spillover Participant

Doug Weaver NOAA Habitat and Ecosystem Effects/Spillover Participant
Appendix III Question tables: Question 1 

16 

18 
Appendix III Question tables: Question 2 

17 

 19
Appendix III Question tables: Question 3 

18 

20 
Appendix III Question tables: Question 4 

19 

 21
Appendix III Question tables: Question 5 

20 

22 
21 

Appendix III Question tables: Question 6

 23
Appendix IV Project Templates – Deep Visual Surveys 

 

24 22 
Appendix IV Project Templates – Shallow Visual Surveys 

23 25 
Appendix IV Project Templates – Trap Survey 

26 24 
Appendix IV Project Templates – Prawn Traps 

25 27 
Appendix IV Project Templates – Acoustic Tracking of Fish Movement and Spillover 

28 26 
Appendix IV Project Templates – Model Food Web Interactions 

27 29 
Appendix IV Project Templates – Foraging 

30 28 
Appendix IV Project Templates – Deep Slope Surveys 

29 31 
Appendix IV Project Templates – Water Quality (sample and data collection) 

32 30 
Appendix IV Project Templates – Sediment Quality (sample and data collection) 

31 33 
Appendix IV Project Templates – Large Scale Physical Influences 

34 32 
Appendix IV Project Templates – Trawl Surveys 

33 35 
Appendix IV Project Templates – Modeling Larval Transport 

36 34 
Appendix V Comments received from the CINMS Sanctuary Advisory Council Research 

Activities Panel 

Research Activities Panel 

A Working Group of the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council 

Submitted September 21, 2005 

Review of the Channel Islands Monitoring Plan Development Workshop Report 

Assembled by Robert Warner (Chair) from comments electronically contributed by RAP 

members.

Background: The CINMS and the National Marine Sanctuary Program hosted a 2-day workshop 

in April 2005 to develop a monitoring program for the proposed federal marine reserves in the 

CINMS. The RAP received a draft of the report of the workshop in early September 2005, with a 

request from CINMS staff for the RAP to consider if the workshop participants missed anything, 

whether they agreed with the prioritization, and if they have thoughts on how to move the 

recommendations into a plan. This is timely, because the next step is to develop the monitoring 

plan itself. 

The workshop considered many different projects that might address information needed for 

monitoring, and placed them into several different categories according to their priority. We are 

in general agreement with the ranking of projects. Given the current economic climate, the RAP 

considers it very unlikely that any of the projects ranked as medium or low priority will be part

of a monitoring plan unless they can be included in the top-ranked programs with little or no 

extra cost. Because of that, we review here only the top-ranked programs. 

As a general comment, it is important to remember that the species expected to show the greatest 

changes as a result of reserve establishment are those that are currently affected by human 

activity (through extraction or habitat alteration). A survey of such activities currently occurring 

in the deep-water zones would suggest a list of species and areas of particular concern, and such 

a list could be used to focus particular monitoring projects. 

There were three projects ranked as high priority by the workshop: 

1. Deep visual surveys (we assume these occur between 30 and 340m, despite the occasional 

reference to >340m). Certainly, these will be the primary source of information on changes in 

deep water MPAs. We note that there is no recommendation as to the method by which these 

surveys will be carried out: submersibles, ROVs, towed cameras, and drop cameras are all 

mentioned. This overlap of methods and lack of resolution has hampered progress in the 

monitoring plan for deeper portions of the State reserves, and appears likely to do the same here. 

There is a limited amount of information comparing the accuracy, efficiency, and repeatability of

these methods, but no decision can be made without some idea of the details of the monitoring 

plan itself. What species are the primary focus of monitoring? Will transects be fixed or 

35 37 
randomly placed? Even if several methods end up being used, great care should be exercised to 

develop protocols that can yield comparable data emerging from these different techniques. 

The number of surveys suggested per year is probably adequate, but is also extremely expensive. 

2. Shallow visual surveys (SCUBA surveys conducted between 20 and 30m). The protocols for 

these surveys is well developed, and we see no major problems with this project. However, diver 

bottom time will be limited for work at these depths, which may increase the cost. 

The number of surveys suggested per year is impressive, far in excess of what is currently taking 

place in shallow water (<20m) for State reserve monitoring. 

3. Trap surveys. This aspect of monitoring is a good complement to the visual surveys, since it 

covers two groups of organisms (lobsters and crabs) that are not counted well visually. It also has 

the advantage of being a collaborative program. Preliminary usage surveys (see RAP comments 

above) are especially relevant here, because the greatest changes are expected in the areas of 

heavy impact prior to reserve establishment. 

One project was rated as “high-medium”: a study to assess the impacts of prawn traps on habitats 

(particularly sponges and corals), to be conducted by a manned submersible comparing areas of 

high and low use. While this is an important project, much of it lays outside the strict definition 

of monitoring. Given that deep visual surveys are likely to be part of a monitoring scheme, we 

suggest that (1) these surveys include assessments of sponges and corals, and (2) some surveys 

be targeted in areas that have received historically high prawn trap fishing intensity. 

Overall, the RAP was impressed with the thoroughness of the Deep Water Workshop process, 

and endorses the report as an important first step towards a comprehensive monitoring program. 

38 36 
ONMS CONSERVATION SERIES PUBLICATIONS 

To date, the following reports have been published in the Marine Sanctuaries Conservation 

Series. All publications are available on the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries website 

(http://www.sanctuaries.noaa.gov/). 

Movement of yellowtail snapper (Ocyurus chrysurus Block 1790) and black grouper (Mycteroperca bonaci

Poey 1860) in the northern Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary as determined by acoustic telemetry

(MSD-05-4) 

The Impacts of Coastal Protection Structures in California's Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

(MSD-05-3) 

An annotated bibliography of diet studies of fish of the southeast United States and Gray's Reef National

Marine Sanctuary (MSD-05-2) 

Noise Levels and Sources in the Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary and the St. Lawrence River 

Estuary (MSD-05-1) 

Biogeographic Analysis of the Tortugas Ecological Reserve (MSD-04-1) 

A Review of the Ecological Effectiveness of Subtidal Marine Reserves in Central California (MSD-04-2,

MSD-04-3) 

Pre-Construction Coral Survey of the M/V Wellwood Grounding Site (MSD-03-1) 

Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary: Proceedings of the 1998 Research Workshop, Seattle, 

Washington (MSD-01-04) 

Workshop on Marine Mammal Research & Monitoring in the National Marine Sanctuaries (MSD-01-03) 

A Review of Marine Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MSD-01-2) 

Distribution and Sighting Frequency of Reef Fishes in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (MSD01-1) 

Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary: A Rapid Assessment of Coral, Fish, and Algae Using the 

AGRRA Protocol (MSD-00-3) 

The Economic Contribution of Whalewatching to Regional Economies: Perspectives From Two National

Marine Sanctuaries (MSD-00-2) 

Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Area to be Avoided Education and Monitoring Program (MSD00-1) 

37 

Multi-species and Multi-interest Management: an Ecosystem Approach to Market Squid (Loligo

opalescens) Harvest in California (MSD-99-1)