Specifics:

• increase public awareness about water quality through education
• ãno dischargeû zones for boats
• need comprehensive coordinated strategy
• concern over discharge from fishing vessels
• make connection between watersheds and ocean systems
• increase water quality data collection stations
• sanctuary should partner with coastal watershed and water quality groups
• impact on kelp from siltation, pollution, runoff
• look at impacts on sanctuary from outside of boundaries
• include provisions for prohibiting discharges outside of sanctuary boundaries that may impact sanctuary resources
• be proactive about terrestrial water quality impacts (including from the Channel Islands)

Communities that contributed comments: Lompoc, Santa Barbara, Oxnard, Long Beach, Ventura, Washington, D.C., Letters (Top of Page)

Specifics:

• better education about sanctuary boundaries and resources
• better recreational diver education
• maps showing resources, activities and issues
• enhance outreach efforts to stimulate stewardship
• should be top priority: more resources and activities, focus on primary schools, and outside of Santa Barbara
• sanctuary should work to improve marine education in the public schools
• more education needed for yacht clubs

Specifics:

• increase monitoring and enforcement efforts
• evaluate effectiveness of enforcement of regulations
• research should include participation of fisherman
• understand dynamism and our role in monitoring
• use CalCOFI data and monitor between stations
• conduct full inventory of species by habitat type, characterize habitat, assess health, look at natural fluctuations vs human impacts
• study impacts of commercial fishing on the resources
• need to summarize research for decision makers and public

Specifics:

• expand north to Santa Rosa Creek with goal of protecting biodiversity
• expansion to include entire Channel and Santa Catalina Island (safety, efficiency, information exchange, protect environment
• expand north to protect ecosystem, dynamic province, strong upwelling components, spawning grounds
• expand to coast to make connection between ocean and land
• new sanctuary between CINMS and MBNMS, concerned about offshore oil and fishing (Central Coast Sanctuary)
• expand to include waters from Pt. Arguello to MBNMS
• north to include Santa Lucia Bank
• include coastal waters of Santa Barbara County and San Luis Obispo County
• boundaries are too arbitrary and donÖt address threats outside sanctuary
• question on whether boundary redefinition would change the focus/mission of CINMS
• need to create new sanctuary from Point Conception to Point Planca
• does not support expansion of CINMS boundaries
• how would new boundaries be selected or developed
• support for extending CINMS to include Central Coast islands
• boundary expansion to Nipono Dunes and Point Sal

Specifics:

• evaluate military activity impacts on environment
• concerned about expansion plans from Navy Sea Test Range
• need protection from radar activity
• military activities to avoid to the Maximum Extent Practicable any adverse impact to Sanctuary resources
• should take into account and be ready for increase in military activity
• concern about the impact of this technology on marine mammals
• the Navy objects to any proposed changes in the plan and regulations that would hinder their ability to train for combat readiness or weapon systems in support of national defense

Specifics:

• evaluate impacts from oil drilling including vessel strikes, pipes, platform blowout, other accidents, potential for increased drilling, impacts on tourism
• concern about oil/gas leases - include language (to maximize protection of the resources) in the reauthorization of renewal of existing leases
• opposed to oil and gas development in the Channel
• concerned about development of 40 oil and gas leases off of SLO county
• slow down oil lease/platform development process
• hazardous material spills resulting from activities within sanctuary boundaries, including leaks from commercial and recreational watercraft and spills from exploration or development activity could adversely affect any species and their prey bases

Communities that contributed comments: Lompoc, Santa Barbara, Oxnard, Long Beach, Ventura, Washington, D.C., San Luis Obispo, Letters, Other (Top of Page)

Specifics:

• increase and/or establish no take zones to protect biodiversity
• evaluate the impacts on the resources from commercial fisheries and consider no take zones as a management tool
• marine reserves needed for the protection of sea otters/macro invertebrates
• no take zones with limited access demonize certain activities, no take zones should be absolute, donÖt let anyone in except for navigation
• need a comprehensive and complete management plan with research area - no take zones as ground truth areas for sampling
• marine reserves issue needs to fundamentally be part of the management plan
• propose to designate more ecological reserves within the sanctuary to protect marine biodiversity: maintain key processes in a relatively undisturbed manner, lessen impact of large scale disasters, increase understanding of marine environment, provide research opportunities
• establish network of sea life reserves to promote biodiversity, improve scientific understanding, maintain areas of ocean as wilderness
• there are enough marine reserves in California

Communities that contributed comments:Santa Barbara, Oxnard, Long Beach, Ventura, Washington, D.C., San Luis Obispo, Letters (Top of Page)

Specifics:

• Sanctuary should take a position on the expanding range of the sea otter
• evaluate accommodation and impacts of sea otters
• marine reserves for the protection of sea otters
• concern about protecting sea otters
• otters will cause more conflicts with people who rely on the resources, CINMS should be prepared
• need to consider sea otters as functional part of original community in Channel Islands and the roll of CINMS in reestablishing populations
• concern about the impact of marine mammals on coastal and pelagic species

Specifics:

• adopt ecosystem management policies that allow for the evaluation of sanctuary regulations and programs and adaptation to new information
• clarify the financial resources needed to meet current and future management needs
• sanctuary should focus on habitat needs including preservation and restoration
• should work better with other regulatory agencies in managing the resources
• any restrictions should be easy and logical for the public
• keep access to the sanctuary open to the public, make it smart and protect the resources for future generations
• incorporate performance standards
• refocus on resource protection rather than use
• resource management should be based on a thorough understanding of ecosystem vs species by species management
• should be mooring systems for boaters who visit islands
• improve coordination with federal and state agencies, and establish new partnerships and better collaboration between agencies across state/federal jurisdictions
• need to address habitat enhancement for endangered species, should be a priority over human use
• need to address the threat non-native species pose to endangered species
• need to recruit stewards of the sanctuary
• concern about tanker traffic
• first priority for management plan should be emphasis on activities within current boundaries
• concern about public being shut out of regulatory process
• too many stakeholders, not all needs can be met
• concern about personalized watercraft