| Summary | Original Management Plans
1981: Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary Management Plan
1989: Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary Management Plan
1992: Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Management Plan - Start of Coding Snapshot
2008: All Three Central West Coast Sanctuaries as part of Joint Management Plan Review
2015: Major Expansion
|
|---|
| Project | SESMAD |
|---|
| Subtype | Formal Governance System |
|---|
| Sector | Marine protected areas |
|---|
| Begin Date | 1981 |
|---|
| Explanation | The Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary was the first of the 3 Central California sanctuaries to be designated under the authority of Title III of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, Public Law 92– 532 (the Act) in 1981. The Management Plan was not incorporated until 1987. Cordell Bank NMS was designated 1989 and Monterey Bay NMS was designated in 1992. This snapshot begins in 1992. The most recent management plans and joint Environmental Impact Statement are from 2008. In 2015, a major expansion of the GFNMS and CBNMS increased the area significantly. |
|---|
| End Date | Current |
|---|
| Explanation | |
|---|
| Governance Scale | State-based policy |
|---|
| Explanation | All within California |
|---|
| Governance System Description | Federal Management Plans for all 3 sanctuaries. In 2008 began a joint assessment of the three central California sanctuaries and a joint environmental impact statement (EIS). |
|---|
| Explanation | National Marine Sanctuaries are designated by the US federal Sanctuaries Act of 1972. The National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) provides oversight and coordination of all US national marine sanctuaries. Specific Federal Management Plans are created for each sanctuary and these adhere to the standards set by NOAA and the sanctuary's unique conditions. The FMPs are divided into two broad categories. The first is programs, or action plans, carried out through research, education, and marine resource protection programs. The second is "regulations for controlling or restricting human behavior that is not compatible with resource protection". The Sanctuary has jurisdiction and enforcement authority over any activities which relate to its primary goals. With designation, the sanctuary is authorized to, "implement the designation, including managing, protecting and conserving the conservation, recreational, ecological, historical, cultural, archeological, scientific, educational, and aesthetic resources and qualities of the Sanctuary" and to include prohibitions if any activity threatens such qualities, except for Department of Defense activities (Cordell Bank FMP). The sanctuary can impose regulations on foreign ships and foreign persons. Fishing is not regulated under this governance system. The management plans create a Sanctuary Advisory Council, to represent diverse stakeholders and provide expert advice to Sanctuary managers. The management plan specifies that the sanctuary staff are directed by the sanctuary manager and are directly responsible for implementing the management plan and also for coordinating efforts of the multiple program areas. |
|---|
| Governance Trigger | slow continuous change |
|---|
| Explanation | Pollution, industrial commercial development, waste dumping, and especially oil spills in the 1960s and 70s heightened the public's concern for coasts and oceans (Chandler and Gillelan, 2005). The US Congress responded by allocating federal funds for states to develop coastal zone management plans, water pollution, and ocean dumping policies. President Johnson's Science Advisory Committee recommended a marine wilderness preservation system in 1966. In 1967, Congressional bipartisan bills were introduced to study the feasibility of creating national marine protected areas. Bills were introduced specifically to prohibit drilling, especially in California after the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill. Jacques Cousteau's 1971 testimony to the Senate Subcommittee on Oceanography is thought to have contributed significantly to federal funding for the sanctuaries.The House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee introduced the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) in 1971 and in 1972 President Nixon signed the act into law. The three California sanctuaries were designated primarily to exclude oil drilling, and were chosen according to their ecologically critical habitats. The Gulf of the Farallones NMS was proposed during a public workshop in Mill Valley, California in 1978 and the following years consisted of issue papers, regional and state hearings, and draft regulations until it was designated. Cordell Bank NMS was introduced by the non-profit organization Cordell Expeditions in 1981 who wanted to explore the Bank (CBNMS FMP, 2008). After deemed eligible by NOAA, public comment and research contributed to its designation 8 years later. The State of California first nominated the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary in 1977 and after a number of site analyses and meetings and public hearings, the Sanctuary was established congressionally by the Oceans Act of 1992 (MBNMS FMP, 2008). |
|---|
| Type Of Formal Governance | Management plan |
|---|
| Explanation | The management plan contains the framework for how to manage the sanctuaries and divides tasks into program areas, and also provides the legal framework regulations to enforce Sanctuary laws. |
|---|
| Mpa Internal Natural Boundaries | Low (1) |
|---|
| Explanation | The Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary was coded "Low" by Edgar and these Sanctuaries are is very similar. The sanctuaries compose of a diverse set of bottom habitats and fluctuating depths from bays and estuaries and from shoreline to the continental shelf. These NMS are adjacent to heavily populated coastline, but certain areas are further away, more coherent, and (e.g. Cordell Bank) are more isolated. |
|---|
| Mpa Migratory Life History | t |
|---|
| Explanation | Yes. Within the Gulf of the Farllones NMS, many birds and mammals breed, feed, and haul out within the oceanic and estuarine systems. 54 species of birds use
the Sanctuary to breed (GFNMS FMP, 2008). The Farallon Islands sustain the largest sea bird breeding colony south of Alaska and contains 30 percent of California's nesting sea birds (CFWS, 2015). The Gulf of the Farallones NMS provides breeding and/or feeding grounds for 26 endangered or threatened species, 36 marine mammal species, e.g. blue, gray, and humpback whales, harbor seals, elephant seals, Pacific white-sided dolphins, and the threatened Steller sea lions, more than 400,000 breeding seabirds, and one of the most significant white shark populations on the planet (GFNMS FMP, 2008; National Ocean Service, 2015). California's largest breeding population of harbor seals, 1/5th of the entire state's population, depends on the GFNMS for food (GFNMS FMP, 2008). The California sea lion, Steller sea lion, northern elephant seal, and harbor seal breed in the Monterey Bay NMS (Duffy 2014). The northern fur seal and Guadalupe fur seal feed in the Monterey Bay NMS (Duffy 2014). This area is excellent for migrating mammals, since it is along a major current from the feeding areas in the productive Arctic to the warm breeding areas in the tropics. Salmon and steelhead fish species migrate to and spawn in the MBNMS (MBNMS FMP, 2008). Elkhorn Slough, which is part of the MBNMS, is particularly important for migrating birds in the MBNMS, including Brown Pelicans, Heermann's Gulls, Elegant Terns, Surf scoters, Greater scaup, Bufflehead, Black-bellied and Semipalmated Plovers, Willet, Marbled Godwit, Long-billed Curlew, Western & Least Sandpipers, Dunlin, Ruddy Turnstone and Red Knot (Roberson, 2012). Black-footed Albatrosses feed at the Cordell Bank NMS and Cassin's Auklets breed at Cordell Bank, while Sooty Shearwaters migrate through the CBNMS, and Ashy Stormpetrels nest on the Southeast Farallon Island (National Ocean Service, 2015; CBNMS FMP, 2008). 26 marine mammals (resident and migratory) marine mammals have been observed in the CBNMS. Gray whales migrate through the CBNMS waters, and Pacific humpback whales and blue whales feed during the summer months in the Sanctuary (CBNMS FMP, 2008). Migratory pelagic fish species in the three sanctuaries include northern anchovy (Engraulis mordax), Pacific sardine (Sardinops sagax), Pacific hake (Merluccius productus), and jack mackerel (Trachurus symmetric us), albacore (Thunnus alalunga) (GFNMS FMP, 2008). Grey whales and humpback whales feed and migrate in all 3 sanctuaries. |
|---|
| Mpa Threats To Migratory Sp | ["Habitat destruction", "Other"] |
|---|
| Explanation | Oil spills, manufactured toxins (e.g. organochlorines; Kopec and Harvey 1995), poor water quality, ship strikes, ocean dumping (illegal), nonpoint source pollution (primarily agriculture, mining, septic system sources), marine debris, shipwrecks (particularly those leaking oil/other fuel) (FMPs, 2008) |
|---|
| Mpa Threats | Climate change, ocean noise, coastal erosion, fishing, oil spills, cruise ships, introduced species, landslides and debris, marine debris, dredging, motorized personal watercraft, whale strikes, dumping, pollution, shipwrecks, poaching. |
|---|
| Explanation | Climate change, ocean noise, coastal erosion, fishing, oil spills, cruise ships, introduced species, landslides and debris, marine debris, dredging, motorized personal watercraft, whale strikes, dumping, pollution, shipwrecks, poaching. |
|---|
| Governance Knowledge Use | ["Scientific knowledge"] |
|---|
| Explanation | The scientific grounding of the FMPs come from peer-reviewed literature and government-led research projects. The Sanctuaries are mandated to use the best available science. |
|---|
| Pa Car Principles | Yes (3) |
|---|
| Explanation | Multiple ecosystems, depths, and habitat types are included in the sanctuaries. The Sanctuaries specify protecting and researching rocky shores, kelp forests, beaches, continental shelf habitats, sandy floor, estuaries, seamounts and banks, submarine canyons, rocks and islands, deep sea habitats, and the open ocean. In 2015, the Cordell Bank and Gulf of the Farallones NMSs were expanded to protect more ecologically critical habitats. The three sanctuaries are bordering to enhance protection of these habitats. |
|---|
| Centralization | Highly centralized (4) |
|---|
| Explanation | Federal government oversees and regulates the sanctuaries. |
|---|
| Distance To Markets | Less than 10km (1) |
|---|
| Explanation | Local seafood supplied to local buyers and restaurants. Whale watching companies less then 10km from whale hot spots. |
|---|
| Horizontal Coordination | Both formal and informal |
|---|
| Explanation | Formal meetings as well as informal relationships occur with the Sanctuary and other users/managers. |
|---|
| Mpa Iucn Somewhat Strict Zones | 9 % |
|---|
| Explanation | Farallon Islands, National Wildlife Refuge, category IV: 211 acres out of 2108800 acres = <1%
Davidson Seamount = 585 square nautical mile/ 4,601 total square nautical miles = 1.2%
Cordell Bank = ~112 square km of 1369 square km = 0.08 = 8% |
|---|
| Mpa Iucn Sustainable Zones | 69 % |
|---|
| Explanation | Anything that is not III, IV, 1a or 1b, II |
|---|
| Mpa Budget | 4728783 $US |
|---|
| Explanation | $4,728,783
MBNMS: about 2.5 million dollars per year
CBNMS: 2008: $627,000, adjusted for inflation 2014: 689,416
GFNMS: 2008: $1.4 million, adjusted for inflation 2014: 1,539,367
FY 1999 Budget:
MBNMS: $980,491
GFNMS: $456,089
CDNMS: $121,421 |
|---|
| Mpa Connectivity | Yes (3) |
|---|
| Explanation | The MPA network designated by the state includes small reserves within the sanctuaries specifically designated for ecological connectivity purposes (Laffoley et al. 2008). The three national marine sanctuaries are bordering to further strengthen resource protection and ensure consistency among the 3 NMSs. None of the sanctuaries are divided into distinct sites, rather a geometric shaped identified by coordinates. The estuaries in the region are important support systems for the ecosystem, particularly Elkhorn Slough which was included in the designation of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and serves as a vital nursery for many species. Seamounts were especially chosen because of their contribution of larval recruits. Population genetics and coupled biophysical models were used to assess larval dispersal, particularly for the Cordell Bank NMS. Kelp beds were chosen to be protected partially because of their ability to retain larvae (based on Duggins 1988). Rocky shelf communities in the Gulf of the Farallones were noted for their importance in post larval settlements, particularly of abalone (based on Haaker et al. 2001). Outreach programs were developed for watershed populations to learn about how watersheds are connected to the GFNMS (GFNMS FMP, 2008). |
|---|
| Mpa Migratory Threats And Redux | t |
|---|
| Explanation | Whale migrations are monitored, individuals are tagged, shipping lanes are navigated to be placed in least-likely collision with migratory species, remote sensing and surveys are conducted to learn abundance and distribution patterns, the Sanctuary responds to distressed migratory species calls. The Sanctuary addresses wildlife disturbance through a mix of educational outreach, regulations, and enforcement. "The Watchable Wildlife program is a unique partnership of federal and state wildlife agencies and non-profit organizations working to educate the public and commercial operators about safe and responsible wildlife viewing practices." |
|---|
| Mpa Motivation | ["Ecological value", "High human impact to mitigate"] |
|---|
| Explanation | Oil companies wanted to drill in this area, which was the primary reason the siting was motivated. But the high ecological value and highly productive biological biodiversity was also deemed critical to why this MPA was here vs elsewhere. |
|---|
| Mpa Primary Goal (In Practice) | ["Biodiversity conservation", "Exclusion of a specific threat"] |
|---|
| Explanation | Exclude oil drilling, protect critical ecosystems |
|---|
| Mpa Protection | ["Protecting key life history stage(s)", "Reducing threats"] |
|---|
| Explanation | Working with the shipping industry, the threat of ship strikes is reduced. Improving water quality reduces threat to ecosystem. Limiting trawling in critical areas reduces ecosystem destruction threat. Having a regulatory role in the disposal of dredged materials reduces dredging threats. In terms of grounded and sunken vessels, the Sanctuary coordinates salvage operations to remove these threats, and studies how to best go about recovering this area. The operation of motorized personal watercraft within the Sanctuary has been restricted to designated zones and access routes to reduce threats of vessels on marine life and habitats. Key breeding and feeding grounds are particularly protected, as well as nursery sloughs. |
|---|
| Metric Diversity | High: Many metrics for success (3) |
|---|
| Explanation | Metrics for success include effective education and outreach, resource protection, and research goals. Condition reports includes metrics on offshore and nearsore environments, and assess habitat, biodiversity, key species, human activities and human health, living resources, water quality, and maritime archaeological resources. |
|---|
| Pa Iucn Strict Zones | 22 % |
|---|
| Explanation | No-Take areas here are called "State Marine Reserves" and identified as: "An MPA designation that prohibits damage or take of all marine resources (living, geologic, or cultural) including recreational and commercial take." According to DFG maps, SMRs consist of about 10% of MBNMS (is 18% of all Central CA MPAs) and 12% of the north coast, totaling about 22% (CDFW 2013).
Note that most of protected areas were limited harvest (e.g. MBNMS 0.204%) (Brown 2001). |
|---|
| Social Ecological Fit | Low (1) |
|---|
| Explanation | The protected area includes multiple habitats which all influence each other (e.g. kelp forest and rocky shores and sandy bottoms) which allows for a comprehensive protection to satisfy the Sanctuary's goals. Regulations vary according to habitat sensitivity, amount of user interest in area, and ability to monitor and enforce. Multiple habitats extend outward of the management and thus the habitats are not fully protected by the management since they are sometimes protected (when within boundaries of the Sanctuary), but sometimes not (when outside the Sanctuary).
The resources are managed to the best available science and the Sanctuary manages for multiple external factors (runoff, shipping, oil, dumping, etc). Intertidal and groundfish are fairly well-covered within the Sanctuary to ensure sufficient protection within Sanctuary borders. |
|---|
| Mpa Migratory Benefit | Yes |
|---|
| Explanation | Yes, migratory species benefit from productive feeding habitats, non-disturbed breeding grounds, limited oil spills, less ship collisions, and reduced lost fishing gear. Long term protection of key habitats benefits species. |
|---|
| Governance System Spatial Extent | 27645 |
|---|
| Explanation | GFNMS: 8,534.011 km2
CDNMS: 3,330.725 km2
MBNMS: 15,780.99 km2
Total: 27,645.72km2 |
|---|
