Sept. 22, 2026
300 People, 50 Tribes, One Meeting: How California Built Its Marine Protected Areas
Apple Podcasts 
Spotify 
YouTube 
Amazon Music 
PocketCasts 
Overcast In 1999, California passed a law ordering the state to fix its patchwork of ocean parks. For two years, almost nothing happened, and two attempts to get the process moving both failed. It took a 2004 public-private partnership, roughly $35 million in public and philanthropic funding, and a decade of work before the state had a real network of marine protected areas. Partway through that decade, more than 300 people from over 50 tribal nations walked into a public meeting in Fort Bragg to protest how the process was treating their rights.
Andrew Lewin walks through what actually happened between the 1999 Marine Life Protection Act and the 124-MPA network Californians know today: the 2004 partnership with the nonprofit funder Resources Legacy Fund that finally got the process moving, the region-by-region design work built on stakeholder groups, a Science Advisory Team, and a Blue Ribbon Task Force, and the Fish and Game Commission votes that made each region official, starting with the Central Coast in 2007.
The process also shows where good intentions ran into real conflict. On California's North Coast, tribal sovereignty and traditional gathering rights were not built into the process from the start, and it took a public confrontation before the state addressed it. The North Coast's final proposal, with a formal tribal gathering exception, was not adopted until 2012, and tribal leaders accepted it with conditions rather than a full endorsement. Andrew connects this history to yesterday's conversation with Anupa Asokan about the network's ongoing adaptive management review, and explains why managing an MPA network never really finishes.
Takeaways:
- California's Marine Life Protection Act passed in 1999 but sat mostly unused for its first two years, surviving two failed implementation attempts before a 2004 public-private partnership with the nonprofit funder Resources Legacy Fund got the process moving.
- The full process to build California's network of marine protected areas took about a decade and roughly $35 million in public and philanthropic funding.
- Each of the four coastal regions went through the same design steps: a stakeholder group draft, a Science Advisory Team review, a Blue Ribbon Task Force recommendation, and a final vote by the state's Fish and Game Commission. The Central Coast was designated first, in 2007.
- The process did not build in tribal sovereignty and traditional gathering rights from the start. In July 2010, more than 300 people from over 50 tribal nations took over a Blue Ribbon Task Force meeting in Fort Bragg to protest it.
- The North Coast region's final proposal, including a formal tribal gathering exception, was adopted in 2012, and tribal leaders accepted it with conditions rather than a full endorsement.
- California's network now includes roughly 124 marine protected areas and recreational management areas, and it is still being managed through an ongoing adaptive process, the same one covered in yesterday's episode with Anupa Asokan.
- Managing a network of marine protected areas does not end at designation. It requires monitoring, reassessment, and revision, and that takes sustained funding, time, and public patience.
Support Independent Podcasts: https://www.speakupforblue.com/patreon
Need help with your ocean non-profit, company, or project? Get the help you need with Pisces Oceans Inc.: https://www.piscesoceans.ca
Connect with Speak Up For Blue
Website: https://bit.ly/3fOF3Wf
Instagram: https://bit.ly/3rIaJSG
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@speakupforblue
Twitter: https://bit.ly/3rHZxpc
YouTube: www.speakupforblue.com/youtube
Transcript
1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:05,605
In 1999, California passed a law ordering
the state to fix its patchwork
2
00:00:05,605 --> 00:00:09,298
of ocean parks. Nobody did anything with
it for two years.
3
00:00:09,298 --> 00:00:12,741
When they finally tried, the process took
a decade,
4
00:00:12,741 --> 00:00:17,526
cost more than $35 million, and at one
point 300 people from
5
00:00:17,526 --> 00:00:21,709
50 tribal nations walked into a public
meeting to protest it.
6
00:00:21,709 --> 00:00:26,604
Here's what actually happened between that
law and the map you see today.
7
00:00:27,158 --> 00:00:29,830
That's on this episode of the How to
Protect the Ocean podcast.
8
00:00:29,830 --> 00:00:32,621
I'm your host, Andrew Lewin. I'm a marine
biologist,
9
00:00:32,621 --> 00:00:37,103
a science communicator, and the oceans
communications manager for Pisces Oceans,
10
00:00:37,103 --> 00:00:42,147
a consulting firm that works with ocean
project leaders to make sure their
projects
11
00:00:42,147 --> 00:00:45,489
succeed to have a positive impact on the
ocean.
12
00:00:45,489 --> 00:00:47,710
Today we're going to be talking about the
history of.
13
00:00:47,988 --> 00:00:52,181
Of the California Networks of Marine
Protected Area System.
14
00:00:52,181 --> 00:00:57,104
Because yesterday you probably heard the I
did with Anupa Ahsokan,
15
00:00:57,104 --> 00:01:01,507
who talked about the adaptive management
process that is ongoing right now,
16
00:01:01,507 --> 00:01:03,619
that's not turning out to what it should
have been.
17
00:01:03,619 --> 00:01:06,581
And we talked a lot about that in
yesterday's episode.
18
00:01:06,581 --> 00:01:08,102
So check that out after this one.
19
00:01:08,102 --> 00:01:11,034
But we're also gonna be talking about it
later on in the week.
20
00:01:11,206 --> 00:01:15,270
because this week is all about this
California Marine Protected Area Network
21
00:01:15,411 --> 00:01:18,674
as well as just marine protected areas in
general.
22
00:01:18,674 --> 00:01:20,291
So check that out.
23
00:01:20,291 --> 00:01:23,974
So I think what's interesting is when we
talk about a marine protected area
24
00:01:23,974 --> 00:01:25,805
or network of marine protected area,
25
00:01:25,805 --> 00:01:30,328
I think a lot of people just assume like
ocean protection rules are there just like
26
00:01:30,428 --> 00:01:35,682
it's purely a science decision or it's
purely a political one and and it's
27
00:01:35,682 --> 00:01:37,933
all just imposed on them. And sometimes
that's the case.
28
00:01:37,933 --> 00:01:39,575
Sometimes marine protected areas,
29
00:01:39,575 --> 00:01:43,938
they're not done with good intentions or
they're taken out with bad intentions.
30
00:01:43,938 --> 00:01:47,290
And there are a lot of problems with the
way marine protected areas are set up,
31
00:01:47,290 --> 00:01:48,611
and there are some that are doing
32
00:01:48,899 --> 00:01:53,991
Really great and have been, really
focusing in on including everybody
33
00:01:54,031 --> 00:01:58,214
and using science to make sure that the
marine protected area is going
34
00:01:58,214 --> 00:02:00,655
to be effective for future generations.
35
00:02:00,655 --> 00:02:02,956
And that is a good way of doing things.
36
00:02:02,956 --> 00:02:04,717
But the process is never perfect.
37
00:02:04,717 --> 00:02:09,600
And we're gonna talk about this process to
establish the California Network
38
00:02:09,600 --> 00:02:14,133
of Marine Protected Areas because it's
something that we need to talk about
39
00:02:14,133 --> 00:02:16,464
so you understand what goes in.
40
00:02:16,836 --> 00:02:20,289
To a process to designate a marine
protected area or a network
41
00:02:20,289 --> 00:02:23,821
of those protected areas, but also what
could go wrong and what could
42
00:02:23,821 --> 00:02:26,203
you adapt to in the future to make better?
43
00:02:26,203 --> 00:02:28,325
And I think this is like a great ex this
story,
44
00:02:28,325 --> 00:02:30,367
it is a great example of that.
45
00:02:30,367 --> 00:02:36,691
So in 1999, the Marine Life Protection Act
sat unused for two years in California.
46
00:02:36,691 --> 00:02:41,115
and after two failed implementation
attempts to put it in in 2001 and 2002.
47
00:02:42,548 --> 00:02:45,963
there was ~ a real worry about what's
gonna happen.
48
00:02:45,963 --> 00:02:47,996
Like it wasn't a dead law, it was still
active,
49
00:02:47,996 --> 00:02:49,839
it was just underfunded
50
00:02:50,079 --> 00:02:55,052
Until in August 2004, the state entered a
public-private partnership with
51
00:02:55,052 --> 00:02:58,333
a nonprofit funder, the Resources Legacy
Foundation,
52
00:02:58,333 --> 00:03:04,777
it created the MLPA initiative to run the
process region by region along the coast.
53
00:03:04,777 --> 00:03:10,380
Now, what's interesting is this came
before a federal
54
00:03:10,600 --> 00:03:13,742
law that was established about marine
spatial
55
00:03:13,742 --> 00:03:18,045
Is when President Obama was in power and
he had the national ocean policy
56
00:03:18,165 --> 00:03:22,567
and its coastal marine spatial planning
framework that put in didn't begin until
57
00:03:22,768 --> 00:03:25,529
July 2010 via executive order.
58
00:03:25,529 --> 00:03:30,227
Now at that point, the California's MLPA
process was already deep into
59
00:03:30,227 --> 00:03:32,473
its third and fourth regional phases,
60
00:03:32,473 --> 00:03:36,436
and the Central Coast region had been
designated back in 2007.
61
00:03:36,436 --> 00:03:39,478
So this process was continuing after the
2004.
62
00:03:40,460 --> 00:03:43,615
inclusion of resources legacy foundation.
63
00:03:43,615 --> 00:03:45,878
And so we started to see all these,
64
00:03:45,878 --> 00:03:50,744
you know, these and these networks start
to get added to the protection area
system,
65
00:03:50,744 --> 00:03:51,744
which is really cool.
66
00:03:51,736 --> 00:03:55,439
So in each of the four regions that were
carved out of this process,
67
00:03:55,439 --> 00:03:57,850
the actual design process worked like
this:
68
00:03:57,850 --> 00:04:01,793
an appointed regional stakeholder group
made up of local fishermen,
69
00:04:01,793 --> 00:04:05,886
conservationists, and other users drafted
MPA proposals.
70
00:04:05,886 --> 00:04:11,429
A science advisory team reviewed each
proposal against ecological design
principles.
71
00:04:11,429 --> 00:04:14,551
So habitat representation, habitat
replication,
72
00:04:14,551 --> 00:04:18,634
MPA size, and spacing between protected
areas,
73
00:04:18,634 --> 00:04:21,016
plus a level of protection.
74
00:04:21,366 --> 00:04:23,837
Rating scale for different allowed uses.
75
00:04:23,837 --> 00:04:28,739
The Department of Fish and Game and the
MLPA initiative staff are also weighed in.
76
00:04:28,739 --> 00:04:32,381
So a policy-level Blue Ribbon Task Force
reviewed the whole package
77
00:04:32,481 --> 00:04:36,483
and forwarded a recommendation to the
state's Fish and Game Commission,
78
00:04:36,483 --> 00:04:40,644
the only body with legal authority to
actually adopt the MPA.
79
00:04:40,644 --> 00:04:44,686
All of this happened in thousands of hours
of public meetings,
80
00:04:44,686 --> 00:04:48,928
most of them recorded and archived over
roughly a decade.
81
00:04:49,676 --> 00:04:53,059
there was a huge conflict in this process.
82
00:04:53,059 --> 00:04:57,782
And the root cause of that conflict was
the process gave the public
83
00:04:57,782 --> 00:05:03,847
a genuine seat at the table, but it did
not accurately address tribal sovereignty
84
00:05:03,847 --> 00:05:06,429
and traditional gathering rights from the
start.
85
00:05:06,429 --> 00:05:09,241
So on California's North Coast in
particular,
86
00:05:09,241 --> 00:05:11,353
there were a bunch of tribal meetings.
87
00:05:11,662 --> 00:05:15,395
That argue that the MLPA framework only
recognized commercial
88
00:05:15,395 --> 00:05:17,527
and recreational fishing categories,
89
00:05:17,527 --> 00:05:20,630
not traditional subsistence and cultural
gathering.
90
00:05:20,630 --> 00:05:25,885
So that tension came to a head in July
2011 when more than 300 people,
91
00:05:25,885 --> 00:05:28,577
including members of 50 tribal nations,
92
00:05:28,577 --> 00:05:31,900
took over a blue ribbon task force meeting
in Fort Bragg,
93
00:05:31,900 --> 00:05:36,614
Described by the participants at the time
as the largest North Coast protest since
94
00:05:36,614 --> 00:05:42,809
1990. The task force ultimately rejected
language that would have terminated tribal
95
00:05:42,809 --> 00:05:48,212
gathering rights, and the North Coast
region's final unified proposal reached
96
00:05:48,212 --> 00:05:51,436
by fishing, tribal, and environmental
representatives together,
97
00:05:51,436 --> 00:05:55,759
was adopted in 2012, with a formal tribal
gathering exception.
98
00:05:56,340 --> 00:06:00,254
But the problem was the tribal leaders
themselves noted that they accepted
99
00:06:00,254 --> 00:06:03,428
it with conditions rather than a full
endorsement.
100
00:06:05,428 --> 00:06:08,799
So this is the what happens in a lot of
these processes because it was
101
00:06:08,799 --> 00:06:14,862
so large and it it it looked at the entire
state that it had groups in
102
00:06:14,862 --> 00:06:18,664
it in these four regions, but obviously in
this case it didn't include
103
00:06:18,664 --> 00:06:23,026
the tribal groups, unfortunately get left
out in a lot of these situations.
104
00:06:23,026 --> 00:06:27,468
So there was a lot of pushback to what
happened throughout this process,
105
00:06:27,468 --> 00:06:30,169
eventually getting an agreement in place,
106
00:06:30,169 --> 00:06:31,720
but it wasn't a full endorsement,
107
00:06:31,720 --> 00:06:32,720
as I just mentioned.
108
00:06:32,830 --> 00:06:34,050
Because a lot of the tribal leaders are
like,
109
00:06:34,050 --> 00:06:35,571
well, look, we took it with conditions,
110
00:06:35,571 --> 00:06:38,201
but it's not perfect, but we'd like to
improve on it.
111
00:06:38,201 --> 00:06:40,312
And unfortunately, in a lot of these
situations,
112
00:06:40,312 --> 00:06:43,973
whether you're a fisher, whether you're a
recreational diver,
113
00:06:43,973 --> 00:06:47,334
or you're some sort of stakeholder or
rights holder like the tribal communities,
114
00:06:47,334 --> 00:06:51,240
a lot of the times not everybody's happy
with the results.
115
00:06:51,240 --> 00:06:56,682
And for good reason, they may not have
been fully represented at the actual time
116
00:06:56,682 --> 00:06:59,442
at the table and with a lot of the
concerns that they've had.
117
00:06:59,442 --> 00:07:01,363
But during that time,
118
00:07:01,639 --> 00:07:06,103
There are times where you have all of this
moving forward through adaptive
119
00:07:06,103 --> 00:07:09,065
management. as the Marine Protected Area
Network is put in place,
120
00:07:09,065 --> 00:07:11,627
as it improved throughout this process,
121
00:07:11,627 --> 00:07:17,532
and that they had a formal setup for these
networks of marine protected areas,
122
00:07:17,532 --> 00:07:22,176
which is, I think it was 124 protected
areas within the network.
123
00:07:22,176 --> 00:07:25,609
Then there comes time of actually putting
it in place.
124
00:07:25,779 --> 00:07:29,290
monitoring it, evaluating it, and then
redesigning it based
125
00:07:29,290 --> 00:07:33,042
on recommendations from the science and
the public input.
126
00:07:33,042 --> 00:07:36,324
And that's where we're kind of left at
this point.
127
00:07:36,324 --> 00:07:38,206
There was another 10 years of waiting,
128
00:07:38,206 --> 00:07:41,387
and recently an adaptive management
process kicked off,
129
00:07:41,387 --> 00:07:43,488
which is what we talked to ANUPA about,
130
00:07:43,488 --> 00:07:45,910
which hasn't really gone in a great way.
131
00:07:45,910 --> 00:07:48,891
And we talked a little bit about that
because they didn't talk about
132
00:07:48,891 --> 00:07:51,863
the science in this and they only had
petitions from the public.
133
00:07:52,281 --> 00:07:56,343
But we're gonna talk about it later on
this week in episodes where we're gonna
say,
134
00:07:56,343 --> 00:07:59,395
hey, this is really important to talk
about when you include the science,
135
00:07:59,395 --> 00:08:03,287
because it gives people the the official
assessment of how these marine protected
136
00:08:03,287 --> 00:08:09,411
area networks are doing. And this is a big
part of managing a marine protected area
137
00:08:09,411 --> 00:08:11,156
network. Because if you don't manage it,
138
00:08:11,156 --> 00:08:15,174
if you don't reassess it and reassess it
and reassess and change
139
00:08:15,174 --> 00:08:19,276
and revise and adapt, then there's really
no point in putting these protected areas
140
00:08:19,276 --> 00:08:20,547
in place. It takes money.
141
00:08:21,015 --> 00:08:22,826
It takes time, it takes effort,
142
00:08:22,826 --> 00:08:26,205
and it takes the will of the people to
have the patience and
143
00:08:26,205 --> 00:08:31,168
the understanding to meet together and and
work on how they can improve
144
00:08:31,168 --> 00:08:33,347
the system for everyone, not just one
party.
145
00:08:33,347 --> 00:08:35,089
So that's the episode for today.
146
00:08:35,089 --> 00:08:39,750
I want to kind of give you that
explanation of what happened during the
setup
147
00:08:39,750 --> 00:08:41,691
of the California Marine Protected Area
System.
148
00:08:41,691 --> 00:08:44,771
Obviously, based on yesterday's episode
with ANUPA,
149
00:08:44,771 --> 00:08:47,433
Things haven't really changed in the way.
150
00:08:47,845 --> 00:08:50,286
where people are being heard for their
concerns.
151
00:08:50,286 --> 00:08:53,758
And it's actually getting more aggressive
in the way that it's doing
152
00:08:53,758 --> 00:08:58,531
it because some groups are speaking over
others and could be intimidating others
153
00:08:58,791 --> 00:09:02,293
in that process. So obviously there's a
long way to go in this process.
154
00:09:02,293 --> 00:09:05,675
The government needs to step up to make
sure that everybody has their
155
00:09:05,675 --> 00:09:07,236
say and feels safe to have their say.
156
00:09:07,236 --> 00:09:11,318
But this was an episode about the history
of the network of marine protected areas.
157
00:09:11,318 --> 00:09:14,280
We're gonna get into it all the rest of
this week with different shows.
158
00:09:14,474 --> 00:09:18,727
That we have coming up. Tomorrow's episode
is going to be on
159
00:09:18,947 --> 00:09:24,111
the actual adaptive management and ~
California's Ocean Safety Net actually
working.
160
00:09:24,111 --> 00:09:26,833
We're gonna really talk about the
evaluation and that assessment.
161
00:09:26,833 --> 00:09:28,944
don't forget to tune in tomorrow.
162
00:09:28,944 --> 00:09:32,117
Hit that follow button so you make sure
you follow this podcast
163
00:09:32,117 --> 00:09:33,578
and don't miss tomorrow's episode.
164
00:09:33,578 --> 00:09:36,600
I want to thank you so much for joining me
on today's episode of the
165
00:09:36,600 --> 00:09:38,041
How to Protect the Ocean podcast.
166
00:09:38,041 --> 00:09:41,103
Have a great day. We'll talk to you next
time and happy conservation.
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:05,605
In 1999, California passed a law ordering
the state to fix its patchwork
2
00:00:05,605 --> 00:00:09,298
of ocean parks. Nobody did anything with
it for two years.
3
00:00:09,298 --> 00:00:12,741
When they finally tried, the process took
a decade,
4
00:00:12,741 --> 00:00:17,526
cost more than $35 million, and at one
point 300 people from
5
00:00:17,526 --> 00:00:21,709
50 tribal nations walked into a public
meeting to protest it.
6
00:00:21,709 --> 00:00:26,604
Here's what actually happened between that
law and the map you see today.
7
00:00:27,158 --> 00:00:29,830
That's on this episode of the How to
Protect the Ocean podcast.
8
00:00:29,830 --> 00:00:32,621
I'm your host, Andrew Lewin. I'm a marine
biologist,
9
00:00:32,621 --> 00:00:37,103
a science communicator, and the oceans
communications manager for Pisces Oceans,
10
00:00:37,103 --> 00:00:42,147
a consulting firm that works with ocean
project leaders to make sure their
projects
11
00:00:42,147 --> 00:00:45,489
succeed to have a positive impact on the
ocean.
12
00:00:45,489 --> 00:00:47,710
Today we're going to be talking about the
history of.
13
00:00:47,988 --> 00:00:52,181
Of the California Networks of Marine
Protected Area System.
14
00:00:52,181 --> 00:00:57,104
Because yesterday you probably heard the I
did with Anupa Ahsokan,
15
00:00:57,104 --> 00:01:01,507
who talked about the adaptive management
process that is ongoing right now,
16
00:01:01,507 --> 00:01:03,619
that's not turning out to what it should
have been.
17
00:01:03,619 --> 00:01:06,581
And we talked a lot about that in
yesterday's episode.
18
00:01:06,581 --> 00:01:08,102
So check that out after this one.
19
00:01:08,102 --> 00:01:11,034
But we're also gonna be talking about it
later on in the week.
20
00:01:11,206 --> 00:01:15,270
because this week is all about this
California Marine Protected Area Network
21
00:01:15,411 --> 00:01:18,674
as well as just marine protected areas in
general.
22
00:01:18,674 --> 00:01:20,291
So check that out.
23
00:01:20,291 --> 00:01:23,974
So I think what's interesting is when we
talk about a marine protected area
24
00:01:23,974 --> 00:01:25,805
or network of marine protected area,
25
00:01:25,805 --> 00:01:30,328
I think a lot of people just assume like
ocean protection rules are there just like
26
00:01:30,428 --> 00:01:35,682
it's purely a science decision or it's
purely a political one and and it's
27
00:01:35,682 --> 00:01:37,933
all just imposed on them. And sometimes
that's the case.
28
00:01:37,933 --> 00:01:39,575
Sometimes marine protected areas,
29
00:01:39,575 --> 00:01:43,938
they're not done with good intentions or
they're taken out with bad intentions.
30
00:01:43,938 --> 00:01:47,290
And there are a lot of problems with the
way marine protected areas are set up,
31
00:01:47,290 --> 00:01:48,611
and there are some that are doing
32
00:01:48,899 --> 00:01:53,991
Really great and have been, really
focusing in on including everybody
33
00:01:54,031 --> 00:01:58,214
and using science to make sure that the
marine protected area is going
34
00:01:58,214 --> 00:02:00,655
to be effective for future generations.
35
00:02:00,655 --> 00:02:02,956
And that is a good way of doing things.
36
00:02:02,956 --> 00:02:04,717
But the process is never perfect.
37
00:02:04,717 --> 00:02:09,600
And we're gonna talk about this process to
establish the California Network
38
00:02:09,600 --> 00:02:14,133
of Marine Protected Areas because it's
something that we need to talk about
39
00:02:14,133 --> 00:02:16,464
so you understand what goes in.
40
00:02:16,836 --> 00:02:20,289
To a process to designate a marine
protected area or a network
41
00:02:20,289 --> 00:02:23,821
of those protected areas, but also what
could go wrong and what could
42
00:02:23,821 --> 00:02:26,203
you adapt to in the future to make better?
43
00:02:26,203 --> 00:02:28,325
And I think this is like a great ex this
story,
44
00:02:28,325 --> 00:02:30,367
it is a great example of that.
45
00:02:30,367 --> 00:02:36,691
So in 1999, the Marine Life Protection Act
sat unused for two years in California.
46
00:02:36,691 --> 00:02:41,115
and after two failed implementation
attempts to put it in in 2001 and 2002.
47
00:02:42,548 --> 00:02:45,963
there was ~ a real worry about what's
gonna happen.
48
00:02:45,963 --> 00:02:47,996
Like it wasn't a dead law, it was still
active,
49
00:02:47,996 --> 00:02:49,839
it was just underfunded
50
00:02:50,079 --> 00:02:55,052
Until in August 2004, the state entered a
public-private partnership with
51
00:02:55,052 --> 00:02:58,333
a nonprofit funder, the Resources Legacy
Foundation,
52
00:02:58,333 --> 00:03:04,777
it created the MLPA initiative to run the
process region by region along the coast.
53
00:03:04,777 --> 00:03:10,380
Now, what's interesting is this came
before a federal
54
00:03:10,600 --> 00:03:13,742
law that was established about marine
spatial
55
00:03:13,742 --> 00:03:18,045
Is when President Obama was in power and
he had the national ocean policy
56
00:03:18,165 --> 00:03:22,567
and its coastal marine spatial planning
framework that put in didn't begin until
57
00:03:22,768 --> 00:03:25,529
July 2010 via executive order.
58
00:03:25,529 --> 00:03:30,227
Now at that point, the California's MLPA
process was already deep into
59
00:03:30,227 --> 00:03:32,473
its third and fourth regional phases,
60
00:03:32,473 --> 00:03:36,436
and the Central Coast region had been
designated back in 2007.
61
00:03:36,436 --> 00:03:39,478
So this process was continuing after the
2004.
62
00:03:40,460 --> 00:03:43,615
inclusion of resources legacy foundation.
63
00:03:43,615 --> 00:03:45,878
And so we started to see all these,
64
00:03:45,878 --> 00:03:50,744
you know, these and these networks start
to get added to the protection area
system,
65
00:03:50,744 --> 00:03:51,744
which is really cool.
66
00:03:51,736 --> 00:03:55,439
So in each of the four regions that were
carved out of this process,
67
00:03:55,439 --> 00:03:57,850
the actual design process worked like
this:
68
00:03:57,850 --> 00:04:01,793
an appointed regional stakeholder group
made up of local fishermen,
69
00:04:01,793 --> 00:04:05,886
conservationists, and other users drafted
MPA proposals.
70
00:04:05,886 --> 00:04:11,429
A science advisory team reviewed each
proposal against ecological design
principles.
71
00:04:11,429 --> 00:04:14,551
So habitat representation, habitat
replication,
72
00:04:14,551 --> 00:04:18,634
MPA size, and spacing between protected
areas,
73
00:04:18,634 --> 00:04:21,016
plus a level of protection.
74
00:04:21,366 --> 00:04:23,837
Rating scale for different allowed uses.
75
00:04:23,837 --> 00:04:28,739
The Department of Fish and Game and the
MLPA initiative staff are also weighed in.
76
00:04:28,739 --> 00:04:32,381
So a policy-level Blue Ribbon Task Force
reviewed the whole package
77
00:04:32,481 --> 00:04:36,483
and forwarded a recommendation to the
state's Fish and Game Commission,
78
00:04:36,483 --> 00:04:40,644
the only body with legal authority to
actually adopt the MPA.
79
00:04:40,644 --> 00:04:44,686
All of this happened in thousands of hours
of public meetings,
80
00:04:44,686 --> 00:04:48,928
most of them recorded and archived over
roughly a decade.
81
00:04:49,676 --> 00:04:53,059
there was a huge conflict in this process.
82
00:04:53,059 --> 00:04:57,782
And the root cause of that conflict was
the process gave the public
83
00:04:57,782 --> 00:05:03,847
a genuine seat at the table, but it did
not accurately address tribal sovereignty
84
00:05:03,847 --> 00:05:06,429
and traditional gathering rights from the
start.
85
00:05:06,429 --> 00:05:09,241
So on California's North Coast in
particular,
86
00:05:09,241 --> 00:05:11,353
there were a bunch of tribal meetings.
87
00:05:11,662 --> 00:05:15,395
That argue that the MLPA framework only
recognized commercial
88
00:05:15,395 --> 00:05:17,527
and recreational fishing categories,
89
00:05:17,527 --> 00:05:20,630
not traditional subsistence and cultural
gathering.
90
00:05:20,630 --> 00:05:25,885
So that tension came to a head in July
2011 when more than 300 people,
91
00:05:25,885 --> 00:05:28,577
including members of 50 tribal nations,
92
00:05:28,577 --> 00:05:31,900
took over a blue ribbon task force meeting
in Fort Bragg,
93
00:05:31,900 --> 00:05:36,614
Described by the participants at the time
as the largest North Coast protest since
94
00:05:36,614 --> 00:05:42,809
1990. The task force ultimately rejected
language that would have terminated tribal
95
00:05:42,809 --> 00:05:48,212
gathering rights, and the North Coast
region's final unified proposal reached
96
00:05:48,212 --> 00:05:51,436
by fishing, tribal, and environmental
representatives together,
97
00:05:51,436 --> 00:05:55,759
was adopted in 2012, with a formal tribal
gathering exception.
98
00:05:56,340 --> 00:06:00,254
But the problem was the tribal leaders
themselves noted that they accepted
99
00:06:00,254 --> 00:06:03,428
it with conditions rather than a full
endorsement.
100
00:06:05,428 --> 00:06:08,799
So this is the what happens in a lot of
these processes because it was
101
00:06:08,799 --> 00:06:14,862
so large and it it it looked at the entire
state that it had groups in
102
00:06:14,862 --> 00:06:18,664
it in these four regions, but obviously in
this case it didn't include
103
00:06:18,664 --> 00:06:23,026
the tribal groups, unfortunately get left
out in a lot of these situations.
104
00:06:23,026 --> 00:06:27,468
So there was a lot of pushback to what
happened throughout this process,
105
00:06:27,468 --> 00:06:30,169
eventually getting an agreement in place,
106
00:06:30,169 --> 00:06:31,720
but it wasn't a full endorsement,
107
00:06:31,720 --> 00:06:32,720
as I just mentioned.
108
00:06:32,830 --> 00:06:34,050
Because a lot of the tribal leaders are
like,
109
00:06:34,050 --> 00:06:35,571
well, look, we took it with conditions,
110
00:06:35,571 --> 00:06:38,201
but it's not perfect, but we'd like to
improve on it.
111
00:06:38,201 --> 00:06:40,312
And unfortunately, in a lot of these
situations,
112
00:06:40,312 --> 00:06:43,973
whether you're a fisher, whether you're a
recreational diver,
113
00:06:43,973 --> 00:06:47,334
or you're some sort of stakeholder or
rights holder like the tribal communities,
114
00:06:47,334 --> 00:06:51,240
a lot of the times not everybody's happy
with the results.
115
00:06:51,240 --> 00:06:56,682
And for good reason, they may not have
been fully represented at the actual time
116
00:06:56,682 --> 00:06:59,442
at the table and with a lot of the
concerns that they've had.
117
00:06:59,442 --> 00:07:01,363
But during that time,
118
00:07:01,639 --> 00:07:06,103
There are times where you have all of this
moving forward through adaptive
119
00:07:06,103 --> 00:07:09,065
management. as the Marine Protected Area
Network is put in place,
120
00:07:09,065 --> 00:07:11,627
as it improved throughout this process,
121
00:07:11,627 --> 00:07:17,532
and that they had a formal setup for these
networks of marine protected areas,
122
00:07:17,532 --> 00:07:22,176
which is, I think it was 124 protected
areas within the network.
123
00:07:22,176 --> 00:07:25,609
Then there comes time of actually putting
it in place.
124
00:07:25,779 --> 00:07:29,290
monitoring it, evaluating it, and then
redesigning it based
125
00:07:29,290 --> 00:07:33,042
on recommendations from the science and
the public input.
126
00:07:33,042 --> 00:07:36,324
And that's where we're kind of left at
this point.
127
00:07:36,324 --> 00:07:38,206
There was another 10 years of waiting,
128
00:07:38,206 --> 00:07:41,387
and recently an adaptive management
process kicked off,
129
00:07:41,387 --> 00:07:43,488
which is what we talked to ANUPA about,
130
00:07:43,488 --> 00:07:45,910
which hasn't really gone in a great way.
131
00:07:45,910 --> 00:07:48,891
And we talked a little bit about that
because they didn't talk about
132
00:07:48,891 --> 00:07:51,863
the science in this and they only had
petitions from the public.
133
00:07:52,281 --> 00:07:56,343
But we're gonna talk about it later on
this week in episodes where we're gonna
say,
134
00:07:56,343 --> 00:07:59,395
hey, this is really important to talk
about when you include the science,
135
00:07:59,395 --> 00:08:03,287
because it gives people the the official
assessment of how these marine protected
136
00:08:03,287 --> 00:08:09,411
area networks are doing. And this is a big
part of managing a marine protected area
137
00:08:09,411 --> 00:08:11,156
network. Because if you don't manage it,
138
00:08:11,156 --> 00:08:15,174
if you don't reassess it and reassess it
and reassess and change
139
00:08:15,174 --> 00:08:19,276
and revise and adapt, then there's really
no point in putting these protected areas
140
00:08:19,276 --> 00:08:20,547
in place. It takes money.
141
00:08:21,015 --> 00:08:22,826
It takes time, it takes effort,
142
00:08:22,826 --> 00:08:26,205
and it takes the will of the people to
have the patience and
143
00:08:26,205 --> 00:08:31,168
the understanding to meet together and and
work on how they can improve
144
00:08:31,168 --> 00:08:33,347
the system for everyone, not just one
party.
145
00:08:33,347 --> 00:08:35,089
So that's the episode for today.
146
00:08:35,089 --> 00:08:39,750
I want to kind of give you that
explanation of what happened during the
setup
147
00:08:39,750 --> 00:08:41,691
of the California Marine Protected Area
System.
148
00:08:41,691 --> 00:08:44,771
Obviously, based on yesterday's episode
with ANUPA,
149
00:08:44,771 --> 00:08:47,433
Things haven't really changed in the way.
150
00:08:47,845 --> 00:08:50,286
where people are being heard for their
concerns.
151
00:08:50,286 --> 00:08:53,758
And it's actually getting more aggressive
in the way that it's doing
152
00:08:53,758 --> 00:08:58,531
it because some groups are speaking over
others and could be intimidating others
153
00:08:58,791 --> 00:09:02,293
in that process. So obviously there's a
long way to go in this process.
154
00:09:02,293 --> 00:09:05,675
The government needs to step up to make
sure that everybody has their
155
00:09:05,675 --> 00:09:07,236
say and feels safe to have their say.
156
00:09:07,236 --> 00:09:11,318
But this was an episode about the history
of the network of marine protected areas.
157
00:09:11,318 --> 00:09:14,280
We're gonna get into it all the rest of
this week with different shows.
158
00:09:14,474 --> 00:09:18,727
That we have coming up. Tomorrow's episode
is going to be on
159
00:09:18,947 --> 00:09:24,111
the actual adaptive management and ~
California's Ocean Safety Net actually
working.
160
00:09:24,111 --> 00:09:26,833
We're gonna really talk about the
evaluation and that assessment.
161
00:09:26,833 --> 00:09:28,944
don't forget to tune in tomorrow.
162
00:09:28,944 --> 00:09:32,117
Hit that follow button so you make sure
you follow this podcast
163
00:09:32,117 --> 00:09:33,578
and don't miss tomorrow's episode.
164
00:09:33,578 --> 00:09:36,600
I want to thank you so much for joining me
on today's episode of the
165
00:09:36,600 --> 00:09:38,041
How to Protect the Ocean podcast.
166
00:09:38,041 --> 00:09:41,103
Have a great day. We'll talk to you next
time and happy conservation.
