Fishing Ban Gets One Last Debate

Sport fishermen and conservationists arrived in Santa Barbara by the busload Friday for a sometimes rowdy debate on a recommendation that fishing be banned in some areas around the five northern Channel Islands.

It was the last chance for public comment before the state Fish and Game Commission begins considering a recommendation to ban fishing in about 25% of the Channel Islands Marine Sanctuary, a 1,252-nautical-acre reserve that surrounds the islands.

Although orderly most of the time, many in the auditorium stomped their feet, clapped or booed. Some hoisted signs--one, on bright pink poster board, read: “Stop These Enviro Nazis.”

Both sides of the issue organized bus trips: Conservationists set out from Los Angeles, while the United Anglers bus originated in Huntington Beach.

Greg Helms of the Ocean Conservancy had volunteers wear turquoise T-shirts, to give conservation-minded speakers friendly faces in the auditorium and possible escorts to their seats.

“It can get pretty intimidating,” he said. “We’ve got a group of angry recreational fishermen here.”

About 450 people attended the forum, although early on the auditorium got so crowded--and warm--that the fire marshal demanded that about 250 people stand outside and listen over speakers.

Sport fisherman Bruce Carter of San Clemente rose at 1:15 a.m. to be at the forum. He had learned via the Internet of the potential closures and wanted to support his fellow fishermen.

His fear is that the closures would be the first of many.

“If I couldn’t fish, I’d end up in a rubber room,” he said.

‘We Have a Chance to Leave a Legacy’

Conservationists say they have no wish to block fishing completely but are already compromising by agreeing to only a 25% ban.

A scientific panel had recommended that 30% to 50% of the sanctuary be closed, saying that anything less would not meet conservation goals of bringing back fish stocks and preserving habitat--including kelp forests, rocky reefs and many diverse forms of sea life.

But officials for the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary and the state Department of Fish and Game said they based the 25% recommendation on two competing proposals that came from two years of meetings of a citizens panel made up of conservationists, commercial fishermen and sport fishermen.

The Fish and Game Commission is expected to begin deliberating on no-fishing zones immediately and to come back with a potential list of regulations. It is not likely to have a final decision until early next year.

For the most part, commercial fishermen have agreed to some no-fishing zones. But sport fishermen say that this map of closures, which includes prime fishing areas around Anacapa and Santa Barbara islands, is disproportionately hard on them.

Richard Zellers, a Lompoc biology teacher who often fishes around the Channel Islands, said he doesn’t trust the scientific rationalizations for no-fishing zones.

“If it works, you’re going to say ‘Let’s close more because it’s working.’ If it doesn’t, you’ll say ‘Let’s close more. It’s not working,’ ” he said during the public comment period. Sport fishing’s “impact is so minimal. But the impact on us is great.”

But conservationists argue that fishermen need to take a longer view.

“I’ve seen the changes, the loss of rockfish,” said Steve Roberson of the Channel Islands Marine Resource Restoration Committee. “We just have to bite the bullet for four or five years. We have a chance to leave a legacy.”