Bid to Curb Sea Fishing Debated

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

It was the last chance for 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 swath that surrounds the islands.

Although the hearing was mostly orderly, 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 groups 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.

Sportfisherman Bruce Carter of San Clemente rose at 1:15 a.m. to be at the forum. He had learned of the potential closures through the Internet, and he felt it was important to be there Friday to support his fellow fishermen.

His fear: that these closures would be the first of many.

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

Conservationists say they have no wish to stop fishing completely but are already compromising by agreeing to a ban covering only 25% of the sanctuary.

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

But officials for the 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 sportfishermen.

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 2002.

For the most part, commercial fishermen have agreed to some no-fishing zones. But sportfishermen say the proposal, 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 islands, said he doesn’t trust the scientific rationale behind 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. Sportfishing’s “impact is so minimal. But the impact on us is great.”

Conservationists counter 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.”