Coastal controversy

Fishing has been a way of life in Arch Richardson's family ever since his ancestors used gold to purchase property on Sonoma County's northern coast.

But that 130-year legacy will vanish, the retired store owner said, if state officials move forward with a proposal to declare the waters off Stewarts Point off-limits to ocean-going activities.

"No more taking the kids fishing. No more getting abalone for dinner. No nothing," said Richardson, whose family owns nearly 5 miles of coastal land.

Stewarts Point is among several areas along the Sonoma and Mendocino coast under consideration for permanent fishing bans or other restrictions as a way of protecting marine life.

About 80 square miles from Santa Cruz to Mendocino County could fall under the most severe restrictions, including many areas on the North Coast that are beloved by abalone divers, fishermen, kayakers and others.

The state Fish and Game Commission will study four proposals put forth this week by a blue ribbon task force that was convened as part of the Marine Life Protection Act.

Passed in 1999, the legislation envisions a network of protected marine areas from Mexico to Oregon. Based on recommendations from another task force, the commission last year established 29 reserves along 110 square miles of the Central Coast from Half Moon Bay to Santa Barbara.

Hearings this summer

The commission is expected to hold public hearings on proposals for the north central coast this summer. But already there is a strong undercurrent of dissatisfaction with the task force recommendations.

"They say the perfect compromise means nobody is happy. They may have struck the perfect compromise," said Sean White, a biologist for the Sonoma County Water Agency and the owner of a kayak company.

White took part in months of negotiations that involved environmentalists, commercial fishermen, sport anglers, divers, citizens, civic leaders and other stakeholders along the coast.

Their charge was to whittle down their diverse interests into workable proposals, which would then be considered by the task force, which was led by former San Diego Mayor Susan Golding.

New plan recommended

The group managed to put forth three plans. But meeting in San Rafael this week, the task force came up with a fourth plan, which they now are recommending for approval.

Some viewed that as a last-minute betrayal of the process.

"They threw us under the bus and came up with their own plan. It's cherry-picking each proposal, but it doesn't work," said C.E. Brown, a retired clinical psychologist who lives at The Sea Ranch with her husband.

Melissa Miller-Henson, the project's coordinator, said participants were informed early on that the task force reserved the right to alter the proposals.

"To say it was cobbled together is far from the truth," she said.

She painted criticism of the preferred proposal as a positive sign that "maybe we hit the middle ground."

Covers 155 square miles

The proposal calls for restrictions along 155 square miles of ocean from Santa Cruz to Mendocino County, with roughly half designated as marine reserves, which would prohibit fishing and other ocean-going pursuits from the beach up to 1,000 feet offshore.

This is separate from a federal proposal to protect marine habitat from 3 miles offshore to as far out as 51 miles from Bodega Head.

Some of the region's most iconic areas are in the state plan, including Point Arena in Mendocino County, Bodega Head in Sonoma County, Point Reyes and the Farallon Islands.

Other areas on the North Coast include Saunders Reef and a swath of Salt Point State Park, including Fisk Mill Cove and Horseshoe Cove, both of which are popular with abalone divers, fishermen and kayakers.

"The north took a beating. It's not fair at all," said White.

Brown's dire warning was that the plan "will be the destruction of The Sea Ranch," a concern that underscores the complexity of trying to identify areas for protection.

The task force's preferred proposal calls for leaving The Sea Ranch basically untouched, aside from expanding the Del Mar reserve that already exists in the ocean off the 10-mile development.

But Brown said the recommendations to ban fishing, including abalone diving, in some areas of Salt Point and near Point Arena will increase the number of people using The Sea Ranch, where the public is guaranteed access to the ocean using seven access points.

She said homeowners already pay $5 million annually in dues to cover security and other costs related to that access.

"They're closing the state parks and leaving us open to be trashed," she said.

In all, 18 marine protected areas would be created under the task force plan between Santa Cruz and Mendocino County.

Special closures

The task force also recommended seven special closures to offer additional protection to seabirds and marine mammals from disturbance.

Environmentalists were disappointed that the task force did not recommend expanding Fitzgerald Marine Reserve at Moss Beach or creating a new reserve at Duxbury Reef just north of Bolinas.

But the Ocean Conservancy signaled its general approval of the task force's preferred plan, noting that it would still leave 90 percent of the coast open for fishing.

"The task force had a real challenge and no one got exactly what they wanted, but this balanced compromise will still offer a legacy for all Californians, and it is a critical step forward towards restoring marine ecosystems in the Pacific Ocean," Samantha Murray, Pacific Region Ecosystems Manager at Ocean Conservancy, said in a statement posted on the group's Web site.

Unhappy fishermen

North Coast commercial fishermen, who already are coping with a ban on salmon fishing, are generally unhappy with the proposal.

Motoring in to Bodega Harbor on Thursday aboard the Seaward, crab fisherman Chris Lawson lambasted the proposal to restrict fishing at Point Reyes.

"That's our fishery," he said. "You take that and we're done."

He and other fishermen said they've felt excluded during the negotiations.

"Since the very beginning they've disregarded most of the fisherman's input," he said. "It's not going to do anything as far as saving any species. It's a feel-good thing."

The north central coast is the second of five regions in California where wildlife and habitat reserves are planned under the marine life legislation.

The Fish and Game Commission will hold a June hearing on the proposals, followed by public hearings. A final decision is not expected until December.

You can reach Staff Writer Derek J. Moore at 521-5336 or derek.moore@pressdemocrat.com