Minutes
February 15, 2006
Members Present: Laura Arnold, Michael Durland, Ron Hendrickson, (Alan) Skeet Lowe, David Loyd, Mary Masters, Victoria Parker, Howie Rosenfeld, Jim Slocomb, Jonathan White, Tina Whitman
Staff: Jody Kennedy, Helen Venada
Absent: Terrie Klinger, Kit Rawson, Ken Sebens, Joy Sevier
Guests: Kirsten Evans, Kat Fennel, Phil Green, Jana Marks, Rowann Tallmon
Presenter: Nancy Larsen
Vice Chair Mary Masters called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. in the Community Room at Islanders Bank Annex, Friday Harbor.
Citizen comments:
Victoria Parker said the San Juan Nature Institute’s winter lecture series continues this Thursday at 7 PM at the FH Labs Commons with Dr. Julie Stein, Director of the Burke Museum, speaking on Kennewick Man.
Rowann Tallmon said the Beach Watchers training begins in two weeks with 15 volunteers signed up so far.
Ron Hendrickson announced that the critical areas workshop has been postponed to March 23rd. He said the decision is being made on how to proceed with the process relative to the minimum work needed to meet the CAO deadline and the larger process funded through Shared Strategy, which could take three years. Laura added that there is a bill pending that could allow a one to three year time extension. Ron said that to do the larger job there will need to be a permanently-assigned staff at CDPD to provide continuity, which is not available now.
Howie mentioned Russel Barsh’s letter to the editor (Journal) about the San Juans not being taken seriously by state agencies for salmon recovery; he asked about MRC’s position. Tina explained that this was the second out of four projects that the MRC recommended for funding, with County Council support. She added that there may have been some misunderstanding by a SRFB member who thought the scope of work was being covered by another project. David Loyd said that this is impetus for the MRC to get its ducks in a row for the next round of funding. Jim that SRFB solicited input on the project and Barbara’s response about SRFB’s handling of the project was very to the point.
Jody announced that the list of events for upcoming MRC meetings will be posted as the committee requested. She added that the Puget Sound Action Team’s calendar was excellent for non-MRC events and Tina said it was possible to get on Hilary Culverwell’s mailing list for northern Puget Sound events.
Mike Durland pointed out the need for more public notice of MRC meetings.
Minutes:
Minutes of the 2/1/06 meeting were approved with the correction that both Kit and Mary were present at the MSA blitz..
Mooring buoy letter:
Copies of the draft 2/15/06 letter to Kevin Ranker were distributed. Mary explained that this is a result of Kevin’s expressing his concern over a large mooring buoy in Westsound, noting that there is not a lot of enforcement happening around illegal buoys and placement. It was suggested by him and Matt Zybas, the then-interim CDPD Director, that the MRC research the situation and come up with some recommendations. The draft explains the MRC position that the enforcement issue is not the committee’s role and that local enforcement action belongs to the CDPD and the County Council. The problem of existing, non-permitted buoys is an enforcement issue for both DNR and SJC to consider. Laura pointed out that the county has the authority at a policy level to determine locations where new mooring buoys are not suitable (as it did in the 1980’s for areas of Friday Harbor that are within county jurisdiction) because they would interfere with normal public use of the water. Mary said the letter recommends that DNR and CDPD get together to sort this out and that the MRC will be addressing mooring buoys policy in the critical areas ordinance update. Tina suggested that the ad hoc mooring buoys committee merge with the policy sub-committee, noting that the issue could also be addressed through the 5-S process with resulting policy recommendations. Ron suggested that the letter be cc’d to David Goldsmith, the pro tem County Administrator. It was agreed that the letter be addressed to the County Council.
Motion: David moved, and Jim seconded, that the letter be sent to all the County Councilmen, adding the phrase that it is being sent “pursuant to a request by Kevin Ranker.” The motion passed unanimously.
Jim added that when he was doing water quality work recently he saw a large number of commercial crab pot buoys in Fishermen’s Bay, Blind Bay, Shoal Bay, Picnic Cove, and Indian Cove; he pointed out that, at the least, these impede boating navigation in the area. David added that there have been several public comments on this.
Salmon recovery meeting:
Copies of Jim Slocomb’s public statement from the MRC were distributed. Jim will be presenting the statement at the salmon recovery plan public meeting to be held next Tuesday in Anacortes. It was suggested that the MRC include a formal cover letter.
Motion: Jim moved, and Laura seconded, that the letter be approved for reading into the public record at the upcoming meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
Presentation on the “Tapping Local Knowledge” Project:
Nancy Larsen gave an update she’s conducted on this element of the MSA initiative. She said that she used an interview format that followed questions recommended in her last meeting with the MRC. Nancy noted that interviews covered a wide range of historical time and that more could be done on each era.
Nancy explained to those interviewed that there is no clearly defined end product, at this point, except for keying the gathered information to the MSA maps. Nancy read some highlights from her interviews and noted that so far she has just scratched the surface.
Jim said he hoped that information Nancy was gathering could help in determining the historical number of fish and that this kind of approach is critical for the MRC to achieve a longer term perspective on changes and cycles over time. Laura would like to see both the stories and data feed back into the human use category of the MSA. David suggested that Tina Wylie-Echeverria, or some other
salmon biologist, could sit in on the interviews to pursue marine resource data. Jody, acknowledging the sensitivity of the issue, said that perhaps a scientist, like Tina Wylie-Echeverria, could review the questions with the sub-committee. Tina Whitman reminded the committee that a scientific review was done when the questions Nancy is using were first drafted.
There was committee discussion on the question of legal issues concerning the future use of such the material and on how to relate anecdotal information to currently known data. Jim said there are lots of models for how to use such information gathered from both active and retired fishermen...the effort in Barclay Sound, B.C. was hugely influential in guiding decisions on areas to be protected, he added. Howie said there might be a possibility for Friday Harbor High School students to do a video project, working with the school’s Gates Foundation grant. Jonathan suggested that perhaps a
Motion: David moved, and Victoria seconded, that Nancy be funded with an additional $2,500 to pursue the interviews and to develop a release form for the interviewees. The motion passed unanimously.
Members can read the draft report in the MRC office, recognizing that the material is at this time confidential. Nancy said there are federal archives in Seattle and state archives in Bellingham mapping all historical reef net locations.
Work session on 5-S Viability and Stresses/Sources:
Kirsten distributed reports on the 2-day session at the end of January when the core team members and a few outside experts (e.g. Phil Block and Kari Koski) worked through the viability analysis and stresses/sources information. The final product will be the material the MRC shares with the marine manager in March, she said. Kirsten asked that the committee review the results today.
Kirsten noted that a “viability” analysis helps to figure out the health of targets, reviewing key ecological attributes for each target. She pointed out that in terms of rating, what is not known is now well documented; Kirsten defined a “poor” rating to mean that there is less than 10% of unfished biomass left, in extreme danger; a “fair” rating means 25% remains which needs to be improved and is vulnerable to loss. The ratings are substantiated (justified) in the workbook comments that can be accessed at the MRC office.
There was committee discussion on whether to track ling cod and rockfish separately. David said that black cod are gone and wondered how that information is being captured here. Kirsten will flag this as an issue to be resolved. The indicator ratings may need to be revised to be more stringent; Tina said this would override state policy. Mary said that the rockfish group needs to reconvene when Kit returns. Jim, Howie, Jonathan and David will work on the human benefit target for the March 1st meeting. The commitee submitted other edits for the viabiity analysis.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 am.
Submitted by Helen Venada
