Reserve stirs tempers

A heated two-hour hearing Tuesday pitted commercial and recreational fishers against environmentalists who favor turning the entire city coastline into a “no-take” zone under state control for five years and created a deep rift between the mayor and the rest of the council.

The City Council on Tuesday voted 4 to 1 for a resolution asking the state to declare all of Laguna’s coastline to be designated a Marine Reserve, anathema to fishers. The resolution will be sent to the state and various agencies and committees involved in the ongoing studies that will reviewed by the Fish and Game Commission assigned to create a network of protected areas along the California Coast.

“This is possibly the most devastating thing that has ever happened in Laguna Beach,” Mayor Kelly Boyd said Wednesday, still riled after casting the lone vote against the resolution. “The supporters have no concept of what they are doing to our economy.

”I am so angry and I will not sign that resolution.”

Councilwoman Toni Iseman sponsored the resolution.

“I am asking for a timeout,” Iseman said. “It is important so we can all enjoy the fruits of our ocean.”

Iseman said a hodgepodge of reserve and less stringent preserve areas is more difficult to enforce than one contiguous reserve.

“Where do you draw a line in the ocean?” she asked rhetorically. “We need to have Laguna Beach protected from the south border to the north border.”

The draft resolution called for one preserve from Abalone Point to the rocky point south of Three Arch Bay. It will be amended to subtract a buffer zone around the South Orange County Water Authority outfall, to lessen the city’s liability.

At present, the tidepools below Heisler Park are protected as a reserve. Other areas along the coast are open to amateur and commercial fishers, subject to laws mostly enforced by city lifeguards and police.

“My question is do we want the state to take control of our coastline that we have controlled since the city was incorporated in 1927?” said Boyd, a scion of the Thurstom family, early settlers in Laguna Beach. “Why give up control that we probably will never get back?

“In my two and a half years on the council, I have never been so upset. I couldn’t sleep the night after the meeting and I couldn’t play golf on Wednesday.”

Boyd said he would attend the meeting of the Regional Stakeholders, one of the groups involved in studying protected marine area network alternatives. The meeting is set for July 1 at Aliso Creek Inn.

“I am mounting a campaign against the citywide reserve,” Boyd said. “I am saying this is not right. If the reserve is approved, we have taken away the livelihood of the commercial fishers.”

Boyd said he could be contacted at his e-mail [email protected] or his City Hall cell phone, (949) 463-8089.

Fifty people spoke at the hearing, 28 from Laguna, 16 residents of other communities and six who didn’t name their home towns. Twenty of the speakers, not all of them from Laguna, including an 11-year old Irvine boy who spoke about his fear of spear fishers, outright supported the resolution endorsing the reserve.

Bluebelt activist Fred Sattler likened the state of the economy, which will take time and money to repair, to the condition of the ocean — over-consumed. The ocean is maxed out and it is time to pay the piper, he said.

“However, we can do it relatively painlessly, without large infusions of capital of public works projects,” Sattler said. “It just requires that we leave several multi-square-mile tracts alone so a domino effect of replenishment can occur.”

What can’t be done in a reserve is fishing, and 29 speakers, including one 10-year-old boy who pleaded to be allowed to continue fishing with his dad, opposed the reserve. They claimed it would be painful for all of them and cost some their quality of life or income.

“I pride myself on providing my family with meals from the ocean,” said Laguna Beach resident Bryan Mennes. “Over-regulation is killing our spirit. I would suggest a more modest approach.”

Bill Shedd of Laguna said the council should consider both sides of the issue.

“There has to be 1,000 licensed fishers in Laguna,” Shedd said. “I spend 50 days a year on the water, fishing from a kayak. I see fishers. They are not wiping out the garibaldi. I see bass, I see halibut. I don’t survive if the ocean is not healthy.”

Jinger Wallace, a South Laguna resident, opined the reserve would not take away anyone’s lifestyle. It’s just a short distance by car to Salt Creek where fishing is allowed she said.

“We encourage this effort,” South Lagunan Michael Beanan said. “The accusation that we are denying fishing is disingenuous. There are delineated areas outside of Laguna.

“The South Laguna board voted unanimously for the complete reserve.”

Surfrider Foundation member Chad Nelson expressed concern that the city’s resolution would exacerbate the divisiveness shown at the meeting. He suggested the council might delay the resolution for awhile to attempt to find a solution that would be supported by everyone.

“I hate seeing us divided this way,” said Jason Adams of Laguna Beach. “Be fair to both sides.”

Several of the speakers brought up the “thick and thin” proposal, which calls for a nine square-mile reserve — three miles along the coast and three miles out.

But Laguna Beach resident Max Isles said handkerchief-size reserves don’t cut it.

“There is a desperate need for large reserves — we need a substantial protected area that serves as a nursery.”

In Lance Allan’s opinion, a city-side reserve is too restrictive.

“I don’t think it appropriate for Laguna residents to cut off the beaches,” Allan said.

He claimed the restrictions could include walking on the beach at low tide, and no dogs, ever, on the beaches — a touchy subject in Laguna.

“We haven’t seen any science,” Mayor Pro Tem Elizabeth Pearson said. “All we have are people’s opinions. We don’t know if the ocean is depleted. We don’t know if it’s over-fished. We don’t know if it needs replenishing. We don’t know if the water needs to be refreshed.

“We are not closing the beaches tonight. The city doesn’t have that power, but because of the abuse, I support the reserve.”

Boyd questioned at the meeting who would enforce the reserve regulations.

“We can’t even enforce what we have now,” Boyd said.

Better enforcement is one of the main reasons to make the whole city coastline a reserve, Iseman said.

As of Thursday morning, the resolution sat unsigned in the mayor’s box at City Hall.

“Let the mayor pro tem sign it — I won’t,” Boyd said.