April 27, 2000

Dear Dive Professional,

We are writing to you for your immediate assistance regarding what we view as a serious threat to the diving industry.

The enclosed letter and chart details the bias and flaws in the Diver Disturbance in Kelp Forests study the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary is promoting. This study portrays divers as environmentally irresponsible and substantially harming our marine environment. It states among other things "Disturbance may be indirectly exacerbated by the overzealous promotion of recreational diving" and "Exploitation of environmental resources is often assumed to be a right". The study recommends restricting access and limiting our diving to underwater trails.

Please take the time to write a letter to Dan Basta, Acting Director of the Sanctuary Program Office, expressing your concerns about the Sanctuary's promotion of this study:

Dan Basta, Acting Director of the Sanctuary Program Office
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
1305 East-West Highway
SSMC-4 / Room 9513
Silver Spring, MD 20910

Please forward a copy of your letters to us at the address listed below so we can track correspondence. Please call if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

David Clayton & Ed Cooper, Diving Representatives
Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council
3793 El Campo Court, Concord, CA 94519
(925) 689-8840 or FAX (925) 689-8480
email drc@ccnet.com
enclosures (2)

April 26, 2000

Dan Basta
Acting Director of Sanctuary Program Office
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
1305 East-West Highway
SSMC-4 / Room 9513
Silver Spring, MD 20910

Dear Mr. Basta:

On behalf of divers and the diving industry, including dive stores, clubs, charter operators, training agencies, and instructors, we are writing to express our concerns with the positions taken by Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) management against the diving community. Sanctuary Management has broken commitments made to the diving community and by promoting the Diver Disturbance in Kelp Forests study the Sanctuary is giving credibility to a flawed and biased study that has the potential of damaging our industry (see attached chart).

Divers are a diverse group who consider themselves conservationists. As divers, we are the people in and under the water that see, first hand, many of the developing problems of our oceans. This history goes back to the early 1960's when we began underwater clean-up dives and made efforts to protect the Pacific Grove coastline from over-fishing.

Divers are the eyes and ears of the Sanctuary, as exemplified by the many environmental issues that have been raised by the diving community. Divers worked to protect the environment by creating the Ed Ricketts Underwater Park and played an active role in creating the San Carlos Beach Park, the only open space left on Cannery Row. Divers were first to report dangerous munitions left underwater by the military, first to report the environmental damage from the live-fish fishery and the over-harvesting of kelp. It is because of similar efforts by divers that numerous reef systems throughout the world have protection. We testified in favor of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS) in the first public hearings and fully support the concept and goals upon which the MBNMS was founded.

Although environmental impact by divers is comparatively small, we acknowledge it. Our training agencies, charter operators, dive stores and the diving press continually educate the diving public about how to minimize these impacts and work to protect the underwater environment.

When the diving community approached the Sanctuary about the over-harvesting of kelp along Cannery Row, the Sanctuary responded by funding two $2000 studies. One addressed kelp harvesting, The Effects of Small-scale Kelp Harvesting on Giant Kelp Surface Canopy Dynamics in the Ed Ricketts Underwater Park; and the other, written by the same author, addressed possible diver impacts on kelp, Diver Disturbance in Kelp Forests (DDKF).

The Sanctuary has presented these studies to the public and other agencies in a way that gives the impression that divers and their training agencies are environmentally irresponsible. The inflammatory title "Diver Disturbance in Kelp Forests" published on the Sanctuary's world-wide web site defames and damages the dive industry's image and community. This has the very real potential of damaging our business.

The accompanying chart details not only important questions regarding the data and conclusions of these studies, but also the bias of Sanctuary management for kelp harvesters and against divers (See attached Chart). For example, the Sanctuary has never placed the Kelp Harvesting study on its web page. This biased and unequal treatment of stakeholders compromises the credibility of the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.

While maligning divers, the Sanctuary attempts to portray kelp harvesting as an activity with little impact on our marine environment. Kelp harvesters removed over 9,000,000 pounds of kelp from our Sanctuary in 1995. This extraction of kelp either kills, removes, or displaces numerous juvenile fish, mollusks, and invertebrates that live in the canopy. The taking of kelp also removes habitat of the threatened sea otter.

Confronted with numerous emails and complaints from dive leaders concerning the issues of manipulated and unsubstantiated data, as well as its potential to damage diving interests, Sanctuary Superintendent William Douros agreed, in February 1999, to remove the DDKF study from the Sanctuary web pages. In addition, he agreed not to use the study in the future for policy-making decisions. Consequently, the study was removed from the Sanctuary web pages. Mr. Douros made these commitments to both Diving Representatives of the Sanctuary Advisory Council. Sanctuary staff reiterated the same promises at the first meeting of the Diver Partnership Program in 1999, which was attended by many other dive leaders. The new Diver Partnership Program was founded on these commitments.

Without notice, in less than a year the Superintendent has reneged on his commitments and included the DDKF study in the first release of the Sanctuary's Kelp Management Plan. He has also put the study back on the World-wide Web.

To conclude, the key component that made the Diver Partnership Program possible was a new sense of trust between Sanctuary management and the diving community as a "partnership". It is clear by the actions detailed above that the diving community cannot rely on commitments made by Sanctuary management. As a result, we are withdrawing from the Diver Partnership Program and its associated projects including the photographic contest and brochure.

We strongly urge the Sanctuary Superintendent to re-honor his original commitments to remove the "Diver Disturbance in Kelp Forests" study from the Sanctuary's world-wide web pages and to stop using the study in making recommendations, policy development, or references to other agencies.

Until this issue is satisfactorily resolved the diving community will continue to fight against the issues raised in this letter. In addition we insist that the Diver Partnership Program on the Sanctuary's web page be removed.

Sincerely,

David Clayton	Ed Cooper
Diving Representative	Alternate Diving Representative
MBNMS Advisory Council	MBNMS Advisory Council
3793 El Campo Court	P.O. Box 148
Concord, CA 94519	Pacific Grove, CA 93950
(925) 689-8840	(831) 375-2200
(925) 689-8480 FAX	(831) 375-0906 FAX
drc@ccnet.com	ecooper@divemonterey.com

Enclosure (1)

cc:
Sam Farr, Congressman
Fred Keeley, Assemblyman
Nancy Foster, Assistant Administrator NOS NOAA
William Douros, Superintendent, MBNMS
MBNMS Advisory Council and SAC Interests

In 1996, the diving community, kayakers, and local businesses approached the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary with the problem of kelp harvesters clear cutting the kelp beds off Cannery Row in Monterey. What the diving community did not know was that kelp harvesting appears to be a protected activity in the MBNMS because of influential special interest groups. The MBNMS responded by funding two studies: One study to determine the effects of kelp harvesting on the kelp forests, and what appeared to be in retaliation for the diving community coming forward, another study to determine the effects of diving on kelp forests. The following chart illustrates how the MBNMS appears to manipulate "science" to give preferred stakeholders special treatment and to punish other stakeholders for bringing this conservation issue to the Sanctuary. This manipulation undermines the credibility of the Sanctuary and the science community.

Description	Kelp Harvesting Study	Diver Study	Notes
Cost of Study:	$2,000	$2,000
Selection of Author for the Studies:	Same author as Diver Study	Same author as Kelp Harvesting Study	The MBNMS selected a scientist to do these studies who was already on record as stating that kelp harvesting does not have a harmful effect on kelp beds. This insured that the outcome of the Kelp Harvesting Study matched the MBNMS goal of protecting this activity.
Title of Study:	"The Effects of Small Scale Kelp Harvesting on Giant Kelp Surface Canopy Dynamics in the Ed Ricketts Underwater Park"	"Diver Disturbance in Kelp Forests"	Note negative bias in the diver study title. Note the title of the kelp study attempts to minimize the impact of kelp harvesting by describing the activity as "Small Scale".
Impact of activity on kelp forest:	Extracts up to 9,000,000 pounds of kelp per year (1993) in our Sanctuary... (Source: Sanctuary Kelp Mgmt Plan). Displaces or kills juvenile fish, snails, and crabs that live in the kelp canopy. Removes habitat that sea otters use to rest and sleep in.	Insignificant. Study found divers detach "2" kelp blades per dive. See note --->	Author rounded up data from 1.56 blades detached to 2 blades detached. One has to analyze the data to determine this hidden rounding up. Study included student divers. Certified divers detached only .7 blades per dive. Study included "sea grass" detachments as kelp blade detachments. Therefore certified diver kelp blade detachments go from .7 blades detached to an even more insignificant level.
Study recommendations:	Kelp harvesting does not hurt the Kelp Forests. No regulations recommended.	Regulations should be considered - including limiting access points and creating underwater trails, etc.	Removing up to 9,000,000 million pounds of kelp per year in our Sanctuary needs no regulations but certified divers detaching less than 7/10 of a blade per dive should require regulations. This decision points to special interest group influence in our Sanctuary.
Study Bias:	Findings support kelp harvesting as not harmful to the kelp forest.	Authors statements used in study: "Disturbance may be indirectly exacerbated by the overzealous promotion of recreational diving"; "Exploitation of environmental resources is often assumed to be a right".	Author seem to have a bias against divers.
MBNMS Position:	Favors self regulation of kelp Harvesting.	MBNMS Superintendent wrote letter stating regulations should be considered (including limiting access points and creating underwater trails).	One questions why the MBNMS Superintendent is treating Sanctuary stakeholders unequally and appears to be favoring special interest groups. By selectively placing the Diver Disturbance Study in Kelp Forests on the MBNMS web site, the World sees the biased title of the study and assumes divers are causing substantial damage to our marine environment. This unfairly damages the diving community's reputation as conservationists.

First Draft of the Sanctuary's Kelp Management Plan:
The kelp harvesting controversy started when harvesters clear-cut the kelp beds off Cannery Row in Monterey. The public hearing locations announced in the first draft of the Sanctuary's Kelp Management Plan did not include a public hearing in the Monterey area, which is the center of the kelp harvesting controversy. The appearance is that the Sanctuary will even compromise the public hearing process to favor special interest groups. The public objected to this omission at the February 4, 2000 SAC meeting and Sanctuary management reluctantly agreed (the following week) to hold a public hearing in the Monterey area. On short notice the meeting was held on February 22, 2000 in Pacific Grove. This public hearing had the highest attendance of all public meetings that were held for the Kelp Management Plan to date.