Regarding “Don’t interrupt the circle of life” (The Canary, May 5), thanks for siding with nature, but we can assure you that Andy Caldwell does not have “a valid point” that “the sanctuary would hurt the fishing industry more than it would benefit marine health.”
Here’s one of many studies that refutes Mr. Caldwell’s assumption: sanctuaries.noaa.gov/science/socioeconomic/pdfs/california_rec_sanctuaries.pdf.
Further, the nomination document for the Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary explicitly states: “The proposed sanctuary shall have no impact on treaty fishing rights and impose no future regulations upon commercial or recreational fishing.”
Your readers can help get the sanctuary designation process started by going here: www.addup.org/campaigns/protect-californias-central-coast-create-a-national-marine-sanctuary.
This article appears in May 12-19, 2016.
