BILL ANALYSIS 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER |
| Senator Fran Pavley, Chair |
| 2009-2010 Regular Session |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BILL NO: AB 2125 HEARING DATE: June 29, 2010
AUTHOR: Ruskin URGENCY: No
VERSION: April 15, 2010 CONSULTANT: Bill Craven
DUAL REFERRAL: No FISCAL: Yes
SUBJECT: Coastal resources: marine spatial planning.
BACKGROUND AND EXISTING LAW
The California Ocean Protection Act of 2004 (SB 1319 (Burton),
Chapter 719, Statutes of 2004), created the Ocean Protection
Council (OPC), consisting of the Secretary of the Natural
Resources Agency, the Secretary for Environmental Protection,
the chair of the State Lands Commission and two public members
appointed by the governor. Among the responsibilities of the OPC
is to coordinate ocean protection and conservation activities of
state agencies; improve the effectiveness of state efforts to
protect ocean resources; and to establish policies to coordinate
the collection and sharing of scientific data related to coast
and ocean resources between agencies.
PROPOSED LAW
This bill is intended as a follow-up to a resolution on marine
spatial planning that was approved in 2009 by the Ocean
Protection Council. Marine spatial planning would be defined in
the bill and may be summarized as an emerging, science-based
process for identifying current and likely future uses of the
ocean that is intended to reduce conflicts among uses while
preserving critical ecosystem services. Marine spatial planning
has been recognized in state laws in Massachusetts, Oregon, and
Rhode Island, and it also a part of the ocean management efforts
of the Obama administration.
This bill provides that:
1. Subject to available funding, the OPC shall support state
agencies' use and sharing of scientific and geospatial
information for coastal- and ocean-relevant decision-making,
including marine spatial planning, by assessing the needs of
public agencies with respect to their abilities to gather,
manage, use, and share information and decision-support tools
relevant to ecosystem-based management.
2. If justified by the assessment, the OPC would consult with
other public agencies for the purpose of increasing the amount
of baseline scientific and geospatial information that is
available with respect to coastal and ocean ecosystems, climate
change, cumulative impacts, existing and predicted human
activities that present conflicting or compatible demands on
coastal ecosystems, and social, economic and cultural values.
3. The OPC would be required to support public agencies'
collaborative management and use of scientific and geospatial
information relevant to ecosystem-based management.
4. The OPC would also be required to help identify tools
relevant to ecosystem-based management, and, where appropriate,
support the adaptation of those tools or the creation of new
tools to serve the state's needs.
5. The bill would require the OPC, again subject to available
funding, to report to the Legislature on the advantages and
disadvantages of marine spatial planning in a variety of
contexts.
6. State agencies with ocean or coastal management interests or
regulatory authority would be directed to cooperate with the
OPC, provided they have funding to do so. Finally, the OPC would
be authorized to award grants or enter into interagency
agreements to support this effort.
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT
According to the author, potential conflicts among present and
future uses of the ocean can be minimized if scientific and
geospatial information is collected and analyzed on an ongoing
basis such that economic activities and ecosystem functions can
be integrated.
The OPC adopted a resolution in 2009 that endorsed interagency
collaboration and management of geospatial information in the
ocean and the resolution further directed its staff to make
recommendations on marine spatial planning for future approval
of the OPC. However, the author believes that this legislation
is necessary to establish that the OPC is the state's lead
agency for increasing the amount of scientific and geospatial
information as well as coordinating information and data sharing
between agencies. The author points to the fact that data
sharing among state agencies for land-based needs has been
assigned to the Chief Information Officer, but that no similar
arrangement has been made for ocean data and agencies. He also
contends if the OPC is not assigned this coordination function
in the ocean, then future permitting actions and long-term
planning will not be as effective as is necessary.
The Ocean Conservancy, as sponsor, stated that the bill is
needed to improve information, coordination, geospatial data
sharing, and new information technology for state planners and
managers with ocean and coastal-related jurisdiction.
The Monterey Bay Aquarium and the Natural Resources Defense
Council separately stated that the lack of information provided
to ocean managers and decision-makers will be overcome, in part,
by this bill which would result in improvements to ocean
governance. They contend that the bill is necessary to further
improve the efficient collection and sharing of information from
state agencies that contribute to the management of coastal and
ocean resources.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
None received
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
Staff recommends two technical amendments:
1. Page 4, line 28, after "health" add "structure"
2. Page 5, line 1: add a new (F) "distinguishing ecological
characteristics, including habitat heterogeneity, species
abundance, and biodiversity
SUPPORT
Ocean Conservancy
Monterey Bay Aquarium
Oceana
California League of Conservation Voters
Nature Conservancy
Natural Resources Defense Council
Coastwalk California
Defenders of Wildlife
OPPOSITION
None received