​October Fish and Game Commission Meeting ​

(October 13-16, 2026).  

 

Tuesday (Wildlife and inland fisheries items); Wednesday (Marine items and Marine protected area petitions); Thursday (Marine protected area petitions); Friday (Marine protected area petitions).  The meeting will be held at the California Natural Resources Headquarters Building, 715 P Street, Sacramento, CA 95814. The meeting agenda has been posted and is available here.

 

The Fish and Game Commission (FGC) has communicated its process for addressing MPA Petition Agenda Items at the October 13-16 Commission Meeting. A recently published document entitled Revised Meeting Goals, Guidelines and Other Important Information outlines that process.  That document can be found here.  Summary of the important elements:

 

• FGC intends to “Deliberate and Vote on 15 MPA petitions and all the actions within each.”  Decisions could be to:

  • Grant the petition and move to a regulatory process, 

  • Deny the petition, or 

  • Take any other action the Commission determines is warranted by the petition.

 

• Scheduling (which will be subject to change). There are petitions on each day that the SAC office has been tracking closely and is planning to comment on.    

  • Wed, October 14 – 2033-33MPA-AMI

  • Thurs, October 15 - 2023-34MPA and 2023-29MPA_AM2

  • Fri, October 16 - 2023 24MPA_AM1

 

Below, we list all the petitions scheduled to be heard.  

​

• Effective September 25, 2026, the ceding of time will be allowed. The SAC office will be sending out instructions for how to do so well in advance of the meeting.

 

• Written public comments are encouraged.  It is also suggested they be submitted by 5PM September 30.

 

• There are detailed instructions describing how to provide comments (both verbal and written).

 

We strongly encourage our members to prepare written comments for those petitions you are most concerned about.  If you are considering making a written public comment on any of the MPA petitions we suggest the following approach:

 

1. Identify the petition you are commenting on and your recommendation.  For example, if you want to express support for CDFW and OPC’s recommendation to deny the petition to expand the boundary of the Cabrillo SMR (La Jolla) – you would reference Petition 2023-33MPA_AM1 and recommend denying the portion of the petition focused on the Cabrillo SMR.

2. Introduce who you are and what you want the Commission to do.  Carrying forth the example, we suspect you would ask them to deny the request to expand the Cabrillo SMR.  Talk about the potential economic impact you would experience. Also talk about how closing that area would impact your clientele – denying their ability to access the marine environment, eliminating a subsistence fishing opportunity (for those who prefer to catch their own fish rather than rely on a fish market), etc.  Even better if you can claim that a percentage of your clients (significant, meaningful, measurable) are from disadvantaged communities.

3. Thank them for considering your comments and offer to make yourself available to answer any questions they may have.  

 

General tips for any comment (verbal or written):

1. What to do:

   • Be respectful.

   • Complain - only if something is truly worth complaining about.

   • Coordinate with others - share the burden of developing comments if others in your community have a similar perspective.

   • Stay on point.

2. What NOT to do:

   • Assume others in your community know of the comment opportunity.

   • Be afraid of participating – the environmental community will be out in force.

   • Use inappropriate language.

   • Make a conclusion without evidence/information in support.

   • Be overly emotional.

   • Repeat yourself. 

   • Complain for the sake of complaining. As noted above, valid complaints (with solutions) are useful.  Providing a laundry list of complaints with nothing else, will not be received well.

   • Assume the reader knows anything about chart boat fishing, fisheries, vessels, your clientele, ports and harbors

 

Scheduled dates for hearing individual MPA petitions. Petitions likely of interest to SAC members are bolded and highlighted in yellow.  If you are interested in looking at the recommendations submitted by CDFW, you can view those here.  OPC’s recommendations are available here. 

 

• October 14 (Wednesday) afternoon.  Petition numbers:

  • 2023-14MPA – Submitted by California Sea Urchin Commission

    • Consists of 9 separate actions that would allow commercial take of sea urchins in 9 State Marine Conservation Areas.

    • Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying this Petition.

  • 2023-23MPA_AM1 – Submitted by Giant Giant Kelp Restoration

    • Consists of 28 separate actions that would prohibit recreational and commercial take of finfish for diver safety when kelp restoration activities are occurring; allow unlimited commercial and recreational urchin culling in these three MPAs, as well as in a portion of Point Lobos SMR; designate Tanker's Reef as new SMR; and other proposed actions to facilitate kelp restoration.

    • Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying this Petition.

  • 2023-33MPA_AM1 – Submitted by Environment California Research and Policy Center and Azul

    • Consists of 7 separate actions that would designate one new MPA and expand boundaries at six existing MPAs; add new take allowance at Point Dume SMCA.  This in the name of protecting kelp habitat.

    • Areas included in this Petition:

      • Cabrillo State Marine Reserve (Point Loma)

        • Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying

      • Point Dume State Marine Conservation Area

        • CDFW recommends denying, OPC recommends granting while disallowing proposed additional take allowance.

      • South Point SMR (Santa Rosa Island)

        • Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying

      • Gull Island SMR (Santa Cruz Island)

        • Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying

      • Point Conception SMR

        • CDFW recommends denying, OPC recommends approving a smaller expansion.

      • Natural Bridges SMR (Santa Cruz – City)

        • Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying

      • New SMCA near Pleasure Point (Santa Cruz – City)                  

        • Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying

​​​

• October 15 (Thursday)

  • 2023-21MPA_AM1 - Submitted by Tolowa Dee-ni' Nation

    • Consists of 2 separate actions.  One would remove recreational rake of Smelt while the other changes the boundary at Pyramid Point SMCA

    • Both CDFW and OPC recommend granting the removal of recreational take of smelt.  CDFW recommends denying the boundary change while OPC recommends granting.

  • 2023-19MPA_AM1 – Submitted by Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians 

    • Designate a new SMCA in Estero Bay named Chitqawi SMCA with no take other than a tribal take exemption for the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians.

    • CDFW and OPC recommends denying the petition while supporting an Alternative Pathway the non-regulatory request to advance co-management with the Tribe.  

  • 2023-20MPA_AM1 – Submitted by Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians

    • Consists of 4 separate actions all centered around Point Buchon

    • CDFW would grant the action changing the name of the Point Buchon SMCA.  OPC recommends approving tribal take exemption and renaming; deny proposed boundary change.

  • 2023-34MPA – Submitted by Environmental California Research and Policy Center and Azul

    • Consists of 3 actions.  One to reclassify Point Buchon SMCA as a SMR and the other two changing allowed uses of the Farnsworth Onshore and Offshore SMCAs. The only allowed use would be recreational spearfishing. 

    • Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying

  • 2023-28MPA_AM2 – Submitted by Natural Resources Defense Council

    • Proposes new Point Sal State Marine Conservation Area (SMCA).  Would allow recreational take of finfish by hook-and-line from shore.

    • CDFW recommends denying while OPC recommends approving.

  • 2023-29MPA_AM2 – Submitted by  Natural Resources Defense Council; co-submitted by Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians (SYBCI) and Environmental Defense Center

    • Proposes new  Mishopshno State Marine Conservation Area (SMCA) at Carpinteria Reef.  Would  allow for the recreational take of finfish by hook-and-line from shore and a tribal take exemption for Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians.

    • CDFW recommend denying while OPC recommends approving.

  • 2023-18MPA [Vandenberg and Kashtayit]) – Submitted by Ocean Conservancy

    • Consists of 7 actions (2 of which will be covered on Thursday)

      • Action 1 – Would redesignate a small portion of the Vandenburg SMR as a SMCA to allow recreational shore fishing for finfish by hook-and-line. Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying.

      • Action 3 – would simplify take regulations.  Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying.  

​

• October 16 (Friday)

  • 2023-27MPA_AM1 – Submitted by Environmental Defense Center

    • Amend Existing Anacapa Island SMCA or Special Closure to Protect Eelgrass

    • CDFW recommends denying while OPC would grant, in part by limiting deployment of lobster traps in waters less than 50 feet..

  • 2023-18MPA [San Miguel and Anacapa special closures] – Submitted by Ocean Conservancy

    • Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying

  • 2023-15MPA_AM2 – Submitted by Blake Hermann

    • Consists of 3 actions that would allow limited amount of commercial and recreational fishing for HMS in the Footprint SMR, Gull Island SMR, and Santa Barbara Island SMR.

    • Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying

  • 2023-16MPA – Submitted by Richard Ogg

    • 2 actions that would Reclassify Stewarts Point and Bodega Head State Marine Reserves (SMRs) to State Marine Conservation Areas (SMCAs) to allow commercial take of salmon by trolling.

    • Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying

  • 2023-32MPA – Submitted by Environmental Action Committee of West Marin

    • 3 actions all focused on Duxbury Reef (Bolinas).  Reclassify Duxbury Reef SMCA to an SMR and Expand the Southern and Northern Boundaries

    • CDFW recommends denying while OPC recommends granting with modifications (those modifications would allow for continuation of other existing shore-and boat-based fishing.

  • 2023 24MPA_AM1 – Submitted by Laguna Bluebelt Coalition

    • Would extend the Laguna Beach No-take SMCA southern boundary to the southern border of the City of Laguna Beach, which will require modification of the northern boundary of Dana Point SMCA.

    • Both CDFW and OPC recommend denying

​

​​​​​​​​_________________________​

​

Fish and Game Commission Meeting​

(August 12, 2026).

 

If you are interested in viewing a recording of meeting, you can do so via the following link – https://cal-span.org/search/?q=fish+and+game+commission.  The meeting’s agenda is available HERE.   The content provided under the MPA Petition Item (Agenda Item 7) was lengthy Agenda and is broken down as follows (the time stamps noted is when that specific topic began on the video recording):

 

• Comments by the California Secretary of Natural Resources – 3:11.08 mark

• Presentation from CDFW on the Tribally led Petitions – 3:35.16 mark

• Second CDFW Presentation on Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion – 4:07.00 mark

• Ocean Protection Council presentation on their recommendations – 4:28.38 mark

• Some questions from Commissioners on those presentations – 4:52.50 mark

• Comments from some of the Petitioners and two legislators – 5:17.16 mark 

• Public comments – 5:39.05 mark

• Commission discussion – 6:45.44 mark