Acanthodoris hudsoni: Hudson’s Dorid– The Race Rocks Taxonomy


General Description:
    Aconthodoris hudsoni is a typical representative of the Dorid Nudibranchs, which are also often referred to as sea slugs. Nudibranchs are sea snails that lack a shell and can vary greatly in coloration and form. That is why they are known as one of the most beautiful marine animals.    Acanthodoris hudsoni can be easily identified by its transparent whitish body and the yellow stripe running at the edge of its mantle. Its body is covered with conical pipalae, which are also tipped yellow. As most nudibranchs, Aconthodoris hudsoni has two long tentacles (called rhinophores) which are used as sensory organs for searching for food or a partner.
PHOTOS BY RYAN J MURPHY – ECOGUARDIAN 2010

Distribution:

    Sea slugs occupy the benthic zone. They usually live in the lower intertidal zone and could be found up to 700m in depth.   

    The dorid nudibranchs (over 3000 species) are widely spread throughout the world. Aconthodoris hudsoni, however, could be found only on the Pacific coast of North America.

Size: 1.5 to 2 cm

Feeding:

    Dorid nudibranchs feed on a wide variety of organisms: anemones, corals, hydroids, sponges, etc. However, they are highly specialized in their feeding habits. Some nudibranchs can eat only one specific genus or even species! Presently, it is not known what is the exact diet of Acanthodoris hudsoni, but biologists believe that it should be similar to the one of the other members of the genus Acanthodoris – bryozoans.

Reproduction:

     Sea slugs are hermaphrodites. Usually, they lay their eggs nearby a food source. The incubation period lasts for about 50 days, but can range in accordance to the abiotic factors in the environment. Nudibranchs go through a larval stage and when conditions are favourable, they metamorphose into young adults. This helps them distribute to larger areas.

Biotic Associations:

     Although the dorid nudibranchs would be usually found on top of rocks, sometimes they live on other organisms, such as corals, seaweeds, and sponges, and exhibit parasitic relationships.

Go to: Student Research: Shade Preference in Sub-tidal populations of Dorid Nudibranchs

References:

Behrens, David. Pacific Coast Nudibranchs. Sea Challengers: Monterrey, 1991. p48.

The Sea Slug Forum

Other Members of the Phylum Mollusca at Race Rocks.

taxonomyiconReturn to the Race Rocks Taxonomy
and Image File
pearsonlogo2_f2The Race Rocks taxonomy is a collaborative venture originally started with the Biology and Environmental Systems students of Lester Pearson College UWC. It now also has contributions added by Faculty, Staff, Volunteers and Observers on the remote control webcams.

, Dec. 2010.- Ryan Murphy

Orcas outside

‘Orca’, 10, ‘There is something particularly special about sitting down at the kitchen table and literally hearing the whales outside. I ”ve been on the water before and heard the the heavy exhalations of a whale before spotting it, but to be on land inside a building is something else entirely. The group of 10 or more orcas were traveling N along the E edge of the reserve towards Victoria. There were two adult bulls, one with a very tattered dorsal fin. They were quite active, with some whales doing back flips and swimming upside down, flopping their tails on the surface.’,

‘Ryan’, ’14:31:09 ,

Clavularia sp. : Pale Soft Coral– The Race Rocks Taxonomy

rmapr10clav

A colony of Clavularia sp. by Ryan Murphy, April 2010. The individual polyps can be seen in unusual clarity.

See Ryan’s underwater set on Flickr with a range of invertebrates:

rmapr10clavclose

This is an enlarged close up of part of the image above.

 

This species is currently being identified. Each polyp is smaller than 1.2cm. Although it may appear at first as a hydroid, it is actually a soft coral, in known as an octocoral because of the eight tentacles. It is found in small patches a few cm. in diameter on the rocks right off the docks at Race Rocks in 10-12 metres of water.

 

Dr. Anita Brinckmann Voss identified this sample and indicated that it is related to Gersemia the soft pink coral. She has seen it in samples from Race Rocks before but not in such a large colony. She also indicated that a new species has been described from the North Pacific and she will try to get us a reference to it.

rmclavactinia

Another photo by Ryan Murphy of a Clavaria colony. The colour difference here is unexplained so far.

Domain Eukarya
Kingdom Animalia
Phylum Cnidaria
Class Anthozoa
Subclass Octocorallia
Order Alcyonacea
Family Clavulariidae
Genus Clavularia
Species sp .
Common Name: Pale soft coral

Octocorals on Coral reefs make up a large portion of the species there. The potential medicinal uses of several species of clavularia have been published. The abstract of one such study on Clavularia viridis is shown below:
Lin YS, Khalil AT, Chiou SH, Kuo YC, Cheng YB, Liaw CC, Shen YC. of the Department of Marine Biotechnology and Resources, National Sun Yat-Sen University, Kaohsiung 804, Taiwan, Republic of China.
Abstract
Chemical investigation of the nonpolar extract of soft coral Clavularia viridis resulted in isolation of five new prostanoids, designated as claviridic acids A-E (1-5, resp.), in addition to the known clavulones I-III. Their structures were determined on the basis of spectroscopic techniques, especially HR-ESI-MS, CD, and 2D-NMR experiments. The isolated marine prostanoids exhibited potent inhibitory effect on PHA-induced proliferation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC), as well as significant cytotoxic activity against human gastric cancer cells (AGS)

This file is provided as part of a collaborative effort by the students, faculty, staff and volunteers of
Lester B. Pearson College
April 2010
Garry Fletcher

Phoebastria immutabilis: Lasan albatross–The Race Rocks Taxonomy

Pam Birley took this photo using the remote cam 5 on February 6, 2010. We have had difficulty identifying it but it looks quite like a Laysan Albatross. Below is a quote from Pam:

“Thought I would draw  your attention to this mystery bird, seen on Middle Rock on Saturday.  I was actually looking at the seals but this large bird caught my eye because it was so white.  I wish I had taken more pictures but only saved this one.  It was larger than the Cormorants (Beside it in the photograph) and had a big yellow/orange beak.  It was white except for the wing area which was black.  It was not a double-crested Cormorant.  The only thing I can come up with from Sibley and consulting the internet is a Laysan Albatross.  Apparently they only breed in the Hawaiian Islands area but do travel up to the Bering Sea, Alaska and the Pacific NW.” PAM BIRLEY, UK

Domain Eukarya
Kingdom Animalia
Phylum Chordata
Subphylum Vertebrata
Class Aves
Order Procellariiformes
Family Diomedeidae
Genus Phoebastria
Species mutabilis

Common Name: Laysan Albatross
See this article in Bird Life International which details the ecological issues threatening this bird such as bycatch in the commercial high seas drift net fisheries.

See this article ” How we killed paradise with plastic: Grotesque consequences of our casual throwaway culture” The image from it shown here provides a stark reminder of the tragedy of plastic pollution in the ocean.

Other Members of the Class Aves at Race Rocks.
taxonomyiconReturn to the Race Rocks Taxonomy
and Image File
pearsonlogo2_f2The Race Rocks taxonomy is a collaborative venture originally started with the Biology and Environmental Systems students of Lester Pearson College UWC. It now also has contributions added by Faculty, Staff, Volunteers and Observers on the remote control webcams. April 2010- Pam Birley

Pluvialis dominica: American Golden Plover –The Race Rocks Taxonomy

American Golden Plover Pluvialis dominica in non-breeding plumage.

Raisa Mirza took these photos of the first American Golden Plover to be photographed at Race Rocks on September 19, 2010, This individual has stopped over at Race Rocks on its migration route .This plover is widespread throughout North America.

DomainEukarya
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumChordata
Sub-PhylumVertebrata
ClassAves
OrderCharadriiformes
FamilyCharadriidae
GenusPluvialis
Speciesdominica
Common Name:American golden plover

Other Members of the Class Aves at Race Rocks.

Return to the Race Rocks Taxonomy
and Image File


The Race Rocks taxonomy is a collaborative venture originally started with the Biology and Environmental Systems students of Lester Pearson College UWC. It now also has contributions added by Faculty, Staff, Volunteers and Observers on the remote control webcams.September 2010
Raisa Mirza

Pandalus stenolepsis: Race Rocks Taxonomy

Ryan Murphy took these pictures in October 2011 and followed up in getting the identifications sorted out between this shrimp and Pandalus danae . See his pictures on Flickr: When Ryan took this image on the right, , he happened to get the small red tentacled a animals in the left of the picture. These are a new phylum for our records, rhe Phoronids.

DomainEukarya
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumArthropoda
ClassMalacostraca
OrderDecapoda
FamilyPandalidae
GenusPandalus
Speciesstenolepsis
Common Name:Shrimp

Other Members of the Phylum Arthropoda at Race Rocks.
taxonomyiconReturn to the Race Rocks Taxonomy
and Image File
pearsonlogo2_f2The Race Rocks taxonomy is a collaborative venture originally started with the Biology and Environmental Systems students of Lester Pearson College UWC. It now also has contributions added by Faculty, Staff, Volunteers and Observers on the remote control webcams. March 15 2010- Ryan Murphy

Myxicola infundibulum: Jelly tube worm–The Race Rocks Taxonomy

Myxicola infundibulum , a slime tube worm is one of the Polychaetes in the Phylum Annelida. It is fairly common among the vast array of other invertebrates living subtidally at Race Rocks.

rmapr09myxicola

Ryan Murphy took this underwater picture in April of 2009 at Race Rocks. It captures the transparency well.

Domain Eukarya
Kingdom Animalia
Phylum Annelida
Class Polychaeta
Order sabellida
Family sabellide
Genus Myxicola
Species infundibulum
Common Name: jelly tube worm

rmapril132010

Slime worm by Ryan Murphy April 2010

This file is provided as part of a collaborative effort by the students, faculty, staff and volunteers of Lester B. Pearson College Dec. 2002  Ryan Murphy

DFO Vision and Objectives for a MPA Strategy

Note: This page appeared on the DFO website until April 12, 2010 at the URL:
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/oceans/mpa/vision_
It has now been removed.
Vision and Objectives for a MPA Strategy

The MPA Vision:
Generations from now Canada will be one of the world’s coastal nations that have turned the tide on the decline of its marine environments.  Canada and British Columbia will have put in place a comprehensive strategy for managing the Pacific coast to ensure a healthy marine environment and healthy economic future.  A fundamental component of this strategy will be the creation of a system of marine protected areas on the Pacific coast of Canada by 2010.  This system will provide for a healthy and productive marine environment while embracing recreational values and areas of rich cultural heritage. Objectives for Establishing Marine Protected Areas:

  • To contribute to the Protection of Marine Biodiversity, Representative Ecosystems and Special Natural Features
  • To contribute to the Protection of Cultural Heritage Resources and Encourage Understanding and Appreciation
  • To provide Opportunities for Recreation and Tourism
  • To provide Scientific Research Opportunities and Support the Sharing of Traditional Knowledge Contact Fisheries and Oceans Important Notices and Disclaimers
  • Updated: 2006-05-25

Return to the Change in DFO policy regarding Education and Outreach

Return to the RRPAB INDEX:

Fisheries and Oceans Canada – Pacific Region
Contact Fisheries and Oceans

image of original page below:mpavision

Posted in MPA

Reflections on the Role of Education and Outreach in the MPA Designation Process, 1998-2010.

This information page was prepared and distributed to members of the RRPAB by Garry Fletcher, Race Rocks Ecological Reserve Warden and Educational director for the website racerocks.com –April 12, 2010.
It was modified on June 2, 2010 after discussion with Kate Ladell, the Marine Planning & Protected Areas Specialist Oceans, Habitat and Enhancement Branch of Fisheries and Oceans Canada .
: From the Canada -British Columbia Discussion Paper of August 1998 entitled Marine Protected Areas, Strategy for Canada’s Pacific Coast, A Joint Initiative of the Governments of Canada and British Columbia , ( a draft discussion paper for an MPA strategy that was prepared in 1998 by both federal and provincial agencies, not just DFO.) Appendix A of the document identifies the “Principal Participating Agencies in the Development of the Marine Protected Areas Strategy” as: DFO, BC Land Use Coordination Office, Parks Canada, BC MOE, Lands and Parks, Environment Canada, BC Ministry of Fisheries
Ms.Ladell of DFO has recently (2010) pointed out that,”The goals in the vision statement were goals of the MPA Strategy, and are broad so that they encompass the mandates of several agencies and Ministries…. they never were the goals of Oceans Act MPAs. Again, there has been no shift. The goals of Oceans Act MPAs have never been tied to Community Outreach and Education – please refer the Oceans Act. ”
in Section 4 on Vision and Objectives for MPAs, one of the benefits of MPAs was found to be: ” encouraging expansion of our knowledge and understanding of marine systems;”

The 1998 Discussion paper went on in the objectives to specify two significant objectives that captured the essence of how important the process was for education and research.
“4.2 Objectives for Establishing Marine Protected Areas
5. To Provide Scientific Research Opportunities and Support the Sharing of Traditional Knowledge

Scientific knowledge of the marine environment lags significantly behind that for the terrestrial environment which can affect the ability of marine managers to identify the merits of protection or management options. MPAs provide increased opportunities for scientific research on topics such as species population dynamics, ecology and marine ecosystem structure and function, as well as provide opportunities for sharing traditional knowledge.

6. To Enhance Efforts for Increased Education and Awareness

Over the last few years, public understanding and awareness of marine environmental values and issues have been increasing. There is general recognition that proactive measures are necessary to protect and conserve marine areas to sustain their resources for present and future generations. However, there is still a significant need for public education to instill greater awareness of the role everyone can play in the conservation of marine environments. Many MPAs will afford unique opportunities for public education because of their accessibility and potential to clearly demonstrate marine ecological principles and values.”

In the 1999 paper by Louise Murgatroyd (sponsored by DFO) titled Managing Tourism and Recreational Activities in Canada’s Marine Protected Areas: the Pilot Project at Race Rocks, British Columbia acknowledgement is made of the role of MPAs and Education.
5.5 Education and Interpretation

The provision of opportunities for education is a central function of MPAs and is a desirable and highly effective strategy against negative impacts from tourism. Education programs also reduce the need for, and cost of, formal means of enforcement (Causey 1995). Commercial tourism activities at Race Rocks are, on the whole, oriented at providing an educational experience and this must remain their primary objective. Tour operators must be encouraged to include information specific to the natural history of Race Rocks and its ecosystem when taking clients there (Willison 1999, pers. comm.). Furthermore, information regarding its protected status as an ecological reserve and pilot MPA should be provided to generate recognition and support for such initiatives. There is a need for consistency in this respect and it would be appropriate for industry, in partnership with other agencies such as local universities and museums, to develop a minimum standard of information to be included in interpretation, to ensure that correct and relevant information is being provided.

Education and interpretation are particularly important for private recreational users who are considerably more difficult to target. Broader efforts aimed at educating the recreational boating public on general conduct and appropriate behaviour in coastal waters, including ERs and MPAs would seem to be a realistic approach. To this end, the distribution of the booklet Protecting BC’s Aquatic Environment: A Boater’s Guide, a joint publication by DFO, Environment Canada and BC’s Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks should continue. The booklet covers a number of aspects of environmentally responsible boating, including respect for marine wildlife. The British Columbia Tidal Waters Sport Fishing Guide contains information on the location and regulations of MPAs, species conservation efforts and whale watching guidelines and is also an important contribution to awareness-raising……contd.

In 2001, The Oceans Directorate of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Pacific Region published an information pamphlet titled
Xwayen (Race Rocks) Marine Protected Area. In that pamphlet educational use is recognized :
Under “Who can use a Marine Protected Area: “The type and level of use depends on why the area is being protected, and will be decided in consultation with local resource users. Levels of protection can vary from controlled use where resource harvesting is allowed to strict “no take”zones. Other uses may include education, research and tourism.”
In the Management Plan developed by the Race Rocks Advisory Board in 2002, the following objectives were set out which also included Education and Outreach:
1″.To contribute to the protection of marine biodiversity, representative ecosystems and special natural features.
2.To contribute to the conservation and protection of fishery resources and their habitats.
3. To contribute to the protection of cultural heritage resources and encourage understanding and appreciation .
4. To support recreation and tourism opportunities.
5.To provide scientific research opportunities and support sharing of traditional knowledge.
6. To enhance efforts for increased education and awareness. To develop partnerships for management and protection of the ecological reserve – marine protected area including monitoring and reporting activities.
7.To develop working relationships and educational programs with First Nations.”
In the 2005 booklet titled Canada’s Federal Marine Protected Areas Strategy published by the Communications Branch of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Three core programs of the Marine Protected Areas Network are set out:
• Oceans Act Marine Protected Areas established to protect and conserve important fish and marine mammal habitats, endangered marine species, unique features and areas of high biological productivity or biodiversity.
• Marine Wildlife Areas established to protect and conserve habitat for a variety of wildlife including migratory birds and endangered species.

• National Marine Conservation Areas established to protect and conserve representative examples of Canada’s natural and cultural marine heritage and provide opportunities for public education and enjoyment.

On the 2006 DFO webpage (active until April 2010), the Vision and Objectives page carried the following 2 objectives of a list of 6:
“The MPA Vision:
Generations from now Canada will be one of the world’s coastal nations that have turned the tide on the decline of its marine environments. Canada and British Columbia will have put in place a comprehensive strategy for managing the Pacific coast to ensure a healthy marine environment and healthy economic future. A fundamental component of this strategy will be the creation of a system of marine protected areas on the Pacific coast of Canada by 2010. This system will provide for a healthy and productive marine environment while embracing recreational values and areas of rich cultural heritage.

Objectives for Establishing Marine Protected Areas:

* To contribute to the Protection of Marine Biodiversity, Representative Ecosystems and Special Natural Features
* To contribute to the Conservation and Protection of Fishery Resources and Their Habitats
* To contribute to the Protection of Cultural Heritage Resources and Encourage Understanding and Appreciation
* To provide Opportunities for Recreation and Tourism
* To provide Scientific Research Opportunities and Support the Sharing of Traditional Knowledge
* To Enhance Efforts for Increased Education and Awareness”

In this 2007 version of the Oceans and Fish Habitat section on the DFO website at http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/oceans-habitat/oceans/ri-rs/mpaframework-cadrezpm/page04_e.asp the need for effective partnership is emphasized.
“The concept of partnership is vital to the MPA Program its success depends on how well various interests are able to work together. Key program areas dependent on partnership include the gathering of information, the development of public awareness of environmental issues, the conducting of research, and the enforcement of regulations.”
Coastal Communities and Non-Government Conservation Organizations

The MPA program provides an opportunity for communities, as well as local, regional and national conservation groups, to be involved in conservation activities in the marine environment. In coastal MPA management, local organizations and communities will have the opportunity to play a prominent role, ranging from nomination and comanagement of sites to consultation activities and public awareness programs. Organizations nominating an MPA could become a ‘sponsor’ for the site. A sponsor is an organization prepared to make a long-term partnership arrangement for managing the MPA.”

Under information Sources:

establishing a monitoring component as part of some MPAs
using MPAs as natural laboratories to conduct environmental research.
Research and monitoring

Many environmental processes within marine ecosystems are poorly understood. Scientific research and monitoring may be conducted within MPAs, where appropriate, to understand marine ecosystems better and to provide valuable data on environmental changes.
Public awareness

Compliance with MPA regulations and management plans depends on the awareness and cooperation of the public. Interpretation and education programs may be necessary to explain the purposes of MPAs, and to provide information on appropriate activities within an area.”

In the 2009 version of the DFO website at:http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/oceans/mpa/vision_e.htm no mention is made of the outreach goals of the MPAs but education is still included in the goals of the National Marine Conservation Area. (However Race Rocks is not part of one of those)
“Purpose and Goals ( of MPAs)

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) designates marine protected areas under the Oceans Act in order to protect and conserve:

* commercial and non-commercial fishery resources and their habitats;
* endangered marine species and their habitats;
* unique habitats;
* marine areas of high biodiversity or biological productivity; and
* any other marine resource or habitat necessary to fulfill the Ministers mandate.

Within Canada, two other federal agencies — Environment Canada (Canadian Wildlife Service) and Parks Canada Agency — are working in collaboration with DFO to establish and manage federal marine protected areas
.Environment Canada

* Marine Wildlife Areas — established to protect and conserve habitat for a variety of wildlife, including migratory birds and endangered species.

Parks Canada

* National Marine Conservation Areas — established to protect and conserve representative examples of Canada’s natural and cultural marine heritage, and to provide opportunities for public education and enjoyment. ”

So it may be apparent now that the government Policy has evolved over the years on why Marine Protected areas are being established, and the public outreach element has been relegated to a task of the National Marine Conservation Areas. Since Race Rocks has never been part of a National Marine Conservation Area Proposal, it calls into question the appropriateness of an MPA under the Oceans act at the Race Rocks Ecological Reserve. Perhaps it should be considered a Marine Conservation Area where education is a priority. It appears that the existing mandate for Provincial Ecological Reserves of “promotion of research and education” will have to be relied upon for the Race Rocks MPA. Many of the stakeholders who have contributed time and energy to the MPA Advisory Process over the past years have done so with the understanding of the importance of “Outreach and Education” as a significant part of the MPA objectives. Clarification provided by DFO indicates that Education and Outreach is not part of their mandate but will still be part of the MPA through the existing Ecological reserve. Indeed I guess we were mislead as is indicated below.
Ms. Ladell of DFO has emphasized: ” There hasn’t been a change in policy regarding education and outreach in the MPA strategy. It is important to clarify that the strategy is not a DFO strategy but a federal-provincial strategy for a network of MPAs. The objectives that are included in that strategy (which, by the way, was released as a discussion paper in 1998 and never finalized), are therefore objectives for a network of federal-provincial MPAs, and are inclusive of the mandates of all involved agencies and ministries. The objective you note with respect to education and outreach is tied to the mandates of BC Parks and Parks Canada, and is one that DFO supports through a network approach, but not one that has ever been tied to our mandate per the Oceans Act. Therefore, the way the old website was written was indeed misleading, as it made it sound like the objectives were all DFO objectives for MPAs, when in fact they are objectives for the MPA network that are inclusive of several agencies’ mandates. ”

“HOWEVER, these are critical components of the Management Plan because they can support meeting the conservation objectives, and can therefore be included in the Management Plan. The important distinction here is between the actual conservation objective and implementation of the conservation objective through the management of the MPA (as outlined in a Management Plan).
This was taken down because it was misleading…… The objectives included in the 1998 Canada-BC discussion paper for a MPA Network Strategy are objectives for a network of federal-provincial MPAs, and are inclusive of the mandates of all involved agencies and ministries. The objectives specific to education and outreach are tied to the mandates of BC Parks and Parks Canada, and are objectives that DFO supports through a network approach, but not objectives that have ever been tied to our mandate per the Oceans Act. Therefore, the way the old website was written was misleading, as it made it sound like the objectives were all DFO objectives for MPAs, when in fact they are objectives for the MPA network that are inclusive of several agencies’ mandates. The old website was taken down because of the confusion it was causing and because it has finally been updated.
……..education is part of Parks Canada’s mandate around the establishment of National Marine Conservation Areas. There is no mention of outreach goals in the 2009 version of the DFO website, because, as stated above, outreach is not part of the mandate for conservation objectives in Oceans Act MPAs.
This is bolded on the website, but it is important to note that this is for NMCAs, not Oceans Act MPAs. As you correctly note above, the purpose of Oceans Act MPAs is very specific to the bullets (highlighted in large brown bold above).
………
Government policy has not changed on why Oceans Act MPAs are being established. The public outreach element has never been a part of the language around Oceans Act MPA designation or purpose from a regulatory standpoint.

HOWEVER, as stated above and in several recent meetings, DFO recognizes the important role of education and outreach and agrees that they should be a component of the management plan for Race Rocks MPA.”
(e-mail from Kate Ladell..June 2 2010 DFO)

Summary Report by Delaney , April, 2010 RRPAB meeting #3

Summary Report: Race Rocks Public Advisory Board Meeting #3

Purpose
The purpose of this report is to provide a summary of observations and recommendations in support of the RRPAB moving forward.

Issues and Observations   

The RRPAB is a representative group of stakeholders who have been providing advice on the designation process.
Many of these stakeholders have been involved with Race Rocks for many years, including the failed attempt to obtain designation about ten years ago.

This history has led several board members to become impatient with the current process and they have begun to question the benefits of continued investment in the designation process.
Some members have been questioning the wisdom of the significant financial investments (DFO) to date to achieve the MPA designation under the Oceans Act.

All members agree that MPA designation would add a greater margin of protection as well as a vehicle for funding management of the MPA.

Recent correspondence between members indicates that the Pearson College, Shaw Ocean Discovery Centre and the RR Eco-Reserve (RaceRocks.com) have significant interest in Race Rocks as a platform for programming. In at least one case there are significant financial pressures on continued programming.

DFO has established a separate, parallel consultation process with First Nations, as they are legally required to do so. These are moving more slowly than several board members would like. Also, only three of the four identified First Nations that hold an interest in Race Rocks are participating in the parallel process. This has been identified as a significant risk that might delay/derail the designation process and steps are being taken to address this risk.

Some board members have expressed concern that the DFO staff who are leading / managing the designation process have changed often and believe this has delayed progress toward designation.

Based upon previous experience, DFO is reluctant to set a definitive timeline for completion of the designation process, as they can not control the level of involvement of all interested parties. This is causing frustration for some members.

 


Recommended Consultation Objectives Moving Forward

Given that a definitive timeline for the designation process can not be established at this time, it is suggested that the following objectives be considered for the RRPAB moving forward.

 

Objectives

Outcomes

Outputs

Status

To review progress to date. Board is up-to-date and supportive of actions and progress to dateMembers see how they have influenced progress to dateMembers understand how the progress to date supports future steps in the designation process and their role in it Power Point presentation outlining the current situation and way forward.An overview of the OAR (includes SECOA, EOAR, and Cultural Overview) structure and status of developmentInformative text to be placed on the website (maybe the minutes of the meeting and the presentation) Full review conducted during meeting #3. Members were provided with an overview of the process, as defined by the Oceans Act, and where Race Rocks is within that processThe Mtg #3 evaluation indicates that the Board is up-to-date
Review the status of the Board TOR approval process The role of the Board within the designation process is clarified.Members know that DFO staff have taken the TORs to senior management for approval and they will be finalized soon.Members know that staff have heard and are attempting to integrate their ideas into the TORs.

Confirm the roles of the Board in the designation process.

TORs are signed off by the PAB and DFO. A full report on status will be provided during meeting #4
To provide an overview of the designation process moving forward, from the current situation to gazetting of the final regulations. Members have an opportunity to question and discuss major milestones and the timeline involved in the designation processMembers are supportive of the proposed approach. Graphic summary (“wiring diagram”) of designation process and brief summary, in order that members can communicate the process to their constituents / members.

Presentation made during meeting #3Minute minutes and attachment provide future referenceRequest for “wire diagram” is pending

From #3 evaluations, clarity of process with PAB is not clear

 

To provide an update on the status of consultations with First Nations. Members understand the status of consultations with First Nations.Members have an opportunity to question and discuss the current approach. Summary of current situation and way forward for involving First Nations Summary of current situation and way forward for involving First Nations
To provide an update on the status of the Overview and Assessment Report and its components and seek input as warranted. An understanding of the Overview and Assessment Report, its function and components.An understanding of how Board input is incorporated into the Report (conservation objective, compatible/non-compatible activities, significance of the protected ecological features, and local and traditional ecological knowledge, SECOA).Receiving input from Board on any concerns regarding the OAR process, board input, how information is being gathered, next steps. Update on Overview and Assessment Report.List of Board-suggested inputs to the supporting documentation.List of Board concerns / issues with the structure of the proposed documentation.

 

Update on Overview and Assessment Report.List of Board-suggested inputs to the supporting documentation.

 

List of Board concerns / issues with the structure of the proposed documentation (i.e. SECOA).

 

To review and obtain input on next steps for the MPA designation process. A full and common understanding of the MPA designation process and timelines.Ownership, support and advocacy for the designation process. Document the differences between the current (provincial) designation process and the MPA process, including the pros and cons, the approach to transitioning between the two and any concerns held by the Board.Document any Board questions/concerns regarding the designation process and timelines.Establish major milestones and timeline for designation process.

A simple graphic outlining the major milestones and associated timeline.

 

Full status report provided during meeting #3

 

To obtain input into the first order conservation objective for the Race Rocks MPA, including, vision, conservation objectives compatible and non-compatible activities A full and common understanding of the CO processOwnership of approach by Board.Resulting CO is reflective of stakeholder values and interests

Determine whether objective is supported unanimously or not, plus list any concerns and which members dissent

Discuss objectives that are not supported unanimously so that all participants are aware of the pros and cons

Establish a list of any follow-up information or explanations required by members.Brainstormed (= draft) list of options for first order conservation objective.Review list to determine compatible and non-compatible activities associated with objective

 

Values summaries have been generated by some groupsDFO has developed preliminary conservation objectives, which were well received by the PABMore discussions required leading to definitive advice

 

 


Assessment of Meeting Outcomes

1. Sample

            Board Members – 6

DFO Project Team – 1

2. Meeting Initiation

VS

S

NS

D

Introductions

3

2

0

1

Statement of meeting purpose

0

2

1

0

Review and approval of previous minutes

0

2

1

0

Review and approval of agenda

0

2

3

2

3. Overview of MPA Designation Process

Very Satisfied

1

Satisfied

2

Not Satisfied

2

Disappointed

2

4. Review of Documents and Instruments

Very Satisfied

1

Satisfied

3

Not Satisfied

2

Disappointed

1

5. Opportunity to Ask Questions

Very Satisfied

1

Satisfied

3

Not Satisfied

2

Disappointed

1

6. Opportunity to Discuss Issues

Very Satisfied

0

Satisfied

1

Not Satisfied

5

Disappointed

1

7. Opportunity to Plan Next 6-8 Months

Very Satisfied

0

Satisfied

1

Not Satisfied

5

Disappointed

1

8. Opportunity to Provide Feedback and Input

Very Satisfied

0

Satisfied

0

Not Satisfied

4

Disappointed

3

9. Detail and Format of Presentations

Very Satisfied

0

Satisfied

4

Not Satisfied

1

Disappointed

2

10. Opportunity to Develop Advice

Very Satisfied

0

Satisfied

1

Not Satisfied

2

Disappointed

4

11. Awareness and Understanding

None Limited Some Good
Role of the Board in designation process.

1

1

5

How the progress to date supports future steps in the designation process.

1

3

3

Current status and approach for First Nations consultation.

4

1

1

1

Current status and content of the overview and assessment report.

4

2

1

The purpose of the overview and assessment report.

1

3

1

2

12. Facilitator Helped Achieve Meeting Objectives

Much Better

2

Better

4

Same

1

Worse

0

13. Useful aspects of a Facilitated Session

1. Unbiased

2. Allowed participation of DFO staff

3. Agenda and key messages written on flip charts

4. Keeping the meeting moving

5. Yes, allowed DFO to more fully participate and there were strong feelings about process and issues that were helped by having a third party present.

6. Staying on task and on time

+++

7. No personal agenda

8. Good time management

9. Defusing tension and redirecting

10. Lowering the “volume”

+++

11. Competent and capable in role

12. Periodic check ins to assess how meeting was going

13.redefining the role of DFO staff in the process

14. Facilitation could be improved

1. Arrange for information request follow-up

2. Pay more attention to the issues important to the board

3. Was not familiar with TOR

4. Kevin needed facilitator help sooner when fielding questions

5. Accommodate the interests of members not just DFO

+++

6. Did not go over ground rules

7. There were some side conversations with DFO in which it appears some decisions where made about the agenda and whether Gary would be able share what he had learned. That information needs to have been shared. Reinforces the impression that this is an tick box exercise for DFO and it does not matter what participants contribute.

8. Seek advice from advisors in future meetings

+++

9. Had to be asked to step in to manage comments

10. Better agenda design

15. Meeting Pace

Too Slow

4

Just Right

3

Too Fast

0

16. Able to Exchange views and Build Working Relationships

Very Satisfied

0

Satisfied

5

Not Satisfied

2

Disappointed

0

17. Held at Pearson College

Very Satisfied

4

Satisfied

3

Not Satisfied

0

Disappointed

0

18. Why Dissatisfied – Nil

19. Time of Day

Very Satisfied

1

Satisfied

5

Not Satisfied

1

Disappointed

0

20. Why Dissatisfied

1. Adjourned too early

21 Food and Refreshments

Very Satisfied

4

Satisfied

3

Not Satisfied

0

Disappointed

0

22. Why Disappointed – Nil

23. Most Important Aspects of Meeting

1. Trying to get DFO to be responsive

2. Working on values identification

3. See letter e-mailed*

4. Understanding that the members of advisory group who have done this process for a decade know so much more than the DFO AND that the DFO staff have not looked at the results of the previous advisory group.

5. Having DFO participate as participants

+++

6. Get DFO to listen

7. That some (no all) of the original advisory group are not convinced DFO is willing to offer anything towards management in the future and a reluctance to rubber stamp something meaningless

8. The use of motions for clear advice / decisions

+++

9. Need First Nations input

10.Kate did a great job of the draft objectives and if they can be integrated with the MPA objectives from 2000 this is an incremental improvement.

11. Having local DFO staff supplemented by Regional staff. Better feed back to DFO management.

24. Least Important Aspects of Meeting

1. Obvious regurgitation

2. Designation process details

3. See letter –mailed*

4. Was the presentations by DFO because they did not link to the enormous advances that has already been made. DFO is missing an enormous opportunity and need to study the oucomes of the last process and then build then outline their process and internal process and then get every one to help them through.

5. Too much time spent on DFO updates

+++

6. That DFO and the facilitator’s need to leave exactly at 3:oo. Ferries appreciated but someone should have stayed out of respect and to learn what was of burning importance.

7. Too much time spent on DFO process

+++

8. DFOs need to control the agenda.

25. Extent to Which RRPAB Influenced Progress

Significantly

0

Somewhat

0

A little bit

3

Not at all

3

26. Closing Comments

1. Need real DFO input, not a cookie cutter

2. Dialogue on management objectives

3. See comments in e-mail*

4. DFO seriously needs to do a review and go and study the Race Rocks web site and the past history. This will go along way to improving the role. Great to have Kate their need a replacement ASAP and they too must do their homework. The process is unnecessarily prolonged given the amount of information that already exists. The funds budgeted for the completion of the process need to influenced by the advisory group. It is likely that this process could be finished in 1 or 2 workshops.

5. Solicit more advice from advisors

* Included with the author’s permission:

April 6, 2010

Richard: Well done!, thanks ..

Maybe some modification is needed on point 5. Be aware that the management plan published by BC Parks in 2001 needs very little modification, and research on gaps is already included, so there should be no delay attributed to management plan, a small modification by those who know what is going on should be adequate.

HYPERLINK “http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/planning/mgmtplns/race_rocks/racerock.html” \o “blocked::http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/planning/mgmtplns/race_rocks/racerock.html” http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/planning/mgmtplns/race_rocks/racerock.html

The science gaps require a commitment from governments to designate funds to thoroughly research the gaps.   One of the reasons for MPAs as well as Ecological reserves is to serve as benchmarks for the environment and to provide educational opportunities.

I also want to see all those at the table who have influence, Transport being one area that has not been involved but yet is essential to solve the problem of overhead airspace. We have consistently asked for representation and accountability from that sector

A further issue that I never mentioned is the need to consider this as one of the first in a network of MPAs.. The marine ecological reserve system provides as good place to start, and I know that is a major goal of parks, FER , CPAWS and others as well.  Refusal to acknowledge openly that this is one of the goals of RR MPA is to further reduce the interest and support of the rest of the conservation and ecologically sustainable use community.  It seems to me that DFO considers this is a one off, and that’s not a good plan.

Garry April 5, 2010

Richard

In response to your questionnaire, I don’t believe in anonymity when criticism is involved so here is my comment to the last part.

It seems that the DFO has a problem with how to handle a group of people who already have a lot of expertise in the area, and who are in general agreement of a fairly clear vision of what needs to be done.  I would go so far as to say much more than the DFO staff. The continuing changing of DFO personnel at our meetings means we are always facing a re-invention of the wheel atmosphere. The most recent appointment will only be there for a few months. How many times do they have to be told that all the resources are available on the racerocks.com website, as it is clear they are either not aware or purposely ignoring them? The lack of transparency in the real goals, intentions and unwillingness to discuss the value added that DFO can bring to the table is deplorable. I also really didn’t appreciate the lack of willingness on the part of the DFO reps to deal with the issues of the finances of the process over the last 11 years. The inability to stick with our original timetable, where we were to be finished by now is unacceptable. The goodwill of volunteers is being stretched too far. Perhaps given that DFO has frittered away a budget of almost half a million dollars in the last 11 years , with nothing done at Race Rocks to ensure its ecological sustainability is enough reason to cut the bureaucratic rubber-stamping process , bring out someone from head office who can make some real decisions and just get on with it. .   An indication from DFO that they are willing to have another meeting right away to get to the bottom of the real issues might indicate to us that they are serious. So now they suggest in MAY!

The continuing absence of First Nations representation and the omission of the Esquimalt  council in existing negotiations, let alone the expenditure of  $170,000  for nothing that has gone towards conservation of ecosystem of Race Rocks in the past 11 years makes it clear to many of us that no one is willing to really deal with the problem up front.  Keep in mind we were promised an MOU from the First Nations by last December. The inability of DFO to effectively handle the First Nations issues was made clearly evident to us when they indicated in the September meeting that they had met with First Nations and a ceremony was held to allow DFO to use the name Xwayen as part of the MPA.  This was clearly done 11 years ago, we never used the name without permission, it was given to us to use for the reserve by an elder of the Beecher Bay band. A burning ceremony was also conducted there to allow the MPA to go forward. It seems that some people have selective memory about these things. Do a thorough analysis of the record to find out the full extent of the mess that DFO has made of what seemed in 1999 to be a simple exercise.

In our September meeting we asked that some effort be made to include a Science representative. The rep from UVIC has only been able to attend once and no substitute has been named. We have therefore not had any representation of what science needs to be done to fill the GAPS in knowledge required to justify this as a MPA.  We also asked that the Department of Transport would be involved as there are many issues under their control.. also no action on that….and now the added expense of a consultant to conduct their meeting and do research on the process.

There is ambiguity in #11 about the “Overview and assessment report” as far as I am concerned no assessment report has been dealt with yet.   If overview meant the DFO presentation, given in the first two meetings if it wasn’t overview? We don’t need any more overview, just get on with it.

Since some people find it hard to get through all the documents on the RRAB web page that are relevant. At least view this one and note the date!  HYPERLINK “http://www.racerocks.com/racerock/admin/proposal/fedpropos.htm” http://www.racerocks.com/racerock/admin/proposal/fedpropos.htm

Garry Fletcher

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PAGE

 

 

PAGE  10

Delaney and Associates Inc.

..durable solutions in a complicated world..