Duxbury Reef is the focus of a growing maelstrom between Bolinas fishing advocates and a Point Reyes Station conservation nonprofit that has petitioned the state to tighten restrictions at the reef, one of the largest exposed Monterey shale reefs in North America.
Anglers argue that new limits proposed by the Environmental Action Committee of West Marin, or E.A.C., are both unsupported by data and unnecessary. The debate came to a head this month, when around 60 residents packed the fire station for a high-wattage meeting.
Representatives of Save Duxbury Access, a group formed to oppose the proposal, walked through the petition point by point, challenging assertions of illegal activity amid post-pandemic visitation increases. They argued that many incidents recorded as poaching or possession involved the handling of invertebrates, a common and often educational practice at tidepools.
At one point, an audience member asked whether the organization would consider withdrawing its petition to the California Fish and Game Commission to allow time for data collection. Representatives of the E.A.C. said they would not.
“Can you read the room?” a resident shouted from the audience as the crowd erupted in discord.
Under the Marine Life Protection Act of 1999, Duxbury Reef was designated as a marine conservation area. Hook-and-line and poke-pole fishing from shore are allowed, while the take of marine life such as urchins, mussels, snails and seaweed is prohibited.
In 2023, as part of the state’s first decadal review of marine protected areas, the E.A.C. submitted a petition to redesignate Duxbury as a marine reserve—the strictest category the state has in its arsenal. The proposal would expand the protected area nearly threefold and ban all fishing at the reef and within 1,000 feet of the low-tide line on an eight-mile stretch of beach.
The petition garnered 150 signatures and letters of support from Supervisor Dennis Rodoni and Rep. Jared Huffman. Save Duxbury Access has since circulated its own petition opposing the change in designation that gathered more than 200 signatures.
Supporters of the proposal say it would protect a fragile intertidal ecosystem, while opponents argue it would devastate fishing traditions while offering little demonstrable environmental benefit. But even the supporters acknowledge that comprehensive data on the reef’s health are limited.
“The species that are most impacted are very difficult to survey,” said Kent Khtikian, a Bolinas environmental activist who helped establish the Duxbury Reef docent program. “They’re small, mobile and hard to find. The data people are asking for doesn’t and isn’t going to exist.”
Critics blast the reliance on anecdotal observation and volunteer-collected data, rather than on scientific evidence of ecological decline. They also say the focus on fishing masks more pressing problems of inadequate public education and enforcement.
“E.A.C. says it’s the access and the activity that’s causing damage, but at the same time they say this won’t restrict access in any meaningful way other than prohibiting fishing,” said Chris Martinelli, a sport angler and deputy chief with the Marin County Fire Department who lives in Bolinas. “[The petition] fails to directly address the environmental concerns it claims to solve.”
The E.A.C. says the proposal is not an indictment of fishing. Rather, it argues that allowing some forms of take while prohibiting others is confusing to visitors and difficult to enforce.
“At Duxbury Reef, many community scientists, longtime visitors and educators have noticed that the abundance and diversity of species have declined in recent years,” said Ashley Eagle-Gibbs, the group’s executive director. “There is strong data showing that full-protection marine protected areas are easier to enforce and that the regulations are better understood by the public than those with partial protection.”
Over two decades ago, when California set out to build a network of marine sanctuaries to counter declines in fish and other sea creatures, representatives of fishing and conservation groups hashed out the boundaries.
Jeremy Dierks, a commercial fisherman who grew up in Bolinas, was among the stakeholders involved in that process. He said he relinquished a significant share of his fishing grounds; if the proposal is approved, he would lose access to productive nearshore waters where he fishes for halibut.
“We find halibut right on the edge of the rocks, right up next to the beach, right up to the surf line,” he said. “That’s a huge portion of our current access. To say there’s no economic impact is just not true.”
Mr. Dierks now makes roughly a tenth of what he earned 15 years ago, a result of closed fisheries, shortened seasons and competition from larger trawlers and party boats. “I’m fighting for my livelihood,” he said. “They’re fighting for a trophy. That’s the difference.”
Duxbury Reef takes its name from a sailboat that wrecked on its rocks in 1849. Its primary access point is Agate Beach, where a parking lot funnels school groups, tide poolers, dog walkers and the occasional angler onto the reef at low tide. A single sign near the trailhead outlines the rules. Enforcement is limited, with just nine game wardens covering Marin and 12 neighboring counties.
Day-to-day education falls to 14 volunteer docents with Marin MPA Watch, a monitoring program led by the E.A.C. with support from the Point Reyes National Seashore and the California Academy of Sciences. The group recorded 132 potential violations at Duxbury last year. None involved fishing; 65 involved the hand collection of marine life, which can include briefly picking up an invertebrate from a tidepool; and most of the remainder involved dogs off leash.
In a statement, Mr. Rodoni said he continues to support protecting Duxbury’s intertidal habitat, but he emphasized the need for balance. “I believe strongly in protecting the relationships and traditions that define our coastal communities,” he said. “That means making sure the people most affected by policy decisions, like the fishing community and other local residents, are at the table when those decisions are being shaped.”
After community backlash, the E.A.C. sought to narrow parts of its original request. In November, it asked the commission for adjustments to the proposed boundaries, citing mapping discrepancies and concerns about impacts to offshore fishing. State wildlife officials said the request arrived too late to be considered during the formal evaluation but that it may be addressed later.
Sara Worden, an environmental scientist with Fish and Wildlife, said the department aims to release a draft evaluation by March. The Fish and Game Commission will hold a public listening session on April 21 in Half Moon Bay.