Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Wesley Chesbro: Show Me the Science behind the MLPA Process
First District Assemblymember Wesley Chesbro (D-North Coast) released a statement on Friday, July 10, criticizing Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's fast-track Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) process - and urging that North Coast communities be made "equal partners" in the process.
Wesley Chesbro: Show Me the Science behind the MLPA Process
by Dan Bacher
First District Assemblymember Wesley Chesbro (D-North Coast) released a statement on Friday, July 10, questioning the "science" that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's fast-track Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) process is supposedly based upon - and urging that North Coast communities be made "equal partners" in the process.
Chesbro's announcement came as a broad coalition of North Coast environmentalists, seaweed harvesters, commercial fishermen, recreational anglers and Indian Tribes is blasting the controversial process for being rife with conflict of interest, mission creep and corporate greenwashing.
"Over the past few months I have been hearing from numerous constituents who have expressed strong concerns regarding the development and implementation of MLPA plans for the North Coast and North Central Coast," he stated. "Because of this strong constituent concern, I am skeptical of the process that has been followed in developing proposed plans for these regions."
"The process must be based on sound science. I have been saying, 'show me the science.' So far I'm not satisfied with the answers I've been getting," Chesbro said.
As a state senator in 1999 who voted for the Marine Life Protection Act, Chesbro said it was his belief that "the MLPA will be a failure if the plans are implemented without the full involvement of all participants, especially local community members and stakeholders. The economic health of local fishing communities must be balanced with the need for habitat protection."
Representatives of fishing groups and local scientists supported Chesbro's questioning of the validity of the "science" behind the fast-track MLPA process, as well as sharing his concern that the need for habitat protection be balanced with the economic health of North Coast communities.
"The RFA agrees with Chesbro," said Jim Martin, West Coast Director of the Recreational Fishing Allliance (RFA), responding to Chesbro's questioning of the "science" behind the MLPA process. "We're concerned with two assumptions in the MLPA science guidelines. The first is that there is no production of fish production outside of no take reserves. The second assumption is that there is a very high rate of fishing outside of the reserves. These two assumptions are mutually exclusive."
Patrick Higgins, respected fishery scientist and commissioner for the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District, also agreed with Chesbro's questioning of the "science" used to justify the MLPA process.
"When the Harbor District filed a California Public Records Act request to CDFG last year asking for data on key species constraining fisheries off our coast, such as the yellow-eye and canary rockfish, they said they didn’t have any," wrote Higgins in an opinion piece in the Arcata Eye on July 9.
"Science is a process where data are collected using methods that are repeatable so that if conclusions are questioned, the scientific methods can be duplicated and results checked," said Higgins. "Interviews by Ecotrust of fishermen do not constitute science. The value of having the best marine scientists in the State on a panel is lost without data because their views without such data are only opinion."
He cited fisheries management expert Dr. Ray Hilborn and others who reviewed the MLPA model for size and spacing of MPAs and found: “It appears to us that those prescriptions were pulled out of the air, based on intuitive reasoning.”
MLPA Costs Are Challenged
Jim Martin also questioned why up to four wardens are being required to attend MLPA meetings to provide "private security" to the MLPA staff at a time when the state is its biggest economic crisis ever with a budget deficit of $26.3 billion.
"It's outrageous that the wardens, who should be out in the field pursuing poachers, are sitting in these MLPA meetings to provide security at public expense," said Martin. "Since the MLPA is a process privately funded by the Resource Legacy Fund Foundation, shouldn't they contract with a private firm to provide security at a lower cost at no public expense?"
In addition, Martin emphasized that the MLPA process has been expanded from a $250,000 a year process to a government boondoggle costing over $35 million a year - at a time that the state can't pay its game wardens, firefighters and teachers because of the budget deficit.
Legislators, fishermen, seaweed harvesters and scientists aren't the only ones concerned about MLPA process impacts on local communities and the taxpayers. This May Jim Kellogg, Fish and Game Commission Member, convinced the Commission to send a letter to the Governor and Resources Secretary Mike Chrisman asking how the state, at a time that game wardens are being laid off and the state's budget deficit grows daily, is going to pay for the management and enforcement of the MLPA process.
Chrisman dismissed the concerns of Kellogg and other Commissioners with a letter stating that there was plenty of money available to fund the MLPA process and its enforcement.
"The Governor's budgets have consistently provided support for MLPA," he stated. "This funding is but a small part of the more than $34.2 million that has been allocated statewide by a partnership of state agencies and foundations. Although we share the concerns expressed by California's difficult economic constraints, the public-private partnership established to help fund the MLPA process will help ensure its success."
Barbara Lewallen-Stephens, Point Arena seaweed harvester and dedicated environmentalist, strongly criticized Chrisman for claiming there was money for the MLPA process when essential services are being cut.
"The state is closing state parks, taking away jobs and cutting health care and here they are coming up with a lot of monies to take away even more jobs," Lewallen-Stephens said. "Where is this money coming from and why is the Governor saying we are broke when this amount of funds is available to shut down coastal communities?"
North Coast environmentalists, seaweed harvesters, fishermen and Indian Tribes, appalled by the conflicts of interest and corruption in a process engineered by the worst-ever Governor for fish and the environment in California history, are trying to to halt or at least slow down Schwarzenegger's MLPA process. Many believe that Schwarzenegger and his allies are trying to kick sustainable seaweed harvesters and fishermen off the water to clear a path for offshore oil drilling, wave energy projects and corporate aquaculture.
Meanwhile, Schwarzenegger, while trying to kick sustainable seaweed harvesters and fishermen off the water by setting up no-take marine reserves, continues to relentessly campaign to build a peripheral canal and more dams in order to export more water to unsustainable corporate agribusiness on the west side of the san Joaquin Valley. Canal opponents believe the construction of the canal will only exacerbate the imperiled state of Central Valley salmon, steelhead, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other fish populations while costing the taxpayers an estimated $10 billion to $40 billion at a time when the state cannot afford it.
There is nothing "green" about Arnold Schwarzenegger, his MLPA process or his push for the peripheral canal, in spite of praise by corporate-funded "Big Green" groups and the corporate media for his cynical "green energy" press conferences and photo opportunities. The only "green" that Schwarzenegger and his supporters worship is the "green" of Wall Street, corporate agribusiness and private foundation money.
For more information about the "Seaweed Rebellion" against the corrupt MLPA process, go to http://yubanet.com/california/The-Seaweed-Rebellion_printer.php. For more information about the peripheral canal, go to http://www.counterpunch.org/bacher07072009.html.
by Dan Bacher
First District Assemblymember Wesley Chesbro (D-North Coast) released a statement on Friday, July 10, questioning the "science" that Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's fast-track Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) process is supposedly based upon - and urging that North Coast communities be made "equal partners" in the process.
Chesbro's announcement came as a broad coalition of North Coast environmentalists, seaweed harvesters, commercial fishermen, recreational anglers and Indian Tribes is blasting the controversial process for being rife with conflict of interest, mission creep and corporate greenwashing.
"Over the past few months I have been hearing from numerous constituents who have expressed strong concerns regarding the development and implementation of MLPA plans for the North Coast and North Central Coast," he stated. "Because of this strong constituent concern, I am skeptical of the process that has been followed in developing proposed plans for these regions."
"The process must be based on sound science. I have been saying, 'show me the science.' So far I'm not satisfied with the answers I've been getting," Chesbro said.
As a state senator in 1999 who voted for the Marine Life Protection Act, Chesbro said it was his belief that "the MLPA will be a failure if the plans are implemented without the full involvement of all participants, especially local community members and stakeholders. The economic health of local fishing communities must be balanced with the need for habitat protection."
Representatives of fishing groups and local scientists supported Chesbro's questioning of the validity of the "science" behind the fast-track MLPA process, as well as sharing his concern that the need for habitat protection be balanced with the economic health of North Coast communities.
"The RFA agrees with Chesbro," said Jim Martin, West Coast Director of the Recreational Fishing Allliance (RFA), responding to Chesbro's questioning of the "science" behind the MLPA process. "We're concerned with two assumptions in the MLPA science guidelines. The first is that there is no production of fish production outside of no take reserves. The second assumption is that there is a very high rate of fishing outside of the reserves. These two assumptions are mutually exclusive."
Patrick Higgins, respected fishery scientist and commissioner for the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District, also agreed with Chesbro's questioning of the "science" used to justify the MLPA process.
"When the Harbor District filed a California Public Records Act request to CDFG last year asking for data on key species constraining fisheries off our coast, such as the yellow-eye and canary rockfish, they said they didn’t have any," wrote Higgins in an opinion piece in the Arcata Eye on July 9.
"Science is a process where data are collected using methods that are repeatable so that if conclusions are questioned, the scientific methods can be duplicated and results checked," said Higgins. "Interviews by Ecotrust of fishermen do not constitute science. The value of having the best marine scientists in the State on a panel is lost without data because their views without such data are only opinion."
He cited fisheries management expert Dr. Ray Hilborn and others who reviewed the MLPA model for size and spacing of MPAs and found: “It appears to us that those prescriptions were pulled out of the air, based on intuitive reasoning.”
MLPA Costs Are Challenged
Jim Martin also questioned why up to four wardens are being required to attend MLPA meetings to provide "private security" to the MLPA staff at a time when the state is its biggest economic crisis ever with a budget deficit of $26.3 billion.
"It's outrageous that the wardens, who should be out in the field pursuing poachers, are sitting in these MLPA meetings to provide security at public expense," said Martin. "Since the MLPA is a process privately funded by the Resource Legacy Fund Foundation, shouldn't they contract with a private firm to provide security at a lower cost at no public expense?"
In addition, Martin emphasized that the MLPA process has been expanded from a $250,000 a year process to a government boondoggle costing over $35 million a year - at a time that the state can't pay its game wardens, firefighters and teachers because of the budget deficit.
Legislators, fishermen, seaweed harvesters and scientists aren't the only ones concerned about MLPA process impacts on local communities and the taxpayers. This May Jim Kellogg, Fish and Game Commission Member, convinced the Commission to send a letter to the Governor and Resources Secretary Mike Chrisman asking how the state, at a time that game wardens are being laid off and the state's budget deficit grows daily, is going to pay for the management and enforcement of the MLPA process.
Chrisman dismissed the concerns of Kellogg and other Commissioners with a letter stating that there was plenty of money available to fund the MLPA process and its enforcement.
"The Governor's budgets have consistently provided support for MLPA," he stated. "This funding is but a small part of the more than $34.2 million that has been allocated statewide by a partnership of state agencies and foundations. Although we share the concerns expressed by California's difficult economic constraints, the public-private partnership established to help fund the MLPA process will help ensure its success."
Barbara Lewallen-Stephens, Point Arena seaweed harvester and dedicated environmentalist, strongly criticized Chrisman for claiming there was money for the MLPA process when essential services are being cut.
"The state is closing state parks, taking away jobs and cutting health care and here they are coming up with a lot of monies to take away even more jobs," Lewallen-Stephens said. "Where is this money coming from and why is the Governor saying we are broke when this amount of funds is available to shut down coastal communities?"
North Coast environmentalists, seaweed harvesters, fishermen and Indian Tribes, appalled by the conflicts of interest and corruption in a process engineered by the worst-ever Governor for fish and the environment in California history, are trying to to halt or at least slow down Schwarzenegger's MLPA process. Many believe that Schwarzenegger and his allies are trying to kick sustainable seaweed harvesters and fishermen off the water to clear a path for offshore oil drilling, wave energy projects and corporate aquaculture.
Meanwhile, Schwarzenegger, while trying to kick sustainable seaweed harvesters and fishermen off the water by setting up no-take marine reserves, continues to relentessly campaign to build a peripheral canal and more dams in order to export more water to unsustainable corporate agribusiness on the west side of the san Joaquin Valley. Canal opponents believe the construction of the canal will only exacerbate the imperiled state of Central Valley salmon, steelhead, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other fish populations while costing the taxpayers an estimated $10 billion to $40 billion at a time when the state cannot afford it.
There is nothing "green" about Arnold Schwarzenegger, his MLPA process or his push for the peripheral canal, in spite of praise by corporate-funded "Big Green" groups and the corporate media for his cynical "green energy" press conferences and photo opportunities. The only "green" that Schwarzenegger and his supporters worship is the "green" of Wall Street, corporate agribusiness and private foundation money.
For more information about the "Seaweed Rebellion" against the corrupt MLPA process, go to http://yubanet.com/california/The-Seaweed-Rebellion_printer.php. For more information about the peripheral canal, go to http://www.counterpunch.org/bacher07072009.html.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Where can more info on mlpa? Usually the acts titles tell you exactly what they intend
not to do. Homeland security is an example. Less secure since that passed, but I do
digress.
My gut tells me we would be far better giving the natural resource industry
industrial hemp. Use hemp fiber and oil. Pay the fishermen and lumbermen
a stipend to layoff the fish and trees, by taxing double dipping retirement income,
medical insurance profits, pharmaceutical profits, or plastic products.
The hemp industry could be taxed too. The point here is to divert labor to relieve
stress on natural resources as the natural resources try to adapt to a changing environment.
not to do. Homeland security is an example. Less secure since that passed, but I do
digress.
My gut tells me we would be far better giving the natural resource industry
industrial hemp. Use hemp fiber and oil. Pay the fishermen and lumbermen
a stipend to layoff the fish and trees, by taxing double dipping retirement income,
medical insurance profits, pharmaceutical profits, or plastic products.
The hemp industry could be taxed too. The point here is to divert labor to relieve
stress on natural resources as the natural resources try to adapt to a changing environment.
Dan wrote;
"Meanwhile, Schwarzenegger, while trying to kick sustainable seaweed harvesters and fishermen off the water by setting up no-take marine reserves, continues to relentessly campaign to build a peripheral canal and more dams in order to export more water to unsustainable corporate agribusiness on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley."
Whether the fresh river water goes to San Joaquin agribusiness via the pumps at Tracy or the proposed peripheral canal as of yet at an undisclosed location, the point is that there is that amount less fresh river water entering the delta and this will increase the salinity of the region's waters..
When studying the actions of San Joaquin agribusiness with respect to their impacts on the ecosystem, one need look no further than their collective withdrawals from the aquifer leading to several hundred feet of groundwater lowering and land subsidence;
"In the Sacramento Valley, the study found groundwater levels have remained stable. Virtually all of the groundwater loss has occurred to the south, in the San Joaquin Valley, where aquifer levels have dropped nearly 400 feet since 1961, she said."
Ironically all the excessive pumping by San Joaquin agribusiness led to the construction of the CA aqueduct transport canal, which now is also sinking;
"Sinking hasn't stopped
The land generally does not recover from this subsidence, and often the compacted aquifer loses its ability to store water.
It was assumed that subsidence had stopped after about 1970. But Steele and Faunt said it has continued because of periodic droughts.
Ironically, this threatens the 444-mile California Aqueduct, built in part to address groundwater shortages in the San Joaquin Valley.
Officials recently learned that the canal may be subsiding because of modern groundwater pumping. As land subsides, the canal drops with it. This slashes the canal's water capacity by creating low spots, which reduce flow rate. It also could crack the structure."
Finally some logic enters the picture;
"One option might be to stop farming in threatened areas."
read entire article @;
http://www.modbee.com/local/story/779818.html
Sending San Joaquin agribusiness water from the north after they had already overdrawn their aquifer is like sending a heroin addict their supply of junk in the mail so they don't need to go to the street dealers anymore. Or like giving multinational banking execs who ruined their corporation and the economy through reckless lending practices even more taxpayer money for them to throw into the wind without any care besides their personal salaries. It is the upmost of foolhardy illogical behavior to imagine that now with another peripheral canal somehow the San Joaquin agribusinesses can kick the habit of using excessive amounts of water for their out of place crops..
With the combination of land subsidence, selenium buildup and soil erosion, the San Joaquin agribusinesses are in their death throes of water and soil mineral mining. Having exhausted the nutritional value of the soil's mineral content without returning anything to their land's base of support results in the dependency on petrochemical fertilizer applications just so the crops can stay alive. Would a parent feel comfortable raising their children on vitamins and pre-packaged astronaut meals alone? Not to mention the inability of the soil to hold moisture due to their overexploitation of this resource. If there is any model of how NOT to farm the land, the San Joaquin agribusiness provide a striking example of what future farmers should NOT be doing..
IF this peripheral canal is allowed to go through as proposed, the people and ecosystem of CA's Central Valley and Bay Delta region WILL bear the burden of climate change's rising sea level caused saline intrusions, further land subsidence along the canal's southern route and other long range problems while the San Joaquin agribusiness execs can retire after disappearing into bankruptcy and leave the soil mined San Joaquin Valley a selenium laced superfund site for taxpayers to foot the clean-up bill..
Who ever heard of corporations cleaning up after themselves? No, they make their profits by exploiting the land, mining the minerals out of the soil, mining and then polluting the water and finally when they've taken every last drop, squeezed the land as hard as they could, they mysteriously declare bankruptcy, vanish into thin air and then leave the public with the clean-up job..
The San Joaquin Valley would be better off restored to native saltbush, sagebrush and grasslands for migratory ungulates like tule elk, pronghorn and other animals that can adapt to this ecosystem without needing so much water from northern rivers. The selenium in the soil will eventually be covered up by decomposing organic matter of grasslands, and if left alone for long enough the aquifers can be somewhat restored at least in the coarse gravels sediments..
For those interested in continued farming in San Joaquin, please consider the benefits of growing drought tolerant native crops like tepary beans (high protein content), nopales edible cactus and jojoba (non-edible oils) as some examples of appropriate crops for this regularly dry region..
The San Joaquin agribusinesses who cannot adapt to using less water by converting to drought tolerant crops must be evicted from the land they currently occupy by any means neccesary..
This travesty of justice has gone on for far too long, time to put the corporate agribusiness giants out of business once and for all;
"Way out West the big farmers fly Lear jets, have private airstrips on gargantuan factory farms, control politicians in both major parties, and harvest barrelfuls of taxpayer subsidy money. They also dry up rivers, pollute aquifers, and conscript an army of Third World families to bring in the crops at below-povertyline wages. Grotesque deformities in ducks and geese, poisoned national wildlife refuges, massive fish kills, and pesticide-sprayed fields littered with thousands of dead birds are common, and unpunished, depredations in California’s agricultural heartland, despite numerous state and federal wildlife-protection laws."
article found @;
http://www.lloydgcarter.com/category/tags/san-joaquin-valley
We the people can and will obtain our food elsewhere, thank you very much!!
"Meanwhile, Schwarzenegger, while trying to kick sustainable seaweed harvesters and fishermen off the water by setting up no-take marine reserves, continues to relentessly campaign to build a peripheral canal and more dams in order to export more water to unsustainable corporate agribusiness on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley."
Whether the fresh river water goes to San Joaquin agribusiness via the pumps at Tracy or the proposed peripheral canal as of yet at an undisclosed location, the point is that there is that amount less fresh river water entering the delta and this will increase the salinity of the region's waters..
When studying the actions of San Joaquin agribusiness with respect to their impacts on the ecosystem, one need look no further than their collective withdrawals from the aquifer leading to several hundred feet of groundwater lowering and land subsidence;
"In the Sacramento Valley, the study found groundwater levels have remained stable. Virtually all of the groundwater loss has occurred to the south, in the San Joaquin Valley, where aquifer levels have dropped nearly 400 feet since 1961, she said."
Ironically all the excessive pumping by San Joaquin agribusiness led to the construction of the CA aqueduct transport canal, which now is also sinking;
"Sinking hasn't stopped
The land generally does not recover from this subsidence, and often the compacted aquifer loses its ability to store water.
It was assumed that subsidence had stopped after about 1970. But Steele and Faunt said it has continued because of periodic droughts.
Ironically, this threatens the 444-mile California Aqueduct, built in part to address groundwater shortages in the San Joaquin Valley.
Officials recently learned that the canal may be subsiding because of modern groundwater pumping. As land subsides, the canal drops with it. This slashes the canal's water capacity by creating low spots, which reduce flow rate. It also could crack the structure."
Finally some logic enters the picture;
"One option might be to stop farming in threatened areas."
read entire article @;
http://www.modbee.com/local/story/779818.html
Sending San Joaquin agribusiness water from the north after they had already overdrawn their aquifer is like sending a heroin addict their supply of junk in the mail so they don't need to go to the street dealers anymore. Or like giving multinational banking execs who ruined their corporation and the economy through reckless lending practices even more taxpayer money for them to throw into the wind without any care besides their personal salaries. It is the upmost of foolhardy illogical behavior to imagine that now with another peripheral canal somehow the San Joaquin agribusinesses can kick the habit of using excessive amounts of water for their out of place crops..
With the combination of land subsidence, selenium buildup and soil erosion, the San Joaquin agribusinesses are in their death throes of water and soil mineral mining. Having exhausted the nutritional value of the soil's mineral content without returning anything to their land's base of support results in the dependency on petrochemical fertilizer applications just so the crops can stay alive. Would a parent feel comfortable raising their children on vitamins and pre-packaged astronaut meals alone? Not to mention the inability of the soil to hold moisture due to their overexploitation of this resource. If there is any model of how NOT to farm the land, the San Joaquin agribusiness provide a striking example of what future farmers should NOT be doing..
IF this peripheral canal is allowed to go through as proposed, the people and ecosystem of CA's Central Valley and Bay Delta region WILL bear the burden of climate change's rising sea level caused saline intrusions, further land subsidence along the canal's southern route and other long range problems while the San Joaquin agribusiness execs can retire after disappearing into bankruptcy and leave the soil mined San Joaquin Valley a selenium laced superfund site for taxpayers to foot the clean-up bill..
Who ever heard of corporations cleaning up after themselves? No, they make their profits by exploiting the land, mining the minerals out of the soil, mining and then polluting the water and finally when they've taken every last drop, squeezed the land as hard as they could, they mysteriously declare bankruptcy, vanish into thin air and then leave the public with the clean-up job..
The San Joaquin Valley would be better off restored to native saltbush, sagebrush and grasslands for migratory ungulates like tule elk, pronghorn and other animals that can adapt to this ecosystem without needing so much water from northern rivers. The selenium in the soil will eventually be covered up by decomposing organic matter of grasslands, and if left alone for long enough the aquifers can be somewhat restored at least in the coarse gravels sediments..
For those interested in continued farming in San Joaquin, please consider the benefits of growing drought tolerant native crops like tepary beans (high protein content), nopales edible cactus and jojoba (non-edible oils) as some examples of appropriate crops for this regularly dry region..
The San Joaquin agribusinesses who cannot adapt to using less water by converting to drought tolerant crops must be evicted from the land they currently occupy by any means neccesary..
This travesty of justice has gone on for far too long, time to put the corporate agribusiness giants out of business once and for all;
"Way out West the big farmers fly Lear jets, have private airstrips on gargantuan factory farms, control politicians in both major parties, and harvest barrelfuls of taxpayer subsidy money. They also dry up rivers, pollute aquifers, and conscript an army of Third World families to bring in the crops at below-povertyline wages. Grotesque deformities in ducks and geese, poisoned national wildlife refuges, massive fish kills, and pesticide-sprayed fields littered with thousands of dead birds are common, and unpunished, depredations in California’s agricultural heartland, despite numerous state and federal wildlife-protection laws."
article found @;
http://www.lloydgcarter.com/category/tags/san-joaquin-valley
We the people can and will obtain our food elsewhere, thank you very much!!
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$220.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network