Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Restoring Our North Coast: We Owe it to Future Generations
Today, California will expand its network of underwater state parks, creating a series of marine protected areas along the north coast to protect sensitive sea life and habitats.
This time of the year, we turn our attention, and our beach towels, toward the subtle beauty and cooling fog of the North Coast. When it gets hot inland, it is time to head for the beach. As a young boy during the 1950’s, I was first plopped down in the tidepools here by my father as he went rockpicking along the shoreline at low tide for then-plentiful abalone. Since 1975, I have been lucky enough to call Bodega Bay home.
During that time, I have seen tragic declines in marine life and ocean health beneath our shimmering waters. The the number of fishing boats, fishing trips, and fishing revenues have each declined by about two-thirds over the past 18 years. For the most part, past rampant overfishing by big industrial nets is to blame, not local family fishermen or visiting sportfishers. However, we all suffer when ocean health declines. Clearly, something must be done to reverse the downward trends.
So in 1999, when California passed the Marine Life Protection Act, those of us who have spent our lives trying to save the coast rejoiced – finally a ray of hope. The premise is simple and the science is clear: if we simply leave some carefully-chosen areas of ocean alone, life will restore itself. Nature is resilient, and the ocean is its own most powerful healer.
Since 2008, I have been honored to serve on the North-Central Coast stakeholders’ negotiating panel for the Marine Life Protection Act. I worked with commercial and sport fishermen, party boat captains, abalone divers, surfers, native tribal entities, beachgoers, and state and national park representatives. We met in good faith for hundreds of hours over the course of a year, backed up by a team of scientific experts.
We traveled from Half Moon Bay to Point Arena to listen to and take to heart local concerns. And we responded – making changes to Marine Protected Area (MPA) boundaries and proposed management regulations to reduce any potential conflicts with existing uses. As a veteran of 35 years of coastal advocacy, I can attest that no public process in California’s history has been more transparent, accessible, and open to everyone -- ever.
Now, as the California Fish and Game Commission prepares to vote on a compromise coastal restoration plan, we suddenly find a small contingent of naysayers, funded by large amounts of mysterious overseas money, trying to sow fear and destroy the progress made to date by so many.
These naysayers are trying every excuse they can dream up. They argue for delay, citing the state budget situation, yet the MLPA has escaped the budget ax and many local and national groups have committed to help with management and monitoring.
The professional skeptics claim, “Oops, we somehow forgot and missed the numerous public meetings” -- even those held in their own local communities. They assert that the ocean is fine, pretend no action is needed, but consistently ignore compelling science and local experience to the contrary. They say fishermen will break the rules and poach in our underwater parks. But they offer no constructive solutions.
I would respectfully remind the naysayers: We cannot afford to ignore this one-time chance to restore local marine life, bring back our fisheries, rebuild declining coastal economies, and leave a positive legacy.
I trust the sportsmanlike ethic of those who love to fish and thus benefit from the public trust resources of our coast; I know most fishermen will respect the rules and follow the law; and I trust the California Fish and Game Commissioners to adopt the carefully crafted compromise MPA plan on August 5. I am counting on taking my two grandchildren fishing some day, and I’d like to tell the kids that we left them what we ourselves found here - - a living ocean legacy.
During that time, I have seen tragic declines in marine life and ocean health beneath our shimmering waters. The the number of fishing boats, fishing trips, and fishing revenues have each declined by about two-thirds over the past 18 years. For the most part, past rampant overfishing by big industrial nets is to blame, not local family fishermen or visiting sportfishers. However, we all suffer when ocean health declines. Clearly, something must be done to reverse the downward trends.
So in 1999, when California passed the Marine Life Protection Act, those of us who have spent our lives trying to save the coast rejoiced – finally a ray of hope. The premise is simple and the science is clear: if we simply leave some carefully-chosen areas of ocean alone, life will restore itself. Nature is resilient, and the ocean is its own most powerful healer.
Since 2008, I have been honored to serve on the North-Central Coast stakeholders’ negotiating panel for the Marine Life Protection Act. I worked with commercial and sport fishermen, party boat captains, abalone divers, surfers, native tribal entities, beachgoers, and state and national park representatives. We met in good faith for hundreds of hours over the course of a year, backed up by a team of scientific experts.
We traveled from Half Moon Bay to Point Arena to listen to and take to heart local concerns. And we responded – making changes to Marine Protected Area (MPA) boundaries and proposed management regulations to reduce any potential conflicts with existing uses. As a veteran of 35 years of coastal advocacy, I can attest that no public process in California’s history has been more transparent, accessible, and open to everyone -- ever.
Now, as the California Fish and Game Commission prepares to vote on a compromise coastal restoration plan, we suddenly find a small contingent of naysayers, funded by large amounts of mysterious overseas money, trying to sow fear and destroy the progress made to date by so many.
These naysayers are trying every excuse they can dream up. They argue for delay, citing the state budget situation, yet the MLPA has escaped the budget ax and many local and national groups have committed to help with management and monitoring.
The professional skeptics claim, “Oops, we somehow forgot and missed the numerous public meetings” -- even those held in their own local communities. They assert that the ocean is fine, pretend no action is needed, but consistently ignore compelling science and local experience to the contrary. They say fishermen will break the rules and poach in our underwater parks. But they offer no constructive solutions.
I would respectfully remind the naysayers: We cannot afford to ignore this one-time chance to restore local marine life, bring back our fisheries, rebuild declining coastal economies, and leave a positive legacy.
I trust the sportsmanlike ethic of those who love to fish and thus benefit from the public trust resources of our coast; I know most fishermen will respect the rules and follow the law; and I trust the California Fish and Game Commissioners to adopt the carefully crafted compromise MPA plan on August 5. I am counting on taking my two grandchildren fishing some day, and I’d like to tell the kids that we left them what we ourselves found here - - a living ocean legacy.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
California has the lowest exploitation rate of fished stocks in the world
The analysis presented in our Science magazine paper shows that the California Current ecosystem has the lowest exploitation rates of any place we examined in the world. The drastic reductions in harvest have been designed to rebuild the overexploited rockfish stocks. At present the community of groundfish is now at about 60% of its unfished biomass, far above the 30-40% level target for maximum sustained yield.
Much of the motivation for the MLPA was concern about the state of the groundfish stocks - there is clear evidence that these can be rebuilt without MPAs resulting from the MLPA that have only recently begun to be implemented. The benefits of the MPAs established under the MLPA will be primarily to have some areas of high abundance of species with limited mobility.
You can read our article, "Rebuilding Global Fisheries," on the new study released at Science Magazine, http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/325/5940/578 (subscription required to read full article.)
Dr. Ray Hilborn
co-author of “Rebuilding Global Fisheries” and professor at the School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences at the University of Washington
The analysis presented in our Science magazine paper shows that the California Current ecosystem has the lowest exploitation rates of any place we examined in the world. The drastic reductions in harvest have been designed to rebuild the overexploited rockfish stocks. At present the community of groundfish is now at about 60% of its unfished biomass, far above the 30-40% level target for maximum sustained yield.
Much of the motivation for the MLPA was concern about the state of the groundfish stocks - there is clear evidence that these can be rebuilt without MPAs resulting from the MLPA that have only recently begun to be implemented. The benefits of the MPAs established under the MLPA will be primarily to have some areas of high abundance of species with limited mobility.
You can read our article, "Rebuilding Global Fisheries," on the new study released at Science Magazine, http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/325/5940/578 (subscription required to read full article.)
Dr. Ray Hilborn
co-author of “Rebuilding Global Fisheries” and professor at the School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences at the University of Washington
Tomas DiFiore
ORCA
Ocean Resources Care and Awareness
Commercial Seaweed Harvester
Astral Arts Mendocino
Seaweed Rebellion
From a 28 year coast resident and activist:
Richard's Charter's bogus article speaks of how we (Stakeholders in the MLPA Initiative Process? people of the State of Calif, who?) suddenly find a small contingent of naysayers, funded by large amounts of mysterious overseas money, and these professional skeptics claim, “Oops, we somehow forgot and missed the numerous public meetings”
And I do mean BOGUS article:
And Frank Hartzell's article misses entirely the concern of locals.
"Hartzell's Soft Sell of Privatization of the Public Commons Held in Trust":
"Because MLPAI real estate is in the ocean, it seems to lack opportunities for insiders to cash in or get rid of polluted property. MLPAI is simply a plan to partially or totally close roughly 20 percent of the ocean offshore to fishing, seaweed gathering or abalone diving." Frank Hartzell Advocate News
Yet it is promoted as so much more by the very foundations pushing the process. There's sea otter recovery, VERY big on the agenda, and commercial fishing is commonly listed as the main culprit for depleted stocks.
What of the BRTF, whose input into the process by now has become the stuff of dark mysteries and scandal. They are composed of waterfront real estate (Schem, Andersen, Golding) interests, and oil development (Catherine Reheis-Boyd).
Of course Privatization of Access and Distribution - whether that be for food or energy is the name of the game. also access to the seafloor for SSD, and carbon injection, seafloor microbial communities -Marine biotech, and deep-water aquaculture, mineral mining, thermal currents, WEC devices (for just about anything), naval operations, oil, natural gas, etc.
Nothing Is Off-Limits Except Fishing.
But a lot of the promotion of the MLPA - Initiative outside the fishing communities across the state is for 'non-consumptive uses' like sitting on the beach, walking in the tidepools, surfing, hiking on coastal trails and looking at the progress of the recovery of the sea otter.
We're talking tourism, eco-tourism, hotels, full-service marinas, zoning changes....
Some of the advantage to having an underwater park and all the wildlife out there to look at is an increase in property values/taxes and not necessarily local. This has entered the process planning stages in late 2006.
California Department of Fish and Game Master Plan for Marine Protected Areas July 21, 2006 p85 Task force recommendations related to appropriate sources of funds:
1. The primary public source of funding for implementing the MLPA should be general purpose taxpayer funds. Efforts should be made to seek General Fund operating and general obligation bond support for the MLPA.
** Anything can be transferred to the General Fund. The Environmental License Plate Fund: the Tahoe fund, and the Yosemite fund have been paying for MLPA-Initiative implementation.
2. A state statute should be pursued establishing an occupancy tax on lodging in coastal areas, which is a reasonable way to capture benefits from enhanced marine life to fund implementation of the MLPA.
** Like that's gonna fly, but it makes my point as to how this 'Initiative' process views the Coastal Communities, and the California Coast. We are like real estate to them, to be carved up by the masters of privatization and theft of the commons held in trust.
Part 2
There can be no rush to implement the MLPA-I.
A good archived webcast of the process from last 08 05 09 hearing in Woodland, wherein Sea Lion Cove in Point Arena has been closed to Abalone and Seaweed harvests, shows how Native ancestral seaweed harvest rights and access were closed off in Sonoma County and Mendocino County. People can view the BRTF, that's Blue Ribbon Task Force, as they coldly defy and deny the Stakeholders Group hard worked alternative.
http://www.cal-span.org/cgi-bin/media.pl...
Besides:
Much of the hype surrounding the need for protection results from Worm etal. an often cited work. And what of peer review?
http://californiafisheriescoalition.blogspot....
"Ecosystems examined in this paper account for less than a quarter of the world's fisheries area and catch, and lightly to moderately fished and rebuilding ecosystems comprise less than half of those. They may be best interpreted as large-scale restoration experiments that demonstrate opportunities for successfully rebuilding marine resources elsewhere."
http://www.sciencemag.org SCIENCE VOL 316 1 JUNE 2007
IN THEIR IMPORTANT RESEARCH ARTICLE ON THE precarious condition of ocean ecosystems (impacts of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services, 3 Nov. 2006, p. 787), B. Worm et al. introduced some confusing terminology that needs to be clarified. Although the term biodiversity is sometimes used to mean the general abundance of life, in publications on conservation biology, it is almost always used to indicate the relative number of species present in a given area or ecosystem.
The conservation problem that the authors intended to emphasize is that the populations of many commercially valuable species have been reduced to the point that they no longer play important roles in the communities to which they belong. Although the phrase population loss may provoke less public reaction than biodiversity loss, it would have been more accurate.
And lest we forget, MAXXAM's Dr John Seidl was hired by the Gordon & Betty Foundation as head of the Foundation Environmental Program, Dr. Seidl oversaw the Foundation's efforts to protect biodiversity and intact natural ecosystems across the globe.
Barry Munitz, #2 at MAXXAM went on to the Getty Trust Foundation. His speech: The Role of Institutions in Leading Public Discourse, "I think the fundamental change has to be a conspiracy between governing boards, the selectors of governing boards and..." is very telling.
Dr. Munitz is a recent a corporate director at Sallie Mae.
That streamlined process so often touted as a hallmark of the MLPA-I process serves what purpose?
Part 3
The Seaweed Rebellion, Indigenous Healthcare
The trees, the rivers, the salmon, are all one ecosystem. How far up would the Salmon swim if original species of flora canopy closure remained intact? If the Forest Practices rules had actually worked? If MAXXAM logging hadn't destroyed large areas of streambed? If agri-business water alotments were in check with natural ecosystem needs?
Why is it that Barry Munitz' name keeps coming up? Because he was there in the beginning.
#2 in the MAXXAM Empire, Munitz, moved on (to the dismay of many) to be Chancellor of the Regents for the entire UC school system. His claim to fame while there was his attempt to privatize the UC System's information network.
Simultaneous to the selection of Dr. Munitz' as Chancellor, then State Senator Barry Keene introduced and later passed a Senate-Assembly Joint Concurrent resolution that would make the Chancellor of the CSU system the head of a to-be-formed Center for the Resolution of Environmental Disputes. It gets as deep as the ocean!
Also Transition Team Chair, announced 11/9/1998 for Gov Gray Davis
Barry Munitz, directed the Davis transition in 1998 and by early 1999, California Governor Gray Davis signed into law the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA). The MLPA directed the state to design and manage a network of marine protected areas.
About Gov Gray Davis, Munitz's appointment and Democratic "centrism" - in his inaugural, Davis pledged to "preserve our God-given natural heritage" and be "tight with your tax dollars." Davis endorsed Hurwitz's demands whereby the feds and the state of California will pay over $495 million for the Headwaters redwood groves more than three times the value of the property, according to a federal analysis.
http://www.astral-arts.com/mlpa_maxx.html
The MLPA Initiative uses private money, payroll science, and private agendas to perform "governance reform" with no access through Public Information channels. Cultural education through art foundation programs and the use of captive species as 'educational entertainment' at Aquariums (which up and down the State support the tightest MLPA interpretations) are built in to the Initiative process.
The Initiative is on a fast track dictated by business interests from the (private sector). Language for this is included in the G&B Moore Foundation's Initiative Portfolio requirements, and yes, the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation is a foundation through which money and the influence of science as policy flow.
For (y) our part;
Among the Assembly Bill X4 1 - Budget Act of 2009 Revisions
AB X4 1 made numerous changes to the budget bill approved by the Legislature in February.
AB x4 11 - Resources Trailer Bill. This bill includes a number of technical provisions dealing with the state's public resources. It is important to note that this bill was an urgency measure which means it will take effect immediately. Among the issues within this trailer bill of interest to cities are:
2) The bill raises the state's voluntary Environmental License Plate Fund fee by $8 per personalized license plate, increasing the current cost to $48 for new personalized license plates and $38 for renewals of personalized license plates. The fee increase is expected to generate approximately $3 million annually which will be used to offset the state Resource Agency cuts.
http://www.cacities.org/index.jsp...
And what is most disingenuous and telling perhaps is the revolving door relationship between the BRTF and seats on the Fish and Game Commission Final Decision Process, as occurred just in time for the NO vote cast against the Stakeholders 2XA alternative proposal last August 05 2009 in Woodland, CA.
Tomas DiFiore
Seaweed Rebellion
Astral Arts Mendocino
The trees, the rivers, the salmon, are all one ecosystem. How far up would the Salmon swim if original species of flora canopy closure remained intact? If the Forest Practices rules had actually worked? If MAXXAM logging hadn't destroyed large areas of streambed? If agri-business water alotments were in check with natural ecosystem needs? After MAXXAM Dr. Munitz' was UC Chancellor, State Senator Barry Keene introduced and passed a SB-AB Joint Concurrent resolution that made the Chancellor of the CSU system the head of a to-be-formed Center for the Resolution of Environmental Disputes. Barry Munitz, directed the Davis transition in 1998 and by early 1999, California Governor Gray Davis signed into law the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA).
Is The MLPA The Back Door To Oil: Ocean Privatization MLPAI Breaks New Ground for Onshore Facilties... perhaps!
by Tomas DiFiore
ORCA
Ocean Resources Care and Awareness
Commercial Seaweed Harvester
Astral Arts Mendocino
Seaweed Rebellion
From a 28 year coast resident and activist:
Richard's Charter's bogus article speaks of how we (Stakeholders in the MLPA Initiative Process? people of the State of Calif, who?) suddenly find a small contingent of naysayers, funded by large amounts of mysterious overseas money, and these professional skeptics claim, “Oops, we somehow forgot and missed the numerous public meetings”
And I do mean BOGUS article:
And Frank Hartzell's article misses entirely the concern of locals.
"Hartzell's Soft Sell of Privatization of the Public Commons Held in Trust":
"Because MLPAI real estate is in the ocean, it seems to lack opportunities for insiders to cash in or get rid of polluted property. MLPAI is simply a plan to partially or totally close roughly 20 percent of the ocean offshore to fishing, seaweed gathering or abalone diving." Frank Hartzell Advocate News
Yet it is promoted as so much more by the very foundations pushing the process. There's sea otter recovery, VERY big on the agenda, and commercial fishing is commonly listed as the main culprit for depleted stocks.
What of the BRTF, whose input into the process by now has become the stuff of dark mysteries and scandal. They are composed of waterfront real estate (Schem, Andersen, Golding) interests, and oil development (Catherine Reheis-Boyd).
Of course Privatization of Access and Distribution - whether that be for food or energy is the name of the game. also access to the seafloor for SSD, and carbon injection, seafloor microbial communities -Marine biotech, and deep-water aquaculture, mineral mining, thermal currents, WEC devices (for just about anything), naval operations, oil, natural gas, etc.
Nothing Is Off-Limits Except Fishing.
But a lot of the promotion of the MLPA - Initiative outside the fishing communities across the state is for 'non-consumptive uses' like sitting on the beach, walking in the tidepools, surfing, hiking on coastal trails and looking at the progress of the recovery of the sea otter.
We're talking tourism, eco-tourism, hotels, full-service marinas, zoning changes....
Some of the advantage to having an underwater park and all the wildlife out there to look at is an increase in property values/taxes and not necessarily local. This has entered the process planning stages in late 2006.
California Department of Fish and Game Master Plan for Marine Protected Areas July 21, 2006 p85 Task force recommendations related to appropriate sources of funds:
1. The primary public source of funding for implementing the MLPA should be general purpose taxpayer funds. Efforts should be made to seek General Fund operating and general obligation bond support for the MLPA.
** Anything can be transferred to the General Fund. The Environmental License Plate Fund: the Tahoe fund, and the Yosemite fund have been paying for MLPA-Initiative implementation.
2. A state statute should be pursued establishing an occupancy tax on lodging in coastal areas, which is a reasonable way to capture benefits from enhanced marine life to fund implementation of the MLPA.
** Like that's gonna fly, but it makes my point as to how this 'Initiative' process views the Coastal Communities, and the California Coast. We are like real estate to them, to be carved up by the masters of privatization and theft of the commons held in trust.
Part 2
There can be no rush to implement the MLPA-I.
A good archived webcast of the process from last 08 05 09 hearing in Woodland, wherein Sea Lion Cove in Point Arena has been closed to Abalone and Seaweed harvests, shows how Native ancestral seaweed harvest rights and access were closed off in Sonoma County and Mendocino County. People can view the BRTF, that's Blue Ribbon Task Force, as they coldly defy and deny the Stakeholders Group hard worked alternative.
http://www.cal-span.org/cgi-bin/media.pl...
Besides:
Much of the hype surrounding the need for protection results from Worm etal. an often cited work. And what of peer review?
http://californiafisheriescoalition.blogspot....
"Ecosystems examined in this paper account for less than a quarter of the world's fisheries area and catch, and lightly to moderately fished and rebuilding ecosystems comprise less than half of those. They may be best interpreted as large-scale restoration experiments that demonstrate opportunities for successfully rebuilding marine resources elsewhere."
http://www.sciencemag.org SCIENCE VOL 316 1 JUNE 2007
IN THEIR IMPORTANT RESEARCH ARTICLE ON THE precarious condition of ocean ecosystems (impacts of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services, 3 Nov. 2006, p. 787), B. Worm et al. introduced some confusing terminology that needs to be clarified. Although the term biodiversity is sometimes used to mean the general abundance of life, in publications on conservation biology, it is almost always used to indicate the relative number of species present in a given area or ecosystem.
The conservation problem that the authors intended to emphasize is that the populations of many commercially valuable species have been reduced to the point that they no longer play important roles in the communities to which they belong. Although the phrase population loss may provoke less public reaction than biodiversity loss, it would have been more accurate.
And lest we forget, MAXXAM's Dr John Seidl was hired by the Gordon & Betty Foundation as head of the Foundation Environmental Program, Dr. Seidl oversaw the Foundation's efforts to protect biodiversity and intact natural ecosystems across the globe.
Barry Munitz, #2 at MAXXAM went on to the Getty Trust Foundation. His speech: The Role of Institutions in Leading Public Discourse, "I think the fundamental change has to be a conspiracy between governing boards, the selectors of governing boards and..." is very telling.
Dr. Munitz is a recent a corporate director at Sallie Mae.
That streamlined process so often touted as a hallmark of the MLPA-I process serves what purpose?
Part 3
The Seaweed Rebellion, Indigenous Healthcare
The trees, the rivers, the salmon, are all one ecosystem. How far up would the Salmon swim if original species of flora canopy closure remained intact? If the Forest Practices rules had actually worked? If MAXXAM logging hadn't destroyed large areas of streambed? If agri-business water alotments were in check with natural ecosystem needs?
Why is it that Barry Munitz' name keeps coming up? Because he was there in the beginning.
#2 in the MAXXAM Empire, Munitz, moved on (to the dismay of many) to be Chancellor of the Regents for the entire UC school system. His claim to fame while there was his attempt to privatize the UC System's information network.
Simultaneous to the selection of Dr. Munitz' as Chancellor, then State Senator Barry Keene introduced and later passed a Senate-Assembly Joint Concurrent resolution that would make the Chancellor of the CSU system the head of a to-be-formed Center for the Resolution of Environmental Disputes. It gets as deep as the ocean!
Also Transition Team Chair, announced 11/9/1998 for Gov Gray Davis
Barry Munitz, directed the Davis transition in 1998 and by early 1999, California Governor Gray Davis signed into law the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA). The MLPA directed the state to design and manage a network of marine protected areas.
About Gov Gray Davis, Munitz's appointment and Democratic "centrism" - in his inaugural, Davis pledged to "preserve our God-given natural heritage" and be "tight with your tax dollars." Davis endorsed Hurwitz's demands whereby the feds and the state of California will pay over $495 million for the Headwaters redwood groves more than three times the value of the property, according to a federal analysis.
http://www.astral-arts.com/mlpa_maxx.html
The MLPA Initiative uses private money, payroll science, and private agendas to perform "governance reform" with no access through Public Information channels. Cultural education through art foundation programs and the use of captive species as 'educational entertainment' at Aquariums (which up and down the State support the tightest MLPA interpretations) are built in to the Initiative process.
The Initiative is on a fast track dictated by business interests from the (private sector). Language for this is included in the G&B Moore Foundation's Initiative Portfolio requirements, and yes, the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation is a foundation through which money and the influence of science as policy flow.
For (y) our part;
Among the Assembly Bill X4 1 - Budget Act of 2009 Revisions
AB X4 1 made numerous changes to the budget bill approved by the Legislature in February.
AB x4 11 - Resources Trailer Bill. This bill includes a number of technical provisions dealing with the state's public resources. It is important to note that this bill was an urgency measure which means it will take effect immediately. Among the issues within this trailer bill of interest to cities are:
2) The bill raises the state's voluntary Environmental License Plate Fund fee by $8 per personalized license plate, increasing the current cost to $48 for new personalized license plates and $38 for renewals of personalized license plates. The fee increase is expected to generate approximately $3 million annually which will be used to offset the state Resource Agency cuts.
http://www.cacities.org/index.jsp...
And what is most disingenuous and telling perhaps is the revolving door relationship between the BRTF and seats on the Fish and Game Commission Final Decision Process, as occurred just in time for the NO vote cast against the Stakeholders 2XA alternative proposal last August 05 2009 in Woodland, CA.
Tomas DiFiore
Seaweed Rebellion
Astral Arts Mendocino
The trees, the rivers, the salmon, are all one ecosystem. How far up would the Salmon swim if original species of flora canopy closure remained intact? If the Forest Practices rules had actually worked? If MAXXAM logging hadn't destroyed large areas of streambed? If agri-business water alotments were in check with natural ecosystem needs? After MAXXAM Dr. Munitz' was UC Chancellor, State Senator Barry Keene introduced and passed a SB-AB Joint Concurrent resolution that made the Chancellor of the CSU system the head of a to-be-formed Center for the Resolution of Environmental Disputes. Barry Munitz, directed the Davis transition in 1998 and by early 1999, California Governor Gray Davis signed into law the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA).
Is The MLPA The Back Door To Oil: Ocean Privatization MLPAI Breaks New Ground for Onshore Facilties... perhaps!
by Tomas DiFiore
For more information:
http://www.astral-arts.com
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$140.00 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