Two Clashing Views on Schwarzenegger’s MLPA Initiative

Two Clashing Views on Schwarzenegger’s MLPA Initiative

http://www.times-standard.com/othervoices/ci_15332824

Clarification of the Marine Life Protection Act

by Beth Warner
June 19, 2010

Most people have heard of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) in one way
or another, but there seems to be some confusion as to what is fact or
fiction. As someone that has been involved-working alongside other community
members from every walk of life to build a marine protected area plan that
will work for our community — I wanted to provide a brief overview of what
has happened thus far in California and on the North Coast.

The MLPA is making California a world leader in ocean protection by creating
a network of marine protected areas that spans the entire state. The
protected areas are being put into place one region at a time to allow local
people to weigh in. After three years of study and negotiations, the design
and mapping work is done from Alder Creek south to the border with Mexico.
Our North Coast region is the final stretch.

Thus far, the North Coast has had many community meetings with commercial
and recreational fishermen, tribal citizens, environmentalists, consumptive
divers, kayak fishermen, oyster farmers, kelp harvesters and many others.
With so many interests represented at the table, it is hard work to find
solutions everyone can agree on, but we can all agree the health of the
ocean is essential to our way of life and economy.

The community meetings yielded various marine protected area plans, which
were then reviewed by a group of scientists. The marine protected areas we
create here on the North Coast will have to meet some important standards:
first, they must stand up to the scientific guidelines, which are designed
to help maximize environmental gains; and second, they need to take into
account potential economic impacts on the fisheries from each port in the
region. The community maps and assessments are publicly available on the
Department of Fish and Game website.

Community-nominated members of what is called the Regional Stakeholder Group
now have the maps and their associated evaluations. Their job is to create a
final plan (or series of plans) that represents our shared interests as a
region. Over the next several months, they will work to map out protections
that balance the needs of different user groups and marine life — all while
meeting scientific guidelines and minimizing socio-economic impacts.

At the end of the year, these maps –or a single map if the stakeholders can
conclusively agree — will be reviewed by the Fish and Game Commission and a
final network will go into the books.

As we work our way through this challenging process, it’s worth remembering
why we are doing it — we all want a healthy ocean that will provide for us
and our children.

The MLPA process relies heavily on public input. Collectively, the citizens
of the north coast region have the knowledge and ability to create a
scientifically robust plan that will keep us fishing far into the future.
The Stakeholders, Science Advisory Team (the scientists reviewing the maps)
and the Blue Ribbon Task Force (the group that reviews the final map designs
before DFG) meetings all are open for the public — and they need your
voice. There is a public meeting on July 7th at the Humboldt Bay Aquatic
Center in Eureka at 5 p.m. — the meeting encourages the public to attend as
this process thrives on public participation.

Please attend the meeting and support the efforts of your community members
in designing a legacy for California waters. All meeting agendas, schedules,
maps and evaluations are all available on the DFG website and meetings are
streamed online and can be found http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/meetings_n.asp.
You can also submit comments to the 34 members of the Regional Stakeholder
Group at MLPAComments [at] resources.ca.gov .

Beth Werner is the outreach and MLPA coordinator at Humboldt Baykeeper.




MLPA: The Privatization of Ocean Management

by Dan Bacher
June 20, 1010

Beth Werner, the outreach and MLPA coordinator at Humboldt Baykeeper, claims
in her article, “Most people have heard of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA)
in one way or another, but there seems to be some confusion as to what is fact or fiction.”

However, for people that have actually examined the implementation of the
MLPA Initiative since Governor Arnold Schwarzengger privatized the process
in 2004, there is no confusion “as to what is fact or fiction.”

The fact is that Schwarzenegger’s MLPA Initiative is a privately funded
process overseen by oil industry, marina development, real estate and other
corporate interests. Rather than truly protecting the ocean as the landmark
law originally intended to do, the MLPA Initiative under Schwarzenegger has
completely taken water pollution, habitat destruction, oil drilling, wave
energy projects and all other human uses of the ocean other than fishing and
seaweed harvesting off the table.

I have a series of questions to ask Werner and other proponents of
Schwarzenegger’s MLPA process.

Why does the MLPA engage in cultural genocide by banning the Kashia Pomo
Tribe from harvesting seaweed and shellfish off their sacred site, “Danaka,”
in Sonoma County?

Why has the Initiative shown no respect for tribal subsistence and
ceremonial rights? This is an overt violation of the American Indian
Religious Freedom Act and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous
People. Article 32, Section 2, of the Declaration mandates “free prior and
informed consent” in consultation with the indigenous population affected by
a state action (http://www.iwgia.org/sw248.asp ).

Why did MLPA staff until recently violate the Bagley-Keene Act and the First
Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by banning video and audio coverage of
the initiative’s work sessions?

Why do the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) and Science Advisory Team
continue to violate the California Public Records Act by refusing to respond
to numerous requests by Bob Fletcher, former DFG Deputy Director, for key
documents and records pertaining to the MLPA implementation process?

Why did the Governor and MLPA officials install an oil industry lobbyist, a
marina developer, a real estate executive and other corporate interests as
“marine guardians” to kick Indian Tribes, fishermen and seaweed harvesters,
the greatest defenders of the oceans, off the ocean?

Why is Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the president of the Western States Petroleum
Association, allowed to make decisions as the chair of the BRTF for the
South Coast and as a member of the BRTF for the North Coast, panels that are
supposedly designed to “protect” the ocean, when she has called for new oil
drilling off the California coast?

Why does the initiative discard the results of any scientists who disagree
with the MLPA’ pre-ordained conclusions? These include the peer reviewed
study by Dr. Ray Hilborn, Dr. Boris Worm and 18 other scientists, featured
in Science magazine in July 2009, that concluded that the California current
had the lowest rate of fishery exploitation of any place studied on the
planet.

Why do MLPA staff and the California Fish and Game Commission refuse to hear
the pleas of the representatives of the California Fish and Game Wardens
Association, who oppose the creation of any new MPAs until they have enough
funding for wardens to patrol existing reserves?

Finally, why is a private corporation, the shadowy Resources Legacy Fund
Foundation, being allowed to privatize ocean resource management in
California through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the DFG?

Werner proclaims, “As we work our way through this challenging process, it’s
worth remembering why we are doing it — we all want a healthy ocean that
will provide for us and our children.”

How can you possibly conclude that a privately funded initiative filled with
so many confllcts of interest and violations of state, federal and
international laws will result in a “healthy ocean ocean that will provide
for us and our children?”