Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
MPAs Work! It's 6 to 1 odds, that a new MPA will show up where you don't want one!
In just 2 months time, the paperweight bilemass of the North Coast MLPA Process has multiplied 6 times, exceeding all MLPA science models and political projections. Additional MPAs may be coming soon.
The MLPA has united the North Coast like never before. Yes there are those who want more areas protected than the North Coast Regional Stakeholder Group agreed upon. And yes there are those who want less areas protected than the NC Regional Stakeholder Group agreed upon. Those I have spoken with - we all agree that we will fight the BRTF if they try to change the NCRSG One Unified Array, and that is an amazing triumph. Like we are old friends again, and allies, there are communities of us, generations of us.
On October 20, 2010, a resolution signed by seventeen local government agencies – a historical first for the region – was forwarded to the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative (MLPAI) by the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District.
The resolution urges the MLPAI Blue Ribbon Task Force and California Fish and Game Commission to adopt, without any alteration, the Unified Marine Protected Area (MPA) Array proposal developed by North Coast stakeholders and communities.
The resolution further urges that North Coast stakeholders and communities must be consulted if any changes are to be made to the Unified MPA Array.
North Coast Governments: Don't Mess with Unified MLPA Proposal
Article by Dan Bacher
Thursday Oct 21st, 2010 11:59 AM
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/10/21/18661915.php
But two days later, a memo titled: California Marine Life Protection Act Initiative, MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force Options for Potential Draft Motion 3: Adopting a Preferred Alternative MPA Proposal - October 22, 2010 was sent to Cindy Gustafson the Chair of the BRTF.
The last sentence on p. 18 sums it all up nicely... MPA(s) added to capture missing habitats may also result in increased potential socioeconomic impacts for commercial and recreational fisheries.
Also: The NCRSG MPA Proposal, could be modified to:
• for any MPA or SMRMA with proposed uses intended to accommodate tribal uses, only include those allowed uses with a moderate-high or high level of protection; all
proposed uses to accommodate tribes and tribal communities with a moderate,
moderate-low or low level of protection would not be included; and
• add MPA(s) to capture missing habitats, looking to rounds 1 and 2 for MPA boundaries
proposed by community groups or the NCRSG as a starting point, and
• include an accompanying statement that traditional tribal uses are intended within the
MPAs and SMRMAs when there is a legislative or administrative change that allows
only tribes and tribal communities to engage in traditional tribal uses within MPAs and
SMRMAs.
Like Tribal Sovereignty is on hold while the Blue Ribbon Task Force and Big Green have what they wanted - more MPAs to choose from than local communities had originally proposed, which early on had looked a lot like ideas converging towards one array.
Apparently there are layers of transparency available in MarineMap and the MLPA Initiative Team Arnold Cup Masters Round 3 Closing Ceremony tomorrow and Tuesday.
Download a 4 page quick sheet compilation PDF (100 kb) of I Team Document V.1. staff memo to the BRTF dated 10 22 2010
http://www.albionharbor.org/oceana/brtf_V1_extremelyimpressed.pdf
The full 18 page staff memo can be found here:
http://www.albionharbor.org/oceana/V1StaffMemo_NC_Gustafson.pdf
At the May 4th 2010 BRTF meeting in Crescent City the BRTF heard Karen Garrison, NRDC, tell them to get on with it
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/round2/kg.mp3
428kb 1min 47secs
Gregory Schem, Global Marina Developer, had suggested a bookends approach
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/round2/bookends_ipa.mp3
1.7MB 7mins 20secs
The extreme 'bookends and preferred size arrays' suggestion garnered much discussion among the BRTF and later on, TOC and NRDC developed arrays that contained everything from Round 1 and 2 as an updated set of arrays.
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/round2/bookends_discussion.mp3
5.4MB 23mins 26secs
Ken Wiseman on 06 30 2010 in a live interview on KZYX states (just as Melissa Miller-Henson did the day previous on AM 1300 Jefferson County Public Radio) that there were only 4 arrays.
SkyHawk Radio: Full 37 minute interview with MLPA Executive Director Ken Wiseman
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/skyhawkradio/skyhawk06302010.mp3
There are but 4 arrays @ 20 mins 30 secs
And yet by August 30-31 2010 the NCRSG had come together and came up with One Array.
http://www.albionharbor.org/onearray.html
Going back in time 3 months previous;
Public comments May 20 2010 to the RSG and BRTF & Iteam presented at 3 locations
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/round2/rsg_05212010_pub_comments.mp3
15.4MB 1 hour 7 mins
July 21st Public comments in the ninth hour of a long day of protests were more raucous:
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/ninth_hour.mp3
18 MB 1 hr 20 mins
On August 30th in front of the RSG, public comments remain strong
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/08302010_pubcom.mp3
9.5 MB 42 mins
Just One MPA Can Ruin Your Whole Day
One MPA, like the Point Cabrillo SMR from Caspar Beach to Jack Peter's Creek (including Russian Gulch) is estimated on the low end to cause an economic impact to:
Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel - Potential Impact Analysis of
9% to Rockfish ocean food providers out of Fort Bragg, and
Commercial - Potential Impact Analysis Report of
11% to the Urchin fishery out of Albion & Fort Bragg harbors.
Commercial harvest of Edible Algae is not even mentioned, although one company alone would face a 20% impact and loss of 'easy safe access' to 2 large coastal onshore and nearshore areas where classes and culinary wildcrafting Seaweed and Sea Vegetable tours have occurred yearly.
October 24 2010,
On the North Coast, there are currently 6 MPA arrays being considered by the BRTF, and hundreds of versions of MPAs. There are Special Closures (10) and most of the North Coast rivers in Mendocino County are proposed Estuarine SMCA or SMP and none of these have received any economic impact analysis to date.
The North Coast California Large Marine Ecosystem and the California Current face a blue-green mythology of overfished stocks still in decline under the shadow of outlawed gear types and global wild-caught protein resource collapse, is just that - myths of the machine of BigGreen. Paid North Coast enviros, grant writers, and Protectionist Agendas mistakenly try to garner support for more MPAs, even though they are continually beaten in their logic and data sources, and don't even know the difference between which species will benefit and which species were once overfished (a decade ago), or how much regulation there is on the North Coast.
But, BigGreen reps, the Ocean Aquarium lawyer, the multi-million dollar Global Marina Man, the Waterfront Real Estate agenda, and the Oiligarchy Heiress on the BRTF want more MPAs - so many that it would be extreme and over the top, and then want us to trust them to cull it back. Who's in charge?
Some time ago Karen Garrison (NRDC) wrote Arnold;
Governor Should Stand Behind California Marine Act, Says NRDC -
Group Disputes Fish and Game Department's Decision to Suspend Landmark Law SAN FRANCISCO (January 13, 2004) The California Fish and Game Department should reverse its decision to suspend a law requiring the creation of marine reserves off California's coast, according to NRDC (the Natural Resources Defense Council). The national conservation group with offices in San Francisco and Santa Monica said Gov. Schwarzenegger should put his muscle into defending the state's landmark Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA).
"If the governor is serious about keeping his promise to protect California's environment and economy, then he won't let this important law die," said Karen Garrison, co-director of NRDC's ocean program. "This is about sound management of the ocean and protecting the rich web of ocean life."
Garrison disputed the Fish and Game Department's claim that it was forced to suspend the MLPA because of the budget crisis. "There's no doubt that we have a serious budget problem," she said, "but it's premature and unnecessary to just say 'stop.' It doesn't take $2 million to develop a plan. Delaying implementation of the Marine Life Protection Act won't help solve the budget mess, but it will steal valuable time that we need to solve our oceans crisis."
http://www.nrdc.org/media/pressreleases/040113c.asp
The MLPA bill to date is many tens of millions.
Welcome To California Corporate State Waters
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/06/05/18649960.php
MPAs will do nothing for Salmon, but they are always tossed into the conversation.
When it is finally understood by even the most staunch proponents of the most stringent closures 1) just what species may benefit, 2)or that it is fisheries management regulation outside of MPAs that will provide (as they do now) ecosystem resilience capacity and resource conservation benefits - we hear then, that maybe we can learn to "protect it better" or that "the Headlands and the tidepools have been loved to death". Like some kind of derivative dribble of fish stock options, on our futures.
From NMFS: status of the stocks
http://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/news.htm
"Our Living Oceans (Resources) 6th edition March 22, 2010
http://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/olo6th-edition.htm
Of particular interest to local North Coast residents involved with the MLPA and the status of "species likely to benefit" from MPAs: Unit 15: Pacific Coast Groundfisheries
http://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/olo6thedition/26--Unit%2015.pdf
Best available science shows that rockfish & other groundfish are rapidly recovering, and increasing in biomass, as a result of existing fishery management measures. Underline: Fish stocks are NOT "in decline"; Overfishing is NOT occurring in our region or anywhere on the west coast of the USA.
From Jim Martin, Mendocino County MLPA Outreach Coordinator
Recently, Defenders of Wildlife email alerts stated that California's marine wildlife and our coast are being threatened by toxins daily. Tell the California Department of Fish and Game to protect all wildlife and create new Marine Protected Areas in southern California.
Ho hum fiddle dee dum. The MLPA only goes after fishing and seaweed gathering as methods of "take". Agricultural runoff, industrial waste etc, along with oil spills are not covered, and the State Attorney General leaves it up to the ESA to define 'harm' and 'take' to species and/or the environment. The Attorney General's Informal Opinion of Sept 25th, 2009 (I have one of those) leaves it up to the ESA, which is only for legal activities, oil spills are illegal and thus the ESA doesn't apply. There are allowable takes, (like for the navy), mitigations, and then the MLPA only proposes protections - that cover the water column from the benthic layer to the surface, (disregarding State bottom-lands leases).
postscript:
According to NRDC Karen Garrison's January 2006 insistence to (Chair Isenberg), the BRTF has a mandate from Resources Secretary Mike Chrisman to submit alternative networks of MPAs by March 2006 and “may recommend a preferred alternative” to DFG. However, the Master Plan Framework adopted by the Fish & Game Commission in August is quite clear that the BRTF will recommend a preferred alternative to DFG. Specifically, Task 4, Activity 4.2 of the Framework (p. 32) says: “Forward proposals to Department. "
"The task force forwards alternative proposals for MPAs, a preferred alternative, initial evaluations, and the general management plan, together with its own evaluation, to the Department for its consideration and submission to the Commission.” (emphasis added)
This language reflects the fact that the BRTF was created to provide guidance and help the Department and Commission make difficult decisions. One of the most challenging decisions the Department faces is the choice of a preferred siting alternative (required by MLPA Section 2857 (a)). In our view, the Framework leaves no doubt that the BRTF’s role is to recommend alternatives, including a preferred alternative, to the Department.
As for the Science Team some individual's efforts can be summed up in SAT member Dr. Karina Nielson's statement of Dec 17th, 2009; "It's not the role of the SAT to recommend a method...."
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/ronkarina.mp3
150 kb Mp3
All along, we have been given one useless piece of information at a time.
One Unified Array, or No Way MLPA!
Tomas DiFiore
Commercial and Subsistence Seaweed Harvester
AHRA board member
On October 20, 2010, a resolution signed by seventeen local government agencies – a historical first for the region – was forwarded to the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative (MLPAI) by the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District.
The resolution urges the MLPAI Blue Ribbon Task Force and California Fish and Game Commission to adopt, without any alteration, the Unified Marine Protected Area (MPA) Array proposal developed by North Coast stakeholders and communities.
The resolution further urges that North Coast stakeholders and communities must be consulted if any changes are to be made to the Unified MPA Array.
North Coast Governments: Don't Mess with Unified MLPA Proposal
Article by Dan Bacher
Thursday Oct 21st, 2010 11:59 AM
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/10/21/18661915.php
But two days later, a memo titled: California Marine Life Protection Act Initiative, MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force Options for Potential Draft Motion 3: Adopting a Preferred Alternative MPA Proposal - October 22, 2010 was sent to Cindy Gustafson the Chair of the BRTF.
The last sentence on p. 18 sums it all up nicely... MPA(s) added to capture missing habitats may also result in increased potential socioeconomic impacts for commercial and recreational fisheries.
Also: The NCRSG MPA Proposal, could be modified to:
• for any MPA or SMRMA with proposed uses intended to accommodate tribal uses, only include those allowed uses with a moderate-high or high level of protection; all
proposed uses to accommodate tribes and tribal communities with a moderate,
moderate-low or low level of protection would not be included; and
• add MPA(s) to capture missing habitats, looking to rounds 1 and 2 for MPA boundaries
proposed by community groups or the NCRSG as a starting point, and
• include an accompanying statement that traditional tribal uses are intended within the
MPAs and SMRMAs when there is a legislative or administrative change that allows
only tribes and tribal communities to engage in traditional tribal uses within MPAs and
SMRMAs.
Like Tribal Sovereignty is on hold while the Blue Ribbon Task Force and Big Green have what they wanted - more MPAs to choose from than local communities had originally proposed, which early on had looked a lot like ideas converging towards one array.
Apparently there are layers of transparency available in MarineMap and the MLPA Initiative Team Arnold Cup Masters Round 3 Closing Ceremony tomorrow and Tuesday.
Download a 4 page quick sheet compilation PDF (100 kb) of I Team Document V.1. staff memo to the BRTF dated 10 22 2010
http://www.albionharbor.org/oceana/brtf_V1_extremelyimpressed.pdf
The full 18 page staff memo can be found here:
http://www.albionharbor.org/oceana/V1StaffMemo_NC_Gustafson.pdf
At the May 4th 2010 BRTF meeting in Crescent City the BRTF heard Karen Garrison, NRDC, tell them to get on with it
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/round2/kg.mp3
428kb 1min 47secs
Gregory Schem, Global Marina Developer, had suggested a bookends approach
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/round2/bookends_ipa.mp3
1.7MB 7mins 20secs
The extreme 'bookends and preferred size arrays' suggestion garnered much discussion among the BRTF and later on, TOC and NRDC developed arrays that contained everything from Round 1 and 2 as an updated set of arrays.
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/round2/bookends_discussion.mp3
5.4MB 23mins 26secs
Ken Wiseman on 06 30 2010 in a live interview on KZYX states (just as Melissa Miller-Henson did the day previous on AM 1300 Jefferson County Public Radio) that there were only 4 arrays.
SkyHawk Radio: Full 37 minute interview with MLPA Executive Director Ken Wiseman
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/skyhawkradio/skyhawk06302010.mp3
There are but 4 arrays @ 20 mins 30 secs
And yet by August 30-31 2010 the NCRSG had come together and came up with One Array.
http://www.albionharbor.org/onearray.html
Going back in time 3 months previous;
Public comments May 20 2010 to the RSG and BRTF & Iteam presented at 3 locations
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/round2/rsg_05212010_pub_comments.mp3
15.4MB 1 hour 7 mins
July 21st Public comments in the ninth hour of a long day of protests were more raucous:
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/ninth_hour.mp3
18 MB 1 hr 20 mins
On August 30th in front of the RSG, public comments remain strong
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/08302010_pubcom.mp3
9.5 MB 42 mins
Just One MPA Can Ruin Your Whole Day
One MPA, like the Point Cabrillo SMR from Caspar Beach to Jack Peter's Creek (including Russian Gulch) is estimated on the low end to cause an economic impact to:
Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel - Potential Impact Analysis of
9% to Rockfish ocean food providers out of Fort Bragg, and
Commercial - Potential Impact Analysis Report of
11% to the Urchin fishery out of Albion & Fort Bragg harbors.
Commercial harvest of Edible Algae is not even mentioned, although one company alone would face a 20% impact and loss of 'easy safe access' to 2 large coastal onshore and nearshore areas where classes and culinary wildcrafting Seaweed and Sea Vegetable tours have occurred yearly.
October 24 2010,
On the North Coast, there are currently 6 MPA arrays being considered by the BRTF, and hundreds of versions of MPAs. There are Special Closures (10) and most of the North Coast rivers in Mendocino County are proposed Estuarine SMCA or SMP and none of these have received any economic impact analysis to date.
The North Coast California Large Marine Ecosystem and the California Current face a blue-green mythology of overfished stocks still in decline under the shadow of outlawed gear types and global wild-caught protein resource collapse, is just that - myths of the machine of BigGreen. Paid North Coast enviros, grant writers, and Protectionist Agendas mistakenly try to garner support for more MPAs, even though they are continually beaten in their logic and data sources, and don't even know the difference between which species will benefit and which species were once overfished (a decade ago), or how much regulation there is on the North Coast.
But, BigGreen reps, the Ocean Aquarium lawyer, the multi-million dollar Global Marina Man, the Waterfront Real Estate agenda, and the Oiligarchy Heiress on the BRTF want more MPAs - so many that it would be extreme and over the top, and then want us to trust them to cull it back. Who's in charge?
Some time ago Karen Garrison (NRDC) wrote Arnold;
Governor Should Stand Behind California Marine Act, Says NRDC -
Group Disputes Fish and Game Department's Decision to Suspend Landmark Law SAN FRANCISCO (January 13, 2004) The California Fish and Game Department should reverse its decision to suspend a law requiring the creation of marine reserves off California's coast, according to NRDC (the Natural Resources Defense Council). The national conservation group with offices in San Francisco and Santa Monica said Gov. Schwarzenegger should put his muscle into defending the state's landmark Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA).
"If the governor is serious about keeping his promise to protect California's environment and economy, then he won't let this important law die," said Karen Garrison, co-director of NRDC's ocean program. "This is about sound management of the ocean and protecting the rich web of ocean life."
Garrison disputed the Fish and Game Department's claim that it was forced to suspend the MLPA because of the budget crisis. "There's no doubt that we have a serious budget problem," she said, "but it's premature and unnecessary to just say 'stop.' It doesn't take $2 million to develop a plan. Delaying implementation of the Marine Life Protection Act won't help solve the budget mess, but it will steal valuable time that we need to solve our oceans crisis."
http://www.nrdc.org/media/pressreleases/040113c.asp
The MLPA bill to date is many tens of millions.
Welcome To California Corporate State Waters
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/06/05/18649960.php
MPAs will do nothing for Salmon, but they are always tossed into the conversation.
When it is finally understood by even the most staunch proponents of the most stringent closures 1) just what species may benefit, 2)or that it is fisheries management regulation outside of MPAs that will provide (as they do now) ecosystem resilience capacity and resource conservation benefits - we hear then, that maybe we can learn to "protect it better" or that "the Headlands and the tidepools have been loved to death". Like some kind of derivative dribble of fish stock options, on our futures.
From NMFS: status of the stocks
http://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/news.htm
"Our Living Oceans (Resources) 6th edition March 22, 2010
http://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/olo6th-edition.htm
Of particular interest to local North Coast residents involved with the MLPA and the status of "species likely to benefit" from MPAs: Unit 15: Pacific Coast Groundfisheries
http://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/olo6thedition/26--Unit%2015.pdf
Best available science shows that rockfish & other groundfish are rapidly recovering, and increasing in biomass, as a result of existing fishery management measures. Underline: Fish stocks are NOT "in decline"; Overfishing is NOT occurring in our region or anywhere on the west coast of the USA.
From Jim Martin, Mendocino County MLPA Outreach Coordinator
Recently, Defenders of Wildlife email alerts stated that California's marine wildlife and our coast are being threatened by toxins daily. Tell the California Department of Fish and Game to protect all wildlife and create new Marine Protected Areas in southern California.
Ho hum fiddle dee dum. The MLPA only goes after fishing and seaweed gathering as methods of "take". Agricultural runoff, industrial waste etc, along with oil spills are not covered, and the State Attorney General leaves it up to the ESA to define 'harm' and 'take' to species and/or the environment. The Attorney General's Informal Opinion of Sept 25th, 2009 (I have one of those) leaves it up to the ESA, which is only for legal activities, oil spills are illegal and thus the ESA doesn't apply. There are allowable takes, (like for the navy), mitigations, and then the MLPA only proposes protections - that cover the water column from the benthic layer to the surface, (disregarding State bottom-lands leases).
postscript:
According to NRDC Karen Garrison's January 2006 insistence to (Chair Isenberg), the BRTF has a mandate from Resources Secretary Mike Chrisman to submit alternative networks of MPAs by March 2006 and “may recommend a preferred alternative” to DFG. However, the Master Plan Framework adopted by the Fish & Game Commission in August is quite clear that the BRTF will recommend a preferred alternative to DFG. Specifically, Task 4, Activity 4.2 of the Framework (p. 32) says: “Forward proposals to Department. "
"The task force forwards alternative proposals for MPAs, a preferred alternative, initial evaluations, and the general management plan, together with its own evaluation, to the Department for its consideration and submission to the Commission.” (emphasis added)
This language reflects the fact that the BRTF was created to provide guidance and help the Department and Commission make difficult decisions. One of the most challenging decisions the Department faces is the choice of a preferred siting alternative (required by MLPA Section 2857 (a)). In our view, the Framework leaves no doubt that the BRTF’s role is to recommend alternatives, including a preferred alternative, to the Department.
As for the Science Team some individual's efforts can be summed up in SAT member Dr. Karina Nielson's statement of Dec 17th, 2009; "It's not the role of the SAT to recommend a method...."
http://www.albionharbor.org/audiotakes/ronkarina.mp3
150 kb Mp3
All along, we have been given one useless piece of information at a time.
One Unified Array, or No Way MLPA!
Tomas DiFiore
Commercial and Subsistence Seaweed Harvester
AHRA board member
For more information:
http://www.albionharbor.org
Add Your Comments
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$110.00 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