Announcements - August, 2008

MLPA AND YOU!
Ready Or Not Our Time Has Come!

For at least two years, our fishing fraternity has been hearing speakers, reading in the media and listening to discussions among members about that mysterious process called the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA). We can get a pretty good hint of how this will impact our future fishing rights by reviewing decisions made along the Central Coast (CCSR) and also the North Central Coast (NCCSR).

What is the MLPA? WHY DO SO FEW OF US GET INVOLVED?

Read about what happened to help you understand and help you to make your own decisions. The current process (So. Cal.) involves the area from Pt. Conception to the Mexican border. Originally passed into California law in 1999, MLPA languished for want of funding. The act was written to preserve the state's oceanic resources- i.e. up to 3 miles from shore. The lack of funds was overcome when in (2005) a public/private partnership was formed between the California Resources Agency and a new entity called the Resource Legal Fund Foundation (RLFF) and Department of Fish & Game via an additional initiative called the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative (MLPAI). A memorandum of understanding (MOU) was executed guaranteeing the Blue Ribbon Task Force-(BRFT) major discretion in the choice of alternatives. Alternatives are the areas targeted for restrictions or closures. The BRTF is a politically appointed body which holds hearings, gets scientific advise, deals with the appointed regional stakeholders and then makes recommendations to the Fish & Game Commission concerning restrictions and what extractive activities, if any, may take place.

There is some suggestion that private foundations, which because of their financial underwriting, may exercise an unfair influence on a public process.

The Central Coast phase, now completed, stretches from (Pigeon Point - San Mateo County to Pt. Conception- Santa Barbara County). It was the first of five study areas- Central Coast Study Region (CCSR)- planned along California's 1100 mile coast.

Restrictions for the Central Coast have been announced and they went into effect in Sept. 07, 2007 being composed of 29 MPAs approximating about 18% of that part of our coast. It is understood that RLFF would bear the costs of this implementation, including some salaries and that RLFF is funded by some major foundations. Indeed, Coastside Fishing Club, a major player, had brought a suit challenging this private funding but did not prevail in court.

The North Central Coast region (NCCSR) runs from Alder Creek (Mendocino County) to Pigeon Point (San Mateo County). Proposals for the North Central Coast were presented June 11th and final regulations are to be adopted by the beginning of next year. Proposals containing elements suggested by the various North Central Coast stakeholders were identified as options: 1-3, 2-XA, and 4. Without going into details on all these options, note that 1-3 is a mixed one. 2-XA is the fishermen's option and 4 is suggested by the NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council). Additionally the BRTF made its own recommendations. These numbers represented certain specific areas selected by the various stakeholders, including scientists, fishermen both recreational and commercial, processors, party boat owners, landing operators, etc.

The fishing public should also note that the composition of the BRFT (Blue Ribbon Task Force) consists of politically appointed members and not necessarily fishermen familiar with the issues. The BRFT will consist of 7 members for the South Coast Study Region. A Science Advisory Team (SAT) was to offer the best available scientific input. The California Fisheries Coalition (CFC) challenged some of their conclusions. It had engaged some renowned scientists whose conclusions were sometimes at odds with those of the SAT for the Central Coast Study Region.

WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR OUR AREA?

When it comes to the South Coast Study Region (SCSR) a number of hearings will be held by DFG /BRTF and input will be furnished after extensive reports by the South Coast Regional Stakeholder Group. There will be socio-economic studies, and stakeholders will represent recreational and commercial fishing interests. Stakeholders should be well prepared as the hearings have the BRTF panel supported by the DFG and their specially selected science advisors as possible adversaries.

Stakeholders - i.e. representing various interests - have to meet certain criteria for their selection. Selections will be made to achieve diversity in the process. A request for nominations to the South Coast Regional Stakeholder Group was made in June. The Director of the Department of Fish & Game will make the final appointments, in consultation with the Chairman of the BRTF, sometime in September.

It is by this process that the proposals for restrictive areas are arrived at. The members of the BRTF will have the final say and convey their decisions to the Fish & Game Commission for adoption. At the final North Central hearings for instance, proposals ranged from 18% to 27% of the total areas. The more restrictive numbers were endorsed by Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). An NGO = Non governmental organization. (In this context = Conservation organizations.) Some NGO's are adamant about closing down our fisheries.

Understand that the LARRC and other recreational groups will abide by any regulations passed in the interest of preserving the oceans. We should work however to assure a level playing field. Some shortcomings in the process have already become apparent in the work done so far. Perhaps there were some lessons to be learned. Our major concerns should rest with the following: input and funding by private organizations into a public process, refusal to recognize pollution and climate changes, water quality as a major contributing factor, existing restrictions already in place, fairness in the choice of administrative board members. Enforcement of restrictions dealing with habitat degeneration and excessive takes should also be on this list.

SOME MAJOR PLAYERS

Among the many stakeholder groups are two important major players striving to maintain 'their' fisheries. One is the California Fisheries Coalition (CFC). They represent most of the various commercial fishing organizations and their alliance also includes the Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA). CFC consists of 23 commercial and recreational organizations. They claim to represent 14,000 fishermen operating 4,000 vessels carrying one million passengers and having 172,000 employees. Total economic value is pegged at $5.5B. (Stats quoted are from '06.)

The second major group is the Partnership for Sustainable Oceans (PSO). This newly minted organization includes Sportfishing Assn of California (SAC), Southern California Marine Assn., Coastside Fishing Club, American Sportfishing Assn (ASA), National Marine Mfg. Assn, and the Northern Cal Kayakers. Saltwater sportfishing in California is worth $2.7B with tax revenue generated at $336M.

The PSO announced in mid July ('08) that UASC was no longer a member of this group. While it certainly represents a major blow to unity, we have not been able to find out the exact reasons for this move.

Additionally keep in mind restrictions already in place for the Channel Islands. NOAA describes these as a network of MPAs. 11 of these marine reserves allow for no take and harvest. Two Marine Conservation areas allow a limited take of lobsters and pelagics. This MPA network encompasses 241 square nautical miles (318 square miles) making it the largest network off the continental U.S. You should also be aware that the State Parks and Recreation Commission has introduced itself into the process in order to control shore angling and abalone dive sites, among others. Their policy re: MLPA is not yet clear.

WHAT CAN YOU DO?

1- We are all stakeholders in a way. So communicate with the local Stakeholder reps that will try to convey our wishes to the committees at the hearing and also create plausible documents for the decision makers. This means identifying your regional stakeholder representative. He will be working on your behalf. Does your club have representation? The need is urgent. Latest word on selection of stakeholder reps is that this will be done by September. The MLPA staff has an email list to which you can subscribe for announcements of meetings and opportunities for public comment - http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/mailinglist.asp

2- Write a letter to Government officials indicating your wants and objections. The recent request to write letters supporting proposal 2X-A is but one example. It represented the optimal choice for both recreational and commercial fishermen during the North Central deliberations. It is a form of direct lobbying!

3- Attend some of the local meetings, which you will be made aware of by the MLPA e-mail list and on the various websites. This is an excellent way to familiarize yourself - carpool with a buddy. A series of workshops has taken place, dealing with socio-economic matters, in places like San Pedro, Oxnard, etc. These were conducted by an outfit called Ecotrust - engaged by the state- to collect data on fishing uses and values - which will affect marine protected area planning.

4- Call on your environmental committee - LARRC is one of the few clubs that has one - to keep you posted and offer them your input.

5- Refer to the attached listing of web contacts, where you can find all the information that's current. Meetings, workshops, fundraisers, and other items re: the MLPA process will be posted on your LARRC.org website. Simply select "Announcements" to get the latest.

6- Your continued membership in an organized fishing group will allow it to lobby more effectively with the weight of numbers behind it and lend financial support for the multitude of activities surely to take place

LISTING OF WEB ADDRESSES FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Channel Islands - http://channelislands.noaa.gov/marineres/main.html

MLPA Initiative Mailing List - http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/mailinglist.asp

BRTF Comments - http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/publiccomments.asp

Governor: http://www.gov.ca.gov/interact

Secretary of Resources: secretary@resources.ca.gov

Schedules for future meetings - (916) 654-1885 or visit http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/meetings_sc.asp

This document: Some changes were made in mid August. No doubt there will be additional revisions. Meantime LARRC suggests that you download this Informative (CLICK HERE) and give it as much distribution as possible.

This informative was developed by the Los Angeles Rod & Reel Club (LARRC.org) as a public service. It is our hope that all concerned fishermen will engage in some part of the process. Truly our future fisheries are at stake. Wide distribution of this document can only help disseminate the information. This might help preserve an important part of our lives. A number of workshops and hearings will be planned by the DFG with final conclusions to be announced during the last quarter of 2009.