Surfrider MLPA meetings starting Tue 9/23 7PM S.C. [Archive] - Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge

forcefed

09-22-2009, 12:09 AM

Being who they in this area, I'm sure they will have an influence with this "letter".

Surfrider
Explore Maps of Marine Protected Areas with the Surfrider Foundation
September 20, 2009
PRESS RELEASE

Decades of overfishing, coastal development, and pollution have taken a toll on Southern California's ocean environment. To help improve our ocean's health, the State is setting aside protected zones similar to state parks so that marine life can thrive.

This is one of your last chances to give meaningful input on where marine protected areas should be located! Please join Surfrider to learn more about the Marine Life Protection Act and to discuss the proposed maps. After the community forums, will compile all constructive comments into a letter that will be sent to decision makers before the final vote. We need to hear from you!

Agenda:

7:00-7:10--Welcome and brief overview.
7:10-7:20--Summary of Surfrider's outreach efforts over the past year and what we learned from local communities and Surfrider supporters.
7:20-7:40--Overview and discussion of each map.
7:40-8:00--Questions & Answers.
<?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O /><O:P>WHEN: Four different forums will be held in the following areas:Orange County, Santa Barbara, Los Angeles and San Diego.All forums will be from 7-8pm.</O:P>

Sept 23. San Clemente Senior Center: 242 Avenida Del Mar. San Clemente, CA 92672.
Sept 24.Watershed Resource Center:2981 Cliff Drive.Santa Barbara, CA 93109
Sept 29.Santa Monica Library--Ocean Park Branch: 2601 Main St.Santa Monica, CA 90405
Sept 30.Encinitas Community Center: 1140 Oakcrest Park Drive. Encinitas, CA 92024

Community Forum Information:
September 23, Wednesday. 7-8pm
San Clemente Community/Senior Center
242 Avenida Del Mar
San Clemente, CA 92672-4005
Use the Library building entrance on Del Mar Street, and the Senior Center is on your left side of the lobby.
:eek:
http://www.surfrider.org/files/FAQSurfriderMLPA%20.pdf (http://www.surfrider.org/files/FAQSurfriderMLPA%20.pdf)
http://www.surfrider.org/files/SF_MPAs_Access_Memo.pdf
http://www.surfrider.org/policy_mpa.asp

About the Marine Life Protection Act

The MLPA is a law that requires the state to establish a "network" of marine protected areas from Oregon to the Mexican border. The goals of the MLPA are to: 'set aside' areas of the ocean to increase fish populations, enhance marine habitat, and to improve recreational and educational opportunities. Over the past year, has been working with diverse groups of people including recreationalists, fishermen, environmentalists, and Chapter activists to ensure the law is effectively implemented. To learn more go here: Surfrider on the Marine Life Protection Act (http://mlpasurfrider.blogspot.com/) or email Ssekich@surfrider.org (Ssekich@surfrider.org)

peguinpower

09-22-2009, 06:00 AM

they seem to be going against the grain of this section of the law.....

"to improve recreational and educational opportunities"

I'm getting desperate :(

bellcon

09-22-2009, 06:40 AM

They better be careful what they wish for...
They just might have to change their name from
Surfrider
to
SurfWatcher
in the future...

dmrides

09-22-2009, 12:28 PM

I think that we should all attend these meetings and cordially discuss our ideas and goals with them. I see quite a few people fishing at La Jolla on stand up paddle boards, one would only assume that they are Surfrider members. I also heard Bird on the morning surf report on 94.9 this morning saying that the surf was small and that he would recommend that you go fishing today rather than surfing. Seems like even Surfrider members would also be bummed about the closure.

Make your voices heard. Show up and let them know your thoughts. Of course do so in a respectful way, but let our voices be heard.

Dan

09-22-2009, 12:34 PM

Stefanie at Surfrider is doing a good job balancing our interests. Pick the meeting close to you and make your points!

Surfrider can throw their weight around in a major way on issues.....the other enviros are not stoked on their moderate stance on this issue.

Matt

09-22-2009, 12:48 PM

Ok so let me lay something out for many of you "informed" people regarding surfrider.....I have been chatting with two of their main people and I assure you they are more closely leaning to our side than many of you think. They have been taking a ton of flack for not joining the "enviro" side, in my chats with them they have been extremely open minded and supportive of keeping Lj open and not increasing the current MPA.....So hear them out and go up and express your opinions in a polite and courteous manner and you may just find that they are more on your side than you think!! Big PROPS should go to both Stefanie and Joe Geever, THANK YOU BOTH VERY MUCH FOR THE TIME YOU HAVE TAKEN TO CHAT WITH ME AND OTHERS!!

Tman

09-22-2009, 12:56 PM

We will be at the Enc. one.

I will tell Clay that they are surfers like him, and have him do a bit of talking with them...;)

Iparker

09-22-2009, 01:12 PM

I second those comments of Matt and Dan and I have also had similar conversations with Chad Nelsen at Surfrider. While they support the MLPA process, I've been told by several times that they have lobbied for a balanced closure that considers all users. A good example of this was the <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comhttp://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/ /><st1:City w:st=Laguna Beach</st1:City> city council meeting where they city was considering a motion that favored a city wide MLPA closure and <st1:country-region w:st="on"><ST1:pChad </st1:country-region>spoke against the motion.

Gino

09-22-2009, 01:42 PM

That letter doesnt express in any way they are looking out for our fishing interest. Depsite individual comments and discussions.

Opening the letter with "decades of overfishing..."

The letter is a hard copy. Its public, unless they are willing to publish a letter to kayakfisherman showing they are out for a balanced resolution.

I dont buy it

joyjiggin'

09-22-2009, 06:19 PM

"Decades of Overfishing/"... I don't buy it either. ...smells fishy.

Billy V

09-22-2009, 09:40 PM

We will see soon enough when their letter is released.

805gregg

09-23-2009, 06:20 AM

Surfrider needs to stick with surf related issues. They should have nothing to do with other issues, that's why the founder of surfrider quit.

dmrides

09-23-2009, 06:32 AM

I appreciate your guys comments regarding your insight into Surfrider. I think this is great to know that they are hearing us and are open to present on behalf of those who speak up and express what it is that they want and why they want it. Since this is the case, this is all the more reason to reiterate to Surfrider how important keeping access to La Jolla is to us yakkers.

Even if organizations do not support our cause, it never hurts to graciously remind them of how many people are in support of keeping access to our fishing grounds.

I think again it comes down to the fact that as a community of kayak fishermen who want to continue to have access to the areas we cherish, we need to make sure the groups that have the ability to have influence are aware of how many people want to protect fishing grounds like La Jolla.

I think that anyone who fishes at La Jolla, or fishes in general, needs to write an email, send a letter or show up to any meetings about the MLPA just to show that you are in support of keeping La Jolla open. If enough people send this message, we will be heard and this will go a long way.

I would hate to be sitting on my couch next year wishing that I could be fishing, but knowing that I did nothing to make that happen.

Iparker

09-23-2009, 08:52 PM

Tman

09-23-2009, 09:04 PM

I attended the San Clemente meeting and left with the impression they had a true interest in feedback from the consumptive community and was glad I went. Not a huge turnout, but I'd guess more consumptives than pro-closure people.

The first 35 minutes is stuff you already know, but if they are in your area, I'd suggest going to provide your feedback.

Iparker, thanks for that feedback...:notworthy:

Hopefully that will enlighten individuals of the necessity of becoming aware...

Or, in simpler terms, show your arses up.

Thanks for showing up bro and giving us feedback.

zenspearo

09-24-2009, 11:23 AM

Big PROPS should go to both Stefanie and Joe Geever,

Never met Joe Geever but is he the guy in this video?

http://www.spearboard.com/showthread.php?t=92742

Matt

09-24-2009, 11:32 AM

Yes he is in there, my bad I missed his part, i fast forwarded it to not have to listen to the lame banter, sorry for that. Look the MPA's are a fact and they are going to happen, and from every talk I have had they are wanting to help us keep LJ open. I have been to a great many meetings and have spoken with SR staff members many times, they are not anti-consumptive users, they realize that close to 45% of their membership are fisherman. They do support the creation of MPA's but they are also willing to help us as Kayakers to try and keep the majority of LJ open, which to me personally is the only part of the fight I actually care about. Closed mindedness will not win, sitting there and saying "fuck coastkeeper", "NO CLOSURES ANYWHERE!", aren't really helping us! Showing up with a bloodydecks shirt showing "over the top" gore is not going to help us! Speak intelligently, be polite, and try using the honey not venom method and we may just save the extremely important spots to us!!!

I am not saying to trust anyone in this process completely, but I am desperately trying to get us allies in order to keep parts of La Jolla/Black's, Malibu, Dana Point and others as open as possible to get us the access we want. Please, please, please help everyone out and show up to the meetings and try and fight the good fight!

Hey you may not agree with everything but we have got to try and win within the system that has been established!

Billy V

09-24-2009, 12:00 PM

I'll be there.

Everybody who fishes La Jolla, or Anywhere Else on a kayak has no excuse not to show up.

-I have spoken to almost every New Faced Kayak Angler I meet out there in LJ and stress the importance of attending these meeting.
-Probable to the extent of sounding a little crazy! (but thats mostly the Jersey in Me.) but WTF I'm fighting to Win.
---------------------------------------

I can't wait until this shit^y process is over, and we can wash this bad taste from our mouths.
In spite of all the stress and turmoil the MLPA has created among us it has solidified friendships that will be long lasting.
---------------------------------------
I hope to see all of you there.

Iparker

09-24-2009, 03:51 PM

Ditto to what Matt said. If you have an hour to spare, I would suggest going so your voices are heard.

zenspearo

09-24-2009, 04:43 PM

Matt,

My comment was not directed at you, and if anyone takes it that way, let it be part of the record that I was questioning where Joe Geever and more specifically where SR stands.

Let's be clear.

If I could be under the impression that he's backing greater closures (and I've been to a shitload of these meetings), based on his and other SR reps public testimonies and his appearance in this video, then rest assured that the public at large and the BRTF is getting the same message that SR is supporting larger closures.

I'm interested in LJ but I am also interested to see other areas get some relief. If other areas are slammed, rest assured that we'll see more fishermen, divers, kayakfishermen, boaters in the little tiny NW corner of La Jolla. Same for PV, same for Point Dume, same for any other areas.

We in the diver communities also have a huge stake in this, including the LJ area, and we also got the "hey-we-try-to-help-you-guys" song and dance from certain SR members.

Hey, then how about showing us that you mean it, SR? Don't tell ME or my fellow divers in whisper. Not when it's the 23rd hour. Tell the BRTF, tell the RSG, tell the SAT, tell the public. So far, the curtain is about to fall, we've seen SR publicly speaking up for more closures and in propaganda videos so pardon the eff out of me for being skeptical of SR intention at this time.

But I'd second the thoughts that 1) it's worth it to go and see what they have to say and put in our 2 cents, and 2) divided we fall.

joe

Not him Joe! Look the MPA's are a fact and they are going to happen, and from every talk I have had they are wanting to help us keep LJ open. I have been to a great many meetings and have spoken with SR staff members many times, they are not anti-consumptive users, they realize that close to 45% of their membership are fisherman. They do support the creation of MPA's but they are also willing to help us as Kayakers to try and keep the majority of LJ open, which to me personally is the only part of the fight I actually care about. Closed mindedness will not win, sitting there and saying "fuck coastkeeper", "NO CLOSURES ANYWHERE!", aren't really helping us! Showing up with a bloodydecks shirt showing "over the top" gore is not going to help us! Speak intelligently, be polite, and try using the honey not venom method and we may just save the extremely important spots to us!!!

I am not saying to trust anyone in this process completely, but I am desperately trying to get us allies in order to keep parts of La Jolla/Black's, Malibu, Dana Point and others as open as possible to get us the access we want. Please, please, please help everyone out and show up to the meetings and try and fight the good fight!

Hey you may not agree with everything but we have got to try and win within the system that has been established!

Holy Mackerel

09-24-2009, 04:54 PM

Never met Joe Geever but is he the guy in this video?

http://www.spearboard.com/showthread.php?t=92742

Joe Geever is in that video, (small cameo, but indicting) and this video is the biggest piece of BS propaganda I have seen. Very one-sided. :rolleyes:

I know some of you have been working with SR, (Thank YOU!) and I hope they continue to act in good faith. From what I have heard they were receptive to working with keeping a larger portion of LJ open to fishing. I have a problem with their fundamental stance on closing access, and lack of focus on pollution, water quality, in the MLPA, among other things, but I will bite my tongue right now.

If you attend this meeting, as has always been asked by kayakers, remember to discuss your thoughts with civility.

so cal shaggy

09-24-2009, 05:34 PM

Matt, I hope that you are correct about the stance of the SRF because believe me, after attending multiple meetings and speaking to SRF members having them state "we want to work with you guys and not close off access to anyone" then listen to those very same SRF members make statements to the RSG, BRTF or SAT like "we need to close as much ocean as possible" or "we are only closing 3% of the coast." great except that most to all of the fish are in that 3% leaving very little areas for anglers to fish. It is difficult to believe what they state in public. Also the fact that a very outspoken anti fishing BRTF member is on the board for SRF I am not sure I believe everything they tell me. I hope they are on board to help you save LJ but I have not heard anything from them regarding Laguna which is under serious pressure to be completely closed which would be all of the Orange County area forcing those of us that live in that area to drive a minimum of over 60 miles to go diving and fishing.

Tman

09-24-2009, 05:56 PM

Just my thoughts...

If they do succeed in closing Laguna because of the $ there, and us fishers being an eye sore to certain people, being how they don't like to look out and see kayakers and the such out disturbing their view, what say we plan a couple

NON-FISHING kayak regattas????

Paddle around, catch some waves, have a big ol' BBQ party on the beach afterwards...:the_finger:

And make sure we Q a bunch of fish and throw the carcasses in the water after we fillet 'em....:sifone:

Holy Mackerel

09-24-2009, 08:23 PM

I think there is some skepticism amongst fisherman/spearos with Surf Rider, and that it is justified. But they have shown good faith with regards to La Jolla (not knowledgeable about other areas).

This thread has been constructive, thus far, but before it turns bashing Surf Rider, (and it hasn't) I think we should see if they are sincere in their good will, and continue to work with its moderate representatives.

tylerdurden

09-25-2009, 10:15 AM

My take, surf rider isn't for us and aren't against us. They kind of straddle some knife edge trying to cater to both sides but fail.

I really wish in their public comment they would come and say something about keeping a specific area open for fishing because of access isues. In private they have been supportive of our access issues as kayakers though. As of yet they have not explicitly stated this in public comment for a specific area that I know of, and it keeps me from supporting them. They support the process in general which is troubling.

When I talked to one of them, they seemed to be interested in taking as much of LJ as possible and knowing exactly where the line was that would piss us off.

Dan

09-25-2009, 12:25 PM

When I talked to one of them, they seemed to be interested in taking as much of LJ as possible and knowing exactly where the line was that would piss us off.

Isn't that better than them not knowing?? I took them to the edge of the land and showed them that exact spot.

Meagan from Coast Keeper and I met to discuss this exact line and really spent alot of time going over the area and what their stance was and where our pain centers were....

Then, in the next round of maps, the Coast Keeper (Kate Hanley-RSG) MPA retreated to that exact spot....is that a coincidence?

Don't blow your chance to educate and contribute to the Surfrider forum by yelling and venting on them. Their letter to the BRTF will hold water. They are very well respected. They have seen the end game of this process in the North Central coast and know that it is going to get really slippery in the hands of the BRTF.....we should learn from them and try and synch up as much as possible. Agree on everything with them? Probably not....but the ability to access them and provide input is a good opportunity.

tylerdurden

09-25-2009, 01:05 PM

I know what your saying Dan. I am frustrated with their seeming lack of public stance on which map they like, or what areas they prefer to close or stay open. I just wish they would give some specific public endorsement or stance, not a general thumbs up to the process.

SR is a very respected organization and has done a lot of good things. Their opinion carries weight and I only hope they side with reason. Nothing hurts our chances more than someone ranting and raving at people. It doesn't and hasn't gotten us anywhere.

tylerdurden

09-29-2009, 08:17 AM

bump.

Tomorrow night. Another chance to show up and push for what is right. We need to be respectful, but we need to be heard too.

tylerdurden

09-30-2009, 10:51 AM

bump again. Tonight 7pm. Another chance to do some good for our fishing future.

Sept 30.Encinitas Community Center: 1140 Oakcrest Park Drive. Encinitas, CA 92024

Tman

09-30-2009, 11:12 AM

The Fishcatcher aka Grommet, and I will be there...

I told Clay to kindly remind them that he has 2 boards and 1 kayak...

that he is one of them, and needs to let them know that...

Billy V

09-30-2009, 03:10 PM

bump again. Tonight 7pm. Another chance to do some good for our fishing future.

Sept 30.Encinitas Community Center: 1140 Oakcrest Park Drive. Encinitas, CA 92024

Who is Going to This Meeting?

Dan

10-01-2009, 08:21 AM

Holy Mackerel

10-01-2009, 08:23 AM

At the meeting last night, most attendees were in support of the shapes presented in WG3 for north county and San Diego.....please send your specific comments on any of the areas that you feel strongly about to Stefanie Sekich at ssekich@surfrider.org The memo they are compliling will be high impact, so speak up!

A quick email with the subject: MLPA Community Forum Comments

A quick one liner is fine. DO IT!!!!

(how was that guy that popped off to Tman? holy crap)

Thanks Dan! Remember to be polite in your email, no use to accuse SR for anything. Just state why you support a proposal, for example, WG2. :sifone:

Tman

10-01-2009, 09:19 AM

(how was that guy that popped off to Tman? holy crap)

Yah, that was hilarious...hope he reads this...

Dan is referring to a comment some douchebag made about how I "shouldn't take a 50lb 9 year old out in the ocean if he can't handle it".

First of all Einstein, the comment I had made was how unsafe it is to have a 9 year old paddle 3 miles out to fish.

Second, he is 75lbs, not 50lbs.

And finally, you should remember this quote..."It is best to keep ones mouth closed and look like a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

Kayakers let it fly after his comment, me with 'Are you insulting my parenting skills' and 'He has 2 surfboards. So he whouldn't surf either?'

Then someone else who shall go unnamed really let it fly...his tale to tell.

Clay couldn't believe that an adult would insult a kid.

Needless to say, poor Stefanie was shocked he said that. As were others.

And nope I am not bashing Surfrider, just question their choice of members. Some members actually supported us on the 'dip net' issue and understood.

Unlike the other dip that spoke out....

"If you make an ass out of yourself, there will always be someone to ride you"

Billy V

10-01-2009, 09:19 AM

At the meeting last night, most attendees were in support of the shapes presented in WG3 for north county and San Diego.....please send your specific comments on any of the areas that you feel strongly about to Stefanie Sekich at ssekich@surfrider.org The memo they are compliling will be high impact, so speak up!

A quick email with the subject: MLPA Community Forum Comments

A quick one liner is fine. DO IT!!!!

(how was that guy that popped off to Tman? holy crap)

Dan,

I spent a few minutes speaking with Stefanie, and Joe after the meeting. She asked that you specifically submit an e mail to Her summarizing the message we spoke about last night.

I will do the same.
ie. Map we support, Dip Net issue on WG3 , and our preferred boundaries.

Billy

Billy V

10-01-2009, 09:31 AM

Kayakers let it fly after his comment, me with 'Are you insulting my parenting skills' and 'He has 2 surfboards. So he whouldn't surf either?'

Then someone else who shall go unnamed really let it fly...his tale to tell.

Clay couldn't believe that an adult would insult a kid.

Needless to say, poor Stefanie was shocked he said that. As were others.

And nope I am not bashing Surfrider, just question their choice of members. Some members actually supported us on the 'dip net' issue and understood.

Unlike the other dip that spoke out....

"If you make an ass out of yourself, there will always be someone to ride you"

Every once in a while a loud mouth like that needs to be reminded to have manners, It was my pleasure.

Notwithstanding the unwelcome outburst, our message was delivered.

Holy Mackerel

10-01-2009, 09:44 AM

That stinks Martin, there are always bad apples in every group. Sounds like Stefanie, and Joe, are trying to work in good faith for everyone's access.

Dan

10-01-2009, 10:04 AM

No way that guy has ever surfed a day in his life. He had to sit there and stew in that comment for another hour before sneaking out.

A good example of how any personal attacks in this process are just straight up ass hat douche nozzle material. That guy lost all cred. And good job Martin for not stooping to his level after he questioned your parenting.

kurt

10-01-2009, 12:25 PM

Way too hold your temper, Martin. You're definitely the better man.

dmrides

10-01-2009, 06:49 PM

It was also encouraging to hear that there is not a great deal of support for WG1, since we all know how much that would suck.

Thanks again to all of you who continue to put in all your hard work to spread the word of what we want. :you_rock:

Holy Mackerel

10-15-2009, 12:40 PM

Here ya go, Surfrider SD for MAP 3. :banghead:

http://www.surfrider.org/files/SurfriderBRTFMemoFINAL.pdf

tylerdurden

10-15-2009, 01:17 PM

Actually, if you look at their specific recomendations by region, San Diego doesn't do too bad as far as kayakers are concerned. I wouldn't want to be a commercial lobster or Urchin guy though.

They really fuck over the guys in Malibu.

WG2 meets all the guidelines with the blue SMCA west of point Dume, at a HIGH level of protection. WG2 captures every habitat with this SMCA other than deep rock. None of the other plans captures deep rock either, but they go out of the way to screw over kayakers. Make sure you let them know this at the BRTF meeting.

FISHIONADO

10-15-2009, 01:18 PM

I just read the paper and Surfrider did not support any of the maps, they only noted that many of their members supported Map 3. Their specific recommendation for La Jolla is below:

"La Jolla:
First, the existing La Jolla Cove SMR is a valuable area and “heritage site” that we recommend should be left intact. We see no compelling reason for “squaring off” the boundaries to meet the “feasibility” guidelines (as suggested in Map 3). This area has been protected for a long time and the boundaries are well‐known. In fact, changing the boundaries to meet strict adherence to the “feasibility” guidelines may only serve to undermine the intent of the guidelines – clarity, public awareness and ease of enforcement. Changing the well‐known boundaries may cause unnecessary violations. Although not included in Map 1, we want to highlight our opposition to inclusion of an SMCA between the existing La Jolla Cove SMR and the Scripps Pier. We are not convinced this area is high value habitat nor that it is necessary to meet the spacing guidelines.

Second, we recommend the current La Jolla South SMR and SMCA cluster be
modified into a single SMR with the northern border at Windansea and the southern border north of the Crystal pier (similar to Map 3).

Finally, assuming the final map would include the La Jolla South SMR
recommended above, we see no need for the Point Loma SMR. The La Jolla South SMR is sufficient to provide unique and valuable protection for this sub‐region. And, the Pt Loma SMR unnecessarily restricts fishing opportunities for boats leaving
Mission Bay."

Tman

10-15-2009, 01:27 PM

Well, can I say it now without worry of offending them?

'A majority of our audience...support Map 3'

To the idiot who made that dumbarse comment to me at the Encinitas meeting, I kept my cool, no need to anymore.

Hey smurfriders, even though half of your members probably don't surf, and your loudmouth member who said maybe I 'shouldn't take a 50 lb 9 year old out if he can't handle it' looks like a kook, you do realize that if they take Swami's, you could potentially lose an epic surf spot?

You guys do realize that, don't you?

Maybe someone should make a run to Swami's today, tomorrow, and this weekend, hand out fliers telling them that smurfriders suggest a reserve at Swami's...hmmm...bet that'll go over good...

PAL

10-15-2009, 03:55 PM

Grego

10-15-2009, 05:06 PM

You know what should happen...is since we require a permit to fish but we won't be able fish in certain areas. The only right decision is to mandate permits for surfers to surf in the SMR's !!! They can pay for the enforcement...it's a great idea! don't you think?!!! :luxhello: Let's start pushing that agenda, it makes sense and it will help the state maintain an adequate DFG force.

FISHIONADO

10-15-2009, 05:50 PM

The opening portion of the Surfrider report reads like an executive summary, suggesting they support WG 1 and 3. In fact, only in OC do they care for anything from WG 2, and that one they find insufficient. 1 = 3, an outrageous, extreme position.

Most damning is Surfrider's position on Malibu, where they too sell out Malibu's kayak anglers to justify lesser but still devastating closures at Palos Verdes. This is precious turf to us, birthplace of modern kayak fishing. They strike right at our heart.

I will never again sympathize with a surfing access or preservation issue. I will remember this betrayal of fellow watermen and women forever. I hope you are with me, that you'll withdraw all support of this group.

I'm ready to take a bulldozer to Trestles and build that proposed highway they hate. And I'm looking forward to the day when either one of their fellow environmental NGOs or an aggrieved fishing group sues the state to compell closure of the wildlife and habitat damaged by surfers at Swamis and the like.

The meeting doesn't start until Tuesday, so there's still time for the Surfrider leadership to make this right. I urge them to do so or they may yet rue the consequences.

I'm busy with life and haven't been able to digest all of the paper or the issue, but I'm probably not as far to the right as you are. I would welcome folks to join me as members of Surfrider and help influence their views. I disagreed with them on the Trestles issue because of their claim it would impact the surf break, I did not support the private road on public land but didn't believe any of the construction would actually impact the break at Trestles. Surfrider and Coastkeeper have done more to clean our rivers, bays, and coastlines than anyone else. I like to consume fresh healthy fish. We should partner with them rather than call them the enemy.

PAL

10-15-2009, 07:53 PM

I'm busy with life and haven't been able to digest all of the paper or the issue, but I'm probably not as far to the right as you are.

As far to the right? This has nothing to do with partisan politics. I'm busy with life too, and after devoting 100s of hours over the past year to preserving reasonable fishing opportunity for kayak anglers, which means doing what I can to make sure the MLPA doesn't single our environmentally benign group out for punishment. I have little tolerance left for mis-statements, deliberate or out of ignorance (not yours, SR's).

Let me put my anger over Surfrider's Malibu position into a context that everyone who fishes La Jolla will understand. Let's say they endorsed closing all of La Jolla except a few acres of stringy kelp on the southern tip. It would be ok, right, because you'd have 100s of acres of sand to fish down to the pier. Right? Would you feel that was a 'fair' compromise?

Not at all, it would be the end of San Diego ocean kayak fishing.

That's exactly the fate Surfrider wishes to impose on Malibu's kayak anglers, people who are every bit as passionate about their sport as we are here.

For those who haven't been paying attention, there are three proposals. Don't believe the propaganda - proposal 1 is not a compromise, cross-interest proposal. Don't believe me, compare it with proposal 3 authored by representatives of the environmental NGOs without the need to deal with any grubby fishermen. If you need the details, contact me via PM.

Proposal 2 protects roughly 0.5% less acreage overall, achieves tremendous conservation, and does so at dramatically decreased socio-economic cost. It's a point the Surfrider of today ignored, whatever their past achivements. Despite the good faith efforts of many here on this board, they chose to disregard their fellow watermen, possibly at the cost of their own future loss of access. They no longer deserve support.

YES ON TWO

GregAndrew

10-15-2009, 08:50 PM

I gotta agree with Pal. At this late date in the process, any individual or group that has publicly taken a stance on one side and not the other is not in the middle. There are many do-good organizations out there that start with great intentions and become something entirely different. Any organization effected by the MLPA process should realize that almost none of the requirements for effective Marine Reserves design is even being considered. Any individual or group that believes that the touted benefits of Marine reserves will occur only considering the size required to capture 90% of the species better keep putting that tooth under their pillow. They are more likely to see the tooth fairy than those benefits. Don't get me wrong, the idea of Marine Reserves in areas of the ocean that are substantially depleted is a great idea. But our coast is not in danger of being depleted by fishermen, and ignoring things such as economic impact, enforcement, marking borders, etc will only reduce the effectiveness of them.

Billy V

10-15-2009, 09:54 PM

Not a single component of the MLPA does anything to address the pollution in coastal waters that kills Kelp, and Fish.

This was posted on Bloody Decks, its a little over the top so I will bleep out the curse words. The point will remain the same.
I guess some people are fed up with all the injustice we have been subjected to.
I know I'm certainly fed up, and don't blame anyone who chooses to voice an opinion, or take a stand.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Watched the Oct. 7th City Council video and here's something I don't get:

At 02:41:20, Currie Dugas came on to read a letter from Coastkeepers Executive Director, Bruce Reznik which stated he could not attend due to a prior commitment to attend the California Coastal Commission meeting to speak on behalf of the San Diego Water Department IN SUPPORT OF A SEWAGE WAIVER.

That would be this:

San Diego Gets Pollution Waiver for Point Loma Plant | KPBS.org
The California Coastal Commission voted Wednesday night to give the city of San Diego a waiver for the Point Loma Sewage Treatment Plant. The vote means the city won't be paying to upgrade the plant.

The Coastal Commission took two-and-one-half hours to consider San Diego's wavier request before approving it on an 8-to-4 vote.

The city is the only metro area in the country that doesn't add secondary treatment to sewage before it's discharged into the ocean.

So let me get this straight -- This as*hole is exec. director of some bullsh*t organization deceptively named "Coastkeeper" who goes out advocating outdated sub-standard sewage treatment is ok as long as it saves the SD Water Dept. money. Meanwhile sends one of his fu*khead zombie sheep minions to go in front of SD City Council to read a statement saying La Jolla must be closed to access by fishermen in order to "protect the fish".

So who is the fu*khead zombie sheep minion Currie Dugas?
Well, according to Coastkeeper's own website, some clueless c*nt who just arrived here in San Diego last week and is already become a mindless tw@t mouthpiece to tell us what's best for our own good:

San Diego Coastkeeper > About SD Coastkeeper > Staff > Interns
Currie joined the Coastkeeper team in the winter of 2009 as Marine Conservation intern. Her work at Coastkeeper mainly focuses on creating awareness of the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative which strives to protect California's ocean life by implementing a network of marine protected areas (MPAs) along the coast. Currie recently moved to San Diego and is very excited to have found a place as part of the Coastkeeper team where she can make a difference for our seas.

Tman

10-16-2009, 12:49 PM

We should partner with them rather than call them the enemy.

You have got to be kidding...you are, aren't you?

Partner with a group that says they have watermen, surfers, divers, fishermen, yet turn around and try to destroy the activities of each of these groups?

Let's see...the Encinitas meeting was a public forum...then why did Stef say, "Just out of curiousity, raise your hand if you are a member of smurfrider..."

Sorry FISHIONADO, I want nothing to do with a group with a member that prob doesn't even surf, that tells me I shouldn't be taking my son out to fish 3 miles if he can't handle it. Yes I am pounding the chit out of this, but they have their own agenda and I for one will not and do not trust them.

They are supposed to be based on surfing, hence their name, I don't recall seeing many tan people at the meeting. They are in disguise. Enviros, PETA freaks, FOS, all synonyms for smurfrider...