Arnie and his enviro cronies screwed us--AGAIN

[zenspearo]

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2...aises-doubts-/


Michael Sutsos was such a new appointment to the California Fish and Game Commission that his photo still hadn’t been posted Monday on the Commission’s Web site.

No need to put it up now. Sutsos, 56, of Sonoma, who was appointed to the Commission on Sept. 9, by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, appears to have been unceremoniously unseated Monday, 18 days later, by the lame-duck California Governor. Sutsos sat in on one, two-day Fish and Commission meeting earlier this month, and now he’s gone.

Calls to Schwarzenegger’s office and the Fish and Game Commission were not returned. But Dan Richards, one of Sutsos’ fellow commissioners, said he received a call about it on Monday. Also, George Osborn, who represents several fishing organizations and the California Fish and Game Warden’s Association, said he was told Sutsos was removed from the Commission.

“Obviously he wasn’t going to vote the way the Governor wanted him to vote,” Osborn said. “He was more conscientious about California’s marine resources than he was about politics.”

The Ocean Conservancy, which throughout the process has backed the most severe ocean closures, could not be reached for comment.

Sutsos replaced Commissioner Don Benninghoven, whose confirmation never made it to the state Senate for approval after sportfishing groups complained about his conflict of interest regarding the Marine Life Protection Act. The MLPA, passed in 1999, calls for a network of marine protected areas along the California coast. The Fish and Game commissioners will have the final vote on all sections of the MLPA. The Central Coast and North Central Coast closures are in. The South Coast is in the environmental review period, and the North Coast section already is being worked on.

Benninghoven had been a member of the Blue Ribbon Task Force prior to his nomination to the Commission by Schwarzenegger and was viewed by both sportfishing and commercial fishing groups as a “shill,” which is what fellow Fish and Game Commissioner Dan Richards of Upland called him in an interview today.
“This just shows how corrupt this process is,” Richards said. “This process, the Marine Life Protection Act, is so corrupt, so offensive it’s unimaginable. Gov. Schwarzenegger is a forked-tongue devil.”

Richards and Jim Kellogg, the president of the Fish and Game Commission, were joined by Sutsos on a recent vote to extend the deadline for comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the South Coast Region of the Marine Life Protection Act. Environmental groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Ocean Conservancy have been battling sportfishing, commercial fishing and several public agencies on the matter of the extension. Those groups want more time to study the more than 500-page document and then comment on it. Kellogg called for a special Commission meeting, which will be held Wednesday, and Sutsos joined Richards and Kellogg in voting for the meeting to discuss the extension for the comment period on the environmental document.

“The reason I have such a problem with (Sutsos) getting taken off the Commission is that this denigrates and disrespects every person who worked on the MLPA process,” Richards said. “Many of the people who worked on the stakeholder groups weren’t paid, certainly weren’t hired guns. That’s why this is so offensive to me. These people don’t care about what the science says, what the reality is, or how what waters they close will affect people’s livelihoods.”

Richards said he once was one of Schwarzenegger’s biggest financial and political supporters. But he no longer is.

“He’s so worried about his legacy that he will do anything right now to preserve his legacy with this,” Richards said. “I have a feeling when this is all over, he’s not going to like his legacy one bit. His legacy right now is damn the people, the government knows more than the people. I truly hope (Schwarzenegger’s) legacy is appropriately tarnished by this.”

Richards said the first sign he saw of the Governor’s – and his environmental cronies -- complete manipulation of the MLPA process dates back to when Cindy Gustafson resigned as Fish and Game Commissioner. Many suspected Gustafson told Schwarzenegger’s staff that she wouldn’t vote for the more severe network of closures called for by the MLPA. When Gustafson let Schwarzenegger’s people know, she was forced to resign. Benninghoven moved over to the Commission seat from his role as chairman of the Blue Ribbon Task Force, which oversees the MLPA stakeholder groups and sends the final ocean closure options to the Commission.

The Blue Ribbon Task Force also has been criticized for being biased in its approach due to its environmental connections through task force member Meg Caldwell.

“Benninghoven was a plant by the radical environmentalists,” Commissioner Richards said. “(Sutsos) was asking reasonable questions about fisheries and what fisheries in California were in trouble. He sounded like one of the most reasonable people I’ve ever met. He was a reasonable voice who asked reasonable and intelligent questions.”

Richards said when Sutsos asked if any California fisheries were in crisis, the Department of Fish and Game staff could not identify one that was.
“That’s because when we did have fisheries in trouble, the federal and state regulations were changed to protect those species and bring them back,” Richards said. “Now those species have rebounded, and the Department says there isn’t one species that is in crisis. Yet these radical, left-wing environmentalists want to put up massive reserves to keep people from fishing. It’s all being funded, this takeover of California’s marine resources, by the Packard Foundation, backed by a billionaire with nefarious intentions. They are anti-fishing, anti-hunting, anti-people.”

Richards said the removal of Sutsos by Schwarzenegger will backfire on the Governor, now in the last months of his administration.

“They’ve already been sued (by fishing groups) for how corrupt the MLPA process has been,” Richards said. “This will anger even more fishermen and other groups, like the eight to 10 major public agencies who have requested more time to read this environmental impact report. That’s the problem this Governor is going to have. He’s not just fighting fishing groups with agendas. There are public agencies who want more time, too. But the radical environmentalists who are controlling this don’t want any public comments they’ll have to address. They want to limit comments and stifle input, which is exactly opposite of what the California Environmental Quality Act is all about. It is set up for legitimate challenges.”
Richards said he is speaking out because Schwarzenegger can’t do anything to him like he did to Sutsos.

“I’m confirmed, and he can’t pull me off the Commission,” Richards said. “He’s stuck with me.”

Richards said he once was a giant supporter of Schwarzenegger.

“I really believed in him,” Richards said. “That’s why this is so shocking to me and so disappointing. It’s like Fantasy Land up there in Sacramento these days. None of this is going to get us anywhere.”

Richards predicted that the MLPA closures will be overturned in court once all the corruption is exposed that went on with the process. He said a judge will look at the lack of time given for the environmental document in the South Coast Region and throw the document out.

“What (Schwarzenegger) did here with (Sutsos) is the height of arrogance, but it’s foolish beyond belief,” Richards said.


>>>>>>>>>>.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010
New commissioner gets axed

Governor Terminates New Fish and Game Commissioner

SACRAMENTO - Michael Sutsos of Sonoma is the most recent sporstsman to fall victim to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s wrath. Sutsos, so briefly a member of the Fish and Game Commission that his photo never made it onto the official commission webpage, was summarily terminated on Monday September 28 when the governor rescinded his appointment.

No replacement was named, but sportsmen can be sure the new commissioner will toe the governor’s aggressively anti-fishing line on the MLPA. Sutsos didn’t, voting with commissioners Dan Richards and Jim Kellogg merely to consider extending the South Coast environmental review period from a too-brief 45 days. The matter will be deliberated at a special session this Wednesday in McClellan, a Sacramento suburb. Prospects for an extension, necessary due to the complexity of the 545 page document, are now questionable.

The timing brings to mind another of the governor’s brazen MLPA power plays. Then commissioner Cindy Gustafson mysteriously resigned days prior to the implementation hearing for the MLPA’s north-central coast study region. Career politico Don Benninghoven was plucked from the head of the Blue Ribbon Task Force to hand deliver the decisive, anti-angler vote.

Ironically, Sutsos took Benninghoven’s commission seat when the state Senate chose to let the clock expire on his confirmation – largely at the behest of outraged fishermen. Fish and Game commissioners may serve up to a year without senate endorsement. Prior to that stamp of approval, commission appointees serve at the whim of the governor.

Sutsos’ commission term was snuffed after just 18 historically short days and a single two-day meeting. “I didn’t ask the right questions. Or maybe I did,” Sutsos said when reached at the Black Point Sports Club to explain his removal for hinting that he thinks for himself.

Commissioner Dan Richards was outraged by the governor’s maneuvers. “This just shows how corrupt this process is. This process, the Marine Life Protection Act, is so corrupt, so offensive it’s unimaginable. Gov. Schwarzenegger is a forked-tongue devil,” Richards told the Union-Tribune’s Ed Zieralski.

Richards went on to predict the move will come to haunt the governor, further taint his legacy, and expose the MLPA railroad job to legal challenge.

Calls to the governor’s office were not returned.

http://www.wonews.com/Blog.aspx?id=1...%20gets%20axed
__________________
A spearo, but we are in this MLPA mess together

[dos ballenas]

:arne1::D

[Gino]

Richards predicted that the MLPA closures will be overturned in court once all the corruption is exposed that went on with the process. He said a judge will look at the lack of time given for the environmental document in the South Coast Region and throw the document out.

Depends on the judge... Theres alot of judges these days over ruling public opinions/votes. If the judge is from San Francisco it will all be pointless :rolleyes: And Im not trying to cross issues. But that seems to be the trend in this states politics.

Unfortunately for Stan K G, "Reasonable" is a term for bending over and closing your eyes. The MLPA process has given fisherman nothing. And they have gained nothing out of it. There is nothing Reasonable about it.
No matter what Maps come up, its the Fisherman losing...
Another unfortunate aspect is there is alot of new Kayakfishing folks int he scene these days (not that im an old salt or a season vet myself) But Its important that these new folks get educated on this MLPA topic.

You get alot of Stan K G, and Young Mola comments alot these days becuase they werent around for the Meetings, and They werent around when the process was in the "infuence war phase" when the maps were being created. Its really a drag going over this process, over and over, It can be a turn off for people becuase its so long drawn out, and detailed. Including all the crooked politics behind it.
But its important to get more folks involved and educated.

This process allows for more closures at a later time, or map expansions... With this process being exposed for what it is. Kayak fishing has a very grim future. There has been many here who have dedicated themselves so much to this process. Its the rest of us who have a duty to spread the word, and insure our sport has a future in this state.

[Gino]

Lets not be hasetfull to prosecute the ill informed.

Stan, If you want you can give me a call, ill PM you my #. Ill explain a couple key points about the process so I can bring you up to date.


Excuse those with harsh comments. Many people put alot of time and hard work into fighting these closures. Its a passionate topic.

[dsafety]

The apparent fact that the powers that be do not want a reasonable moderate who pays attention to the facts involved with the DFG does not surprise me. We all know that most Government decisions are purchased by special interests these days.

All the Machiavellian twists and turns of the MLPA process now has me fully confused. Do we want the DFG to sit on its backside and not do anything for months and years to come? Do we want to push for a reasonable resolution soon? Which would be better?

The next question involves the incoming Governor. I tried for months, but could not pin down either the Brown or Whitman camp on where they stand on the MLPA issue. All I ever got were promises that someone would get back to me. We have no idea what either candidate might do once they gain power. Is the devil you know better than the devil you don't know?

My gut feeling is the Whitman might be more inclined to see things our way but if she is successful in buying her way into the Governor's chair, she will undoubtedly have a bunch of big political debts to pay off. Some of those payments could be going to people who do not agree with our point of view.

Brown, on the other hand is more of a known quantity. Unfortunately, his leanings have historically favored the the enviros. This is not necessarily a bad thing as long as he listens to some of the more reasonable people in that camp. We could end up getting screwed either way.

Brown and Whitman are debating tonight. It sure would be nice if someone could sneak in a question on the MLPA. Unlikely but one can hope.

Bob

[Gino]

Whitman is run by political advisors. What she will say in public and What she will say in private may be 2 differant things. (or even what shes saying in public for that matter)
Thats a Craps Table Dice roll...win big or bust.

Were as Jerry Brown is well connected with the political enviormental possey. His apointments to the Air/Carb board speak plainly enough. The guy seeks support from Unions and Enviormental influences. Besides why trust a man whos hands have been on the kiln shaping the mess this state is in. The guys been in CA politics for 40 years. Hes done nothing to stop it, what makes you think he will now? Hes never balanced a payroll in his life anyways.

Just look where the money is comming from, and whos contributing to whome. And youll have your answer to that question.

Ive said it before the next governor has the power to work on either sides behalf on this process. The State STILL doesn thave a budget for this year... It will be the least of the next Governors problems.

[MVC]

I would not expect to get any help from either Brown or Whitman. I hate to say it but unfortunately our best hope is with the Courts.

[T Bone]

Well forget about Jerry Brown.He is such a UN-represenative of the people that as ATTONEY GENERAL he took an OATH to UPHOLD THE LAW,that is to say THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.He is Taking a political stand (Stunt)against Prop 8 because its what his party stands on and his leftie buddies count on him to do.He should just say "I am Against it,but the people have spoken"Dont think that he cares what you think.As for Meg (Whitman not that tree banger Caldwell)I dont know what her stand is but she would seem to be the lesser of 2 evils.

[T Bone]

I dont like Meg Whitman either I just cant stand Jerry Brown...

[Ohana]

I would not expect to get any help from either Brown or Whitman. I hate to say it but unfortunately our best hope is with the Courts.

Having dealt with the South County Air Quality Management District and their clean air mandate with regards to emissions and the printing industry, you are correct that the courts are the most effective way to put a stake in this vampire called the MLPA. Courts are something they fear as they have to present the facts and figures that they claim they based their decision process on. What I observed with the AQMD is a lot of assumptions and "we feel that..." statements are what they use in their decision process and the courts punch holes in these "facts".

Kevin

[Tman]

How about instead of jumping up my ass you do some of that explaining and educating?

There's like 20 different maps for different proposals and none of the news articles cover what is likely to go into effect. All I'm seeing is each side calling the other nazi's and "devils".

Stan, no one (hopefully) means to jump up your ass, it's just that there has been from day one a unification with the kayakers and spearos in fighting this 'losing' battle and it still riles the phook out of alot of us.

As you stated, there's like 20 different maps...guess what, every time we thought we were compromising, giving in to save a little, they changed the shit on us so they could get what they want. There has been no compromise on their end, lotsa lies, and even more harassment by the other side in different forms.

Do a search, seek out some old posts on what actually went on in these meetings...you will be shocked, and even more shocked that the whole time this shit was going on you were one of the many who were unaware of how bad we were about to be phooked....

Like I said, no one is pissing in your direction, but we can finally open up about how this whole process was flawed, fixed, and the BRTF was bought and paid from day one...

[Grego]

This is just plain BS.....the best we can do is comment on the DEIR, then watch them ignore, tap dance around, or half ass address the comments.

[robmandel]

Somebody else takes this.

general zenspearo, I'm on the ground for you anytime you call!! you were awesome at our meetings. if I didn't say it before, thanks a million!!

How about instead of jumping up my ass you do some of that explaining and educating?

There's like 20 different maps for different proposals and none of the news articles cover what is likely to go into effect. All I'm seeing is each side calling the other nazi's and "devils".

you have no idea the bloodletting fight we went through. if you weren't in carlsbad, long beach, ontario, wherever the hell else, as a whole bunch of us were, you can't understand what we faced. for those of us, LJ guys, malibu guys, spearos, we fought a life and death battle. I consider all of them my brothers. I'd go to war with them any time. as long as blood runs through my veins, I'm all in.

first, the emotional legacy of this event alone is enormous. we faced literally, from teh start, a death sentence. so your "compromise" is a bad situation that could have been so much worse. which sounds like a compromise, except there was no "give" on the enviro part. they got to take, take, take. they just didn't take it all. yet.

second, you have no understanding of the web of conflicts, compromises, and outright dishonest and illegal activities. look, I spent a ton of time investigating, and there were business partners (schem and anderson) on the BRTF, who sold out their votes to save their asses in MDR. the head of the BRTF was bought and paid for by the monterey bay aquarium via the packard foundation, who also funded the entire mlpa process. there so much more. the group running the show, the RLFF, gets its money from the PF and MBA. and the chair of that group is a colleague of meg caldwell's at stanford. there's a huge, I mean HUUUUUGE freaking web of conflicts.

you didn't see school teachers parade in their whole classroom and stand there parroting lines they were given extra credit to recite a bunch of mindless shit. while our ass-kicking kid Clay jumped into the fray like a fighter, stood tall, and kicked the shit outta those bastards. T-Man, you got a great boy there!! and what that asshat wiseman did to your son, man you got some self-restraint!!!

you didn't see the mistreatment and outright abuse we suffered while the laguna tuna battalion got to ramble on and on. I could go on...

from teh start, it was a decked stacked so much against us. it was supposed to be a simple, get in-get out-get done, deal, steamroll us and move on. but we stood there at the pass of the hot gates, and there weren't even 300 of us.

anyways, it ain't about closures, compromises, and science. it's principle. fishing is a right, we've hurt nobody, and we aren't the problem. they put our backs to the wall and lined up the firing squad. the whole process has nothing to do at all with protecting marine species. period. it's a disgusting abuse of power. remember, there was no victory for us. if they did nothing at all, we'd be where we started with, which was all we wanted. we asked for nothing from anybody. simply wanted the dfg to manage the game, which is their job, which is what out license money goes for. period. no matter what happened, we lost. period. that is no compromise. we are no special interest. special interests ask government for favors, money, special privilege. all we want is to be left the hell alone. period. we don't hurt anyone, nobody has been aggrieved by us, nobody has cause for redress. period.

we are the victims of a tyrannical government run amock. and we're still gonna fight like hell.

I'm sure you don't know any of that, which is fine. go back, read the old posts about what happened.

[zenspearo]

From: http://www.mercurynews.com/california/ci_16198987?nclick_check=1

Jack Baylis to be appointed Fish and Game Commissioner

"Fish and Game Commission to hold special meeting on fishing limits
By Melissa Pamer Staff Writer
Posted: 09/28/2010 06:42:56 PM PDT
Updated: 09/28/2010 06:52:34 PM PDT

A state commission will hold a special meeting Wednesday to consider extending the public comment period for a controversial plan that could halt or limit fishing in nearly 400 square miles of waters off Southern California.
A large area off Point Vicente on the Palos Verdes Peninsula would be affected by the plan, which was developed under the state's Marine Life Protection Act, known as the MLPA.
The 11-year-old law, designed in part to protect ocean habitat, prompted a lengthy and closely watched process that last year divided fishing interests and environmentalists over which coastal waters should be designated marine protected areas.
The five-member California Fish and Game Commission, which has in recent weeks seen abrupt changes in its makeup, will today at a noon meeting near Sacramento vote on whether to allow another 45 days for comment on a lengthy environmental review of the proposal.

A spokesman for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said late Tuesday that a new appointee - Jack Baylis of Los Angeles - would be announced this morning and would participate in the meeting.
Baylis, an executive with global design and engineering firm AECOM, is on the board of the state Coastal Conservancy and is a former board member of nonprofit local advocacy group Heal the Bay. The group pushed for strong local protections - some of which were intensely opposed by South Bay fishermen - during the MLPA process.
Commission Deputy Executive Director Adrianna Shea said today's vote comes in response to requests from members of the public who wanted more time to examine a state-required environmental report that is more than 500 pages long.
"They're saying it's because it's a large document and they need time to review it. Others are saying it's a stall tactic so a decision won't be made until after the election," Shea said.
The report focuses on a compromise plan that was approved last year by the MLPA initiative's Blue Ribbon Task Force. The Fish and Game Commission must certify the review and related regulations before marine protected areas can be created.
The report was made available Aug. 18. Comment is currently due Oct. 4, and commission staff expected a vote on the plan by December.
If an extension is approved today, comments would be due in mid-November and a commission vote on the landmark marine initiative would not occur until after a new governor is in office following the Nov. 2 election, Shea said.
Today's vote comes after a period of uncertainty about the Fish and Game Commission's membership.
Last month, Don Benninghoven, a commission appointee who was thought to be sympathetic to environmentalists and who had previously overseen the Blue Ribbon Task Force, was not confirmed to the post by the state Senate.
Then, on Sept. 9, Schwarzenegger's office announced a new appointee: Michael Sutsos, a 56-year-old Sonoma resident who is president of a Bay Area hunting club.
Sutsos participated in one two-day commission meeting in mid-September. At that time, he voted with the majority to bring the MLPA public comment extension to a vote at today's meeting.

On Monday, Sutsos told commission staff that he had been informed his appointment was being withdrawn, Shea said. Schwarzenegger spokesman Matthew Connelly would not say what caused the change in commission makeup. "It didn't work out. It's a personnel matter and I can't really go beyond that," Connelly said.
Baylis would have to be confirmed by the state Senate within one year or his appointment would expire, Shea said. If confirmed, Baylis' term would expire in 2016.
melissa.pamer@dailybreeze.com
Find out more
What: Fish and Game Commission meeting to consider extending public review of an environmental report on a plan to limit or halt fishing and protect ocean habitat in Southern California.
Where: The meeting is in McClellan, Calif. Watch online at cal-span.org.
When: Noon today
More info: The review document is available at dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/regulatorydocs_sc.asp"

[Cheney]

So with Baylis being appointed, this is a nail on the coffin? Or is there still a chance to get the extention?

[Gino]

For example, has anyone brought up the argument that if zones are made catch and release, legal fishermen are very prone to reporting poachers to DFG, whereas no-fish zones would just be prone to poaching without any law abiding fishmen around to report it.

I think kind of argument would resonate well given the DFGs manpower shortages.

The very guy who started this post along with Mr/ Lebowitz were the ones who were the "level headed" folks who took on the taste to represent us. your ill informed.

Everything You have said was brought up, and has been exuasted. There was very little comproise on anything. There was some succes to get Hook n Line fishing allowed in La jolla, but it didnt help our Spearfishing friends.

They had a certain territory type size and requirments going into the map making process.... Most of the maps your looking at was the bare minimum... And they still pushed for more.

Your ill informed, sorry but the MLPA website isnt going to help you all that much. I gave u my # and i sent you a PM i was willign to help explain or answer questions fro you. That offer is still int he table

But let me suggest you keep quiet when you go on with other political Jargon, its not apart of the topic. The group of people on this forum and those who fought agaisnt the closures are far from "Tea Party" folks many of them being Democrats. Theres no partisan politics involved in out side of this process. So leave that in the shitter.

Alot of guys took time away from there famlies, there vacation time from work, and more to show up at a multiple meetings from San Diego to LA and inbetween... for 15 secounds of speaking time at a public comment. Only to find out the public comments were almost largely a front for "transparency" may of these folks were at these meetings all day long.
Do you know the owners of this very site make a good deal of money of kayakfishing... some of these closures potentially could have really hurt there buisness. They arent the only ones either...

Like I said some folks are Quite bitter about it. You werent there you werent involved. So keep your trap shut

This group of folks Raises every year over 10K or more for Cancer or a families in need. Thats just 1 tournament. Ask all the Questions you have about the MLPa. But Give this comunity a little more respect. Youll get a a more friendly response.

[Gino]

Hey i was only stating a fact which is true. I put no partisan Endorsement on my post... Thats the part where you came in touting your "Tea Party" Acusations... And your Post about Muslim or Mexicans was highly Racist. Not sure where that came from.

If you read the origional post of this thread it talked about the Governors influence on the MLPA process, so naturally talking about the Governors Race and its canidates makes sense. Considering things could change extremely. I gave a critical opions on both of them. And I made the closing point of that when i said the next governor has and will have more important issues than the MLPA to worry about. So putting our chips in that direction isnt going to do us much good.,

And I told you, Id be willing to explain the problems with the maps for you. I sent you a PM and a phone number. so we could spare this thread the posting stress.

(then there's the problem of some of you guys wanting no preserves at all, even existing ones, so that's some counter extemism to the extreme environmentalists)

There was men fishing feeding there Families long before there was a "Marine Reserve" Not sure thats counter Extremeism. We arent telling the Enviormentalist what they can or cant do. We are telling them what they cant do to us. Like I said Your clearly uneducated on the issue. Ill even go to the extent of saying you may have a warped view on what public process is about. Or how it works.

Why dont you tell us where your comming from. Since you clearly cant comprehend our side of the issue. . What facts do you bring to the table to support the MLPA closures and the current Maps selections. What Science do you have to back up your opinion. And Lets here your Ideas.
You havent Asked 1 question, all youve done is talk shit.

And for the record. If venting and ranting got us a free soda from Burger King, Itd be alot more than what we got from having an "inteligent Dialect" and "reaching across the Isle" or what you call "reasonable compromise" ever got us in this process

So lets hear it. Why are the MLPA maps to you a good compromise? dont be shy.

[T Bone]

Stan, since your new you are going to get a pass...

I have been dealing mainly with my sons cancer this last year and havent had the opportunity to go to many meetings.I did make it to the one in Ontario at the Doubletree and got to meet many of you there.I can say that Kayak fisherman and Spearos were about 90% of the turnout for our side.No one really representing sportboat landings that I meet(who have a monetary stake in this)none of the Newport Lobster fleet(who will lose Laguna)just a few other fisherman.
You are literally speaking DIRECTLY to the ones fighting the fight for fisherman right here.A very clean fight too I might add.So thats a little something for you to chew on before you go any further.

To my brothers in arms :cheers1:
We will raise up our glasses against evil forces...

[deepdvr]

Stan, why be so combative? Obviously, your views are not those of just about everyone on this forum. It's time to let this one die on the vine. You are not going to convert anyone here.

This is a very sensitive topic for everyone on this forum. There are other means of fostering 'conservation' that don't involve restricting access. We've been advocating this from day one. There is a reason we have a department of fish and game and regulations. This is simply a land grab by the other side.

As was stated before, you are new here but don't make the rookie mistake off stepping in this one. Many here have devoted a tremendous amount of time, money, lost wages, etc. to the cause.

[Grego]

What the F...seems like the enviros are hunting and fishing around this board AGAIN with this stan man and bmercury login names :the_finger:

[kurt]

If you weren't at the meetings and involved with the process, it's hard to explain how the BRTF changed the rules, or tried to change the rules, when it didn't suit them. How one side was admonished for being threatening and uncompromising for wearing one color shirt, only to see the other side wear the same color shirts at future meetings, and nothing was said. How new closures were all of a sudden added on to existing maps.

We went to these meetings in good faith, offering our input, hoping that the public would be heard. Unfortunately, these meetings had a predetermined goal and we were virtually ignored. This is all politics, with little or no science involved, as far as I can see. You can see that with the governor's dismissal of a DFG commissioner who committed the sin of wanting more time for a 548 page document to be studied. I'm sure the new commissioner who was appointed today will vote for no extension. His background indicates he will.

[AquaticHunter]

From: http://www.mercurynews.com/california/ci_16198987?nclick_check=1

Jack Baylis to be appointed Fish and Game Commissioner


Baylis, is on the board of the state Coastal Conservancy and is a former board member of nonprofit local advocacy group Heal the Bay. "

We need to start calling State Senetors to make sure this guy is not confirmed.

What the F...seems like the enviros are hunting and fishing around this board AGAIN with this stan man and bmercury login names :the_finger:


Exactly what I was thinking. But I'm proud to stand and fight with the rest of you guys. As Rob said, "I'm on the ground for you anytime you call!!"

[robmandel]

everything you need to know is that when sustos asked some questions based on science, and simply wanted more time to review the document, he was fired. we don't have any species in danger.

truth is the mpa's won't help fisheries at all. there is no science to back it up. the only evidence offered was mpa's in other countries which a) were never managed at all in the first place and b) suffered from the tragedy of the commons.

now, I teach economics in high school and college (well, did in college before the budget axe!!). any economist will tell you that when you make a resource off limits, you effectively make its value zero. in other words, it has no value, and is worthless. what this means is that there is no reason or incentive to protect or preserve or in any other way take care of the resource. so expect the polluting of those areas to increase. why? well, the water has no value, and polluting it cannot lessen the value in any way. period.

the other problem any economist will tell you is that in closing those areas, you create an economic drain. maintenance and protection require vast effort, and will always be a losing proposition. since you can't utilize the resource, it offers no benefit.

as for the mpa's working, well, they don't. there is no evidence of the "spillover effect". it won't benefit pelagics obviously as they migrate through. as for residents, like calico bass, there is something called carrying capacity. and when any area in particular reaches it, populations won't keep growing and expending. besides, what they closed off or wanted to close off) were particularly (well, except in PV) good habitat areas so there's simply not the habitat to support expansion on the periphery. and, do you think the sport boats won't have those gps coords plugged in? you think they're not going to sit on the edges and pick off any spillover bass? please. what fools those people are!!

see also the DFG artificial reef program.

the problems that the coast and the coastal fishery faces - over-development, runoff, pollution, erosion, et al. - are not and cannot be addressed by the mlpa. go ahead and read the bill. I did. there's nothing in there which addresses those problems as a whole, which (pollution for instance) will "spill over" from non-mpa's into mpa's. so the fundamental issue isn't addressed. but, there's a catch: the burden on the localities to maintain, and worse, the requirements:

"the area shall be maintained to the extent practicable in an undisturbed and unpolluted state."
also
"Marine life reserves shall be designed, to the extent practicable, to ensure that activities that upset the natural ecological functions of the area are avoided."

which means that it's going to hit local areas very hard. that's a huge economic impact which was NEVER considered. which by the way, was addressed somewhat at the F&G meeting in march. the local city gov'ts are scared.

which is another problem in economics, the infrastructure problem. pols love building bridges - jobs, fancy signs, even get to name them in west virginia!! - but afterwards, the upkeep gets to be enormously expensive. and it'll be a drain on california's, and the local's, economies for a looooong time. and the unforeseen consequences, the loss of fishing, etc., and the impact on jobs, hell, all of south SaMo bay cities lobbied hard to keep rocky point open. yo uthink it was all abotu fishing? please.

and this:
To ensure that California's MPAs have clearly defined objectives, effective management measures, and adequate enforcement, and are based on sound scientific guidelines.
none exist. DFG wardens already said they can't.

and this:
An identification of select species or groups of species likely to benefit from MPAs, and the extent of their marine habitat, with special attention to marine breeding and spawning grounds, and available information on oceanographic features, such as current patterns, upwelling zones, and other factors that significantly affect the distribution of those fish or shellfish and their larvae.

none of this was part of the process. it was about closures, but no mention of species was presented.


The department shall establish a process for external peer review of the scientific basis for the master plan prepared pursuant to Section 2855.
never happened.

the mlpa violated the law also as it the SAT didn't have the required members

(A)Staff from the department, the Department of Parks and Recreation, and the State Water Resources Control Board, to be designated by each of those departments.
(C) One member, appointed from a list prepared by Sea Grant marine advisers, who shall have direct expertise with ocean habitat and sea life in California marine waters.

A and C were not part of the South Coast but WERE part of the Central Coast. Their absence cannot be simply an oversight. It is a clear violation of the law. The entire outcome is therefore null and void. damn sure if it was reversed, the enviros would be screaming bloody f***ing hell on this one.

I've said enough. just please know this, when fishermen take the position that "it's not that bad", or "we need some closures", etc., a) there's alot of people here that gave everything they had and then some to keep it "not that bad" and b) you're aiding groups that want to shut fishing down completely. I know alot of the guys here, mostly from the meetings and what not, and you won't find a better group of people anywhere. to have happen to them what happened is a crime. period.

take it or leave it. I'll stake my camp with the guys I fought with.

[Gino]

Well thanks for wasting my time.

Thought you were a reasonable person, but looks like you're one of the zero-conservation extremists that don't give a crap about maintaining our fisheries beyond your own lifetime.

And you'll dismiss any research I bring up, without any logical justification...Other than you don't agree with it.

(Also love your whining about "enviromentalists" telling you what you cannot do when you seemingly complained about "san francisco" judges, ie, Prop 8 getting overturned?)

And Aparently you dont know anything about fish either. You think Fish species sit on the same kelp all there life? maybe blue perch do :biggrinjester:
Take a hike buddy, Conservation could have been done in other ways, lowering fishing limits, or increasing slot sizes. Not closing down the sections of the ocean to no fishing in general. Fish have tails my friend. Soem of those "kelp Species" can swim a couple miles or more a day.
Thats the point buddy. There is no logical Science behind this MLPA process. alot of the science used in this process had alot of hole in it. There is no threatened fish species along our coast.

Do you know where the 9th circuit court of apeals is? I could have been clearly speaking amongst other things. I said nothing about Prop 8. And it has no buisness in this thread. You brought it up.

When a Gorilla comes to you door and grabs your lunch bag, lets see you have a "Reasonable conversation"... Your clearly some sorta Latte Lifting Enviormetal Lefty. Or some guy just looking to flex his internet testosterone. or both rather.

So spare everyone here the headache and the time and get lost. :the_finger: I was more than willing to answer your questions. And still am if your willing to man up and talk like a big boy.:biggrinjester:

[bellcon]

Damn Stan,
I wish you were here a year or so ago...
could have saved me a bunch of time, money and frustration...

I'm officially on Stans side now.
He went from being ignorant about the MLPA issue to an expert in less than 24 hours...

I have been mislead by Paul, Chris, Grego, Billy, Tyler, Zenspearo, etc. etc.
oh also Clay and his gaffing dad

I want a few hundred hours and few hundred dollars back...
Rob your the economics professor, figure it out, who do I send the bill to?

I hate being mislead...:the_finger:

[jhook]

30 seconds in google search turned up this, study of florida MPAs

http://www.vliz.be/imisdocs/publications/54423.pdf
.

Very weak study. And I'm not the only one who thought so:

Science 15 February 2002:
Vol. 295. no. 5558, pp. 1233 - 1235
DOI: 10.1126/science.295.5558.1233b

Prev | Table of Contents | Next
Letters
Marine Reserves and Fisheries Management
In their report "Effects of marine reserves on adjacent fisheries" (30 Nov., p. 1920), C. M. Roberts and co-authors present data indicating that fishery yields have increased in waters adjacent to marine reserves in St. Lucia and east Florida. In many developing island nations like St. Lucia in the Caribbean, fisheries are seriously overexploited, and little or no fisheries management exists. In such cases where marine reserves are the primary means of control of fishing effort and catch, they can result in increased yields compared with a no-management scenario. However, the St. Lucia example is specific to coral reef fisheries and does not prove the global utility of reserves to fisheries.

In contrast to St. Lucia, the recreational fisheries in east Florida are stringently regulated. Currently, the bag limit for red drum is one fish per person, with a slot limit of 18 to 27 inches (~46 to 69 centimeters) long (1). What effect have these regulations had on sizes of red and black drum along the entire east coast of Florida? According to the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey, the mean weight of red drum and black drum in east Florida has more than doubled since the 1980s (2). Although the reserves in the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge examined by Roberts et al. reportedly have provided trophy-size fish to a limited area outside their boundaries, "traditional" fisheries management has resulted in size increases across the entire fishery. Furthermore, it is estimated that 80 to 90% of reserves have not succeeded in meeting their management objectives, even in coral reef systems (3).

Before implementing new reserves, it would be wise to ask whether a reserve is the best strategy for managing a particular fishery, and how might current reserves be better managed so that they attain their fishery goals.

Mark H. Tupper
University of Guam Marine Laboratory,
UOG Station,
Mangilao, GU 96923, USA.
E-mail: mtupper{at}guam.uog.edu

References and Notes

1. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Red Drum Management Plan (Specific Authority Art. IV, Sec. 9, Florida Constitution, chaps. 83-134, Laws of Florida, amended 1991).
2. Data were queried from the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey available at http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/recreational/queries/index.html
3. G. Kelleher, C. Bleakley, S. Wells, A Global Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (World Bank, Washington, DC, 1995); J. Alder, Coastal Manage. 24, 97 (1996); T. McClanahan, Coral Reefs 18, 321 (1999).

The study by C. M. Roberts and colleagues seems little more than a promotional tool for proposed no fishing zones styled as marine reserves. The authors conclude that marine reserves off the southwest coast of St. Lucia and the east coast of Florida have enhanced adjacent fisheries, but such a conclusion is overreaching, given the data they present.

In the latter case, for example, Roberts et al. examined data from the two reserve zones in the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge at Cape Canaveral. They conducted seine samples and report that they found more and bigger fish inside the area than outside where fishing was allowed. The study is presented as if the research were current, but no true dates are given for the seining. In fact, the seine samples go back to 1987-89 (1), a period when the fished waters were subjected to wanton commercial gill netting at its peak. In 1995, a Florida constitutional amendment finally banned the gill nets. This reform accompanied numerous new limits on recreational fishing. As a consequence, fish stocks have skyrocketed in the same fished area, as demonstrated in young-fish research projects by the state. So, all that Roberts et al. have shown is that when commercial pressures are curtailed, fish stocks thrive.

The authors bolster their conclusions about the Cape Canaveral marine reserves by listing a number of recreational fishing records supposedly set because of big fish migrating out of the reserves. However, before being closed to the public, the reserve waters (part of what was established as the Cape Kennedy security zone) were already known to harbor record specimens of certain species because of prime habitat. In addition, there was a spurt of records along Florida's east coast, largely as the result of line-class categories created by the International Game Fish Association, as well as $1000 awards paid by a line manufacturer. Importantly, many records were set in areas far removed from the reserve areas, including Mosquito Lagoon waters that are separated by land from them.

The real cause of perceived problems in fisheries management is the commercial take-for-profit. There is no justification for banning family-level angling, which is allowed in Yellowstone and Everglades national parks and other fragile areas. Good management does not require draconian prohibitions.

Karl Wickstrom*
Florida Sportsman Magazine,
2700 South Kanner Highway,
Stuart, FL 34994, USA.
E-mail: karl{at}floridasportsman.com

*Founder and Editor-in-Chief

References and notes

1. D. R. Johnson, N. A. Funicelli, J. A. Bohnsack, N. Am. J. Fish. Manage. 19, 436 (1999).

The conclusions by C. M. Roberts and colleagues that the effects of the Soufri`ere Marine Management Area (SMMA) extended beyond its boundaries and that commercial fish yields were increased because of the marine reserve are weak, for two reasons. First, there were no controls in the study and thus there can be no strong evidence for an effect of the experimental treatment. Second, the increase in abundance and catch outside the reserve was far too rapid to have been due to a buildup of a spawning population inside the reserve and export of eggs and larvae.

Regarding the second point, proponents of marine protected areas argue that spawning stock will build up inside reserves and eggs, larvae, and juveniles will then be exported to areas outside the reserves. For this chain of events to happen and for the exported eggs and larvae to grow to sufficient size for fishing would require time. Yet Roberts et al. report that the abundance outside the SMMA increased immediately after its establishment, despite the fact that fishing effort and catch increased outside the reserve. The rapid increase in abundance outside the SMMA could not have been due to increases in spawning stock inside. Alternative explanations for the data include an environmental change, as Roberts et al. suggest, or the effect of the experiment, which involved not only the establishment of the protected area, but "daily patrols by wardens," heightened public awareness, and other factors that could have contributed to improved compliance with existing regulations.

Ray Hilborn
School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences,
University of Washington,
Seattle, WA 98195, USA.
E-mail: rayh{at}u.washington.edu


You seem to be a master of the ad hominem attack (e.g. people who might disagree with you are racist, islamaphobic, too stupid too understand the MLPA because they are economists), so I'm awaiting your slander. Perhaps the font I used is sexist? :rolleyes:

[robmandel]

a few things, and I will end this.

as for the economists and houses, mostly it was policy, not economists. some argued for creating a housing bubble, but policy did it. I'd explain, but you're better off reading Tom Woods or Bob Murphy.

As for the mpa's, of course if you don't fish an area it's fish populations will increase. that's freaking obvious. don't fish at all, yes, there'll be more fish. but will we get a spillover effect with bass, rock fish, etc.? we simply don't know. we have mpa's already and there's not been documented evidence, in california, on california species. truth is the science wasn't settled.

eco-tourism will not benefit at all from mpa's. there's nothing gonna suddenly appear in five years that isn't there now. that's a moot point. the LJ caves are there and visited. mpa's won't help that. people paddle off the coast on paddleboards and kayaks and what not already. eco-tourism in california is like the whale watching trips. they aren't going to be affected, either way. and yo apparently missed the "undisturbed and unpolluted state" part. eco-tourism would disturb. and it'd be such a small addition which would be far surpassed by all the loss and extra cost.

as for the mpa's addressing other issues, if it falls on local agencies, they're flat broke. if it falls on the state agencies, they're flat broke too. and it leaves too much wiggle room, cf. "to the extent possible". and the mlpa was specifically about closing areas to fishing. period.

it's more than buoys. you're going to create a nightmare of enforcement, unless you want civilian patrols, neighbor turning in neighbor, citizen turning into enviro-police. welcome to the soviet union. and no, that's not hyperbole.

all along, the obvious solution was management. look at what fishermen have done with the white sea bass (not that I'd know, but that's my poor fishing skills!) fishery. or how we've handled the black sea bass. put slot limits, take limits, do C&R, all that. we're fine with that, and will absolutely support that 110%. do you honestly think that the closure people really are concerned with your fishing? do you think they want healthy sustainable fishing? if you do, then you're fooling yourself. I'd use worse, but I'll leave that to your imagination.

the closures were never about any of that, and if you were there, if you went through what we went through, you'd know it. you'd know the malfeasance of the brtf and the hearings. you'd know what the "other side" tried to pull, and even still, was able to get away with. you'd know how the rules (i.e. persistent kelp) were changed, altered, rewritten, etc. you'd know of the behind door dealings on maps (illegal by the way). you'd know how science was specifically thrown out, ignored, or in other cases, modified. but you weren't, and you don't.

there's not a single guy here who doesn't want healthy fish populations, doesn't want to see well managed fisheries. not a single guy here isn't in touch, literally, with water quality and it's impact. not a single guy here doesn't want to work hand in hand with the dfg to manage game, nail poachers, and stop the vast over harvesting by some commercial fishing. oh, and the fact that we were lumped with the commercial fishing, that's another thing.

but the bottom line is still principle. it was an egregious act of abuse by government, taking away livelihoods from some, liberty from all. in any other venue, the newspapers woulda been all over this like stink on shit. it woulda been front page news. but it wasn't even mentioned. it was top to bottom a corrupt, dishonest, and disgusting process, an abuse of power by a government set against its citizens. but you don't know that, or don't care to know.

if our fisheries were in peril, that'd be one thing. but they're not. and what is affecting them is far removed from 3 miles of coastline in malibu or la jolla and can't be corrected by closing them off. and we know they'll be back. the mpa's slated won't solve the problem, and we know that more is coming. we know what they want, what the money is trying to buy, and what the goal is.

healthy fishing isn't their goal. no fishing at all is.

I will fight them as long as I have breath in my lungs.

[dorado50]

Stan reminds me of the internet fisherman,you know,the guy thats just starting out and catches a fish on a wide open bite,then the very next day has all the answers and experiences it takes to become a good fisherman. :rolleyes:

[dsafety]

It's not in my nature to stay silent about things that I care about but that is exactly what I am going to do here. Rob's last post pretty much covers things. Well done.

I just have one question for Stan. For a guy who claims to be new to all of this, he seems pretty passionate about his point of view. That is unusual from a newbie. Could Stan actually be a seasoned agent from the other camp out trying to steal some souls? It's possible.

If that is your game Stan, I don't think you will find many in this community willing to take a bite of your poison. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Most of us just don't agree with yours.

Bob

[zenspearo]

Turns out that they gave the public another 15 days, but that's because that's the amount of time DFG calculates will be sufficient for them to finish cramming this Socal closure down our throat by their magic Dec. 15 deadline. Any longer and they will miss the "deadline" (guess those who have the gold makes the rules, and the pro-closure people know who pay their salary so they are scrambling to make that artificial deadline).

In contrast, the DEIR process for lesser CEQA projects (less complex and smaller sizes) have run 90, 120 days. But they are going to cram it down our throat on this one.

So in the end, the shenanigan landed them a FG&C Commissioner who's an enviro insider and they throw the public a 15-day bone. I predict they are going to try to push for more closures now with the new closurephile Commissioner on board.

How much you want to bet elements of Map 3 and External C is going to be pushed in these last two FG&C meetings in October and December? They are going to try to slide in as much as they can now that they have the FG&C voting rigged. We are now back to fighting for the survival of our sports.

To the troll: These guys are nice, trust me. You definitely got a pass here on this board. Try some of your troll on spearboard and see how long you'll last before you get a firm kick in the nuts and a permanent ban. :the_finger: I happen to know the mod over there and he can be an a$$hole ;)

[MVC]

Arnold wants to push this through before he is out of office. I regret my vote for him more than any vote of my lifetime. Hopefully the courts will throw this back in his face.

[dsafety]

Yes, I'm a sekrit MLPA agent sent by arnold to steal all your fishing rods. Lock them up and hide the key!

hint; not everyone that thinks differently from you is a secret opposition agent :stupid:

Stan, it is spelled Secret. As with many of your our other comments, your ignorance is showing here. I am done listening.

Bob

[steveooo]

So what's the problem with the MLPA?

Disregarding your previous posts- I'll try to break it down to one of the basic, basic problems. There are deeper problems, but I'll just keep it simple and address your question from my perspective.

You appear to be a surf fisherman? Nice corbie and leo from your previous posts.

http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwegallery/data/500/0b292945.jpg

http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwegallery/data/500/P7050015-1.jpg

What beaches did you catch them on? Are they special beaches to you? Good memories there? Nice variety of fish? Have you seen whether those beaches are affected by the proposed MPA's? That would suck for you if they were closed, no?

You ever shore fish any other areas? Laguna Beach up in the OC? I fish there pretty frequently. Its awesome up there. A couple of reasons why I love it there
1- I've Never been dealt the Helmet, even if I only swing by for a quick 10 min lunch session.
2- Cool variety of fish- You never know what could be on the end of your line
3- Awesome coastline.
4- My wife caught her first surf fish there
5- Its got good family friendly beaches that I can bring my wife and daughter to, and spend a few minutes surf fishing.

Laguna is very special to me for many reasons.

Unfortunately, if you've never been up to fish @ Laguna, you better do it quickly. It's on the chopping block. Which part? The whole part. Based off of what scientific data? A few old ladies that go swimming and claim that they are seeing less fish there than they did in the 80's.

You asked for specific reasons- That is just one. There are plenty of guys that have their favorite fishing spot, especially kayak accessible spots, on the chopping block through this whole process. I think the frustration you are seeing is that the guys that were involved in the process from early on, saw how little the input from the public really mattered, and that there were other intentions that were driving the process.

If those beaches that you caught your Corbie and PB Leopard on were in danger of being put on the "No Fishing" list, would you speak up to fight for them Stan? If you actually spoke up to save them, and then found out what you care about doesn't really matter to those running this process, would that frustrate you?

I'm seriously asking those last two questions and would like your honest answer Stan, not just hypothetically throwing them out there to prove a point.

And for the record- Steveooo in IN on this thread before it gets locked :the_finger:

[robmandel]

non-mlpa economics interlude-------
politicians make policy. it was politicians that wanted to subsidize housing, fed chairmen that flooded the markets with money and artificially lowered interest rates, politicians that forced lenders (CRA) to make bad loans, etc. I'd go on, but read tom woods and bob murphy for starters. i'll admit that from mankiw to krugman, they got it all wrong. I'm a libertarian. student of austrian economics. also, I despise both parties equally.
-------

you remind me of aristophanes' play, the clouds. or perhaps Plato's Gorgias. are you playing Thrasymachus?

on a side note, this is an awesome site, filled up with a bunch of great guys who love to help out others with kayak fishing. it's an invaluable resource and you're gonna meet lots of guys here on the water. and you'll learn a ton from them. but I'm kinda thinking you might not find it so. I'd advise you to change your screen name and kinda leave the mlpa stuff alone. you don't know, and you don't know what you don't know.

i'm out. got better things to do than feed trolls.

to my brothers down south :you_rock::you_rock::you_rock::cheers1::cheers1::c heers1:

[Tman]

What?
All I got so far was
a) we're angry
b) we've been angry a long time now
c) one of us out-argued an elementary school teacher and her students


First of all Stan, or Ken, or Meg, whatever your 'moniker' is, I hope you are not referring to my Son (...c) one of us out-argued an elementary school teacher and her students...).

Had you been there, maybe you were, he did not argue with anyone, he made valid points on his own. You misinterpreted the post that was made and it did sound like you were implying that my Son argued with elders (a teacher, albeit a misguided one at that).

If anything, the only disrespect shown was by Ken Wiseman towards my Son, but I did have a talk with Ken after the 'extensive public input' session.

Or maybe you were at the smurfrider meeting in Encinitas who again insulted a youngster for speaking up for what he believes in.

Funny how a ton of people spoke up for what they believe in, only to get chided by you for their views.

Question for you though Stan...at one of the meetings, I asked the BRTF members directly why it was never considered creating an artificial reef to increase our 'declining' fish population, and was told that there was not a guarantee it would work. How do you know if you don't try? Sure seems the one off San O turned out nice.

So, based on your rants, are you saying that a reef should not be considered, and the only way to increase the population is to go to drastics measures before any other thought is taken into consideration?

Did like one of your comments though...you know, this one...

Well thanks for wasting my time.

Thought you were a reasonable person, but looks like you're one of the zero-conservation extremists that don't give a crap about maintaining our fisheries beyond your own lifetime.



Take your ball and go home...

Maybe I'll run into ya at Torrey Pines some day...

[jhook]

Most of these are weak or aren't specific to south CA MPAs



He says the US MPA isn't a general result that would be the same in the rest of the world....which isn't the issue here...we are talking about another US MPA so the study is relevant

No. What he says is "Before implementing new reserves, it would be wise to ask whether a reserve is the best strategy for managing a particular fishery..." He also points out that less extreme measures are also working.



He also admits that, yeah, it might have increased the size of catches near the area (which you decided not to bold, convenient)

You caught me! Cleverly trying to hide the truth by posting his entire response.


The Fishing magazine writer (no conflict of interest there!) decided to ignore the statistic of biomass inside the MPA surpassing outside biomass in the same time frame.


And what about the interests of the authors of the original article? Do you think they would have been published in one of the most prestigious scientific journals in the world if their results would have found no effect?
In fact "the fishing magazine writer" addresses the point you accuse him of ignoring, directly: "However, before being closed to the public, the reserve waters (part of what was established as the Cape Kennedy security zone) were already known to harbor record specimens of certain species because of prime habitat." Which illustrates one of the biggest flaws of the study. No controls.


Also, yellowstone is heavly regulated, some rivers are closed to fishing year round, some are fly fishing only, there is no fishing for several months every year, and yellowstone isn't fished as heavly as our coastal waters simply due to population density, being a state park, and freshwater anglers these days being more likely to practice C&R.

All measures that are short of MLPA-style outright bans.




This guy doesn't seem to know that biomass isn't fish count....fish grow bigger every hour of every day...they don't need to spawn to grow bigger.

He seems to know it quite well, which is why he says: "Regarding the second point, proponents of marine protected areas argue that spawning stock will build up inside reserves and eggs, larvae, and juveniles will then be exported to areas outside the reserves."
The whole point is more fish, right? Not an equal number of bigger fish (that will then be caught outside the MPA).

Aww, don't like it when the enviromentalists you guys like to talk smack about so much give it back a little? :sifone:

Everyone was more than civil with you before (and even after) you starting implying that they were racist, islamaphobic, homophobic, extremists. One guy even gave you his phone number! It's pretty clear who's doing the smack talking.

[Gino]

http://i1012.photobucket.com/albums/af245/glruffolo/STAN.jpg
:biggrinjester: Look what I got! :biggrinjester:
Hello Sir nice to meet ya. Nice to see someone fishing dressed in there sunday Best!


See thats the fundamental differances here. And those folks Rob, Dsafety and even Steveo summed it up best.

You know Stan, The constitution Doesnt say that i have a right to fish. But shutting down large secions of the California coast to fishing is just flat out wrong.

I took my first girlfriend up to the Dana point headlands, Now its going to be a Hotel. But I aint against Developement.
I grew up in Dana point, I fished up and down the coast of Laguna. I live only 20 minutes up the coast. And I still miss my home.

That Coastline that some of you Enviormental folks seem to know so much about. all those red areas on a map, Landmarks and Gps cordinates. They may just be that to you.

But those places, They are All that I am...

The MLPA process doesnt hurt the big sportboats, or the commercial fleets, the guys taking all the fish. Its hurting the local kayak fishign comunity, they peopel who take less than 1% of fish in comparrison to the rest... Were the ones getting a shaft.

Stan you dont know who your talking to here. The people in this community pick up trash when out on the water, they fish man powered crafts. They are not keeping mass Quanities of fish, not even the full limits. They enjoy the sport becuase it puts them in touch with the enviorment. Anyone could get a loan for some Fancy Lefty Marine Biologist Degree, where they teach you that Science is proving logic wrong And that just becuase fish have tales doesnt mean they wont swim out of the Reserves, And that if you take a sentence move the words around it could mean what they want it to mean and whatever. The people in This community are made up of Tax payers. Mothers and Fathers. Hard working Americans, and outdoor enthusist.

What you dont udnerstand is that those who take from the Enviorment could tell you alot about it. Fisherman have Infinately more knowlege about the Ocean than some professor in a classroom. When you love something, you put your whole heart it in, and try to learn everything about it.

In fact Im doing a study right now on California Halibut Diets. And what they eat during certain times of the year, and what they are feeding on in certain Enviorments, i personally think they eat more than the bait we use to catch them with.

Yeah I was college myself, most folks here know im a pretty young guy for this crowd. But i know what they teach you "marine Biologist" I took a good deal of classes myself. And a good lot of it is Horse shit.


What this MLPA has done. Is it has damaged the the relationships between the state and the fisherman. In other states, Fisherman and the DFG work hand in hand to help manage the enviorment. Fisherman take form the Enviorment so as a whole they know whats going on. And they have the most to lose from its mis management. Now the DFG survey folks cant get an honest anwser to questions about what they caught anymore., becuase folks think that info could be used in the MLPA proces to guide the state on where to close? The fisherman dont trust state anymore.

You came on here looking for a fight. and you got one. Pick apart any anyones posting all you want. You arent going to Sway any minds here.

So take a Hike. God forbid I ever see a sunday school dressed guy out there surf fishing. I might think its you.

[AquaticHunter]

Gino seems to think he shouldn't be told where and how to fish...fishing is a right apperently...missed that part of the constitution I guess.



CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS

Section 25. The people shall have the right to fish upon and from
the public lands of the State and in the waters thereof....

Clear enough for you genius?

I think I remember you. Are you the guy at the Long Beach MLPA meeting who said he was a kayak fishing guide and then insulted all kayak fishermen as being incompetent and stupid on the water?

I really like the game you played here. Starting with... "what's wrong with a little closure? Seriously, please explain it to me.." going from that to quoting obscure scientific studies and insulting some great guys.

Freedom and liberty are the bottom line here. The freedom to put the kids in the car and go down to our favorite spot to go fishing. The freedom to drive along the coastline with a kayak in the back looking for a new spot to launch from and fish. These freedoms are going to be gone if we don't do something. And when that freedom is gone, it's gone forever. Lost freedoms only return by the spilling of blood. That's why we talk about this fight in battle terms.

To the rest of the guys on this board... :cheers1:

[Gino]

Stan. What fisheries are in trouble right now? Specifically in the Southern Section of the MLPA (were the folks on this froum fish)

Im interested to hear what information you have. :biggrinjester:

[THE DARKHORSE]

This is the reason I don't answer questions about using the sonar and what types of knots to use :biggrinjester:.


To my MLPA fighting blood brothers, united we stand! :cheers1:
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->__________________
http://www.bigwatersedge.com/images/trophies/wcw-2007-1.gif
<!-- / sig -->

[dorado50]

52 posts of pure garbage, come back when you got game....:doh:

[deepdvr]

52 posts of pure garbage, come back when you got game....:doh:

More like come back when your doc gets your meds straightened out. :stupid: Or better yet, just disappear.

[steveooo]

If those beaches that you caught your Corbie and PB Leopard on were in danger of being put on the "No Fishing" list, would you speak up to fight for them Stan? If you actually spoke up to save them, and then found out what you care about doesn't really matter to those running this process, would that frustrate you?



The beaches were on the block in earlier proposals, it would have sucked, but we have hundreds of MILES of great fishing beach up and down the coast and I know several great spots. I don't get emotionallly attached to a section of beach...lets me move around to find good fishing rather than get stuck if a beach is having a bad week.



So what you are saying is that you would just bend over and take it in the ass, while they took your fishing spots from you?
My guess is that this is not the first time you have bent over to take something in the A--:puke:


Try dana point, it's supposed to be great from reports I've seen


Welcome to the board Stan, I fish Dana a good amount. Its decent there. I hope to fish with you one day there, :reeling:

Bring your fly rod and your busted fishfinder.
Seriously....

For the record, Steveooo was in on this thread before it was locked 2x :cheers1:

[bellcon]

Sitting here remembering that list I was taught in class...
"The list of fallacious arguments"... Stan the man reeks of them...

one of the most common:
Ad Hominem (Argument To The Man): attacking the person instead of attacking his argument.
For example, "Stan's fews about MLPA's are worthless because he is an asshole" (Which is true, but that's not why they're worthless.)

Only on the super friendly site of BWE could this guy go on for so long...



P.S.
Stan,
sorry for being unfriendly... But I really think you are an asshole:the_finger:

[Tman]

Stan, you are incredible...the old saying, hook, line, and sinker...let's review and follow this rant... (though we all know at this point it is to no avail...)

Hey, don't blame me for robs bad wording.
...yea
You guys have this AWESOME selective reading where all your condescending and dismissive crap is ignored
costs money, adds even more things to debate, which areas get it?
If all the proposed MPAs were to get a reef that would cost a lot in materials, ships and just basic planning to servey the sites.
First selective reading and now putting words in my mouth, good work!
Nice threat, and I'm the bad guy.
Makes all your anecdotes of you people being "reasonable" at the meetings realy trustworthy!

First of all, you had bad wording from the get go (think spellcheck).
If you misread Rob's quote, that would be on you. I was merely pointing the obvious facts, had you been there you would have seen it for yourself.

Next....

Also, had you read between the lines, you would have surely noticed the reference of my Son having respect for his elders...hmmm...yet you call Dorado an 'old man'?

Next...

Reefs cost money, more areas to debate? Are you serious? Did you see where the BRTF got to stay, catered lunches, dinners, and do you think they were doing all of that gratis? That serious $ could've been spent elsewhere, oh, gee, maybe increase funding for the DFG?

Now that is a concept. Increase presence, less poachers...sure you have an argument, er, disagreement with that though...

Next...

Selective reading, putting words in your mouth? Wow...denial is not a river in Eqypt. You came on here wanting to be informed of the whole process, folks did their best to enlighten you, yet here, 20 some odd posts later, you are an expert and formulated your own opinion just by doing some research.

Selective reading indeed...

Next...

Nice threat, now you're the bad guy? You came on asking for help to understand this mayhem, it was given, even offered via PM or picking up the phone, you seem to have entirely mislead us of your knowledge and data stored based on how quick your responses were, so now you want to come across as the victim, whoa is me, they are picking on me since I just asked a simple question.

And to touch on that,

It makes our anecdotes of us being "reasonable" at the meetings realy trustworthy?

Stan, check your spelling among other things. We have been reasonable and tolerant of not only this whole process, but you in general.

Not once did we try to deceive you. Talk about trustworthy.

Funny though, knew all along you would not be able to read between the lines.

Respect is earned, not given, and you have clearly demonstrated a lack of respect.

And true to form, you bit...:sifone:

[The Kid]

Let me make this statement. From the time that the MLPA was dug back up from the dust covered shelves in the capital, and brought back to haunt the this generation of fisherman I have always been curious as to why the first course of action to encourage growth rates of pelagics, such as yellowtail, would not be taken into consideration before a complete closure was deemed the best option. The top option that should have and maybe or maybe not considered is to limit the keep of such species. For example in the white seabass restoration project, which I am sure you know about, is the perfect example for a successful restoration project. There is an obvious boom in populations presently and if you dont believe me heres some numbers for you page 33(http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/wsfmp/pdfs/wsfmp.pdf). If the take was restricted and length limits or slot limits were enforced would that not allowing for adequate breeding aged fish, boosting fish populations simply by increasing a certain species biomass in any ecosystem.
Is that not a valid reason to question the MLPA? To go to the most extreme restriction while spending 30 -40 million dollars a year to fund this program isn't that strange as well. Our government is corrupted there is no doubt about that. Who is getting the short end of the stick? The fisherman who are out there for sport while at the same time using the resources given them for their family who are spending their days stuck making enough to buy a kayak while keeping their family safe and have enough money to send off to our politicians who are are making this country more and more in debt with each breathe I take. Some of us don't make the same amount of money as are "trusted" politicians. So who in this day and age has the swing in the vote. If I stepped up to a podium at the capital and said my peace and during my speech Sigourney Weaver shakes her head in disagreement who is going to have the greater influence. Now to say this analogy is absurd is false in several meetings this is exactly what is going on. With many members appointed in the regional stakeholder group (RSG), a science advisory team (SAT), the California Department of Fish and Game, MLPA Initiative staff, the public and a policy-level blue ribbon task force (BRTF) simply in their head passing off fisherman public comments because they don't have a fancy title to show importance. So I ask you MLPA supporters, in this debate what is fair? To shut off local saltwater fishing (the productive areas of course), or to limit it. Both we assume to have the same results the only concern is time. Sure it may take longer, but if you keep both sides happy is not more productive than pleasing one side and having anarchy and resentment within your community?

[Tman]

Black, pink, and green abalone?

They were not overfished, they were overpoached!

Nor Cal has a slot limit, with seasons, limit of daily take, and max per year.
The ab population in Nor Cal is very healthy, as is the urchin population (missed that one).

Had there been strict regulations of take, which I am certain would've helped, and better enforcement, we could still be getting them.

Do some research on poachers who have gotten caught with abalone for transport out of this country, see how many times they were caught, then come back again when you want some more...

As far as BSB, wow...grasping at straws there Stan...maybe because they are slow growers who get to massive size, friendly, and generally lethargic creatures is the reason they are protected. That and the fact that if you don't take great care in releasing them they could die might be another...

Go ahead, do your research, sure you will have a rebuttal for this too...

BTW, take is still 1 per day in Mexico waters, please start firing off some rants and facts to the Mexican fisheries on that one.

WSB? Funding...hmm...fishing license revenue, fishing tournaments, awareness, outreach, all have helped the rebound of these fish. These same people that catch stock, help with the program, donate their time, monitor and care for the fish want them to thrive...why do you think that is Stan?

BTW Stan, do you even own a kayak?

I may be wrong, but I think I have it figured out...

Did your mommy tell you to go play on the freeway one too many times?

[Billy V]

lmao -

You're a funny guy stan.
Did you shoot dope before you posted on this thread ?

[Gino]

Southern California Steelhead (endangered)

Black Abalone (endangered)

Bocaccio

cowcod

green abalone

pink abalone

Yelloweye Rockfish

Canary rockfish

Giant (black) sea bass

I'm sure I missed some.

Cowcod If i remeber right are off limits to take... so thats ones solved. And if you were a kayak fisherman youd know damn well the Black Sea Bass arent endangered, those are also off limits to take so problem solved there.

Dont think anyone here has caught any Abalone from there kayak... thats right becuase they restrict the take on those too And they dont take fin bait...:biggrinjester:
The rockfish Fisheries are just fine. and the kayak take of those specieies mentiond is very small (less than a ton a year statewide)

Stealhead? those are endanrged due to damning the rivers and turning them into drainage systems for farming irrigation. Whats funny is there used to be Stealhead ay the rivermouth here in Dana point. they destroyed the san juan river. so no more stealhead. no MLPA is going to bring that back...

So there you ago, any other endangered species? many of thsoe rockfish species are caught well outide the MLPA map zones anyways so the MLPA doesnt help them either.

You still have no case! :biggrinjester:

[Gino]

Maybe if we give this guy a Joint and a Guitar hell go away. :biggrinjester:

[deepdvr]

Stan, why so much flip-flopping?????

Remember this thread you started?

Stan K G (http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/member.php?u=3819)
Member

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 56


san diegito lagoon/river?
<hr style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" size="1"> anyone take a yak to fish in there? any luck?

-----------------------------------------

deepdvr (http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/member.php?u=3019)
Senior Member

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Carlsbad
Posts: 221




All this info is on the DFG website. There are maps as well:

Existing Marine Protected Areas in California: Regulations



<table width="100%" border="1"><tbody><tr><th width="33%" align="center" bgcolor="#cccccc">San Diego County </th> <th width="34%" align="center" bgcolor="#cccccc"> SPECIES PROHIBITED For Recreational Take </th> <th width="33%" align="center" bgcolor="#cccccc"> SPECIES ALLOWED For Recreational Take </th> </tr> <tr> <td>Buena Vista Lagoon State Marine Park (estuarine)
</td> <td>Kelp
</td> <td>Marine aquatic plants EXCEPT kelp; Invertebrates in designated times and in designated areas; Finfish by hook and line during designated times and in designated areas
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Agua Hedionda Lagoon State Marine Reserve (estuarine)
</td> <td>All
</td> <td>None
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Batiquitos Lagoon State Marine Park (estuarine)
</td> <td>All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates
</td> <td>Finfish by hook and line from shore
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Encinitas State Marine Conservation Area
</td> <td>All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates
</td> <td>Finfish
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Cardiff-San Elijo State Marine Conservation Area
</td> <td>All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates EXCEPT chiones, clams, cockles, rock scallops, native oysters, crabs, lobster, ghost shrimp, sea urchins, mussels, and marine worms¹
</td> <td>Chiones, clams, cockles, rock scallops, native oysters, crabs, lobster, ghost shrimp, sea urchins, mussels, and marine worms¹; Finfish
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>San Elijo Lagoon State Marine Park (estuarine)
</td> <td>All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates
</td> <td>Finfish by hook and line from shore
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>San Dieguito Lagoon State Marine Park (estuarine)
</td> <td>All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates
</td> <td>Finfish by hook and line from shore and the Grand Avenue Bridge
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>San Diego-Scripps State Marine Conservation Area
</td> <td>All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates
</td> <td>Finfish
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>La Jolla State Marine Conservation Area
</td> <td>All
</td> <td>None
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Mia J. Tegner State Marine Conservation Area
</td> <td>All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates
</td> <td>Finfish</td></tr></tbody></table>

-------------------------------------------

Stan K G (http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/member.php?u=3819)
Member

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 56




Booo!

-------------------------------------

Stan K G (http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/member.php?u=3819)
Member

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 56




bummer...is the san diego river outlet off limits too?

---------------------------------------

Stan K G (http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/member.php?u=3819)
Member

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 56




I just want a winter sight fishing spot once the corbina take off.



It's all about you isn't it Stan. You're a freakin hypocrite. :you_rock:

[The Kid]

Err, ok.

No offense, but did any fishermen try to represent our side in a level-headed matter without all this tea party Lite talk?

I'm going to get my ass chewed off for this, but people tend to ignore the side that doesn't debait the points and just rants about how everyone else is evil and corrupt and ruining america. It's great for republican primaries, don't get me wrong, but doesn't work for much else.

(And please dont start blaming mexicans and muslims for the MLPA)

But it is important to discuss that because the fact is our leaders are making decisions for all of us. To say that it serves for republicans who gives a shit. However the decisions made should be made to serve the community justice not one side or the other. Did you know more tax dollars are spent on prisons than education? Who the hell allowed that to happen. hmmmm oh yeah government officials. So to deny the importance of acknowledging a dollar based decision process within our government is being ignorant.
p.s. im not a tea party supporter

[The Kid]

Except you're wrong...can't even follow existing regs.

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/bfregs2010.asp#south


COWCOD ARE PROTECTED,you cant keep them, says in the info you provided! we arent misinformed you are

[Billy V]

http://www.smooth3d.com/xterra/assclown.jpg

[The Kid]

So, I have to love the closures?

Sorry, guess I'm just more grown up than most of you guys; I can not like something, while still understanding its purpose, and not throw a tantrum calling the government tyranical...for protecting a lagoon.

but do you really think it serves a profitable purpose

[Gino]

You asked for endangered species in the MPA area...I gave them. Steelhead migration paterns aren't known once they leave the rivers. And the MPAs would make some of the lagoons they use to grow out a no-fish area.



No becuase those Lagoons are not allowed to be included in the MPA becuase they are man made, And i remember something that had to do with Polution. At the Laguna meeting I talked about this with a guy who was apart of some Steelhead project and he wanted to protect the Aliso beach river spot and wanted to see if it would be included in the MPA. Based on all 3 maps it wasnt, the cosures stopped there. Thats why there is no fishing piers included in these MPA reserves :biggrinjester:

Stealhead migrations arent known once they leave the rivers? Well thats becuase there is no stealhead! And there is no more rivers! the MLPA wont fix either of those problems. How can you not understand that? I asked for exmaples of stealhead fish species in the Southern Section. Steelhead are largely near extinct becuase well, there is no rivers for them to spawn... Of course there is no way to track there migrations, especially in southern California. the MLPA plays no part in that issue


NOAA has no way of tracking Kayakfishing Catch #s. thats my point.... Its largely pennys comparend to commercial or sport boat fishing. We are talking about Kayakfishing here buddy. the NOAA will give you nothing in that form of imformation, only specualtions.
The MPA doesnt extend protection to the Juvenile rockfish, any more than what protection they have today.
Humboldt Squid have more to do with low rockfish Numbers than recreational fishing...If you knew how much those little rockfish those Squid eat, You regulating the squid on what they eat. Good luck on that one.

Your saying poachers cant poach if they cant go to the protected Abalone in the MPA, As if someone is going to be there watching... There no enforcement, theres no plans or funding for any enforcement of these Reserves, and Poachers will Poach Regardless of the any MPA... So you MPA reserve Bouys wont stop the bad guys.

[Gino]

Off topic

[Gino]

Well, polls show that the majority likes the MLPA

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/lmonroe/oppositionsponsored_poll_demon.html

Voters, by pushing for ultra tough sentencing for non-violent crimes. Yeah it feels nice, but then you gotta pay the cost of housing those people.



Err, the tea party rant that "government is evil" is not an acknowledgment of government decision making...it's a rant.

Also, fun fact; privatizing prisons increases cost. Prop 19 would actually help reduce prison costs because people would stop getting jailed for pot posession.\


acually the prisons cost so much becuase of the Prison Gaurds Union. That was Jerry Brown, he did that one some Eons ago.. :biggrinjester:

The guys getting thrown into prison for Pot are the big pushers or illegal smugglers... Not the average guy with a dime sack. :D Jail and Prison are completely differant. If your smuggling out of country thats Federal offense. the states prop 19 wont save that guy.


Way off topic.

[zenspearo]

LMAO.

This Stan guy personifies the cliche of an attention-seeking troll. What's amazing is the mod allowed him to carry on this long.

First he pretended to ask a question. Then he egged everyone into arguing with partisan drivels that show his true color.

He recited his party line well, I grant him that. What's telling is none of his points are original--zero evidence of original thinking. The same ka-ka we all heard before and dealt with when it mattered except it's clumsily delivered here.

He doesn't care how much of an asshat he's coming across with this audience because he basks in the glow of negative attention he created. Beat him down with logic, and all that was accomplished was wasted time and winning against an idiot.

This is when some mod action would be highly useful so this site can get back to its mission of serving kayakfishermen.

[The Kid]

I cant use that poll info that you provided to justify your reasoning. it is biased in my opinion. But 7% of tax dollars spent on education really versus 11% for prisons? anyways lets leave that one out back to topic

[The Kid]

I don't really care about profit, conservation on its own is good. :eek:

conservation in the end is encouraging a bountiful ocean which in turn profits those who seeks to harvest from it and that's what the MLPA and such acts like it are doing they are ensuring future profit. But the method, MLPA, used to accomplish it is rash when there are better methods to accomplish the same goal.

[robmandel]

stan, guess you have no idea who the sophists were. ought to investigate that one. might have a moment of self discovery. (not that this ought to be a maslow moment for you though. I'm pretty sure you've achieved that already!!)

ok, I'll give up the ghost. sophists were pre-socratics in ancient greece (socrates was accused of being one, though he rejected them), who argued for the sake of arguing, could take any side and argue indefinitely, without facts or evidence, "winning" as much as by taking apart their opponents arguments rather than constructing one of their own. they would use rhetorical tricks to gain the upper hand. rather than reaching a logical conclusion based on facts, evidence, and reason, they instead would show how an opponent made a mistake or something and thus, "win". yes, they were hated, cf the clouds. also, truth was relative (i.e. man is the measure of all things) and something that could change or existed in one mind different from another. in fact, there was no truth, simply what one thought to be, was.

even the ancients knew the to be what we so eloquently refer to as, bullshit artists.

[jhook]

We have the other measures, apperently they aren't enough. (and no anecdotes about how you think the fishery is fine)

Which fishery?


Yeah, the result you don't like has gotta be the only one the journal would accept...those evil scientists HATE when things don't work.

Honestly you highlight the exact problem with bringing up factual evidence to convince you people. Everything counter to your view must be some conspiracy, not anything you can proove, but, you know....It has to be!


The whole point of my response was to point out the flaws in the "factual evidence". One flawed study should not be enough to convince anyone. And, I can assure you that non-results do not get published in top-tier journals. Science also has a definite editorial bent (like all journals). You have far too much faith in experts. Scientists are human, and have personal conflicts and biases, just like everyone else. That doesn't make them evil. Scrutinize the data. Don't just trust the experts.


Where are your exhaustive, double-blind, US-based MPA studies anyhow?


Shouldn't the burden of proof be on those that are trying to change the rules?


How are rivers being off limits to fishing different from MPAs that are off limits to fishing?

For one thing, the data are much better for relatively small, relatively closed systems like freshwater lakes and streams.




Another person with those awesome rose colored shades.:cool:

I'm not surprised that the discussion devolved into ranting and name calling. I just wanted to point out that you started it. Too bad really, as I'm trying to learn more about the MLPA process as well.

[The Kid]

the poll was designed by an anti-MLPA group...how much less biased against your direction can it be?

this poll that you used i found another part you forgot to mention. the same organization that did this study also said this.

"The Alliance of Communities for Sustainable Fisheries (ACSF) has released the results of a national public opinion poll revealing the public’s attitudes about ocean conservation which found that the public strongly wants the ocean to be protected, but not with total marine closures.

Respondents expressed a reluctance to place the ocean off limits to human use if those areas and the resources can be used sustainably. The public does support placing areas off limits to all human use, but only if it is to protect rare and fragile habitats, where no sustainable use is possible. And researchers found that the level of support for both commercial and recreational fishing remains strong.

“The public doesn’t support laws or regulations that hurt the nation’s small, independent fishermen or recreational fishing activities,” said Vern Goehring, manager of the California Fisheries Coalition. “They want smart management of marine ecosystems, not total ocean closures that hurt local economies.”
http://www.alliancefisheries.com/pub_html/html/NewsPR1%20July%2022%202009.html

the info was translated into an article that was biased and left out information pertinent to the subject.

[Gino]

Acually Your Mexicans and Muslims comment I think was what really turned it sour. That was a Colorfull display of ignoramus.

<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset" class=alt2>Originally Posted by Gino http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/showthread.php?p=66181#post66181)
No becuase those Lagoons are not allowed to be included in the MPA becuase they are man made

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>not all lagoons a man made

http://i54.tinypic.com/x0p72s.jpg

Steelhead dont spawn in Lagoons. certainly not Lagoons in Southern California. We would have Stripers down here too if they had acess to brackish water to spawn. I caught one in Dana point.

What? Now you're just being dense.

juvie fish will live IN the MPAs, if you cannot fish in the MPAs, you can not catch the juvie fish IN the MPAs.

No one on this forum is fishing for Juvi Rockfish. If any are caught on a rare ocasion. they are released, and the death to release ratio is pretty small. Becuase the catch ratio of juvi rockfish is very small.

Kayakfishing has a very low impact on the Rockfish populations The MPA does not protect agaisnt even 90% of the rockfish take in Southern California. Kayakfishing has little effect on most of these fisheries. Protecting Juvenile Rockfish does not improve the Rockfish Fishery, Regulating a lower limit or size Requirments does. There is no Juvenile Rockfish if there is not Big rockfish spawning. We have a good amount on Rockfish Spawning Protection now. That Fishery is closed a good portion of the year. and Regulated even by Depth in certain areas. lowering the daily limit would be leaps and bounds, not an MPA. You want to increase rockfish populations point your fingers at the Commerical Fishing. Not at us.

Did you get that degree yet?

I dont need a Degree to know Big Squid, eat little fish. For an animal that grows from a Fry to 5 feet long in a little more than year, it has to eat alot of fish. Im willing to bet if there was a study, Im sure youd find a Substancial amount of Small Rockfish in there Diets. I never said i was expert. But Logic trumps reason.

There is very little enforcement in the already Existing MPAs... The MLPA does not have anything in that legislation that increases enforcement or enforcement personel. How do the police uphold the law without policemen patrolling the streets? a Law means nothing without enforcement. Theres not enough enforcement now... theres no tax dollars going around to increase enforcement tomorrow. Most of the newly expanded, or aquired MPA will have no enforcement when they become implemented. DFG is plenty understaffed. and Local Law enforcement wont pick up the Tab. They cant even Enforce protecting the Local Tidepools from the public stepping all over Sea Anemones.

And that Black Sea bass guy, He got his sure fare share of criticism on this forum and many others.. Acually it was alot of the Kayakfishing community who got the DFG and DA to investigate. The Fishing Community in general was what gave those videos the exposure, Which lead to him being charged.
Besides there was no kayak fisherman in the making of that film.
And since there was no MPA around that pier to save that fish, i guess it was just his unluckly day! :biggrinjester: he musta wandered away from his protected Kelp... :rolleyes:


The MPA hurts fishing access for us. It limits us on where we can fish. We are the ones most effected by it. just becuase you see alot of empty coastline apart form the closures on a map. doesnt mean there is efficiant or safe public access to it. The people who endanger our natural Resources the least are the ones being restricted the most. And were somehow supposed to apreciate the MLPA? or accept it for all its specualted goodness? I wish i could say our Tax dollars were funding this but its not, its Packard and Moore, and Special intrest groups, While Big oil gets involved to make sure its future buisness adventures are well protected. Its all upside down.

You maybe could have looked at the MLPA on its face and say hey its a good thing. Funny Enough at First i sure did. Until i started going to the meetings... And when i started to see and learn about some of the crooked side of it.

As far as pole #s go. If you put a poll up for califronians asking who they feel about more Oil drilling of the coast. after that BP and the goverments mess back in the Gulf. Im sure youd find folks would be "strongly agaisnt" Well even they are using the process to there advantage. I know a good deal about that i happen to have connectons involved in Big Oil.


You can post up here all your NOAA and your missworded poll Data. We are just recreational Fisherman, No some billion dollar Enviormental Lobbyist or monster coporations coalition trying to get there peice of the pie. We just want to fish and not be botherd.

[dorado50]

please, no name calling. It will not be tolerated on this forum.

[bellcon]

please, no name calling. It will not be tolerated on this forum.


:doh:

I seem to remember that rule Dave...

maybe this is a "special" case

Come on guys, by now
We all know there is no "reasoning" with stan
This whole post is like looking at porno for a guy like him...
he has his pants down around his ankles,
typing shit he would never say in person, face to face with anyone here.

Keep it simple
stans a douche bag leaf licker

As you get "older" you realize kicking someone ass for being an obnoxious, argumentative little piece of shit, who doesn't know when to shut up or leave... just isn't right...

then a guy like Stan comes along
and kind of makes you rethink the whole idea


I wonder how many other boards stan is sharing these little rants with...
"oh look at me... look how upset I got all those mean kayak fishermen"
:biggrinjester:

He doesn't deserve to hear us re-hash our arguments
or our logic
if he wants to see what we have said on this subject he can go back in the DFG archives and watch us speak at the meetings...

[AquaticHunter]

Guys. He fishes with a fly rod. Enough said?:sifone:

[Ohana]

Guys. He fishes with a fly rod. Enough said?:sifone:
Hey I fish with a fly rod!

Just for that remark, I now support the MLPA's most restrictive plan. Now I have to go cut my nose off to spite my face! :biggrinjester:

Kevin

[lambadmin]

wow.

Stan K G has got too much time on his hands.

And the things don't quite add up here...

Multiple requests for Spam Sanitation Dept intervention have been filed in.

I have a feeling we're not going to hear back from him - at least not from Stan K G account.

[Grego]

What the F...seems like the enviros are hunting and fishing around this board AGAIN with this stan man and bmercury login names :the_finger:

Told you sooo....:biggrinjester:

Lambchopmod, you should delete this guy's comments, he's still happy his posts are going to be up for a long long long time...

[AquaticHunter]

Hey I fish with a fly rod!



I knew that was coming!:linesnap:

[lambadmin]

Told you sooo....:biggrinjester:

Lambchopmod, you should delete this guy's comments, he's still happy his posts are going to be up for a long long long time...


at your service, master Grego

[The Kid]

:luxhello: moderation is good

[ZUMAN]

This ASSCLOWN is also starting crap and getting threads locked
on scsurffishing as well:the_finger:

http://www.scsurffishing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=64606

[cabojohn]

Stan,
Go pour yourself a nice tall glass of bleach & draino mix and drink up.:the_finger:

**I hope you have the pleasure of running into some of the nice guys here surf fishing.


IB4TL :)
(that's one for me Steveo)


EDIT- looks like Stan got the ban hammer. Good riddens.

[Ohana]

I knew that was coming!:linesnap:

:cool:

By the way, I have used my 12 wt fly rod and caught 150 lb makos. But, I am not a purist; I use casting gear for 99% saltwater and fly gear for 75% freshwater.

Kevin

[zenspearo]

Yay.

Mod cleaned up the trash nicely. :luxhello:

[dsafety]

Aah, fresh air. Thanks Zenspero for your enlightening first post in this thread. It sure got everyone's juices going. Now what should we do?

Bob

[Hunters Pa]

Ya know, this amusing banter seems to have gotten everyone fired back up. Well done Stan, you accomplished the exact OPPOSITE of your mission to convince us our stand was misguided.

We are a very diverse group, but bring on a common enemy and see how fast we band together.

[zenspearo]

Aah, fresh air. Thanks Zenspero for your enlightening first post in this thread. It sure got everyone's juices going. Now what should we do?

Bob

Thanks for the kind words Bob but truly, I'm just a guy thankful for the collaboration from my kayakfishing brothers. :cheers1:

The thanking should be done by us in the spearing community to you guys.:notworthy:

I can't say it anymore eloquently than your kayakfishing RSG rep. He has put out a call and I am going to try to get our spearos going as well.

http://bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/showthread.php?t=8445

Paul Lebowitz is completely right--this kind of "stack the deck, push for more closure than IPA" has been tried before in the North Central Coast process. This lameduck appointment of a blatantly pro-closure Commissioner at the 11th hour puts our two communities (the most selective and low-impact but also most vulnerable fishing communities) at risk.

Our earlier showings were in front of RSGs and BRTFs. This is the decider, and a new audience. And they are the ones voting which map would decide our fishing/diving future. We have to smartly, persistently, and convincingly make our case heard for our needs.

We have only two more MLPA meetings and so we spearos will not let you guys down. We will meet you there again on October 20th/21st.

I hope everyone who ever fished in our SoCal ocean or spearfishing under its waves will be there.

Location: FG&C meeting in San Diego on Oct 20-21 at the Four Points by Sheraton on Aero Drive.

[PAL]

Joe is right. It's time to strap it on for the final two meetings.

Stacked deck is the perfect description. The balance on the commission is so far towards the enviro NGO side, that we have to be ready to meet an all-out attack on La Jolla.

We all know how much it chafed them to leave us the north kelp. They lied - regularly - about our use areas, drummed up fake kayak anglers, and continually tried to undermine our credibility.

Even if the commission decides to go with the IPA, there are a number of changes they can choose from. The DFG doesn't like the South La Jolla MPA boundaries. That could grow to the north and south.

We also have to watch the pier bait situation. It's a complication for them. Tyler tried to tell them to move the line so it doesn't bisect the pier. They didn't listen, so we have to stay on that case too.

The Oct meeting is in San Diego. No excuses! The other side will resort to their usual dishonorable tricks. Will we see taxpayer funded bused-in schoolchildren again? Maybe.

December's meeting in Santa Barbara is jsut as important. Make a commitment now! All that we battled for together with a single voice could be lost if we don't stay on the job to the very end.

[Grego]

San Diego....again, don't mean a thing to the BT....we will be THERE AND IN SANTA BARBARA in force as usual to meet our brethren on the battlefield. Those that refuse to make the trek southward/northward or drop out of the road march? easy,we kick them off the board !!! :luxhello::luxhello::luxhello::luxhello: :biggrinjester:

[-scallywag-]

bring some stones....we'll vote them out Roman senate style :luxhello:

[zenspearo]

San Diego....again, don't mean a thing to the BT....we will be THERE AND IN SANTA BARBARA in force as usual to meet our brethren on the battlefield. Those that refuse to make the trek southward/northward or drop out of the road march? easy,we kick them off the board !!! :luxhello::luxhello::luxhello::luxhello: :biggrinjester:

This SD guy will be in Santa Barbara as well. And I'll bring my speargun and wetsuit to pay them fish and lobsters a visit. :cheers1:

[dsafety]

Paul and Joe, thanks for your continued efforts. I thought that we may have lost Paul for a while. Welcome back.

This is the first that I have heard about a San Diego meeting in October. If I can, I will be there but it will be the first time that I have been able to attend one of these things.

If I may make a suggestion, it would be great to have some advice, suggestions... no, lets make it instructions, as to what we should and should not do at that meeting. Many guys know what needs to be done. Many others, myself included don't have a clue.

This forum is probably not the best place to distribute those instructions. I recommend that a list of guys who are on the right side of this issue be compiled, (lets leave Stan on the sidelines for this one). Once the list has been compiled, instructions should be distributed by email or PM.

I am happy to help. When is the meeting? Who is the point guy?

Bob

[AquaticHunter]

:cool:

By the way, I have used my 12 wt fly rod and caught 150 lb makos. But, I am not a purist; I use casting gear for 99% saltwater and fly gear for 75% freshwater.

Kevin

Kevin, you seemed to take that comment too seriously.


To the subject in question, it didn't surprise me Stan was a fly fisherman. In fact, it fit perfectly.

[PAL]

Bob, I never left. Just went quiet for a time.

I hear you. The same goes for those who contacted me offline. We're working on an action plan, messaging, and ways to get the word out to the kayak and spearfishing communities. It will take a few days.

In the meantime, check out this news:


Judge rules MLPA officials must release public records

<SCRIPT> pv["p.a_2"] = "Judge rules MLPA officials must release public records";</SCRIPT>
By Ed Zieralski (https://www.signonsandiego.com/staff/ed-zieralski/)<SCRIPT> pv["p.a_3"] = "";</SCRIPT> Originally published September 30, 2010 at 8:11 p.m., updated September 30, 2010 at 8:56 p.m.

A Sacramento (http://topics.signonsandiego.com/topic/Sacramento) County Superior Court judge ruled Thursday that the Blue Ribbon Task Force and the Master Plan Team for the Marine Life Protection Act South Coast Region are “state agencies” and must adhere to the California (http://topics.signonsandiego.com/topic/California) Public Records Act.

Judge Patrick Marlette ruled in favor of San Diego’s Robert C. Fletcher, saying the agencies must release all requested documents related to the South Coast Region of the Marine Life Protection Act by Oct. 10.

The Blue Ribbon Task Force and the Master Plan Team have been charged with drawing up proposals for enactment of the Marine Life Protection Act

Read the rest here: https://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/sep/30/judge-rules-mlpa-officials-must-release-public-rec/

This is a big deal. As most of you know from personal experience, the BRTF meetings were not conducted on the up and up. They may yet be held to account for their corrupt actions.

[Tman]

Bob, I never left. Just went quiet for a time.

...They may yet be held to account for their corrupt actions.

Better yet, they may yet be held accountable for their corrupt actions...
C'mon Paul, been reading too many of Stan's posts? :biggrinjester::you_rock:

I will plan on being there, somehow, some way...


Just know that I am gonna catch chit for this one...

[Matt]

I'll be there regardless of the outcome I'm still gonna fish......dear enviro-Nazi-jackoffs your not gonna stop us EVER!!! And the only good thing Jerry Brown ever did was inspire the Dead Kennedys!

[Ohana]

Kevin, you seemed to take that comment too seriously.


To the subject in question, it didn't surprise me Stan was a fly fisherman. In fact, it fit perfectly.

Do not worry, I am just pulling your line! :)

I am surprised Stan did not comment on your post as he seemed to react defensively to the others making a comment about him

[Ohana]

Paul and Joe, thanks for your continued efforts. I thought that we may have lost Paul for a while. Welcome back.

This is the first that I have heard about a San Diego meeting in October. If I can, I will be there but it will be the first time that I have been able to attend one of these things.

If I may make a suggestion, it would be great to have some advice, suggestions... no, lets make it instructions, as to what we should and should not do at that meeting. Many guys know what needs to be done. Many others, myself included don't have a clue.

This forum is probably not the best place to distribute those instructions. I recommend that a list of guys who are on the right side of this issue be compiled, (lets leave Stan on the sidelines for this one). Once the list has been compiled, instructions should be distributed by email or PM.

I am happy to help. When is the meeting? Who is the point guy?

Bob

I second Bob's suggestion. I will try to make the October meeting and, considering how it appears our foes have an organized plan, it would probably be good for first-timers to the meetings have one also or at least how we can be most effective.

Kevin

[Regor]

I am surprised Stan did not comment on your post as he seemed to react defensively to the others making a comment about him
A little hard to comment when he was banned.

[AquaticHunter]

I am surprised Stan did not comment on your post as he seemed to react defensively to the others making a comment about him

Didn't really surprise me he had no answer to the constitution because it's plain as day. I'm glad we have guys on here that know about obscure scientific studies and economics because I can't speak about stuff like that with any kind of authority. But God has given me a healthy dose of common sense and a hunger for freedom. I am only surprised the lawsuit that's been filed had to do with corruption of the MLPA process and not the constitutionality of it. Perhaps that's a future plan, I don't know.

[dorado50]

I'll be there regardless of the outcome I'm still gonna fish......dear enviro-Nazi-jackoffs your not gonna stop us EVER!!! And the only good thing Jerry Brown ever did was inspire the Dead Kennedys!


X2...but I refer to them as "liberal socialist" ie.people with a mental disorder....

[Tman]

There once was an enviro named Stanley
Who thought all his rants were quite manly
But what nobody knows
The gay bars where he goes
He's known quite simply as Candy

[Billy V]

I'll be there regardless of the outcome I'm still gonna fish......dear enviro-Nazi-jackoffs your not gonna stop us EVER!!! And the only good thing Jerry Brown ever did was inspire the Dead Kennedys!

Yup - that about sums it up.

It will actually make it more fun for me playing cat and mouse with any ill gotten closures.

-Game on .... lmao

[Suck me]

You idiots are too funny.

You bitch about being called biggots and then break out the homophobic slurs

You whine about freedom and then cheer the banning and complete sensoring of someone that doesn't agree with you.

You morons say you are a "diverse community" but talk down on any type of fishing that isn't yours.


Have fun with your little tea party circle-jerk, good on the MPLA for ignoring morons like you.

[Suck me]

And the golden one, where you nimrods say you're moderate and sensible but threaten physical voilence.

[dsafety]

Yup - that about sums it up.

It will actually make it more fun for me playing cat and mouse with any ill gotten closures.

-Game on .... lmao

Billy, I'm with you. Sometimes when a law is unjust, you just have to rebel. In the spirit of the Boston Tea Party, Rosa Parks and anyone who has ignored the 55 mph limit, I plan to continue fishing where I have been fishing should all of this crap become the law.

On another subject, I would like to gently suggest that all who have been calling our opponents Nazis, Socialists, Commies and other similar similarly degrading names interchangeably pick up a dictionary and figure out exactly what you want your insult to mean.

Nazis, (National Socialists), are really Fascists. The real socialists are on the other side of the political spectrum along with the Communists. I don't think you can be both a Nazi and a Socialist at the same time. I suspect that some have blurred the line between the these groups' political manifestos and the fact that both tend to support dictatorial rule.

I think that that is what I object to the most. When a small minority of people have the power to deny individual freedoms to the masses, the seeds of rebellion start to germinate. I think that we are at that stage now. Dictators rely on fear to keep the masses in check. That may not work with our group. If they push us too far, I have no doubt that some will start pushing back. Hopefully we can avoid that.

Bob

[cabojohn]

And the golden one, where you nimrods say you're moderate and sensible but threaten physical voilence.

:the_finger:
no power snivlers

Wait, is this Stan's boy toy? Welcome and adios.
XOXO

[dorado50]

Billy, I'm with you. Sometimes when a law is unjust, you just have to rebel. In the spirit of the Boston Tea Party, Rosa Parks and anyone who has ignored the 55 mph limit, I plan to continue fishing where I have been fishing should all of this crap become the law.

On another subject, I would like to gently suggest that all who have been calling our opponents Nazis, Socialists, Commies and other similar similarly degrading names interchangeably pick up a dictionary and figure out exactly what you want your insult to mean.

Nazis, (National Socialists), are really Fascists. The real socialists are on the other side of the political spectrum along with the Communists. I don't think you can be both a Nazi and a Socialist at the same time. I suspect that some have blurred the line between the these groups' political manifestos and the fact that both tend to support dictatorial rule.

I think that that is what I object to the most. When a small minority of people have the power to deny individual freedoms to the masses, the seeds of rebellion start to germinate. I think that we are at that stage now. Dictators rely on fear to keep the masses in check. That may not work with our group. If they push us too far, I have no doubt that some will start pushing back. Hopefully we can avoid that.

Bob


Thats exactly what socialist liberals believe in...and thats a very good definition there also Bob...

[Gino]

You idiots are too funny.

You bitch about being called biggots and then break out the homophobic slurs

You whine about freedom and then cheer the banning and complete sensoring of someone that doesn't agree with you.

You morons say you are a "diverse community" but talk down on any type of fishing that isn't yours.


Have fun with your little tea party circle-jerk, good on the MPLA for ignoring morons like you.

You had absolutely no intentions of having a respectfull conversation about this origional Topic of this post. I gave you more than enough chances. You were someone just looking to talk shit.

This Website is Owned by a buisness. They have the legal right to censor anything they want. Sorry. :luxhello:

Whos the one Ranting now... :doh::biggrinjester:

[JoeBeck]

LMAO Candy is back and wants to get sucked :hahaha:

[Dan]

Just FYI, it's spelled bigot, not biggot.

[Grego]

Yaayy...Candy Sucker is back...We Wuv Wu Weetie!!!!:luxhello:

[tony]

Enviro campaign video backfires big time....
A little too truthful ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDXQsnkuBCM

[Gino]

From my knowlege, As far as the Differance between Nazis and Socialist and such. has very little to do with political policies, and more to do with Philisophical beliefs. Were Communism is about he collective, tearing down all and any individual qualities, including religious.
Were Facism or Nazism (Nazi :National socialist workers Party) Does pretty much the same, but dictates individualism through Racial Identities.
Economic policies vary from differant examples. Were Nazi Germany had authority over German companies that were privately owned. Were as a Communist State, The State owns and operates all economic activities. Nazism was paracticed more like a Religion. It helped to shape Goverment and Economic policies, But the Nazi party and its rule during Germany were Socialist.

Thats what The Enviormentalist movement in this state as well as in the country is doing. They shape public and economic policy for the good of there movement. If a delta smelt a small fish is somewhat endangered and some Scientific report is conjured up saying so. The goverment shuts off the water flow from a Damn. Thats crippling Economic productivity and Destroying a community over a fish.
Thats just a single Example. The states AB32 bill could put Diesel Truckers out of work and a good amount of contruction. Over less than 1% of predicted Toxic Emissions... Thats a predicted estimate, and it could have no effect on the Enviorment, or global warming.

Thats very similuir to the MLPA, Its Enviormental Special intrests Funding public policy, along with the bending and breaking of rules and disregard for the general public, all to achieve a goal, with no real results.

Besides. The indoctrination these groups are doing to children... using Tax payer dollars bus school children into an MLPA meeting where the children have no say what so ever becuase They arent legal adults or Tax payers at that. But that level of indoctrination is very comparible to Hitler youth styles of teaching. Tearing down there individual thoughts and a capacity to think individually. All for an Ideaology.

In alot of ways its very easy to Equate the enviormental movement with Nazism. Becuase they have alot in common in how they operate and how they indoctrinate (educate if you see it that way) They preach Sacrafice, for a common good, and use Nazi style tactics to impose it on the rest.

"It only stands to reason that where there's sacrifice, there's someone collecting the sacrificial offerings. Where there's service, there is someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice is speaking of slaves and masters, and intends to be the master." Ayn Rand

[Matt]

Thanks Gino at least you got it!!!

[Kiyo]

Whitman is run by political advisors. What she will say in public and What she will say in private may be 2 differant things. (or even what shes saying in public for that matter)
Thats a Craps Table Dice roll...win big or bust.

Were as Jerry Brown is well connected with the political enviormental possey. His apointments to the Air/Carb board speak plainly enough. The guy seeks support from Unions and Enviormental influences. Besides why trust a man whos hands have been on the kiln shaping the mess this state is in. The guys been in CA politics for 40 years. Hes done nothing to stop it, what makes you think he will now? Hes never balanced a payroll in his life anyways.

Just look where the money is comming from, and whos contributing to whome. And youll have your answer to that question.

Ive said it before the next governor has the power to work on either sides behalf on this process. The State STILL doesn thave a budget for this year... It will be the least of the next Governors problems.


Gino... Jim Kellogg, who is the union pipe fitters president donated something like $500,000.00 to Jerry Brown. Jim Kellogg is also the president of the Fish and Game Commission and sides with Richards. I believe Jim Kellogg is a president of some hunting club too and loves fishing. This tells me to vote for Brown.

[GregAndrew]

Like someone else already stated, because of his actions in this process, I regret having cast a vote in the direction of Arne. It appears, by all the recent evidence, that he intends for this to be a moot point for the next governor anyway. He wants this to be his legacy and will cram it down our throats before Dec. recess, and to hell with reason. I would love to see the judge that required the BRTF to show all their work halt the process until everyone had a chance to chew it over.

I would not want to hazard a guess as to which of the candidates for the next governor would better meet our expectations. Nor do I expect anyone to cast their vote solely based on their interpretation of the candidates stance on the MLPA (or their stance on Unions). There are too many other very important considerations for each and every one of us in this state today. You gotta pick the package that is best for you and eat a little vinegar with your sugar.

I hope, at the meeting, we can all keep our heads and be on topic so that the other side appears to be what they are. They are the fanatics, the instigators, the liars and the ones that prey on the ill informed and those that could care less.

The fact is that there will be an MLPA process unless the voters repeal the law. There will be reserves and conservation areas which, unfortunately, will close some peoples favorite spots. But, what was in the passed law is a far cry from what we are being presented in the all but final product. Complete areas of consideration (like flora, pollution, etc.), all highly related, have been swept under the rug from consideration. Not to mention all the above mentioned back room and chopping block dealings that have been going on throughout the process. Seems to me that this is the weakest link in the chain, and the point most easily attacked.

[Holy Mackerel]

Oh boy, time to lock this thread......... :eek:

[Gino]

Gino... Jim Kellogg, who is the union pipe fitters president donated something like $500,000.00 to Jerry Brown. Jim Kellogg is also the president of the Fish and Game Commission and sides with Richards. I believe Jim Kellogg is a president of some hunting club too and loves fishing. This tells me to vote for Brown.


That is all 100% true Kiyo

I was talking more along the lines of public employee unions. Even with those Contributions, Jerry Brown has pushed a very strong Green Agenda. So the contribution may have more to do with public works projects and future contracts aka work. Since the money came form the Pipe/steam fitters Union, and has little to do with Fishing rights. Jerry Brown is one man who does not back down on an Enviormental Agenda. The 405 and 5 freeways between 3-6pm are proof of that. Im acually a big fan of trade unions, But i think once they dibble & dabel into the political theater i think they have over reached there intented purpose. Trade unions and Public Employee unions are almost night and day in comparrison. I personally dont think public employees, employed by the taxpayers should be unionized. I could make a great case for it. And Jerry Brown orchestrated it during his first terms has governor (not that i was born yet)

Im not a fan of either Canidate, And I apologize if recently or in the past I may have sounded persuasive about the governors race.
I personally wont be taking part in picking the next governor. I honestly think that anyone who is capable of running this state effectively is acually to smart to want the job :biggrinjester:

[CurtyL]

dang, I missed one of the best threads ever. :mad: I guess old Stan got the boot. :cheers1:

[Hunters Pa]

Isn't Arnies private residence in Pacific Palisades, with a nice view? No wonder he sides with the Malibu celebs & Laguna elitists.

[Caballito]

I think "Suck Me" was responding to "Stan"...and was very correct in doing so!

"There once was a...." ...excellent!:ciao:

[Tman]

Usually people like my limericks, OK OK, I'll tone it down...

There once was an enviro named Stan
Who thought he would say all he can
He spewed bull$@!# around
And in the end he found
All his actions got him a ban!

[Kesepton]

I think I really need to be paying more attention to this... When I found this thread, I had to sit down and read the whole thing. Im sorry for not being there. Im on the team now.

But seriously... some people.

http://www.hdforums.com/forum/attachments/the-general-b-s-forum/124447d1277399216-where-is-that-keyboard-commando-pic-keyboardcommando.jpg