SPEAKING STRATEGY: PLEASE READ --> We are slaying this beast
 

GUYS,

We have an opportunity to speak twice. Whoo hoo.

So here's the latest coordinated strategy for H&L, kayakfishermen, and spearos.

1) Fill out TWO cards. One should specify "Agenda item H (Wiseman memo) and others" and one should specify "GENERAL"

The first speaking time will be at 9:40AM or shortly thereafter. The second speaking time is scheduled to be 11:30 for now but it may be pushed back.

You drove all the way up--may as well do it!!! Remember the next BRTF meeting is in July--and then it's pretty much over.

2) We have been talking about speaking out against External Proposal C. That will be shortly after the 9:40AM discussion by the BRTF. You all should check the various posts for ideas on what to speak.

For the general speaking session that is supposed to start at 11:30AM, you can speak about socio-economic impact to YOUR diving area, asking the BRTF to give guidance for minimum closures since this is an adaptive process and once more data (both science and socio-economic) are available, better decisions can be made. Don't rush a long term decision on poor or non-existence data...etc.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Whatever you do, at the end of your speech, please insert a few seconds and implore that the process be paused.

Here is the gist, feel free to put in your own words: Please address the point that there is, in addition to a science data gap, a socio-economic data gap, a financial gap, there is now a credibility gap. The science data gap and the socio-economic data gap come from the inadequate Ecotrust data. The finance gap comes from the fact that the state is flat broke, and we see the cost creeping up at every turn --and no way to pay for closures and DFG is broke. The credibility gap comes from the constantly shifting rules, the demoralized RSGs and incidents like not providing science data material to the RSG until the night before and expecting them to act on it the next day on voluminous data they don't have time to read, and a distrusting public through incidents such as the External C vote.

This process needs to be paused for these gaps to be fixed.

This is what we want to coordinate and it needs to be repeated 200 times tomorrow to support ongoing legislative activities and other activities.

Some more points about the gaps:

For example, as of today, we still don't know what level of protection is given to the military closures. Without the level of protection, we do not know whether and how much the scores would be given to these closures. We don't know what activities would be allowed.

As another example, we understand the kelp has been changed to persistent kelp for the SoCal process. Is it? Or is the RSG to use maximum kelp? average kelp? We do not know who made the decision to change the kelp data in MarineMap, who grants that authority, and what safeguard does the SAT have in place to prevent a single person from unilaterally making that change.

As another example, we do not know what is being done about the data gap in the water shallower than 30 meter region.

What we are asking is for the process to be paused for 60 days for the data to catch up so the RSGs can make more informed decision. So that the public can feel that the process is science-driven instead of agenda-driven. So instead of August RSG meeting, defer the RSG meeting until October.

Guys this is extremely important. The BRTF has not answered many outstanding questions from the RSG, and public who had asked these questions, and made their concerns in previous meetings!! We can't let it slip away.

Quote:

Here is the gist, feel free to put in your own words: Please address the point that there is, in addition to a science data gap, a socio-economic data gap, a financial gap, there is now a credibility gap. The science data gap and the socio-economic data gap come from the inadequate Ecotrust data. The finance gap comes from the fact that the state is flat broke, and we see the cost creeping up at every turn --and no way to pay for closures and DFG is broke. The credibility gap comes from the constantly shifting rules, the demoralized RSGs and incidents like not providing science data material to the RSG until the night before and expecting them to act on it the next day on voluminous data they don't have time to read, and a distrusting public through incidents such as the External C vote.

If you get cutoff because you are repeating what has already been said...
say " it is important enough that you hear it again." Everyone that wants it can speak for their minute.

That's just my take.

We got warned at Santa Ana that they might interject if we all said the same thing.

BUMP!!!

See everyone tomorrow! If you are the fence.. JUST GO!