Breaking MLPA News and call to action - Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge

landwhale · 04-01-2009, 05:41 PM

From Western Outdoor News. This is Pat McDonnell’s column.
http://www.wonews.com/Blog.aspx?id=517&AuthorID=59047&t=MLPA%20FUNDING%20ISSUE%20FINALLY%20STARTING%20TO %20DRAW%20SOME%20ATTENTION%20IN%20SACRAMENTO

Monday, March 30, 2009
MLPA FUNDING ISSUE FINALLY STARTING TO DRAW SOME ATTENTION IN SACRAMENTO

One has to liken the MLPA process to a baby elephant. When it was first brought into the house in 1999 it was manageable, an effort signed into law that would organize, improve and link our state’s patchwork of coastal reserves.

It has, in the years since, evolved into a massive marine resource land grab with dubious intentions, high costs, conflicts of interest and no indications our state will be able to fund the science or the enforcement. The elephant has outgrown its welcome. We can’t house it, and we sure can’t afford it.

The outcry from sportsmen is now being heard in Sacramento. The costs have escalated from $250,000 to $35 million a year, and it’s a price tag we simply can’t stomach at a time when public safety budgets are being cut, our best and brightest teachers are being pink-slipped and we may end up with a force of wardens that, laughably, will be 100-strong for the entire state. A “Thin Green Line” indeed.

Last Saturday, at a fundraising dinner in San Francisco, Senate Majority Speaker Dean Florez (D-Shafter), had an interesting topic for his rubber chicken speech: “The runaway cost of the MLPA and the special interests running the process.”

Florez told the assembled crowd of recreational anglers and press he will convene a hearing into the MLPA process to determine how the costs have escalated in 10 years to $35 million with no way to fund it. Further, Florez said that Senate Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) is aware of the issue and in favor of such a hearing. Music to our ears. Finally someone in political power has tuned into this madness.

Better yet, Florez intends to look into claims of conflict of interest in the State Fish and Game Commission, which is the end of the line for any MLPA proposal. A massive closure in the Central Coast has already been rubber stamped by the commission and the EIR was just finished for the North Central Coast, opening the way for final commission approval for that area. The South Coast project and the SoCal closures it promises are coming at us like a freight train and is yet one more indication of the unholy alliance between the well-heeled enviro community and Governor Schwarzenegger’s appointees.

Florez also told the crowd he intends to have Resources Secretary Mike Chrisman called before the Committee to answer “tough questions” at that hearing about the finding sources for running the MLPA process and possible conflicts of interest. We’ve been asking those questions for years. In our mind, sportsmen are being led to slaughter in the face of a monumental effort by environmentalists to fund the process and skew it for their own reserve-grabbing agenda.

Conflicts of interest will be as easy for Florez and other senators to spot as, well, an elephant. At the dinner, he cited Fish and Game Commissioner Mike Sutton and the Monterey Bay Aquarium. The conflict there is only too obvious. Florez will be asking Commissioner Sutton why he neglected to list his income from the Monterey Bay Aquarium on state Form 700 during the Commission vetting process, and whether Sutton, an officer at the Monterey Bay Aquarium and who was once an officer in the Packard Foundation, should be allowed to vote on the MLPA closures. Of course not!

It is the Packard Foundation that is pouring money into the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation (RLFF) that is funding the MLPA process, since the DFG has nowhere near the resources to keep it going. The RLFF kicked in $18 million into the process so far (but has not committed to any funding after the state lands are stolen from sportsmen). The biggest red flag? It has been reported that the Packard Foundation has provided $120 million over three years to the Monterey Bay Aquarium, where Sutton works.

NOW I URGE YOU TO RIGHT AWAY READ AND ACT ON THE FOLLOWING

To Everyone Concerned With The Threat of MPAsffice

ffice" />>>
>>
Friendly State Senators (Senators Florez, Ducheny and Hollingsworth) share our concerns and are interested in pursuing a Legislative review of the MLPA process and the creation of MPAs. To do so they need the support and permission of the leader in the Senate, President proTem Steinberg. MPA advocates are pressing him to stop any investigation. It is critical that everyone contact Senator Steinberg with the following message: CALL his office and FAX it to his office also (see below for numbers).>>
>>
> >
April 1, 2009>>
The Honorable Darrell Steinberg>>
President Pro Tempore>>
State Capitol, Room 205>>
ffice:smarttags" />lace w:st="on">Sacramento, CA 95814lace>>>
>>
Dear Senator Steinberg:>>
>>
The Marine Life Protection Act process requires oversight by the Legislature to ensure compliance with the law. I urge the Senate to exercise its oversight authority to investigate the numerous conflicts-of-interest in the MLPA process; the lack of funding to adequately carry out the program; and the inequitable single focus on fishing to fix the ocean. Further, I urge the Senate to investigate the cost of implementing the MLPA in light of lace w:st="on">Californialace>’s unprecedented budget shortfall. Without funding for science, monitoring and enforcement, huge sections of the ocean will be closed to fishing forever. This will unnecessarily impact the economy of coastal businesses and seafood consumers at the worst possible time in this terrible recession.>>
Thank you for considering my views.>>
Name>>
Address>>
City, CA zip>>
Phone number>>
>>
Please call Senator Steinberg's office with this message and also print it out and Fax it today! His numbers are:>>
Phone – 916-651-4006>>
FAX - 916-323-2263>>
THIS IS IMPORTANT!

Billy V · 04-01-2009, 07:01 PM

I guess the letter I mailed today was on target.

Attack Now! =

Holy Mackerel · 04-01-2009, 07:41 PM

Thanks for the post Steve!! Now is the time for action, yes, I know it seems we are being inundated with info, requests, but it will be worth it!

To Everyone Concerned With The Threat of MPAs

Friendly State Senators (Senators Florez, Ducheny and Hollingsworth) share our concerns and are interested in pursuing a Legislative review of the MLPA process and the creation of MPAs. To do so they need the support and permission of the leader in the Senate, President proTem Steinberg. MPA advocates are pressing him to stop any investigation. It is critical that everyone contact Senator Steinberg with the following message: CALL his office and FAX it to his office also (see below for numbers).

See Steve's post above for info on contacting ProTem Steinberg.

Here is another article, citing legislative dissonance for MLPA funding...

READ ARTICLE!!!

State Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez To Investigate MLPA Funding

By Ed Zieralski

March 29, 2009, 12:43 p.m.

It's just a guess, but Resources Secretary Michael Chrisman and Fish and Game Commissioner Michael Sutton soon may be sweating in their seats while being grilled by state senators over Sutton's alleged conflicts of interest and the funding of the Marine Life Protection Act.

Sen. Dean Florez, a Democrat from Shafter, is a powerful man, and it's not nice to try and dupe powerful men.

Florez is the state Senate Majority Leader and also recently was named the Democratic caucus chairman of the new budget oversight committee. Considering the state's dire financial situation, that is one very important job that Sen. Florez has taken. He'll be in charge of reaching into the state's wallet for funds, and he's going to want to know what is worthwhile and what isn't. And right now he's asking probing questions about the Marine Life Protection Act that calls for a statewide network of marine protected areas and no fishing zones off California .

Florez joined other state senators such as Sen. Denise Moreno Ducheny (D-San Diego) and Sen. Bob Dutton (R-Rancho Cucamonga) in the search for answers about the MLPA process and its funding. California Fish and Game Commissioner Dan Richards of Upland initiated the questions months ago when he asked the Department of Fish and Game to provide a detailed analysis of the costs of potential fishing closures off the coast of California .

Commissioner Richards now has been joined by these key state senators who want to know how this fisheries Act, which was passed in 1999, went from potentially costing the state $250,000 a year to a projected cost of $30 million to $40 million a year once all the marine protected areas are in place. Thus far, closures are in place off the Central Coast , and the environmental impact report for the North Central Coast was released this week by the Department of Fish and Game. The Fish and Game Commission will vote on those closures later in the year.

Florez' questions surfaced in a big way Saturday night at a Coastside Fishing Club fundraiser in San Rafael . Florez' topic was, according to sources there: "The runaway cost of the MLPA and the special interests running the process."

Florez told the recreational anglers he will call a hearing to look deeply into MLPA process to see why the projected costs went from $250,000 a year to an estimated $35 million per year to run. He told the anglers he has the blessing of Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D – Sacramento ) to go forward with the investigation. Florez will call Resources Secretary Mike Chrisman before the Committee and ask him about MLPA funding sources and any potential conflicts of interest.

Florez told the group he wants to know why Commissioner Michael Sutton failed to list his income from the Monterey Bay Aquarium on state Form 700 during the Commission vetting process.

Florez specifically said he wants to find out if Sutton, who is an officer at the Monterey Bay Aquarium, has conflicts of interest regarding the Marine Life Protection Act. Sutton once was an officer in the Packard Foundation, and the Packard Foundation, through the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, is funding the MLPA process. Thus far, the RLFF has poured over $18 million into the MLPA process to keep it going at a time when state funds are shrinking. The Packard Foundation also gave over $123 million over three years to the Monterey Bay Aquarium, where Sutton works.

Sources close to the MLPA process say Chrisman, Sutton and MLPA Initiative staff, particularly executive director Ken Wiseman, are growing increasingly nervous about questions about Sutton's conflicts of interest and the funding of the process.

Sources say Wiseman has resorted to calling key members of the South Coast Stakeholders Group, which is in the process of forming fishing closures off Southern California , and has asked that they tone down their criticism of the funding and the process.

Chrisman and Sutton have both gone on record saying it's not important that the money isn't there to fund the MLPA. Sutton was quoted saying if the Fish and Game Commission waited for money from the Legislature, no fish and game regulations would ever pass.

Meantime, the state is in the throes of deep budget cuts, mandatory furlough days for state employees. It faces a $42 billion deficit that could grow to $50, depending on the outcome of voter propositions set for May.

Sources indicate the Department of Fish and Game has been ordered to complete detailed reports about what has been spent on the MLPA process, what is being spent now and what will it cost to implement all the fishing closures and marine protected areas once this process is complete.

The DFG reported back to the Commission at Commissioner Dan Richards' request earlier on the estimated costs of the entire MLPA, and that's how the figure of $30 million to $40 million was reached. That money would cover the necessary scientific monitoring, law enforcement and public outreach.

All this for a DFG that recently had to stock sub-catchable trout, some with parr markings, in Southern California and Eastern Sierra waters because it couldn't afford trout food at its hatcheries.

04-01-2009, 07:01 PM	#2
Billy V Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bay Ho Posts: 1,382	I guess the letter I mailed today was on target. Attack Now! =

04-01-2009, 07:41 PM	#3
Holy Mackerel Señor member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 1,627	Thanks for the post Steve!! Now is the time for action, yes, I know it seems we are being inundated with info, requests, but it will be worth it! To Everyone Concerned With The Threat of MPAs Friendly State Senators (Senators Florez, Ducheny and Hollingsworth) share our concerns and are interested in pursuing a Legislative review of the MLPA process and the creation of MPAs. To do so they need the support and permission of the leader in the Senate, President proTem Steinberg. MPA advocates are pressing him to stop any investigation. It is critical that everyone contact Senator Steinberg with the following message: CALL his office and FAX it to his office also (see below for numbers). See Steve's post above for info on contacting ProTem Steinberg. Here is another article, citing legislative dissonance for MLPA funding... READ ARTICLE!!! State Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez To Investigate MLPA Funding By Ed Zieralski March 29, 2009, 12:43 p.m. It's just a guess, but Resources Secretary Michael Chrisman and Fish and Game Commissioner Michael Sutton soon may be sweating in their seats while being grilled by state senators over Sutton's alleged conflicts of interest and the funding of the Marine Life Protection Act. Sen. Dean Florez, a Democrat from Shafter, is a powerful man, and it's not nice to try and dupe powerful men. Florez is the state Senate Majority Leader and also recently was named the Democratic caucus chairman of the new budget oversight committee. Considering the state's dire financial situation, that is one very important job that Sen. Florez has taken. He'll be in charge of reaching into the state's wallet for funds, and he's going to want to know what is worthwhile and what isn't. And right now he's asking probing questions about the Marine Life Protection Act that calls for a statewide network of marine protected areas and no fishing zones off California . Florez joined other state senators such as Sen. Denise Moreno Ducheny (D-San Diego) and Sen. Bob Dutton (R-Rancho Cucamonga) in the search for answers about the MLPA process and its funding. California Fish and Game Commissioner Dan Richards of Upland initiated the questions months ago when he asked the Department of Fish and Game to provide a detailed analysis of the costs of potential fishing closures off the coast of California . Commissioner Richards now has been joined by these key state senators who want to know how this fisheries Act, which was passed in 1999, went from potentially costing the state $250,000 a year to a projected cost of $30 million to $40 million a year once all the marine protected areas are in place. Thus far, closures are in place off the Central Coast , and the environmental impact report for the North Central Coast was released this week by the Department of Fish and Game. The Fish and Game Commission will vote on those closures later in the year. Florez' questions surfaced in a big way Saturday night at a Coastside Fishing Club fundraiser in San Rafael . Florez' topic was, according to sources there: "The runaway cost of the MLPA and the special interests running the process." Florez told the recreational anglers he will call a hearing to look deeply into MLPA process to see why the projected costs went from $250,000 a year to an estimated $35 million per year to run. He told the anglers he has the blessing of Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D – Sacramento ) to go forward with the investigation. Florez will call Resources Secretary Mike Chrisman before the Committee and ask him about MLPA funding sources and any potential conflicts of interest. Florez told the group he wants to know why Commissioner Michael Sutton failed to list his income from the Monterey Bay Aquarium on state Form 700 during the Commission vetting process. Florez specifically said he wants to find out if Sutton, who is an officer at the Monterey Bay Aquarium, has conflicts of interest regarding the Marine Life Protection Act. Sutton once was an officer in the Packard Foundation, and the Packard Foundation, through the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, is funding the MLPA process. Thus far, the RLFF has poured over $18 million into the MLPA process to keep it going at a time when state funds are shrinking. The Packard Foundation also gave over $123 million over three years to the Monterey Bay Aquarium, where Sutton works. Sources close to the MLPA process say Chrisman, Sutton and MLPA Initiative staff, particularly executive director Ken Wiseman, are growing increasingly nervous about questions about Sutton's conflicts of interest and the funding of the process. Sources say Wiseman has resorted to calling key members of the South Coast Stakeholders Group, which is in the process of forming fishing closures off Southern California , and has asked that they tone down their criticism of the funding and the process. Chrisman and Sutton have both gone on record saying it's not important that the money isn't there to fund the MLPA. Sutton was quoted saying if the Fish and Game Commission waited for money from the Legislature, no fish and game regulations would ever pass. Meantime, the state is in the throes of deep budget cuts, mandatory furlough days for state employees. It faces a $42 billion deficit that could grow to $50, depending on the outcome of voter propositions set for May. Sources indicate the Department of Fish and Game has been ordered to complete detailed reports about what has been spent on the MLPA process, what is being spent now and what will it cost to implement all the fishing closures and marine protected areas once this process is complete. The DFG reported back to the Commission at Commissioner Dan Richards' request earlier on the estimated costs of the entire MLPA, and that's how the figure of $30 million to $40 million was reached. That money would cover the necessary scientific monitoring, law enforcement and public outreach. All this for a DFG that recently had to stock sub-catchable trout, some with parr markings, in Southern California and Eastern Sierra waters because it couldn't afford trout food at its hatcheries.