MPAs - What Can I Do?

[Seacidal]

Some divers have asked what they can do, here and now. It's a good question. But there's also a good answer. That answer is "A LOT!"

Each of us can try to be a good example of what spearfishing and hunting/diving really should be. Highly selective, efficient, responsible, humane, and sustainable. Don't be one of the divers that gives our activities a black eye. Don't do foolish, irresponsible, reckless or illegal acts that give the media something to broadcast, or the public something to complain about.

Do everything you can so that spearfishing and hunter/diving is viewed as a respectable, conscientious, and sound method of take. Take good care of your catch, from the moment you aim and pull the trigger to the time it's on your table. Don't disrespect your catch or the ocean it came from. Treat your catch with the care and respect it deserves. After all, you're going to eat it, right?

Educate others and help them understand how our activities are in accordance with responsible management practices and sustainable fishery stocks. Don't be obsessed with killing. It's easy to disregard someone who resembles a simple killer.

Hunting while diving is a noble and spiritual practice. Diving is an enjoyable experience even on trips where you don't pull the trigger. Don't be greedy. Be aware of the big picture.

Be respectful that this isn't your resource. It's the public's. It belongs as well to people who don't hunt, but like knowing it's there and well-managed. Being able to access it is not a right, but rather a privilege. One which can be easily taken away if abused.

MOST OF ALL, talk with people. Talk with non-divers. Educate them and try to get their support on the issues we're facing. We need the support of individuals, businesses, communities, organizations, and more. We are too small in number to risk alienating those who might, with education and discussion, be our allies in helping us to retain access to the ocean resources we care so much about.

[diverlen]

Some divers have asked what they can do, here and now. It's a good question. But there's also a good answer. That answer is "A LOT!"

Each of us can try to be a good example of what spearfishing and hunting/diving really should be. Highly selective, efficient, responsible, humane, and sustainable. Don't be one of the divers that gives our activities a black eye. Don't do foolish, irresponsible, reckless or illegal acts that give the media something to broadcast, or the public something to complain about.

Do everything you can so that spearfishing and hunter/diving is viewed as a respectable, conscientious, and sound method of take. Take good care of your catch, from the moment you aim and pull the trigger to the time it's on your table. Don't disrespect your catch or the ocean it came from. Treat your catch with the care and respect it deserves. After all, you're going to eat it, right?

Educate others and help them understand how our activities are in accordance with responsible management practices and sustainable fishery stocks. Don't be obsessed with killing. It's easy to disregard someone who resembles a simple killer.

Hunting while diving is a noble and spiritual practice. Diving is an enjoyable experience even on trips where you don't pull the trigger. Don't be greedy. Be aware of the big picture.

Be respectful that this isn't your resource. It's the public's. It belongs as well to people who don't hunt, but like knowing it's there and well-managed. Being able to access it is not a right, but rather a privilege. One which can be easily taken away if abused.

MOST OF ALL, talk with people. Talk with non-divers. Educate them and try to get their support on the issues we're facing. We need the support of individuals, businesses, communities, organizations, and more. We are too small in number to risk alienating those who might, with education and discussion, be our allies in helping us to retain access to the ocean resources we care so much about.

Seacidal, that is an eloquent post. Truer words have never been said. I have reread it a couple of times to make it sink in. I sincerely hope that those among us who are involved in the movement to protect our PRIVELEGES, not our RIGHTS, will absorb your thoughts before moving forward with representation. Merry Christmas and a Very Successful New Year!:D

[Seacidal]

How upset should I be over the recent California DFG fee increase? Is there some level of increase that is acceptable, but a penny above that it become unacceptable? It's a matter of degree, and such matters are never resolved to everyone's liking.

Gas went up almost $1 per gallon in the past year. Now that is a fairly significant increase. But I understand some of the motivations behind it, and while I may not like or agree with all of the factors, I still pay the price to fill the tank. Even though the cost of gas impacts me a lot more directly than the cost of a fishing license.

The cost of a license works out to maybe few bucks per trip. How much do we spend on gas? Beer? Gear?

It is generally agreed that DFG needs more enforcement (both in number of agents and in efficacy). Perhaps there should be some kind of assessment program worked out where funding for much-needed additional enforcement could be obtained in some other fashion? If some reasonable and practical proposals could be generated, it might be worth considering promoting them.

If any of you have good ideas (that are legal and workable), let's start having some serious discussions. And not more pointless ranting. Whining to this crowd is preaching to the choir.

If you're really upset, then start writing and keeping writing letters, make phone calls, contact politicians, attend meetings, and if you have to, travel to the meetings. They aren't often going to be held in your back yard. This state's too big for that. One letter from you is not going to change anything. You have to be determined, resolute, and convincing in order to get more and more people involved and active.

Given that there is a shortage of data for recreational catch and effort data for a number of species, and proper fishery management requires a lot of reliable data, reasonable sportsman should support well-designed programs to gather that data.

Repeated attempts have been made to encourage people to participate in the voluntary (non-enforcement related) data gathering efforts of DFG. It was obvious what the consequences would be if recreational users didn't cooperate in voluntarily providing accurate data. Despite significant effort, both in phone surveys and creel surveys, the amount and quality of the obtained data was inadequate. We had our chance on that one. Now we're stuck (for the time being) with the history we created for ourselves.

What would really help is if, especially all of you who give away fish and other game to family, friends, neighbors, acquaintances, etc. -- Let them know that they need to help out too. Or else the free ride stops. Now! Explain to these how you and they will be impacted by the MPAs and rising license costs. Get them to write letters explaining how they feel and what they think should or shouldn't be done.

Some of you take a lot of fish and lobster and proudly talk about how much you give away or the huge parties you have. Well, now's your chance!

Contact every one of the people you have "gifted" over the past several years, and get them to write letters, make phone calls, and attend meetings with you.

If they won't do even that for you, why the hell are you providing them with bounty from the ocean that another diver or angler would appreciate more?!

For that matter, we would all be better off if you took only what you could eat and left the rest to remain part of the wild stocks.

If the people who have benefited from your diving prowess won't stand up for you and put themselves out, even a little bit, then maybe that should give you some idea of how the rest of the public might respond.

[Bulit7]

Good post man. I'm with ya on that one.

Were do you live? I currently live in South Florida and I can tell you that it is not easy to score a nice size fish out here. You dive this beautifull reef system and the majority of fish you find are 12-16 inches. It's cleaned out. To shoot a 20 lb grouper here, you almost have to luck out. They are few and far between.

What people don't understand is that when you take fish from the sea that is allready depleted and below capacity, you are altering the balance of the ecosystem even more than it allready is. Every shot should be weighed out and taken with the knowledge that it will affect the environment.

Take every fish you will consume. Be greatfull it is still available for you to take. One day it may not be there and you will be left to dive on a reef that is empty like here in SoFLa.

[Seacidal]

Bulit7,

I'm out on the (other) West Coast, in Ventura, California. While we still have some decent diving in the area, and some select fish stocks have rebounded in recent years, there remains a significant amount of pressure. Both in the form of fishing effort and decreases in ecosystem health.

It's often frustrating to witness the obsession of divers and anglers on size and quantity, rather than quality and sufficiency. If someone is taking so much game that they routinely boast about how much they have to give away, then perhaps they should reflect a bit upon the need to have that kind of impact on the resource.

We are not commercials, we aren't harvesting for a living. We are recreational. We are doing this for the enjoyment of the experience. Part of the spirituality of hunting is in the experience, not in the killing and taking of everything you can or are allowed to. Just because the regs say it's okay, doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do.

Unfortunately, our society tends to glamorize adrenaline and testosterone fueled behaviors. As regards recreational hunting activities, this often has negative implications. True hunters are some of the staunchest conservation-minded individuals, because they understand the impact of their actions and the need for appropriately selective and responsible behavior.

As a result, the increased popularity and visibility of our activities might just be our downfall. Time will tell which history we deserve.

[seacrecher]

Chip,

this last post was very well put. Perhaps you ought to post a link in the Cali section so that those that don't venture far from that section can get something from what you have said.

You raised the question about what clubs are doing to influence the impact of the plethora of new divers/hunters that Cali has been experiencing. I think that this last post is definitely something that many of those newbies should definitely be made aware of. If you don't mind, I am going to copy this and send it out on our club site. Thank you!

[Todd M Peterson]

Chip,
Fantastic post, keep up the great work!
Todd

[Seacidal]

Thanks John and Todd. We absolutely need to get word out and get people involved!
The voices of divers alone won't be sufficient. Ours should not be the only voice supporting our activities.

We need to make it clear that spearfishing and hunter-diving is appreciated and supported by the public, and acknowledged by other stakeholder groups for the selective and ethical method of take it is.

[Todd M Peterson]

This discussion has never been more timely and this post deserves a "Sticky". Chip nailed it, we are each accountable and hold a role in how our sport is perceived and if it will be around in our future.

[hardway]

Seacidal: excellent series of posts here, I couldn't agree with you more.
I've been ab diving for a while, but just started spearing over the last couple years. I always try to be a good ambassador for the sport, and I always try to be very selective in my shots. It only makes sense to take what you need and leave the rest, and I feel a little regret for every life i take out there.
My family raises meat animals, so I trade fish for chicken and lamb, but other than that I don't hunt to give meat away.
I gave three nice rockfish to a friend once and they left them in their freezer for a long time, then wound up tossing them out. Now if I want to share, I invite people to dinner.
I hadn't thought about getting my family and friends to write in about the mlpa process, great idea. I love this sport and I don't want to see it taken away so soon after I've discovered it!

[C.Keating]

Chip, outstanding post. I can only hope that some will read and then reread your post in hopes that they "get" it. We definitely all need to stand on the mountaintop and explain our passion and our mission of responsibility to our resource. I for one have not gifted much fish. However through my job many of my customers know of my hobby/passion. They now will also know what the mpa/mlpa process is trying to do and I will implore all of them to take action.

[Mateo]

"What can I do?"....Bend over and grab your ankles

[C monster]

"What can I do?"....Bend over and grab your ankles
I'm with him.

Eloquent posts and well stated and even in somecases, well supported arguments have done nothing in the past and will continue to do nothing. The brutal facts are, we are at the mercy of the people who decide what gets closed and what doesn't.

Believe me when I tell you, I have as much time in with these people and experience with their MO, as Chip, or anyone for that matter. The only thing we can REALISTICALLY do, as opposed to IDEALISTICALLY, is hope we don't get hit that hard, because in this fight, we're not allowed to hit back. They SAY we are, but for some reason our blows never seem to land, or cause any damage, OR make a difference.

Don't get me wrong... I have in the past, and will continue to do everything mentioned in Chip's posts... I'm just saying I really don't think it'll matter. It never has before.

Vaseline is cheap.

S

[Seacidal]

Mateo and Sandy,

I have to disagree with you on this one. First off, why insist on viewing the process as a battle? Science is not a battle. Science is based on facts. Notice that the term is "peer-reviewed" and not "peer-defeated". You can debate the science, and debate the policies, but the laws exist. If you want a fight, take the matter to court and attack the law. But the MPA process is just that. It's a process, with clearly stated goals. We can either participate or we can wait around for the leftovers.

In the past, I've found that engaged and extensive participation in an appropriately transparent process is the best way to ensure the best outcome. Going in looking for a fight only serves to distance you from the other participants and diminish your respect all around. The support of other stakeholders and participants will be necessary if we want to have the sound, ethical, and selective traits of spearfishing recognized.

But it can't be all talk. All of us have to walk the walk as well. Every assertion about the conservation-minded, ethical, and selective nature of spearfishing is going to be subject to the "straight face" test. Media articles, online forums, etc. are going to be held out as evidence that spearfishers aren't as we make them out to be.

Just one more reason why our future depends on every one of us. When guys are out there, firing their spearguns "tommy gun" style, from the hip and in the general direction of what they thought might be a fish, losing fish to poor shots or poor rigging, or they bring in catches of bloody slimy fish bent and stuffed in a cooler with no ice -- what is that doing for our reputation?

Those kinds of behaviors send out messages that effect each one of us, and all of our futures, and the future of the resources we value and depend on.

What are we going to do about it? Each of us? Sit by and do nothing, and then gripe and whine about whatever happens? Or do our best to participate effectively, in order to ensure that we did our best, regardless of the outcome?

[C monster]

Chip,

I'm afraid we are of a difference of opinion here. : ) It's cool.
As usual, like in the past, I respect yours, and admire your passion.

S

[Seacidal]

That may be, Sandy. I respect your right to your own opinions on such matters. Not a problem.

That being said, what do you plan to do to address the issues and see that our interests are properly considered?

I've put forth my views and some of the policies that support them. If others share these perspectives, great. If some don't, that's their choice. I respect that.

Still, I am very interested to hear about others' proposals for addressing the issues, and how such approaches are more likely to achieve better results?

It may be the MPA process today, but most assuredly there will be other issues facing us down the road.

If we want to have spearfishing for future generations, we need to think about the big picture and the long term. Part of that is determined by how each of embodies the hunter's conservation mindset and the awareness that they are an ambassador for all of spearfishing, each time they head out. We need to be constantly reminding ourselves that our ability to hunt these waters is a privilege and not a right. A privilege that we could lose, either directly or indirectly.

[MiguelT]

What are we going to do about it? Each of us? Sit by and do nothing, and then gripe and whine about whatever happens? Or do our best to participate effectively, in order to ensure that we did our best, regardless of the outcome?


Right now, all I see is a bunch of complaining. "talk to people", "educate them"? Is that really seen as proactive, like the problem is that we just haven't been talking to people about our effect on the resource?

At this point it's either do something productive or sit back and bitch, I agree with you on your second post Chip, we need to start writing letters, making phone calls doing something, anything!

I tried to get the ball rolling, and apparently there's a tiny amount of people that actually want to go somewhere with being proactive, and a huge amount of people that want to sit back and bitch and whine about how bad the mlpa's are, it's freaking pathetic. There, I said it, pathetic. I didn't see the Edlund and the active cencal guys making bitching threads when the MLPA's were up there, they were too busy doing something about it. All the majority of socal people have done is whine whine whine, when we actually have the numbers down here to at least be noticed.

[Todd M Peterson]

Miguel,
Sorry the responses to you offer to help and make it easier for everyone to participate have not been as strong as you had hoped. I myself haven't signed up for your service. It think it is awesome that you are being pro-active and setting a great example for all of us. Don't spoil it by letting "them" get the best of you.
Happy new year!
Todd

p.s. Moderators, how about making this thread and Miguel's threads STICKY"S. Thanks.

[Seacidal]

Todd & Miguel, Which "service" are you referring to? Something particular, or just general efforts?

There are efforts underway, but regrettably, many of them are spinning in circles on their own, without the coordination and backing necessary to truly be effective.

I tend to agree with Miguel, it is pathetic to see how many are quick to whine and complain, yet slow to make an effort about doing something that could make a difference.

There have been a number of posts on these forums that represent a lot of the negative aspects that are attributed to our sport, and it will be a sad day if those are put forth to negate whatever inroads and advances we might be making.

[MiguelT]

Thanks Todd, much appreciated :)

Chip, it's not so much a service as just a way to start getting everyone at least mobilized and in contact with each other, that way we can all figure out a way to start doing something a little more proactive. So far there's new addresses for mailing letters, several letter templates are getting posted up this weekend, and a .org website in the style of peta sites is in the works for educating people on the damages that mlpa's might do to the socal economy. Here's the link http://www.spearboard.com/showthread.php?t=56057

As of yet we're kicking around a lot of ideas behind the scenes as well as beginning to collaborate with other groups than just spearos, and things are starting to take shape.

[Seacidal]

Miguel, I appreciate the efforts of you and others in the regard. Certainly, establishing a foundation for coordinated future efforts could help throughout the MPA process. However, I would urge care in the selection of policy or fact-based issue. Economic impacts might seem an appealing issue, but it should be determined as to whether the law (MLPA) allows such factors to be considered.

The MLPA states that "marine life reserves" (defined as no-take areas) are essential elements of an MPA system because they "protect habitat and ecosystems, conserve biological diversity, provide a sanctuary for fish and other sea life, enhance recreational and educational opportunities, provide a reference point against which scientists can measure changes elsewhere in the marine environment, and may help rebuild depleted fisheries" (Section 2851(f)).

The concept of economic impact is not mentioned. I'm not saying that people shouldn't write letters about it, as they should be writing letters expressing their views, regardless of the basis.

There are avenues for making such economic impact assertions and others, and hopefully our group will be able to speak with one voice. For a single focused presence is going to have the numbers behind it, and the alliances of others alongside it, to bring about the most significant and effective presence. Thanks again for all your efforts on this and other matters. Things are taking shape, and while change is coming, each of us has the ability and an obligation, to help shape the future.

[MiguelT]

With a poorly managed fishery, especially after very poorly managed closures, economic impacts would be heavy, much more so in socal where a lot of the shore based economy focuses on fishing. Arguing that science that can be proven to be bad will damage jobs in southern california will get a lot more attention than throwing scientific journal study references, which I also will do once I finish compiling the hundreds of peer reviewed sources that I've found that say that large scale closures will damage a fishery and the economy :)

I'm not arguing "the economy will be hurt by closures", I'm arguing that the closures are shortsighted and biased, and will severely poorly impact the ecology by destroying fish counts due to poor management of the fishery. Unlike the peta groups though, there's the science to back it up 100%, and unlike norcal and cencal we've got serious numbers of people that can fight this thing down here.

I'd rather be pushing the boulder up the hill knowing that it will in all probability roll down again than stare at it and say "there's no way we can move that thing up the hill"...

[Todd M Peterson]

Chip,
I have to agree with Miguel on this, you should be supporting this wholeheartedly since it creates action, and action begets action. The one element that kills any innovation or contribution is to have people try to kill your ideas or tell you why your idea is stupid. I think Miguel has taken a risk by putting himself out there to help people understand what is happening with the MLPA's and he should be honored not cut down for trying to get more spearos organized with trying to make a difference. You are a really intelligent guy and I know your training is to find the weak points and expose them, but in this case I think the strong points need to be strenghtened and we can all work together on what may or may not work.

Miguel keep raging against the machine! Chip we need your support!
Todd

[Seacidal]

I'm with you guys on organizing, and Miguel's efforts are commendable. However, proper orientation in alignment with the process is necessary, or else it becomes a rather straightforward exercise to dismiss the efforts as "misunderstanding" the process. It has happened before and may well again.

This is a large and well organized process, and coordination is called for.
Regarding my pointing out the need for a single focused and organized presence, consider that the MPA process requires managers "need to determine not only how many members are in each group but also the identity of these groups, their objectives, their interests, their activities, and how influential their members are within the community."

There's a lot of material already committed to writing about how this is to go down. I am all for an organizing and working within the process to achieve the most balanced and beneficial results.

By knowing how particular user groups affect the marine environment, managers can help target education and outreach campaigns, or encourage involvement in collaborative processes. Those objectives help managers in making more informed decisions and lessen disagreements.

The costs and benefits of MPAs have been written about and discussed at length. An example of such economic considerations explains:

"Proving that the long-term value of marine ecosystem conservation will benefit society is often insufficient for individuals to support the MPA. Evidence is required to show that both the long-term and short-term benefits outweigh the costs. These costs might include loss of revenue to fishermen, offshore oil and gas concerns, and to other businesses. However, benefits might include increased ecotourism and improved fish populations over the long term."

What concerns me is, when every ounce of contribution and effort is so valued, it should be directed and focused in a fashion which is determined to have the most potential benefit. That's all I'm saying. Regardless, I applaud the efforts of those who are dedicating time to this process, but I believe that in order to be most effective, there needs to be some greater level of organization and direction. For spearfishing, that is still in the works.

[MiguelT]

I'm with you guys on organizing, and Miguel's efforts are commendable. However, proper orientation in alignment with the process is necessary, or else it becomes a rather straightforward exercise to dismiss the efforts as "misunderstanding" the process.

Chip, it seems like when anyone posts something helpful, you're the first one to shoot it down. I said I'll be arguing the science, if I can prove the science is bad, then it proves the... You know what, I said it already, you just didn't read it.

Chip, have you read any of your threads? Do they contain any plan at all that will actually do anything? I've asked you before and will ask you again Chip, what's your actual plan? If you want to shoot down every other plan, where is yours?

Here, let me highlight the real problem for you, I'm not inserting opinion here, I'm just reading between the lines and showing you what you're really saying.

This is a large and well organized process, and coordination through me is called for.
Regarding my pointing out the need for a single focused and organized presence (me), consider that the MPA process requires managers "need to determine not only how many members are in each group but also the identity of these groups, their objectives, their interests, their activities, and how influential their members are within the community, like, for example, me[/B]."

There's a lot of material already committed to writing about how this is to go down. I am all for an organizing and working within the process to achieve the most balanced and beneficial results, as long as I am the one organizing it.

What concerns me is, when every ounce of contribution and effort is so valued, it should be directed where I choose to direct it, and focused in a fashion which is determined to have the most of what I feel to be potential benefit. That's all I'm saying. Regardless, I applaud the efforts of those who are dedicating time to this process, but I believe that in order to be most effective, there needs to be some greater level of organization and be under my direction. For spearfishing, that is still in the works, since no other efforts will count until I've deemed them to be worthy
.

Chip, you would rather undermine efforts done by anyone other than you. It's really, painfully obvious. And it's really sad that you would put your own interests for self glorification ahead of the best interests of moving to action on this issue. Any action is better than inaction, and what you've got going on so far is inaction disguised as posturing. The difference is Chip, I'm not going to let anyone undermine me, I don't care if I'm doing it by myself, and I sure as heck don't care if anyone notices. I'm intelligent enough to know that you shooting down any plans has nothing to do with the plans themselves.

[Todd M Peterson]

This thread should not die, especially the message Chip articulates in his first 3 posts on this thread it is great stuff!

[Seacidal]

Miguel, I have no interest in self-glorification on this or other matters. Rather, I see the best opportunity for my contribution to this effort is as a resource. If there is a need for those resources, great. If not, fine. Not a problem.

I don't think that I'm the one who should be sitting at the table, representing our collective interests. There are others far better suited to the task, and the MLPA has tools for helping determine who that should be. However, I believe I do have a bit of knowledge, education and experience that can be of some benefit to whoever that person may be.

You repeatedly assault me for emphasizing my views on the need for organization of resources, coordination of effort, and agreement on issues and policies. I'm not asking to be in charge. As I stated, I'm simply another resource. An advisor, a consultant, an analyst, however you wish to term it. But I have the feeling that if we don't get our ducks in a row, it could be embarrassing and counter-productive.

For example, imagine this scenario: A stakeholder gets a phone call from a spearfishing representative in order to discuss relative positions on the issues. The spearfishing rep is told that the stakeholder just got off the phone with a different spearfishing group, and they had a different position on the issue!

My point is simple, and not self-aggrandizing. We should be working right now to coordinate and organize. We need to keep in mind that we may get "a" seat at the table, not the entire table. (speaking figuratively)

You are always asking for my "plan". It's not about me, or up to me to construct a plan. I guess, in the abstract, my plan involves participating in the process, in an informed and effective manner. Becoming informed and effective may require some additional planning. As to the finer points of action, I don't know that they are necessarily appropriate for discussion on a public forum. However, I'm alway glad to discuss these or other matters with you.

I apologize if you took my earlier comment about "misunderstanding" the process to be directed at you (or anyone) personally. It was not intended that way. Rather, it reflected what can happen at regulatory meetings when certain views on an issue are presented in a manner that isn't considered proper. I'd be glad to discuss it further with you sometime, off-line. I could give you some interesting examples.

I believe that each of us should participate in these efforts, and contribute according to our ability, resources, and expertise. That's what I'm trying to do. Part of that involves offering advice based on experience. If a group isn't willing or interested in receiving constructive criticism, then we have a different problem.

It is frustrating when you see divers who can always find time or money for diving, or are quick to voice opinions, but when it comes to helping out, they find lots of reasons not to.

I'm hoping that we can find a way to effectively pool our efforts and resources in order to provide a unified voice on the issues and decisions that confront us. I'm willing to do what I can to further us toward that goal.

[MiguelT]

My point is simple, and not self-aggrandizing. We should be working right now to coordinate and organize. We need to keep in mind that we may get "a" seat at the table, not the entire table. (speaking figuratively)


Which, being what I'm trying to do, makes it very confusing when you say that it's misplaced effort. I'm trying to avoid the exact scenario that you posted, where it seems like different groups of spearos aren't even on the same page because there's no large scale contact.

It is frustrating when you see divers who can always find time or money for diving, or are quick to voice opinions, but when it comes to helping out, they find lots of reasons not to.


Very much agreed. Seriously, we're going to get screwed at this rate aren't we :bang:

It's funny how the other side has an emotional, moral issue at stake with "fishing is wrong because I said so", and they can mobilize like crazy. Us, on the other hand, when faced with losing our resource that we actually base a lot of our happiness on can't mobilize past a few dozen people.

It seems like everyone wants to buy their way out of it by signing up with the RFA to avoid having to do any real work of their own.

[Todd M Peterson]

Good discussion guys, just remember we are all on the same side. Chip's points have merit and Miguel I understand your frustration at Chip's comments and no one taking responsiblity for a roadmap that all of us divers can sign up for. With that said I commend both of you for your efforts and continue to educate the rest of us with what you find. Miguel although you might not sense it a lot of people are reading this discussion and you have more support than your sign ups would indicate. You only fail if you quit so don't quit!
Thanks,
Todd

[MiguelT]

No worries, Chip and I always seem to butt heads, but agree where it counts :)

:beer:

I think that the internet doesn't lend itself well to what people are actually trying to say, and maybe it's easy to interpret things a little more harshly than they were meant...

[Seacidal]

I think that the internet doesn't lend itself well to what people are actually trying to say, and maybe it's easy to interpret things a little more harshly than they were meant...

That is the truth!!! The one-dimensionality of typed text really obscures the tone of whatever someone is saying.
I think we all see eye-to-eye more often than we realize.

[Todd M Peterson]

I just want to see this discussion continue and more spearboarders to read it! Thanks guys.

Boy it would be nice is Tomol or Zen would make this a sticky!

[Bill McIntyre]

I wasn't reading all the threads while in Germany for the holidays, so I may have missed something.

My general impression is that while anyone can attend a public hearing, it is "stakeholder reps" from each interested community who actually sit down at planning and negotiating sessions. Is that true?

If it is true, do we have a designated rep?

If so, who is it?

If not, is there a process that will select that rep?

If so, what is the process and who will participate in the selection?

I recall seeing something from a member of the San Diego club saying that they were taking the lead and coordinating with the Fathomiers and Neptunes.

Is that happening? Is that the way the stakeholder rep will be selected?

If the clubs are indeed taking the lead, will they be asking the rest of us for input and/or and letting us know what is happening? If so, how?

I feel that I'm totally in the dark about this thing, so if anyone can educate me, it would be appreciated.

[Seacidal]

Bill, You didn't miss much while you were gone. For now, we all need to be signed up on the MLPA mailing list and Miguel's (google) group. (They're in some SB threads, I'm sorry I don't have the info in front of me). That, and communicate with as many influential and engaged divers as possible.

If the MLPA/MPA process is to achieve credibility, it needs to be open and accessible to (an informed) public. The State has a less than stellar record in regard to keeping the public informed, and hopefully will take this opportunity to improve their track record.

It's great to see someone like yourself, Bill, who has a lifetime of diving experience, still enjoys diving every chance he gets, takes responsibility and pride in his catch, and helps introduce and mentor new divers to freediving and spearfishing. All of that, and you remain concerned about the future of our ability to have access to these activities, with healthy resources for the next generation and beyond. And you want to be involved in making that happen. That's great!! We need more like-minded divers!

Too often, there are divers who go diving every chance they get, spear all the fish they want, like to introduce others to spearfishing or want to see their kids get into spearfishing. And yet many of these same divers can't be bothered to take time to try do something other than pitch a few dollars somewhere and be done with it. This is going to require more than that.

I've been in contact with some divers, and eventually the wheat separates from the chaff. That's OK. But I hope that everyone can appreciate the gravity of this situation, and the fact that there is strength in numbers.

I know that this kind of stuff isn't as "fun" as going diving and shooting fish or grabbing bugs. (Not that getting impaled with urchins is fun!) But some things in life are necessary, even if they aren't fun. (Kind of like personal hygiene? :) )
We NEED to address this. I hope everyone can understand and agree on that.
Thanks,
Chip

[Todd M Peterson]

Bill,
Have you signed up?

[Bill McIntyre]

Bill,
Have you signed up?

For what? Miguel's mailing list? If so, the answer is yes, but I haven't received any mail.

[Todd M Peterson]

Thanks Bill, also just an excuse to bump this post since the mods won't "Sticky"

[Summerland Key]

Chip and all the others on this thread, excellent posts!

I am not sure how this Islands in the Stream proprosal will progress, but I have been talking with Billy Causey some. He is very adamant about it being an open process with public involvement. I would have to take Billy's word on this as he has always kept his word in the past.
Still, I think those of you on the gulf coast need to pay close attention to what is going on. Send in e-mails to NOAA or make phone calls to stay on top of this. If you need contact info. send me a PM and I can get that to you.
I am on both the snapper/grouper and MPA advisory panel for the South Atlantic Council, but that will not help much with the Gulf.
Don

[Todd M Peterson]

Bump

[jross]

I wasn't reading all the threads while in Germany for the holidays, so I may have missed something.

My general impression is that while anyone can attend a public hearing, it is "stakeholder reps" from each interested community who actually sit down at planning and negotiating sessions. Is that true?

If it is true, do we have a designated rep?

If so, who is it?

If not, is there a process that will select that rep?

If so, what is the process and who will participate in the selection?

I recall seeing something from a member of the San Diego club saying that they were taking the lead and coordinating with the Fathomiers and Neptunes.

Is that happening? Is that the way the stakeholder rep will be selected?

If the clubs are indeed taking the lead, will they be asking the rest of us for input and/or and letting us know what is happening? If so, how?

I feel that I'm totally in the dark about this thing, so if anyone can educate me, it would be appreciated.


Bill, I'm not sure if your question was answered yet, but from what I have found out, we are being represented at the Statewide Interest Group (SIG) by Kevin Cooper of the San Diego Freedivers. More info can be found here: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/meeting_120707.asp , here: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/pdfs/agenda_120707a3.pdf, and here: http://www.fishpolitics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1776

From what I have been able to gather, the SIG is not the same thing as the Southern California Stakeholder Group (SCSG) which will convene later this year to draft proposals for the boundaries of the MLPAs. The spearfishing community will need to appoint somebody (Dave Edlund clone) to that panel if that has not already been done.

[whipchastoked]

To all the people out there working hard to keep our SP members informed, Thank you very much!
As a lifelong waterman and father, keeping our areas open to our activites is a must. I read the attachments in the above post and, correct me if Im wrong, these meetings have alot going on woth not much time for all present to voice thier thoughts. If this is so, a prepared presentation would seem like a good call. Of course it would list the facts about spearfishing. How little we REALLY take, and how we are very close to really seeing whats going on underwater. Being stewards, helping to responsabilly manage our wonderful resource.
Its very difficult for me to make time with Two very young children and a morgage to take care of, but I would like to help more.
Prehaps if a short letter were prepared on our behalf, we could get many peoople to sign it. I know I could get some.
Thanks to the Mods for making this a sticky!!

[MiguelT]

For what? Miguel's mailing list? If so, the answer is yes, but I haven't received any mail.

That's weird, a couple of things have been sent out already... I think it may be ending up in spam filters sometimes.

[jross]

Not my words, but I wish I wrote them:

From: Charlotte Zajac [mailto:whalecar@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 10:30 AM
To: MLPAComments
Subject: The MPA Process

The MPA process, I have found, is a candy coated land grab being made by certain idealists. While pretending to be responsive to user groups, the idealists have actually pitted these groups against one another. The groups are fighting for what is left while the idealists have claimed the most bio-diverse areas for themselves and their research. During the process kayakers fought against fisherman, sport fisher against commercial, eco-diver against spear fisher, jet skier against birder. At the end of every meeting the Blue Ribbon Task Force would congratulate themselves on having "worked" with the fisherman, and it seemed the fisherman were actually the ones who were losing the most, if you value a fishing heritage and a five hundred year long legacy taught from father to
son.
It seemed odd that, at one of the first meeting long ago, I looked around at the Blue Ribbon Task Force, and noticed that on each members desk a brand new Hewlett Packard computer. Coincidental?
Private funding? Could hard working fishing folk be held on an equal intellectual level by the scientists toting this technology? The mediator at many meetings looked suspiciously like Al Gore, and chose members of the scientific community armed with informative charts, graphs and pretty underwater photos over fisherman who were allowed to speak only at the ends of these elaborate presentations. No, we were not part of this process and do not be deceived by a couple of traitors. We pleaded that fishing laws are now tougher than ever and that there were issues so important that all of this focus should have been aimed at these issues and not at sustainable fisherman.
These issues were: 1) Pollution such as oil spills and oil spill preparedness. 2) Agricultural pollutants and their effects on ground water and nitrogen discharges near shore causing Red tides. 3) The effects of climate changes on our sanctuary, (Thank you Al Gore). 4) Invasive species coming in through ships holds in their bilges.
The MLPA process claims to have taken only a small percentage of the resources, yet by using side scanning sonar, have grabbed ninety percent of the reef structure in Monterey Bay. These spots are Ano Nuevo, Portuguese Ledge and Soquel Canyon. Did they plan on refunding our license fees or paying our rent? Congratulations on the science.
As a thirty year fisherman, I can honestly say that they have searched out, found and closed the areas of this bay which have the highest concentrations of fish that fishermen and women relied on to make a living.
Do I want your sympathy? No, in fact I am amazed at your systematic ability to trample the constitutional rights of the fisherman of the North Pacific. There could be people in this process who wish we were dead and there are fisherman past who must be rolling over in their graves at these issues. You are taking away our freedom to roam the seas, and our futures and replacing them with EIS systems which track us all like animals. For many you will extinguish a way of life. I can only assume that now, in Federal waters, you will grab the next large areas of up-welling and unbelievable productivity and marine diversity, the sea mounts.
All of this protection against "take", will draw money away from preparation for the next huge oil spill. The oil from the Costco Busam will never be "cleaned up" and its effects will be around for years. Ironically it was the fishermen who were called upon to respond to this clean up effort.
In Conclusion, I give the MPA process an "F" for forging ahead with short sightedness and wasting tons of tax payer money. I personally have to travel two and a half extra hours through a No Take Zone to fish, an unnecessary waste of four gallons of fuel each time I go fishing. This creates more Greenhouse gasses.
People of the North Coast! I've read some of you e-mails about MPA's. You are falling into the same trap we fell into, suggesting that they close one ab-divers spot over another.... or for your safety. These people do not care about you! Ab divers, fishermen, both recreational and commercial, spear fishermen,
urchin divers, kayakers, anyone who wants to pick up a seashell... you had better make a united front, because you are about to be relieved of your constitutional right to enjoy a public resource. Use your media connections to make a resistance to this Ocean grab by a group of Sea Lion cuddling zealots. I have lost countless fishing days attending these meetings. As stake holders we got no where. It is hard to fight large amounts of private money. So, be aware of this and do not allow them to divide and conquer. If you want to read an e-mail which to me sounds suspiciously professional and coerced, read the Patrcia King Letter. They always include one of these suspiciously supportive and congratulatory letters because in reality it is just the scientists against the public. While we lose our jobs and infra structure, they gain jobs in research and science based studies, which many locals will not qualify for. Fight for your right to fish!
Sincerely, A Central Coast Fisherman


Edit: if you want to write your own comments regarding the MLPA process send them here: MLPAComments@resources.ca.gov

[whipchastoked]

Not my words, but I wish I wrote them:

From: Charlotte Zajac [mailto:whalecar@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 10:30 AM
To: MLPAComments
Subject: The MPA Process

The MPA process, I have found, is a candy coated land grab being made by certain idealists. While pretending to be responsive to user groups, the idealists have actually pitted these groups against one another. The groups are fighting for what is left while the idealists have claimed the most bio-diverse areas for themselves and their research. During the process kayakers fought against fisherman, sport fisher against commercial, eco-diver against spear fisher, jet skier against birder. At the end of every meeting the Blue Ribbon Task Force would congratulate themselves on having "worked" with the fisherman, and it seemed the fisherman were actually the ones who were losing the most, if you value a fishing heritage and a five hundred year long legacy taught from father to
son.
It seemed odd that, at one of the first meeting long ago, I looked around at the Blue Ribbon Task Force, and noticed that on each members desk a brand new Hewlett Packard computer. Coincidental?
Private funding? Could hard working fishing folk be held on an equal intellectual level by the scientists toting this technology? The mediator at many meetings looked suspiciously like Al Gore, and chose members of the scientific community armed with informative charts, graphs and pretty underwater photos over fisherman who were allowed to speak only at the ends of these elaborate presentations. No, we were not part of this process and do not be deceived by a couple of traitors. We pleaded that fishing laws are now tougher than ever and that there were issues so important that all of this focus should have been aimed at these issues and not at sustainable fisherman.
These issues were: 1) Pollution such as oil spills and oil spill preparedness. 2) Agricultural pollutants and their effects on ground water and nitrogen discharges near shore causing Red tides. 3) The effects of climate changes on our sanctuary, (Thank you Al Gore). 4) Invasive species coming in through ships holds in their bilges.
The MLPA process claims to have taken only a small percentage of the resources, yet by using side scanning sonar, have grabbed ninety percent of the reef structure in Monterey Bay. These spots are Ano Nuevo, Portuguese Ledge and Soquel Canyon. Did they plan on refunding our license fees or paying our rent? Congratulations on the science.
As a thirty year fisherman, I can honestly say that they have searched out, found and closed the areas of this bay which have the highest concentrations of fish that fishermen and women relied on to make a living.
Do I want your sympathy? No, in fact I am amazed at your systematic ability to trample the constitutional rights of the fisherman of the North Pacific. There could be people in this process who wish we were dead and there are fisherman past who must be rolling over in their graves at these issues. You are taking away our freedom to roam the seas, and our futures and replacing them with EIS systems which track us all like animals. For many you will extinguish a way of life. I can only assume that now, in Federal waters, you will grab the next large areas of up-welling and unbelievable productivity and marine diversity, the sea mounts.
All of this protection against "take", will draw money away from preparation for the next huge oil spill. The oil from the Costco Busam will never be "cleaned up" and its effects will be around for years. Ironically it was the fishermen who were called upon to respond to this clean up effort.
In Conclusion, I give the MPA process an "F" for forging ahead with short sightedness and wasting tons of tax payer money. I personally have to travel two and a half extra hours through a No Take Zone to fish, an unnecessary waste of four gallons of fuel each time I go fishing. This creates more Greenhouse gasses.
People of the North Coast! I've read some of you e-mails about MPA's. You are falling into the same trap we fell into, suggesting that they close one ab-divers spot over another.... or for your safety. These people do not care about you! Ab divers, fishermen, both recreational and commercial, spear fishermen,
urchin divers, kayakers, anyone who wants to pick up a seashell... you had better make a united front, because you are about to be relieved of your constitutional right to enjoy a public resource. Use your media connections to make a resistance to this Ocean grab by a group of Sea Lion cuddling zealots. I have lost countless fishing days attending these meetings. As stake holders we got no where. It is hard to fight large amounts of private money. So, be aware of this and do not allow them to divide and conquer. If you want to read an e-mail which to me sounds suspiciously professional and coerced, read the Patrcia King Letter. They always include one of these suspiciously supportive and congratulatory letters because in reality it is just the scientists against the public. While we lose our jobs and infra structure, they gain jobs in research and science based studies, which many locals will not qualify for. Fight for your right to fish!
Sincerely, A Central Coast Fisherman
WYF? LETS UNITE! I WILL NOT GIVE UP MY FREEDOM AND THE FREEDOM OF MY OFFSPRING! WE NEED TO MAKE SEVERAL PRESENTATIONS ON OUR BEHALF! FIGHT FIRE WITH FIRE! TIT FOR TAT! DIVERISION FOR DIVIRSION! CHART FOR CHART! GRAPH FOR GRAPH!LOOK AT WHATS GOING ON.:mad::eek::confused::mad:

Edit: if you want to write your own comments regarding the MLPA process send them here: MLPAComments@resources.ca.gov

WAKE UP CALL!

[Kale]

I drove out to the coast today and sat and looked at the place I use to love to spearfish. It's an MPA now, but I tried to cheer myself of by thinking at least I won't be making that two mile paddle downhill anymore......then something occurs to me ( hope some North Coast guys are reading!); almost all of the no take reserves that were put in on the central coast are in non shore diving places! Vandenberg= military base with no shore access. Pt. Buchon= PG&E property with no shore access. Piedres Blancas= Elephant Seal rookery with no shore access. Big Creek= Off an inaccessable(at least safely) cliff in Big Sur. Carmel Pinnacles= not a shore dive. Pt.Lobos= not open for shore diving spearfisherman. I'm not familiar with the the other spots but it looks like the vast majority of these reserves were not accessible from shore to begin with.Keeping areas open that are historically used for shore diving/fishing seems like something we should shoot for. It's a small consolation, but this first set of MPAs could be used as a standard and it doesn't look like they closed a lot of good shore accessible spots. Places like Sea Ranch and Salt Point are historically some of the best shore dive places on the North Coast. Generations of divers have been diving them. PV, Malibu and LJ have some very long history of shore diving as well. I think that those areas are a good place to make a stand. I may be a little on the optimistic side, but I think we can make a pretty good case for the relatively low impact of recreational shore divers/fisherman and could get A LOT of people and families to stand up and tell about the decades of tradition as well as the economic contributions of divers to these areas. We as the public pay to keep access open to these areas and in some of them, a large percentage of the people who use these access points are shore divers and fisherman.
Ok, thanks for reading. I apologize for the rant.
Kale

[Todd M Peterson]

Kale,
Nice insight, don't forget about pt. Loma.
Todd

[zenspearo]

Great insight Kale.

I drove out to the coast today and sat and looked at the place I use to love to spearfish. It's an MPA now, but I tried to cheer myself of by thinking at least I won't be making that two mile paddle downhill anymore......then something occurs to me ( hope some North Coast guys are reading!); almost all of the no take reserves that were put in on the central coast are in non shore diving places! Vandenberg= military base with no shore access. Pt. Buchon= PG&E property with no shore access. Piedres Blancas= Elephant Seal rookery with no shore access. Big Creek= Off an inaccessable(at least safely) cliff in Big Sur. Carmel Pinnacles= not a shore dive. Pt.Lobos= not open for shore diving spearfisherman. I'm not familiar with the the other spots but it looks like the vast majority of these reserves were not accessible from shore to begin with.Keeping areas open that are historically used for shore diving/fishing seems like something we should shoot for. It's a small consolation, but this first set of MPAs could be used as a standard and it doesn't look like they closed a lot of good shore accessible spots. Places like Sea Ranch and Salt Point are historically some of the best shore dive places on the North Coast. Generations of divers have been diving them. PV, Malibu and LJ have some very long history of shore diving as well. I think that those areas are a good place to make a stand. I may be a little on the optimistic side, but I think we can make a pretty good case for the relatively low impact of recreational shore divers/fisherman and could get A LOT of people and families to stand up and tell about the decades of tradition as well as the economic contributions of divers to these areas. We as the public pay to keep access open to these areas and in some of them, a large percentage of the people who use these access points are shore divers and fisherman.
Ok, thanks for reading. I apologize for the rant.
Kale

[Phil14312]

Whether we like it or not, MPAs are here. I think that the best ideas presented on this board preach involvement in the process. If we bury our heads in the sand, we will wake up one day and the time will have passed. I've bolded and italicized the parts of the process we, as stakeholders, have the most say in.
Edit: The bolded/italicized parts didn't show up from Word. If you read anything, at least read Number 2.


The Blue Ribbon Task Force MPA Design Process
The MPA design process is composed of four general activities:
1. Regional MPA planning, which starts with the identification of a study region along the
coast that constitutes a logical locale based on a variety of scientific and socioeconomic
criteria for studying where MPAs might appropriately be placed. Much of this
background information is assembled into a regional profile. A regional stakeholder
group is then established for the selected region. This step ends with an evaluation of
existing MPAs and other management measures, initial discussion of areas of
ecological importance and human use interest, and refinement of the regional profile.
2. Assembling alternative MPA proposals, which involves developing and refining
alternative MPA proposals for the study region. Development of alternative MPA
proposals is informed by: a) information provided in the regional profile; b) guidance on
developing MPAs which satisfy the MLPA provided by the Science Advisory Team and
adopted by the Commission; c) the Department’s written guidance on feasibility criteria;
d) contributions of members of the regional stakeholder group; and e) contributions
provided from other sources, including interested parties, potentially affected
stakeholders and public comments. This stage also includes an initial evaluation of the
proposals, including socioeconomic effects, and a feasibility study to determine whether
proposals can be implemented.
During this stage regional goals and objectives developed in earlier study regions are
assessed and revised as needed for subsequent study regions. As proposed MPA
alternatives are finalized, information on how each MPA contributes to the goals and
objectives will be developed and incorporated into the proposals for MPAs. The
Department actively supports this development and refinement of MPA proposals,
bringing its information and perspectives into the process both verbally and in written
comments.
3. Evaluating alternative MPA proposals, which begins with initial evaluation by the task
force based on the information described in step 2 above. The task force then forwards
the package of alternative proposals and its recommendation of a preferred alternative
to the Commission. As the recommendations regarding proposed MPAs and a
recommended preferred alternative are provided to the Commission, the Department
provides information, analyses and comments to the Commission on feasibility of
aspects of the MPA proposals and on the prospects of the MPA proposals to achieve
the goals of the MLPA.
4. Fish and Game Commission consideration and action on MPA proposals, which
includes public hearings, consideration of testimony and action on the proposals.
California Department of Fish and Game Master Plan for Marine Protected Areas
April 13, 2007 Page 20
Figure 2 illustrates these activities and the major elements of each. Table 1 provides a
summary of the activities and elements of the activities, together with a list of the lead actors
and the groups to be consulted. A more detailed description of each activity follows in the text.
The ultimate goal of these activities is compliance with the MLPA, and specific elements listed
here provide general guidance only. In each regional process, the specific elements
undertaken must be selected and adjusted based both on the specifics of that region and
adaptations suggested from prior experiences implementing the MLPA.
The process used in the central coast study region and the master plan framework guiding that
process were used as the basis for this statewide master plan. Changes were made to the
framework and process based on lessons learned in the central coast process.

[whipchastoked]

I drove out to the coast today and sat and looked at the place I use to love to spearfish. It's an MPA now, but I tried to cheer myself of by thinking at least I won't be making that two mile paddle downhill anymore......then something occurs to me ( hope some North Coast guys are reading!); almost all of the no take reserves that were put in on the central coast are in non shore diving places! Vandenberg= military base with no shore access. Pt. Buchon= PG&E property with no shore access. Piedres Blancas= Elephant Seal rookery with no shore access. Big Creek= Off an inaccessable(at least safely) cliff in Big Sur. Carmel Pinnacles= not a shore dive. Pt.Lobos= not open for shore diving spearfisherman. I'm not familiar with the the other spots but it looks like the vast majority of these reserves were not accessible from shore to begin with.Keeping areas open that are historically used for shore diving/fishing seems like something we should shoot for. It's a small consolation, but this first set of MPAs could be used as a standard and it doesn't look like they closed a lot of good shore accessible spots. Places like Sea Ranch and Salt Point are historically some of the best shore dive places on the North Coast. Generations of divers have been diving them. PV, Malibu and LJ have some very long history of shore diving as well. I think that those areas are a good place to make a stand. I may be a little on the optimistic side, but I think we can make a pretty good case for the relatively low impact of recreational shore divers/fisherman and could get A LOT of people and families to stand up and tell about the decades of tradition as well as the economic contributions of divers to these areas. We as the public pay to keep access open to these areas and in some of them, a large percentage of the people who use these access points are shore divers and fisherman.
Ok, thanks for reading. I apologize for the rant.
Kale
What he said!:thumps:

[bigeyedave]

Crunch time is here. Please attend one of the public meetings below and state your case. If you don't you will lose the areas you love. You have to fight to keep them. Your input has helped guide this process so far and it is almost over. Don't give up. Keep fighting. If we have a strong showing at these meetings we can make a difference.
Public Workshops
Upcoming Workshops

Monday, February 4, 2008
6:00 - 9:00 p.m.
Sheraton Sonoma County, Petaluma
745 Baywood Drive
Petaluma, CA 94954

Tuesday, February 5, 2008
6:00 - 9:00 p.m.
Gualala Art Center
46501 Gualala Road
Gualala, CA 95455

Wednesday, February 6, 2008
6:00 - 9:00 p.m.
Best Western Lighthouse Hotel
105 Rockaway Beach Avenue
Pacifica, CA 94044
Thanks,
Dave

[saltierdog]

Join The Recreational Fishing Alliance!!!

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

united we stand divided we surely will fall

as i mentioned in prior thread the vast majority of proposed MPA locations in 2000 were in places that both anglers and divers share equally

we will be much more likely to be of impact to the MPA process if we allign with RFA and we will likely have a stakeholder or two that will hear our perspective if we join them

$35

also go to the website and fill out the on line survey

www.JoinRFA.org

http://www.joinrfa.org/Press/ENews52.pdf

joe farlo
Fathomiers
conservation officer

[Noyo Jim]

Join The Recreational Fishing Alliance!!!

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

united we stand divided we surely will fall

as i mentioned in prior thread the vast majority of proposed MPA locations in 2000 were in places that both anglers and divers share equally

we will be much more likely to be of impact to the MPA process if we allign with RFA and we will likely have a stakeholder or two that will hear our perspective if we join them

$35

also go to the website and fill out the on line survey

www.JoinRFA.org

http://www.joinrfa.org/Press/ENews52.pdf

joe farlo
Fathomiers
conservation officer

Thank you, Joe.

The RFA has been leading the way representing fishermen on MPA issues nationwide, and the MLPA process needs everyone's attention in California.

The RFA will be nominating spearfishing and angling representatives to the MLPA Southern California Regional Stakeholder Group and we will be working within the system to defend the interests of saltwater anglers and divers everywhere on the federal level.

We aren't against MPAs, we just want quantifiable data to prove whether they work or not. The RFA is the only sportfishing organization that has been engaged in the MLPA implementation from the start, and RFA members will be the "last man standing."

[Seacidal]

Jim,
You and Joe help make clear the need for organization and alliances between divers and fishermen to make our voices heard. In order to be most effective, our primary approach needs to be to work within the process to ensure that quantifiable and reliable scientific data is used in making decisions. The RFA has been working with divers from the start, and we need to ensure that the collaborative efforts continue.

Chip Bissell
aka Seacidal

[Robbert]

Hi Jim,

Since Chip noted the RFA has done a lot I won't question what the RFA has done on behalf of diver's and fishermen, I'll take it for granted but I was a bit dissapointed not the be able to find any relevant MLPA info on the website! Maybe it's there and I can't find it.

- Robbert

[thekelpcrawler]

www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa

[Noyo Jim]

Hi Jim,

Since Chip noted the RFA has done a lot I won't question what the RFA has done on behalf of diver's and fishermen, I'll take it for granted but I was a bit dissapointed not the be able to find any relevant MLPA info on the website! Maybe it's there and I can't find it.

- Robbert

Robert =

Go to www.fishpolitics.com and click on the MLPA forum. Lots of info going back to the beginning of this process. The national website mainly covers national news. The local west coast stuff is on the west coast board - that's where we post the news and info for California.

[mbhalihunter]

if you want to watch the meetings

http://dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/meetings.asp

[headshot]

DFG is conducting MLPA phone surveys.
The DFG hired a contractor to conduct MLPA phone surveys. They are calling from a list of randomly selected So-Cal residence. The caller asks ocean usage questions such as how often do you fish, do you fish for Salmon,.........
The survey takes 10 minutes.
The caller does not clearly identify herself as a DFG contractor, or that the results will be used for MLPA closures.

DFG will use this data to determine influence MLPA closures in San Diego and Los Angelus.

Please be truthful.

Tells your kids and spouses, domestic partners we need to be heard, not to hang up on the surveyor.

[halibutmike]

Meeting June 11.

if you want to watch the meetings

http://dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/meetings.asp

California Marine Life Protection Act Initiative Announcement



WHO: Blue Ribbon Task Force and California Fish and Game Commission

WHAT: Joint meeting to deliver recommendations for north central coast marine protected areas (see draft agenda below)

WHEN: Wednesday, June 11, 2008 at 9:00 a.m.

WHERE: Clarion Hotel
700 - 16th Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
and via simultaneous webcast on the day of the meeting at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/meetings.asp





California Marine Life Protection Act Initiative

California Fish and Game Commission and

MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force

Joint Meeting Draft Agenda

(revised May 28, 2008)



Wednesday, June 11, 2008 at 9:00 a.m.



Clarion Hotel *

700 – 16th Street
Sacramento, California 95814





Members of the public are invited to view or listen to the meeting via simultaneous webcasting on the Internet. For more information please visit the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) website at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/meetings.asp.



Public participation: The public will be invited to offer comments on the agenda item. Speaker cards will be requested and may be found at the entrance to the room.



Briefing documents and meeting presentations/handouts: Please note that briefing documents are listed at the bottom of the agenda as either attachments (received in advance of the meeting) or handouts (received on the day of the meeting); they are posted to the website as they become available.

Meeting Objectives

§ Receive presentation of MLPA North Central Coast Regional Stakeholder Group (NCCRSG) marine protected area (MPA) proposals submitted for the MLPA North Central Coast Study Region

§ Receive the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force recommendation for MPAs in the MLPA North Central Coast Study Region

§ Receive summary of the methods used to evaluate MPA proposals

§ Receive presentation of the MLPA Master Plan Science Advisory Team (SAT), California Department of Fish and Game, and MLPA staff analyses and evaluations of the MPA proposals



Meeting Agenda




Welcome and Introductions

Richard Rogers, President, California Fish and Game Commission

Susan Golding, Chair, MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force



1.
Integrated Preferred Alternative Recommended by the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force and MPA Proposals Developed by the North Central Coast Regional Stakeholder Group

A. Review of the decision-making context for the north central coast process

B. Update on the activities of the MLPA North Central Coast Regional Stakeholder Group

C. Update on the activities of the MLPA Master Plan Science Advisory Team

D. Introduction of the Integrated Preferred Alternative and overview of marine protected area proposals



E. Evaluations of NCCRSG MPA Proposals

i. Presentation of MLPA Initiative staff evaluations of MPA proposals

ii. Presentation of SAT habitat representation, habitat replication, size/spacing, birds and mammals evaluations

iii. Presentation of SAT (Ecotrust) commercial and recreational fishing evaluations

iv. Presentation of California Department of Fish and Game evaluation of potential impacts to abalone, and feasibility of MPA proposals and their prospects to achieve the goals of the MLPA

v. Presentation of SAT models and modeling results


Adjourn




* This facility is accessible to persons with disabilities. To request reasonable accommodations for a disability, please contact California Relay Service (at least two days prior to the meeting) at 800.735.2929 (TT) or 800.735.2922 (voice) and ask them to contact the California Marine Life Protection Act Initiative at 916.653.5656.