PDA

View Full Version : "MLPA Farce" - SD Union-Tribune


Noyo Jim
12-22-2008, 09:27 AM
SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE

December 21, 2008

outdoors


Marine act is a farce for state's fishermen

Ed Zieralski

Welcome to Civics 101, courtesy of the California Fish and Game Commission, the Legislature and the rabid preservationists who are hijacking our state's resources.

Today's lesson is a basic one.

Don't pass legislation like the Marine Life Protection Act without a funding plan to make it work. Otherwise, all you get is a giant ocean money pit and dazed and confused Fish and Game commissioners.

I digress.

In 1999, the misguided Legislature passed the Marine Life Protection Act, a plan to establish a network of underwater refuges along the state's 1,100-mile coastline. Proponents of the act say it's all about protection of habitat, ecosystems and developing a beautiful underwater Yosemite.

In reality, the process was hijacked by preservationists and anti-fishing groups who now are targeting commercial and recreational fishing and want to eliminate any take of sustainable and viable ocean resources in most of these underwater parks.

The process already is here in the South Coast after some fishermen's lives were destroyed by fishing closures in marine protected areas on the Central Coast. Some fishermen now are working on the North Central Coast, where abalone divers are fighting the good fight. Soon, we'll be fighting for our ocean-fishing lives, with everyone from urchin divers to bait suppliers threatened.

I know this because I watched a replay of the recent Fish and Game Commission meeting at which the DFG listened to abalone divers make a case for a change in marine protected area boundaries that will lessen the impact on abalone divers. At this meeting, I heard DFG personnel tell the commissioners how many millions of dollars the entire network of marine protected areas will cost the state.

More on that in a bit.

The Marine Life Protection Act died a couple of justifiable deaths before preservationists – not conservationists, as they like to call themselves – gathered enough cash from the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, or RLFF, to raise it from its watery grave.

An explanation: The RLFF draws its money from various organizations that have close ties to rabid preservationists. That was Fish and Game Commissioner Michael Sutton, a former officer in the Packard Foundation (one of the RLFF's deep pockets), patting himself on the back at the recent commission meeting, boasting how this wonderful public-private partnership between the DFG and the RLFF has kept this great farce going.

Thus far, the RLFF has given the DFG and the MLPA process more than $18 million since 2004 to keep this ocean land-grab going. The preservationists are paying for these parks and they're getting all they want.

And yet, there still is no clear plan to fund these restrictive parks.

It gets worse.

DFG personnel told the commissioners at their meeting last week that the entire network of marine protected areas will cost the state as much as $40 million a year for enforcement, public outreach and monitoring.

Let me write that again: $40 million a year. That's our taxpayer money.

There are whispers that the DFG will follow other state agencies and make 25 percent cuts in its operating budget as California tries to erase what could be a $42 billion deficit in 18 months.

So, where is the DFG going to get $40 million a year to keep its underwater Yosemite protected and green?

Gov. Schwarzenegger, with all due respect, your little ocean legacy plan really is an ocean money pit that preserves nothing but more debt, wastes taxpayers' money and ruins the lives of hard-working fishing families.

rhyne
12-22-2008, 11:13 AM
now that's a good read.

bigeyedave
12-22-2008, 03:07 PM
Way to go. That is exactly the kind of press we need.
Dave

thereefgeek
12-22-2008, 03:34 PM
Yep, the part no one mentions when they talk about how great this will be to preserve these "underwater Yosemites" is the price tag that comes attached. Groups like the O.C. and NRDC will gladly spend their contributers' [tax free] donations on lawyers to argue, and biologists to "compile survey data" that supports their view point, but then they leave the taxpayer to pick up the check at the end of the meal.

What's frustrating is that the DFG is too myopic to see that the added costs associated with implementing these preserves will ultimately require raising our license and tags fees, but if we the licensees have no place left to fish, we no longer need to purchase licenses and tags. Simple economics.

Tino Bernazzani
12-22-2008, 03:46 PM
Excellent read Jim,
We need this kind of exposure.

Seacidal
12-22-2008, 04:06 PM
The article highlights a key aspect of resource management that is often overlooked. In order to have effective fishery management plans, adequate and reliable science is required. Such projects are expensive and often must extend over considerable time periods.

Conventional fishing license fee schedules do not adequately provide for ongoing costs of research, enforcement, education, and adaptive management methods. More often than not, fishery management budgets soon far outstrip revenue derived from licenses and enforcement.

Bringing other stakeholder groups into the discussion may help increase awareness among the general public that, even through their indirect benefit from well-managed ocean resources, they too are obligated to fund its future.

In other words, it doesn't make sense to keep raiding the DFG coffers for the general fund. If the public-approved legislature enacted the MLPA, then the whole of the public needs to pony up the funds to make it happen.

zenspearo
12-22-2008, 04:48 PM
good article. thnx for posting Jim.

ralphthehalibut
12-22-2008, 08:45 PM
Ed is a really solid guy and on top of the MLPA thing. He's been writing abotu the shennanigans behind the MLPA funding and "science" since day one. Hopefully more of the press will look into it deeper too.