MLPA Letter Writing and Speaking Resources

[zenspearo]

This thread will serve as a resource for members to obtain addresses and phone numbers and email addresses of those to whom we need to write, call, and cajole during this MLPA process.

The next few posts will be 1) an Address Compilation Post, and 2) Speaking Point Compilation posts.

Feel free to add any and all contacts you found here and post speaking points here so members can use this as a resource in their outreach effort. I will use the information to update the address compilation post and the speaking point compilation posts to have this information at fingertip for members to use.

Note: Letters without your address on it will be ignored. You need to put your address in the following format:

John Doe
123 Springtime Lane
Sunny City, CA 91234

To: XXXXXX

Re: MLPA map and MLPA process for South Coast Region 2009


Let's get to work!

[zenspearo]

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger

http://gov.ca.gov/interact

If you need to find out who your assemblyperson/senator is, use this tool
http://192.234.213.69/amapsearch/framepage.asp


California Senate Resources

http://www.senate.ca.gov/~newsen/senators/senators.htp

California Assembly Contact info

http://www.assembly.ca.gov/clerk/MEM...emberdir_1.asp


MLPAComments@resources.ca.gov

Marine Life Protection Act Initiative
c/o California Resources Agency
1416 Ninth St., Ste. 1311
Sacramento, CA 95814

Fax: (916) 653-8102 Attn: MLPA Initiative


Cindy Gustafson, President
California Fish and Game Commission
1416 Ninth Street
Sacramento CA 95814-2090

California Department of Fish and Game
Carrie Wilson, Associate Fisheries Biologist 20 Lower Ragsdale Drive, Suite 100 Monterey, CA 93940 831-649-7191 www.dfg.ca.gov/mrd cwilson@dfg.ca.gov
California Department of Fish and Game
David Moore Statewide Aquatic Education Coordinator Central Coast Region PO Box 47 Yountville, CA 94599 707-944-5575 www.dfg.ca.gov dmoore@dfg.ca.gov
California Department of Fish and Game – Marine Region
Edgar W. Roberts III Associate Marine Biologist California Recreational Fisheries Survey Northern California Supervisor 619 Second Street Eureka, CA 95501 707-441-5757 www.dfg.ca.gov eroberts@dfg.ca.gov
California Department of Fish and Game
Mary Patyten, Marine Outreach Coordinator 20 Lower Ragsdale Drive, Suite #100 Monterey, CA 93940 831-649-2804 www.dfg.ca.gov MPatyten@dfg.ca.gov.
California Resources Agency
Brian Baird, Assistant Secretary for Oceans & Coastal Policy 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 916-653-9416 www.resources.ca.gov brian@resources.ca.gov
California Resources Agency
Amy Boone, Oceans & Coastal Policy Analyst 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 916-653-9416 www.resources.ca.gov amy.boone@resources.ca.gov

This page contains mailing addresses and emails for the state's representatives on the MPA's. Mailing a letter is a lot more beneficial than sending an email, but doing both never hurt anyone either.


Addresses

Marine Life Protection Act Initiative
c/o California Resources Agency
1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311
Sacramento, CA 95814

Contact Information:
(These first three are the top assembly members for the Cali legislature environmental caucus)
Head Assembly member Loni Hancock
Assemblymember.hancock@assembly.ca.gov
(Best address)
State Capitol, Room 4126
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: (916) 319-2014
District Office
712 El Cerrito Plaza
El Cerrito, CA 94530
Phone: (510) 559-1406
Fax: (510) 559-1478
Capitol Office
State Capitol P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249-0014
Phone: (916) 319-2014
Fax: (916) 319-2114



Jean Fuller, Vice Chair
Assemblymember.Fuller@assembly.ca.gov
Web contact form
http://republican.assembly.ca.gov/me...x?page=Concern
Capitol Office
State Capitol
Room 3098
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 319-2032
Fax: (916) 319-2132
Bakersfield District Office
4900 California Ave.
Suite 100 - B
Bakersfield, CA 93309
Phone: (661) 395-2995
Fax: (661) 395-3883

Assembly Member Greg Aghazarian
Web contact form
http://legplcms01.lc.ca.gov/PublicLC...?district=AD26
Capitol Office
State Capitol
Room 4167
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 319-2026
Fax: (916) 319-2126


(Great resource)
Republican Assemply GOP Leader Michael N Villines
online contact form, easy to fill out!
http://legplcms01.lc.ca.gov/PublicLC...?district=AD29
Two different addresses

Capitol Office
State Capitol
Room 3104
Sacramento, CA 94249-0029
Phone: (916) 319-2029
Fax: (916) 319-2129
Fresno District Office
6245 N. Fresno Street, #106
Fresno, CA 93710
Phone: (559) 446-2029
Fax: (559) 446-2028

(Another great resource)
Republican Assembly Caucus Chair Bob Huff
Another easy online contact form!
http://legplcms01.lc.ca.gov/PublicLC...?district=AD60
Addresses
Capitol Office
State Capitol
Room 4098
Sacramento, CA 94249-0060
Phone: (916) 319-2060
Fax: (916) 319-2160

Diamond Bar District Office
23355 E. Golden Springs Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
Phone: 909-860-5560
Fax: 909-860-5664


Governor's Office:



Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-445-4633

Here are your SAT members with email addresses:

(**MAKE SURE YOU ONLY SEND SCIENCE-BASED OR DATA-BASED QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS TO SCIENCE ADVISORY TEAM (SAT) MEMBERS. DON'T WASTE THEIR TIME WITH ISSUE THEY CAN'T CONTROL. DOING SO MAY BACKFIRE DUE TO RESENTMENT**)

[zenspearo]

Speaking Point Place holder #1

I suggest that there are 2 main points to each of your letter. Please customize your letter in your own words. Don't verbatim copy because it will go into the round file. See above for format

Brief introductory paragraph: "I want to write to register my concern regarding the Southern California Marine Life Protection Act implementation." or something similar.

1) It costs too much money and where is that going to come from? Marine Life Protected Areas are costly to setup and operate after the closed areas are setup. In order to benefit the species, studies need to be made before, during, and after the implementation to understand the impact of closure on the species and to optimize the management. Further, funding needs to be made to hire adequate DFG agents to enforce the closures. Proper and on-going management and enforcement are so important, they are in fact required by the Marine Life Protection Act. The fifth goal of the 1999 MLPA states "To ensure that California's MPAs have clearly defined objectives, effective management measures, and adequate enforcement, and are based on sound scientific guidelines."

Without proper management and enforcement, the rush to closure will not benefit species since we cannot improve what we do not understand or guard against poaching. Since the state is running out of money and currently has no money to properly manage and enforce established Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in the Central California region, it is hard to imagine how the State of California can afford to fund the management and enforcement of the NEW MPAs currently being proposed for the South Coast region.

In fact, in November 2008, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has placed a moratorium on funding for MLPA implementation and the South Coast MLPA process is now carried forth only by a large donation from Resource Life Legacy Foundation. Without commenting on the propriety of continuing a quasi-legislative process on what is essentially lobbyist's money, there is no guarantee that any private funding source would be there to manage and enforce the South Coast MPAs after its establishment. At that point, the implementation is either doomed or the State will have to step in to come up with the estimated $30 millions/year to manage and enforce the new MPAs. Given the current budget crisis in California, I do not believe that this is the best priority to spend our money to establish new MPAs for which we do not have the money to manage or enforce while existing MPAs (such as those in the Central Coast regions) are not even properly funded for their legislatively mandated management and enforcement.

2) Disproportionate social/economic impact to user of resources and business that make a living from the resources. I am from San Diego/Orange County/Los Angeles/Ventura/Santa Barbara county and I have seen the proposed closures made by certain preservationist groups. These proposals call for the closure in <**Fill out the areas from the maps from eco-groups. For San Diego, it would be the entirety of Point Loma and La Jolla area**>. I wish to point out that these closures appear to be designed to completely shut down fishing activities based on ideology instead of reasonable protection in view of social/economic impact to the public. I am a fisherman/spearfisherman and closing La Jolla and Point Loma in the manner proposed will effectively eliminate shore-based and kayak-based fishing/spearfishing activities for all citizens of San Diego County because there are essentially two kelp beds where most San Diego citizens go fish: La Jolla and Point Loma. This closure will affect boating ownership, marina occupancy, and visitation to the coast for lawful fishing and diving and recreation purposes. These closures, which occur underwater, will not increase tourism to the area since most tourists do not go on the water or in it to recreate except to fish. By completely shutting down fishing in these areas, there will be a disporportionate and undue social/economic impact on those currently using the resources for recreation or on businesses depending on it for a living.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
General Note: Although this is not a "central point" of any letter you want to write, I would deemphasize any "sporting" aspect of spearfishing. The public sentiment is going to be "find a sport that doesn't involve killing fish if that's your strategy."

Your best bet is to focus on the problem of MLPA and its implementation and leave out the spearfishing angle--we'll make that point with the appropriate people in the RSG/SAT/BRTF.

[zenspearo]

Here is a PDF of example emails to DFG in the past round.

As you read through, you will see that some emails come across as "better" than others. Model after those.

Also, emails to legislators and governors are NOT effective. You need to write letters.

Nevertheless, here are examples of what have been submitted to DFG.

[zenspearo]

Speaking Point Place holder #3

San Nicholas and San Clemente closures (3 total) by the Navy should be accepted by the MLPA panel. With the state's budget the way it is and with DFG's thin resources, the Navy will clearly be able to do a better job of keeping all takes away from these San Nicholas and San Clemente closures. Under the vigilant eyes of the Navy and with total closure status, these Navy closures come the closest to the MLPA's hoped-for "State Marine Reserve" closures.

Note: We want the MLPA people to ACCEPT these NAVY closures because in all likelihood, we already lost them anyway to the Navy--now we just want to make sure these closures count for MLPA purposes so the pressure will be off closing coast-side areas. Turning a bad situation to our advantage so to speak. The worst that can happen is we lose access to these Navy closures and they don't help in the MLPA scoring to help relieve closure pressures from other areas (PV, LJ, etc.)

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

San Diego-specific.

La Jolla is a heritage site for the sport of spearfishing in the US as we know it. Many of the gear today enjoyed by all divers, consumptives and non-consumptives, are born by divers plying the waters of La Jolla in the 30's and 40's. One of the goals of MLPA being preserving heritage--the closure of La Jolla should be avoided.

emphasize that 1) you fish to eat and eat all you spear--you humbly waste nothing--you don't do this for blood sport, 2) you are in the water and your sport depends on the health of the ecosystem, making you very aware as a good steward of the ocean (point out the trash collection, etc.), and 3) You practice a very selective method of take. You see the fish, you identify it, you know its size, species before you take and you take only a few to eat.

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

Safe access for shore fishermen and divers- you can't be expected to swim 3 miles to traverse a closed area to get to legal fishing grounds. You can't be expected to cross that kind of distance in a kayak either. Note: Here is your chance to tailor the facts to your locality. For example you kayak fishermen should be able to argue that the distance from the only viable launch, Avenida de la Playa would be too far to any fishing grounds if LJ closure is extended southward. In the afternoons, the NW winds and swells kick up and making the paddle back hazardous and impractical if one has to paddle 3-4 miles to begin fishing.

Cost: Nobody has said what this whole thing will really cost to MANAGE PROPERLY. We don't care much about what enforcement will cost. Enforcement is crap, plain and simple. You don't write tickets to poisons in the enviroment, you don't arrest foriegn waterborne diseases that kill the enviroment.

WE AS FISHERMEN SHOULD NOT BE EXPECTED TO PAY FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF WATERS WE HAVE NO ACCESS TO. WE WILL NOT PAY FOR THIS ALONE, WE WXPECT THAT THE FUNDING MUST COME FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND THE PUBLIC A S A WHOLE. They are the people who voted for this, they wanted this, they can PAY for this!

OTHER CONTRIBUTORS TO HABITAT AND FISH DECLINES:
Water Pollution
Water Temperature Changes
Resurgence of marine mammals, sea lions and sea otters
Ocean Acidification
Pollution from coastal streams
Pollution from Electrical plants and Desalination plants

THE SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACT IS HUGE: Many Californians make their living on the sea and many more rely on the ocean for fishing recreation and these endeavors support a very large financial pyramid—lodging, boating, supplies, fuel, etc.

THE COST IS UNSUSTAINABLE AT THE CURRENT ESTIMATE OF 30-40 MILLION: The State is essentially bankrupt. The Department of Fish and Game admits is currently does not have the resources to manage the huge array of closures. The net effect is that honest fishermen will stay out of reserves, but poachers will not.

THE TAKE- NO-TAKE PLAN IGNORES FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AS AN EFFECTIVE TOOL FOR PREVENTING OVERFISHING: The array of reserves should not be a surrogate for fisheries management. If there is over-fishing, then the Department of Fish and Game is not doing its job

THERE ARE CURRENTLY NO DEPLEATED OR ENDANGERED FISH SPECIES IN THE AREA: When pressed, the Department of Fish and Game could not name one fish species that was depleted.

WHY DO ENVIROMENTAL PROPOSALS FOCUS ON THE MOST PRODUCTIVE HABITATS FOR CLOSURE? The environmentalists’’ proposals focus on the most productive areas ( “A+ habitats ) for their reserves because they want the best habitat reserved for themselves. What they fail to realize is that these areas are the most productive and resilient and closing them will offer little net gain. It would be better to close some of the “B” habitat to let it become more productive—the net effect will be much greater

THERE IS NO PROVISION FOR FISHERIES ENHANCEMENT: Such successful programs such as fish propagation ( white seabass ) and artificial reefs are ignored in the process and these programs can go a long way to enhance the ocean waters off our coast.

Dear ________,

As a concerned voter, I am writing to you regarding the Marine Protection Areas process in Southern California. As you know, the Department of Fish and Game is reviewing whether to close large areas in Southern California and turn them into marine reserves. Unfortunately, they are not using unbiased scientific information, and this could result in disaster for the California ecosystem and economy.
All known research shows that turning large areas of our oceans into reserves will cause fish stocks to be severely depleted in the remaining areas, with little to no spillover from the reserves. This in turn damages the economy and local fisheries by allowing the entire ecosystem to be depleted on the remainder of the coastline!
I am very worried that the current MPA are not working in the state’s Representatives best interests, the recreational fishing industry alone in California has an unbelievable 2.4 million anglers contributing over $4.9 billion to the state’s economy! The proposed MPA measures are meaning to cut these numbers in half, which could have a repercussion on the over 43,000 registered voters whose jobs depend on our beautiful California oceans. The state’s current $14 billion budget deficit has put California in a fiscal crisis, and losing half of $2.5 billion and 22,000 jobs during this time would only have disastrous effects on our economy, as well as on voters opinions in the upcoming elections.
As a concerned voter, I urge you to push the Department of Fish and Game to introduce proper science and management of fish stocks over the large MPAs that are poised to further harm our great state’s economy.
Once again, I thank you very much for your time.

Sincerely,


___________________

Your Name Here

[mnguy]

Make sure you customize any letter you send. Don't just copy and paste the form letter and send it out. It will most likely get trashed.

Instead, take these speaking points and apply them to yourself in your own words. I.E #1 and talking about safe access. Take that idea and apply it to a spot that you dive that, if closed, means an unsafe and dangerously long swim/kayaking trip to reach worthwhile fishing grounds. Maybe where you dive, if forced to kayak in the opposite direction out of the harbor because the usual and safe direction gets closed down, you would be screwed if the wind picked up as it would be almost impossible for you to make it back into the harbor safely, even though you are a very competent swimmer/kayaker.

[Wind_in_his_hair]

Originally Posted by mnguy

Make sure you customize any letter you send. Don't just copy and paste the form letter and send it out. It will most likely get trashed.

Great point Mike.

[saltierdog]

additional aspects that i would like to address are

1. the personal historical importance an area has to you and your community for us the annual lobster opener when over 200 boats are out in north PV bond fires are on the beach it's a cultural event unique to our community

2 another particular to PV is the health effect to the citizens of the south bay
north PV has by far the cleanest water in all the Santa Monica bay. by closing this area to fishing you force people to fish within the bay where there are much higher levels of runoff pollution or fish south PV which is contaminated with DDT
thus it is a major health issue (this is also a major flaw with the scientific guidelines of the mlpa process that looks for the cleanest water areas to protect thus leaving poor water areas to the citizens who pay for use)

i imagine the north west corner of la jolla also has very clean water as well thus the same argument

thanks for posting this thread
i would like to use some of the material on the website
joe

[zenspearo]

By Sunday night or Monday night, I hope to populate this thread much more with speaking points. Joe Farlo and others are taking time from their incredibly demanding work schedule and mobilize and step up to the plate--much kudos. Paul (Rojo)--thanks a million for those pictures. You have brass balls. It's going to be a fight for the survival of our lifestyle and please everyone add your thoughts and contacts for everyone else to draw from.

Thanks.

[zenspearo]

From Peter Culp (thnx).

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

Here is another great place for your voice to be heard.

Here is the link for public comments.

MLPA Public Comments

Here is the Direct Email.

MLPAComments@resources.ca.gov

Take five minutes and tell them what the ocean means to you.

We need this link filled with responsible fisherman who care about the ocean.

[zenspearo]

From Chip (Thnx).

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

In case you've been living under a rock, you know that the MLPA/MPA process is underway and will be making decisions about establishing closures and/or limitation regimes for Southern California.

Do yourself a favor. Read this:

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/scsrnews/special0308.asp#q3

Understand that we are still in the first stages of this process. There are a number of proposals and possible arrays that are being presented for consideration at this time. Everything is very preliminary right now and being presented for discussion.

Some of the proposals may appear either overly broad or perhaps not broad enough to satisfy legal and management requirements. Time will tell.

What is important is that you (yes, every one of you!) take time to let your views be known. That doesn't necessarily mean threatening or insulting other individuals/groups involved in the process.

It does mean effectively communicating your interests and beliefs on the issues. Proposing acceptable alternatives tends to be much more effective than simply objecting to everything.

Remember, if we are to be respected for our contributions, we have to earn that respect from everybody in the process.

Here's a "map" of the MLPA/MPA process to give you some idea of where we are and where we have to go.

As you can see, we need to pace ourselves in order to remain effective through the course of this action. And get better organized so we can be better advocates in upcoming issues. This sort of thing isn't simply going to go away.

If you care about the future of this sport, about your future in this sport, then invest some time and effort in doing something about it.

Thanks,
Chip

[Bill McIntyre]

I know I've been goofing off in Hawaii since last weekend, but I want to mention a problem that I have, and that may be a problem for others.

There are so many threads telling me what to do about MLPAs, telling me what is going on with MLPAs, etc. that I find that the easy way out is to just avoid reading any of them. And remember, I'm retired. Most people work for a living and maybe have wives and kids that need attention. How can they keep up?

I don't know what the solution is, and I know that pointing out the problem is the easy part, but I just wanted to mention my difficulty in keeping up.

[downdiver2]

Originally Posted by Bill McIntyre

I know I've been goofing off in Hawaii since last weekend, but I want to mention a problem that I have, and that may be a problem for others.

There are so many threads telling me what to do about MLPAs, telling me what is going on with MLPAs, etc. that I find that the easy way out is to just avoid reading any of them. And remember, I'm retired. Most people work for a living and maybe have wives and kids that need attention. How can they keep up?

I don't know what the solution is, and I know that pointing out the problem is the easy part, but I just wanted to mention my difficulty in keeping up.

I agree, I am at work and fortunately I had the opportunity to sift through and make a cheat sheet of addresses.

[downdiver2]

Here is a cheat sheet to easily copy and paste in word Letters & Mailings for your envelopes.

Its to easy.

[toggy]

Don't forget...the MLPAs are meant to be a science resource, NOT a fisheries management issue! The criteria to close a region should be based on its value for study, not on how many people fish the location. If spot A and B have equal study value, but more fishing occurs in spot A, we should be able to persuade closure of spot B. In this way it may be possible to compromise and keep our favorite locations. We need to keep this thought at the front.

Of course scientists realize that no-take zones are not a proper way toward sustainability -- but the MLPAs have been manipulated into a protectionist issue

Make sure people realize that the MLPAs are not meant as fisheries management