Letter to our Governor

[Tman]

Feel free to use it, the more the merrier...sent to him through Interact and his website...

Dear Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,

I am writing you regarding the future of California in regards to the Marine Life Protection Act.

I am a California taxpayer and a single parent. With the economy the way it is, my son and I rely on access to our fishing grounds, not only for healthy enjoyment, but to sustain ourselves. We are environmentalists. We take only what we plan to use. Decisions made will have a disastrous effect on us and our livelihood.

How can you actually allow the MLPA process to move forward when the public knows it is clearly one-sided, filled with conflict of interest issues, inadequate data, and false information?

The MLPA brochure clearly states this;

"The MLPA requires the state to examine and redesign California's system of marine protected areas, with extensive public input."

That is clearly misleading, akin to false advertising. That, Governor, is not how this process is actually happening. It is filled with inadequate data and selective years for the studies, especially regarding optimum kelp habitat.

I have attended numerous meetings along with my 9-year old son so he can see first hand the workings of our government and how this process could potentially affect him. At these meetings, our public comment is limited to one minute. And this is considered extensive public input?

There is no data available on how this will affect everyone from recreational anglers, bait shops, tackle stores, boat dealers, seafood retailers, kayak and diving gear dealers, and the thousands of people employed in these businesses at a time when the state is broke and cutting benefits, closing state parks and beaches, and downsizing the DFG.

The process being pushed forward at breakneck speed, with amendments to proposals being submitted at the last minute with the science data not completely accurate and fully completed, the constant shifting and changing of rules, has caused a distrusting public to doubt the credibility of the whole MLPA process and those in charge.

Again, I have attended numerous MLPA meetings, and see first hand the misleading of the public to expediate the process. It is not a process with extensive public input; the public is controlled on their time for input, have no say in the voting process, are told to not say anything negative or question statements of the MLPA board members, we the public are not even allowed to address the board members for specific answers to our concerns.

I ask you, how can this be considered a fair process, with extensive public input, if we are not allowed to address our concerns, essentially having no say regarding how this will affect us?

I ask that this process be paused to allow for the science and socio-economic data to catch up so that informed decisions can be made that will benefit the state of California and its people.

Sincerely,

Martin Craig Harding
Encinitas, California
San Diego County
A concerned consumptive/environmentalist

[Tman]

"The three items that the MLPAs are supposed to address are coastal development, pollution & over-fishing. They have so far failed to even address the two biggest factors, instead going after the easier to attack industry of fishing..."

From an Andrew Wright comment, LA Times article.

So, go after the over-fishing, yet downsize the DFG?

And when you close these productive areas for fishing, who's going to monitor and enforce the regulations?

Who said the MLPA process was logical?

[Grego]

You should also say that they have even gone so far as to suggest what we should wear to their meetings!