Next MLPA meeting--April 28 (Tues) in Oxnard

[kurt]

Thanks for posting up those petitions. I've already got my whole company to sign. Everyone, please print those out and get some autographs. If you've ever given fish to anyone, get them to sign. I'm sure they appreciate your fishing grounds.

It was good to see some familiar faces at the meeting yesterday. Hope to see more at the next one.

Paul, sorry I left early. If it was closer to home, I would've stuck it out. How long did the comment session last?

[Mr Mugu]

Ask and ye shall receive!
Gee thanks alot guys! :lol:

Hot off the press, they've added Tuesday May 19th to our meeting schedule. So we'll be in Santa Ana the 19th, 20th, and 21st.

This meeting has a LARGE chunk of time devoted to YOU!!

We'll be meeting at 1pm for a work session, then break for dinner at I believe 5:30, and then we'll have Public Comment from then on.
Again this is for YOU to be heard! And at a reasonable hour for those trying to make a living.

And yes those that spoke yesterday had a very good impact on our work session today.
Again BIG THANKS!

Chris...PM SENT

[Matt]

[quote=Mr Mugu;37802]Ask and ye shall receive!
Gee thanks alot guys! :lol:

Hot off the press, they've added Tuesday May 19th to our meeting schedule. So we'll be in Santa Ana the 19th, 20th, and 21st.

This meeting has a LARGE chunk of time devoted to YOU!!

We'll be meeting at 1pm for a work session, then break for dinner at I believe 5:30, and then we'll have Public Comment from then on.
Again this is for YOU to be heard! And at a reasonable hour for those trying to make a living.

And yes those that spoke yesterday had a very good impact on our work session today.
Again BIG THANKS!


I think I will attend the entire meeting on the scheduled day for public forum to be allowed due to the fact that Ms. Thuden, Mr. Fox, and Mr. Poncelet seem to continually change the order of the meeting.....Let's just say I don't necessarily trust them all the way

[PAL]

Former SAC president Bob Fletcher read this letter into the record, excerpted below. MJ Kennedy and I both signed it, as the ground rules have been continually changed, usually at the last minute, making sound decision making next to impossible.

Dear Chairman Benninghoven:


We, the undersigned members of the South Coast Regional Stakeholders Group (SCRSG), are writing to express serious concerns with the direction of the South Coast Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) planning process.


When we agreed to constructively participate in this project, we did so with the belief that the process would be fairly adjudicated, unbiased, open and transparent based on consistent direction and quality science. Current events demonstrate this is not the case.


Laboring mostly in the dark and lacking information (habitat mapping, LOPs, etc) which is vital to good judgment, we nonetheless completed our first round of network proposals.


These have now been analyzed by the Science Advisory Team (SAT). As of the Blue Ribbon Task Force’s (BRTF) recent meeting, none, not even the most preservation oriented plans - could make the grade. This is astonishing. Those of us with intimate, expert knowledge of the study region expected better results. Although the proposed networks may in fact require adjustment, we believe most of the shortcomings lie with the data and its analysis. Many SAT members said as much during their last meeting.

We respectfully disagree with I-team statements that data resolution good enough for the North Central Coast Study Area is sufficient for the South Coast study area. But, southern California is not northern Californiala. Some 24 million people are clustered along our intensively used coastline. We don’t have the luxury of mile after mile of undeveloped shoreline, a situation which permitted the previous process to get by with incomplete and inaccurate science in the Central and North Central study areas.


Furthermore, the BRTF has failed to resolve the military use area issue. The BRTF’s ultimate decision will have serious implications. Without clear policy guidance on the military areas, the RSG’s hands are tied, because we cannot reasonably balance impacts between the user groups likely to be impacted.


The RSG only has two opportunities to revise MPA proposals following SAT feedback. We believe it would be irresponsible to waste round two on guesswork. The science data – the habitat maps - must be significantly improved and made readily available. The BRTF must provide certainty on the military use area issue.


These are serious issues that threaten the successful conclusion of this public process. We ask: what is the penalty for waiting until we can get it right? Insisting on sticking to the timetable only serves to heighten suspicions of bias.

[Tman]

Paul, good to see that brought to light. Even Ms. Tuden acknowledged that, with her comment of why the proposal changes at the last minute...

Another thing that baffles me, referring to Shaggy's statement regarding kelp...at the meeting, alot was mentioned of kelp and it's effect on the habitat. Based on their reasonings regarding underwater structure, rocks, eel grass, etc., as optimum conditions for kelp to thrive, then how can they even factor in LJ as part of their rationale?

We will be at the next meeting...and the point being made that more people need to be made aware of what is actually at stake, I big time agree with that.

Clay enlightened his class, it's a start.

Anyone have something I can print up and make copies to give people a general idea of what's going on and what they can do, maybe a letter they can sign and send away?

Maybe that is one course we can take to get more people involved. Hand them out to co-workers, neighbors, schools...

[tylerdurden]

Thanks for the update Paul and MJ. Thanks again for spending countless frustrating hours on the cause.

Sorry I am a little unclear about MJ's post, the day added to the next meeting, May 19 is the day with the public comment now? Just want to make sure I ask for time off work on the right day since it is just over 2 weeks away already.

[PAL]

I have a lot to say this morning, so please forgive the back to back posts.

The MLPA planning process continued unabated yesterday. Although hampered by the ever-changing data, MJ and I did our best to represent kayak fishing interests. I can't say how it went, not because I've been muzzled. I only know what took place right in front of my eyes, in a group of about 8 stakeholders. That was mixed.

I want you to hear two messages.

1) Preserving access to La Jolla will be a difficult, uphill battle. If we are to have any chance of success, YOU BETTER TURN OUT AT THE MEETINGS FROM HERE ON OUT. Don't be surprised if the other side starts showing up in force.

Can't go? Then please donate to the PSO and keep our lobbyist in the game. Go here for details: http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/s...ead.php?t=4834

Direct link to the PSO donation page: https://keepamericafishing.org/donation/

I may have a second organization to recommend very soon, as it is nearing the time to raise money for any eventuality.

2) Other groups in the fishing community have been offered incentives to trade away all or part of La Jolla in return for concessions elsewhere. Because I have actively campaigned for solutions that balance impact between fishing groups, our friends are unlikely to turn on us. Especially if we are LOUD, PROUD, AND IN EVIDENCE AT THE MEETINGS. In spite of my confidence in our friends, we have to put in our own work.

Consider this my personal thank-you to all those kayak anglers who made the trip to Oxnard. Most of the guys arrived early, and suffered through the marathon meeting along with me and MJ. That was top shelf, and I don't blame you one bit for hitting the road after public comment. If I could have, I'd have been right on your heels. I'm only sorry you didn't see the debate that followed delivery of the delay letter. I'm proud to know all of you, especially Clay. At 9 years old, you are already one formidable guy. Everyone else on this board may be taller, but today, we're all looking up at you.

[PAL]

Sorry I am a little unclear about MJ's post, the day added to the next meeting, May 19 is the day with the public comment now? Just want to make sure I ask for time off work on the right day since it is just over 2 weeks away already.

To tell you the truth, I don't know any better than you. We know public comment is scheduled for the evening of May 19 as of today. There may be another public comment session on the 21st, prior to RSG action on which round 2 proposals move forward. Then again, there may not be. We wont know for certain until an agenda has been posted.

[Billy V]

I received a CHange E Mail this morning. More last minute changes to confuse, and shake off the fleas.

[MLPA Initiative] Calendar changes for BRTF and SCRSG
California Marine Life Protection Act Initiative Announcement


Who: MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) and MLPA South Coast Regional Stakeholder Group (SCRSG)

What: Calendar changes

When: New meeting date on May 8, 2009 at 12:00 noon (BRTF) and additional work session on May 19, 2009 at 1:00 p.m. (SCRSG)

Where: Via teleconference (BRTF on May 8) and Santa Ana (SCRSG on May 19)