MLPA - Important info for Dec 9 F&G Commission - Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge

PAL · 11-12-2009, 02:14 PM

SoCal MLPA's BRTF chapter is closed, it's time for the next round.

We shift to the Fish and Game Commission. Look below this first message for more information on the Commission.

First, let's cover what will happen on Dec 9 at the Radisson Hotel - LAX ABC Ballroom at 6225 W. Century Blvd. We don't have the agenda yet, but have a general idea based on past history.

First MLPA staff will present the 3 RSG proposals, the BRTF IPA, and the zero action alternative (existing MPAs) and discuss their relative merits. Expect to see more of the spin on display this week.

After that the BRTF will bow out and it will be the Commission's game. They'll take a vote on which proposals to forward for the formal California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis. There's little reason to believe they won't send them all along.

There could also be vote over which proposal goes forth as the Commission's preferred alternative. That would probably end in a 3-2 loss for us, but I recommend you start writing letters supporting Proposal 2 as the preferred alternative.

Remember, RSG Proposal 2 provided nearly the same conservation value as the others, but at dramatically reduced cost. It's the one that the broader fishing community can support.

Some here no doubt feel they can live with the IPA's La Jolla map, but overall the IPA is a disaster. We have two big kelp closures within 15 miles in San Diego, a rediculous and disproportionate hit. Laguna is a nightmare wedge focused on taking the biggest possible bite of public access. It kills our close friends the free divers. They fight for us - we fight for them. Palos Verdes was the fishing community's only victory, and the unacceptable price is Pt Dume, Malibu's version of La Jolla. The IPA stinks!

Personally, I will stand in solidarity with kayak anglers throughout Southern California. We should discuss all the varied issues, but perhaps not so publically. Every one of you should weigh in. Me, I see strength in unity and recoil in disgust at the trade-off of Malibu for Palos Verdes. That was done in LA political circles, not within fishing ranks.

If you are wondering about ammending the IPA, in the prior study regions only minor, technical changes made it through. Something like moving the boundary line that cuts the pier is a good example, or maybe a regulation change. I do not recommend this course of action, but if you feel compelled, please make it clear that you do not support the IPA.

(continued next post)

PAL · 11-12-2009, 02:20 PM

The Fish and Game Commission is a five member panel of political appointees. This is NOT the DFG, it is a separate entity. They don't manage the department, but they do set regulations for take, seasons, and the like.

Read about the members here: http://www.fgc.ca.gov/public/information/bios.asp

Dan Richards and Commission President Jim Kellogg voted against implementing the MLPA in North Central California, citing concerns over enforcement and the state budget. They were strong, vocal critics and are expected to continue this stance.

Michael Sutton is linked to BRTF member Meg Caldwell. How? In a sense, she is his boss. Sutton works for the Monterey Bay Acquarium. Caldwell is on the board or is a trustee of some type.

Don Benninghoven was plucked from chairmanship of the SoCal BRTF to deliver the decisive vote that pushed the NorCal IPA over the top. He replaced the former president, who resigned mysteriously just days from the vote.

Richard Rogers joined Sutton and Benninghoven in that infamous NorCal vote. Expect more of the same.

Now that you know who you are dealing with, here's how to write them: fgc@fgc.ca.gov. The subject line should read something like: Comment on MLPA South Coast Process

Please mind your manners. This is a whole new ballgame with different, much stricter rules. You'll be treated with respect if you show up to comment, and given adequate time, usually 3 minutes but no less than 1. The Brown Act applies to the Commission - they are supposed to notice their meetings appropriate, conduct their business in the light of day, and avoid conflicts of interest.

Now get to it!

11-12-2009, 02:14 PM	#1
PAL Senior Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 754	MLPA - Important info for Dec 9 F&G Commission SoCal MLPA's BRTF chapter is closed, it's time for the next round. We shift to the Fish and Game Commission. Look below this first message for more information on the Commission. First, let's cover what will happen on Dec 9 at the Radisson Hotel - LAX ABC Ballroom at 6225 W. Century Blvd. We don't have the agenda yet, but have a general idea based on past history. First MLPA staff will present the 3 RSG proposals, the BRTF IPA, and the zero action alternative (existing MPAs) and discuss their relative merits. Expect to see more of the spin on display this week. After that the BRTF will bow out and it will be the Commission's game. They'll take a vote on which proposals to forward for the formal California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis. There's little reason to believe they won't send them all along. There could also be vote over which proposal goes forth as the Commission's preferred alternative. That would probably end in a 3-2 loss for us, but I recommend you start writing letters supporting Proposal 2 as the preferred alternative. Remember, RSG Proposal 2 provided nearly the same conservation value as the others, but at dramatically reduced cost. It's the one that the broader fishing community can support. Some here no doubt feel they can live with the IPA's La Jolla map, but overall the IPA is a disaster. We have two big kelp closures within 15 miles in San Diego, a rediculous and disproportionate hit. Laguna is a nightmare wedge focused on taking the biggest possible bite of public access. It kills our close friends the free divers. They fight for us - we fight for them. Palos Verdes was the fishing community's only victory, and the unacceptable price is Pt Dume, Malibu's version of La Jolla. The IPA stinks! Personally, I will stand in solidarity with kayak anglers throughout Southern California. We should discuss all the varied issues, but perhaps not so publically. Every one of you should weigh in. Me, I see strength in unity and recoil in disgust at the trade-off of Malibu for Palos Verdes. That was done in LA political circles, not within fishing ranks. If you are wondering about ammending the IPA, in the prior study regions only minor, technical changes made it through. Something like moving the boundary line that cuts the pier is a good example, or maybe a regulation change. I do not recommend this course of action, but if you feel compelled, please make it clear that you do not support the IPA. (continued next post) Last edited by PAL; 11-12-2009 at 03:06 PM.

11-12-2009, 02:20 PM	#2
PAL Senior Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 754	The Fish and Game Commission is a five member panel of political appointees. This is NOT the DFG, it is a separate entity. They don't manage the department, but they do set regulations for take, seasons, and the like. Read about the members here: http://www.fgc.ca.gov/public/information/bios.asp Dan Richards and Commission President Jim Kellogg voted against implementing the MLPA in North Central California, citing concerns over enforcement and the state budget. They were strong, vocal critics and are expected to continue this stance. Michael Sutton is linked to BRTF member Meg Caldwell. How? In a sense, she is his boss. Sutton works for the Monterey Bay Acquarium. Caldwell is on the board or is a trustee of some type. Don Benninghoven was plucked from chairmanship of the SoCal BRTF to deliver the decisive vote that pushed the NorCal IPA over the top. He replaced the former president, who resigned mysteriously just days from the vote. Richard Rogers joined Sutton and Benninghoven in that infamous NorCal vote. Expect more of the same. Now that you know who you are dealing with, here's how to write them: fgc@fgc.ca.gov. The subject line should read something like: Comment on MLPA South Coast Process Please mind your manners. This is a whole new ballgame with different, much stricter rules. You'll be treated with respect if you show up to comment, and given adequate time, usually 3 minutes but no less than 1. The Brown Act applies to the Commission - they are supposed to notice their meetings appropriate, conduct their business in the light of day, and avoid conflicts of interest. Now get to it! Last edited by PAL; 11-12-2009 at 03:04 PM.