So Cal Marine Life Protection Act Log, Terry Maas Stakeholder (Ranked latest date first)
1/14/2009
Nov 18-19 SAT has defined 5 bioregions. The coast is divided into two of these
regions split at Reviewed habitats, recognized 75% is sand Reviewed size and spacing criteria
Introduced a planning tool Marine Map ( http://marinemap.org/marinemap/ ) This tool
allows users—including the public—to design and edit reserves. Stakeholder
groups can share ideas of networks as they develop. Most important, we can share these
ideas with you. We just email a small Google Earth file and you can see the exact
boundaries for comment. We are disappointed that the Department of Fish and Game favors very
simple reserve design—straight lines, and all no-take—for simplicity of
enforcement. We hope that more imaginative reserves, with specific boundaries for special
goals, different layers of harvesting (allowing divers to take pelagics) and close spacing
of different uses will allow us to parse up the area in a more intelligent fashion. We met with the group Fisheries Information Network (FIN), a
support group for stakeholders with the goals to provide stakeholders with support and
strategy during this process. Their desire is to minimize impact on fishers and to provide
a combined front, and to receive comments from consumptive fishing groups not represented
as stakeholders. The blue ribbon taskforce, the group that makes the final
recommendation to the Fish and Game Commission, is calling for strict adherence to size
and spacing guidelines and simplicity for enforcement. Generally, MPAs should be 6-12 miles wide along the coast and
separated by no more than 30-60 miles. Ecotrust data: Divers finally came to the table and represent the
same number of respondents as the shore and
kayak fishers—about 170 responses for each group. Good work! This means that your
favorite areas will be respected equally with other user groups. (When I worked with NOAA
on a similar project, I was impressed on how closely our favorite areas
coincide—fishermen and divers). On the commercial side, an impressive number of over
50% of commercial fishermen responded. Both Eric I would appreciate more input from any of you. As we are approaches “lines in the sand”, we would like you input. Call or email us: tmaas@west.net and Eric at: seazen@gte.net +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 09/28/08 This
will be my first entry into the log I intend to maintain, which will report progress on
the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) for the My philosophy going in is that we view this process as future insurance so that over-fishing today does not destroy the chance for our children to enjoy what we currently have. I feel that with some creative thinking, we can retain most of our most popular locations while at the same time preserve some of the coastline for generations to come. I plan to communicate through my web site: www.freedive.net/MLPA where I will keep a running
log of significant activities as they occur. Please review my acceptance letter, which includes the name of the other 29 stakeholders and their alternates. Please feel free to email me with any personal knowledge you have of my other stakeholders—their attitudes and beliefs—so I might have a better idea with whom I will be working. (link to letter.) Below is my review of a very interesting meeting I attended this weekend on a computer modeling process, which can help the consumptive folks make a good case for alternatives to our best spots to the environmental folks, to help them accomplish their goals while at the same time preserving most of our valuable locations. This program dovetails nicely with the information provided by Ecotrust. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 09/27/09 Meeting with the The model is very sophisticated and purports to model the effects of a special reserve network on the abundance of marine life and economic benefits (plus or minus) to fishermen. One of the Science Advisory Team members (SAT) members, who will advise the process was in attendance and was able to explain some of the process: There will be five subzones, presumably with a minimum of one 3 X 3
mi reserve included in each, spaced no more than 60 miles apart (minimum MLPA guidelines).
The coast is split at One important take-away from this meeting is that both yellowtail and white seabass are species “not likely to benefit” from a special reserve. If we can show (unlike the hook-and-line guys) that we will create no “collateral damage,” which is best defined as accidentally catching one species while targeting another, then we might be allowed into reserves to take these specific species. More work will have to be done to document the selective nature of our sport, but this opens the door a crack for us, especially for the shore-based divers who might not have the luxury of boat travel to the islands. Since the room was filled primarily with commercial fishermen, both party boat operators and fishermen, I was impressed on how the outcomes of the MLPA can impact their livelihoods. If certain reserves take out a port’s primary fishing ground, then their business is destroyed. There is a lot at stake for these folks. Another thing that really impressed me is that these guys have really
been working the maps and alternative strategies. I was impressed how, in most cases,
their sacred areas match ours. This means it is unlikely that we will be thrown under the
bus or otherwise sacrificed, because we want to preserve the same areas. More as the process unfolds. I look forward to your individual
comments and will do my best to respond: email tmaas@west.net +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 10/7/2008 The So Cal Consumptive Diver
Team: Eric Kett and I had lots of time to confer on our way to and from the
meeting. We have a very high level of agreement on how to proceed with this process. We
will issue joint statements and endeavor to engage special interest groups based primarily
on geography. We are hoping to work with 3 key groups: Both Eric and I are committed to listening and conferring with divers
who are most affected by the planned reserves in their area, most notably the Hello
I’m Eric Kett, A 27 year
resident of I look
forward to working with Dr. Terry Maas, the rest of the RSG, BRTF, SAT, and any divers
that would like to be more closely involved it looks to be an exciting year ahead. Best
regards, Highlights of the first
meeting of stakeholders 10/6-7/08 The goal of the group is to produce 3 proposals, one each from 3
subgroups. Each draft will undergo at least 3 revisions. Each draft will be reviewed by
the Scientific team (SAT). The distillation body, The Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) is
responsible for taking the best elements from each proposal and combining them for its
final recommendation to Dept. of Fish and Game Commission. In the northern study areas,
often segments from one proposal were included in other proposals. Also the committee will
look at any fully fleshed-out proposal from any group outside the stakeholder grooup. The
idea for asking for multiple proposals is to try to avoid 100% consensus behind one plan,
which the department has found in not possible. The final outcome will utilize 3 types of reserve designation:, RESERVES (no take by anyone), PARKS (possible inclusion of some recreational take), and CONSERVATION AREAS (some recreation and commercial take may be allowed.), The stakeholder group is composed essentially of 60 members, 30
primary, 30 alternates. Except for time constraints (when the primary and alternate
confer) the members designated as alternate have the same rights, impact and importance as
their primary throughout the process. While the Department says that we can be inventive with reserve
boundaries and rules, they worry a great deal about complexities that might confuse the
public. Both Eric and I agree that the group appears to be composed of a high
percentage of stakeholders interested in consumption. Everyone appears cooperative at this
point and there are high expectations that the group can minimize impact on consumptive
users. The chair of the BRFT, who is ultimately responsible for the plan submitted to the
Commission, Don Benninghoven, addressed the group and said that it was his desire to
“come up with the most protection with the least economic impact.” We translated
this to suggest that any plan should consider highly fishing interests. The next step in the process is reviewing and improving the
Department’s Regional Profile, which draws upon data from bathometric maps most
notably hard and soft bottoms, Ecotrust data and user-mapping data created by NOAA.
Stakeholders will input their particular knowledge so that the profile maps accurately
characterize the entire region. Initially, the Channel Island Reserves were advertised to be entirely
open to being re-drawn. However now rather than open these up, the department has chosen
to fall back on one of the goals of the MLPA act—adaptive management—whereby the
Fish and Game commission will evaluate these reserves and make suggestions for changes.
These evaluations are to be made every 5 years, which makes the first review due now. The
review will be conducted by the Scientific Advisory Team (SAT), who will advise if any of
the current reserves should be modified. This process is wonderfully transparent to interested public members. Each meeting is broadcast to the web in real time and each meeting is open to the public members who are allowed time to comment to the group. The main information web site is: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/MLPA/southcoast.asp If you are interested in the proceedings, you can review them in web-based archives. Meetings will rotate between SB, LA and SD so there is plenty of opportunity for you appearance and input. Both Eric and I appreciate your input. If you plan to attend a meeting, let us know so that we can meet and confer at breaks. Terry Maas and Eric Kett Here is a link to a simple podcast, which describes the process and
progress to date. While it is from an environmentally oriented group, it offers a fair
overview of the implementation of the act for the So. Cal area: http://www.thankyouocean.org/podcast/
|