I was asked to post this article that recently was published in Western Outdoors magazine. I have a regular column in that publication and its companion, the weekly Western Outdoor News.
I have lots of deadlines to meet, but I will also post the latest on the MLPA happenings, which are extensive.
Rich Holland
Years have passed since California’s Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) was unleashed upon the unsuspecting angling public.
Written by the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC), pushed through a Democratic-controlled legislature by subsequently-disgraced San Francisco politician Kevin Shelley and signed by a lame duck governor amidst promises the language protected both recreational and commercial fishing interests, the MLPA was then taken behind closed doors.
A hand-picked team of scientists and government employees, closely monitored by Karen Garrison of the NRDC, chose to focus on language in the act that called for the replication of protections of habitat types, then subdivided the coastal habitat of California faster than farmland outside Stockton.
The result was maps of massive fishing closures the length of the state. The scientists and Department of Fish and Game officials were actually surprised at the uproar that met the maps and quickly regrouped for a different approach. They had no choice, since the legislature told them to junk the maps and start fresh.
Fishermen barely had a chance to get worked up about the next attempted railroad job, as a chain of working groups along the coast was disbanded when funding dried up. Not coincidentally, Arnold Schwarzenegger had just replaced a governor with close ties to the environmental community.
But the new governor and his wife were literally at home within the same political group, as the environmental movement has deep roots in the slippery Malibu hillsides.
One of Schwarzenegger’s early appointments was fellow Republican Mike Chrisman as Secretary of Resources. The move was applauded by sportfishing leaders, who had come to know Chrisman through his work on the California Fish and Game Commission.
The new Resources Secretary certainly seemed an excellent alternative to predecessor Mary Nichol, a Los Angeles lawyer straight from the ranks of the NRDC.
Chrisman, a Southern California Edison employee and rancher whose family name graces a pumping station on the California aqueduct right off I-5, is a strong supporter of multiple resource use — and parks.
Chrisman had already proved he bought into the environmentalist viewpoint that much of the California coast should be turned into parks. Instead of the hunting ban found in National Parks (which all allow fishing), coastal parks would eliminate both commercial and recreational fishing.
In his role as a Fish and Game Commissioner, Chrisman was instrumental in the closing of 25 percent of the coastal waters of California’s Channel Islands National Park to all fishing.
So it was no surprise when Chrisman went into the "war room" with environmental groups in the days following the announcement that the MLPA process had been halted due to lack of funding.
After all, the environmental groups were using their contacts in the major daily media to slam both Chrisman and the governor.
Up until this point, Chrisman had been easily accessible to this reporter, but all interview requests during those critical days were refused, as were subsequent requests.
But clandestine meetings seem to be par for the course in the MLPA process and the latest backroom dealings resulted in the MLPA Initiative — a bulletproof anti-fishing wolf dressed in the sheep’s clothing of public policy.
The money would come from the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, a front for groups who have been major donors to environmental organizations like the NRDC. Foremost among those are the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Marisla Foundation, and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.
The millions were to be doled out on a yearly basic and only if certain performance clauses were met, sort of like a pro ballplayer’s contract.
Chrisman’s master stroke was to announce the formation a Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) chaired by Phil Isenberg, a veteran policy-maker, former legislator and past mayor of Sacramento.
Chrisman tasked the BRTF with bringing the MLPA Initiative to life, something that took place at breakneck speed. Unfortunately for recreational anglers, Isenberg and the other lawyers on the BRTF made clear at initial meetings they took a narrow interpretation of the legislation.
Although the language of the act merely says the intent is to improve the existing array of marine reserves and manage them as much as possible as a network, BRTF members and staff stated the MLPA clearly intended to create more marine reserves.
Ah yes, the BRTF staff. The high powered individuals who made up the actual panel could not be expected to do the substantive work. So individuals intimately involved with the two previous MLPA processes were hired to make up the staff.
To make things worse, a Science Advisory Team (SAT) was constructed of mainly the same scientists who drew up the initial maps.
Meanwhile leaders of sportfishing groups were lulled into cooperation by cozy backroom meetings with Isenberg and Chrisman after dog and pony shows at the big winter fishing and boating extravaganzas.
Chrisman’s message to anglers at the ‘sportfishing caucuses’ was simple: get involved in the process, because the closures are going to happen with or without you.
A coalition of recreational and commercial fishing interests — the California Fisheries Coalition (CFC) — was formed (one major California recreational group to not join was United Anglers of Southern California).
The CFC managed to get some of their own scientists on the SAT, but their influence was minimal and that resulted in the first major defeat suffered in the process by fishermen.
While the draft Master Plan Framework noted there were many definitions of a "network" and MLPA language didn’t differentiate between an administrative network or an ecosystem network, the draft approved by the BRTF included network design guidelines crafted by pro-reserve scientists that mandated large reserve sizes and close proximity of the reserves. (The larger the reserve, the farther away it could be from another reserve.)
The Master Plan Framework is an impressive document, one that could only have been crafted in its January to April timeframe last year by a staff that already knew what it wanted.
When the framework was forwarded to the Fish and Game Commission, which has final say on any reserve, the commission approved the document in an Aug. 2005 meeting, but commissioners specifically said the instructions of the scientists should not be considered prescriptive.
Which was the opposite of what happened once the Central Coast Regional Stakeholders Working Group convened. Formed in the middle of the summer, the working group picked up on the fast pace of the MLPA Initiative process thanks to the prodding of the professional facilitators of COMCUR.
As with all the public meetings in any way associated with the MLPA Initiative, all the official working group meetings were broadcast over the internet as staff strived for the appearance of public involvement.
This brand of reality TV, especially during the first meetings, seemed like a cross between "Survivor" and "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" as the tribes of fishers and environmentalists quickly became apparent and the meticulous facilitators dictated the rules of engagement.
An informed viewer knew it was Karen Garrison of the NRDC in attendance, even before she stood up during public comment to congratulate the group for its (her) work. And it was no surprise to see working group member Kaitilin Gaffney of the The Ocean Conservancy seated next to MLPA Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Force member Meg Caldwell. Caldwell is the director of the Environmental and Natural Resources Law and Policy Program at Stanford.
Just prior to the final working group meeting, the Coastside Fishing Club (formed around an internet site of the same name) filed suit against the Resources Agency over the use of private money to fund the MLPA initiative.
But the beat went on and in December 2005, the Central Coast Regional Stakeholders Working Group wrapped up six months worth of meetings by sending forward three project packages for a network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) from Pigeon Point to Point Conception.
All three packages included sizeable new State Marine Reserves which will be completely closed to all forms of fishing (see accompanying maps).
Two of the packages were the result of outside work. While the general public only had until Oct. 15 to submit network proposals, both the coalition of fishermen and the environmental groups used their representatives on the working group to get around the deadline. The extra time was spent on the proposal packages with the help of "hired gun" scientists.
The packages were unveiled at a working group meeting the previous month and facilitator Scott McCreary of COMCUR actually welcomed the outside influence, as the fracture in the group was evident.
The third package was a hybrid of the other two put together by working group members who claimed they were not affiliated with either faction.
In the short interval between working group meetings the SAT reviewed each package and offered guidance. Going into the final round of deliberations, members of the stakeholders group were admonished by the Task Force to pay strict attention to the guidance of the SAT. Meg Caldwell of the BRTF was again there to monitor the proceedings.
A key component of the SAT guidance was a judgement of the conservation value of the various MPA components, with the no-take State Marine Reserves rated the highest and State Marine Conservation Areas (SCMA) that allowed recreational fishing rated the lowest. The SAT did note that restricting salmon fishing — the only recreational effort allowed in many of the proposed SCMAs — to waters deeper than 50 fathoms would greatly increase the conservation value.
After a couple days of straw votes, individual meetings and caucuses to winnow down and revise the packages, a visible division in the group remained, but members on either side agreed they were, as Kaitilin Gaffney of the Oceans Conservancy put it, "close to 75 percent in agreement" on the content of all three packages.
The next step was for the SAT to review the packages and send them on to the Feb. 1 meeting of the BRTF. Proponents for each package were designated and were to stay active in the process as it continued.
Howard Egan, who represented the Recreational Fishing Alliance on the working group, promised to make any changes recommended by the SAT and also promised BRTF staff members that recreational groups would not make any attempt to flood the task force meeting with members, as happened during the Channel Islands process when hundreds of anglers in red shirts showed up to little effect.
According to executive director John Kirlin, the BRTF hopes to finalize its work on the Central Coast Project at its March meeting, at which point the package(s) will be forwarded the Department of Fish Game (DFG). The DFG will identify a preferred alternative, begin CEQA and present the preferred alternative to the Fish and Game Commission, at which point the commission’s deliberations and public comment process will begin. A final decision on the new Central Coast MPAs could be made by the end of 2006.
During the closing comments of the December working group meeting, Doug Huckins of the DFG’s enforcement branch reminded everyone the critical question of funding had yet to be adequately addressed.
"These new reserves will put a heavy burden on enforcement and our budget," said Huckins. "We can’t just rob Peter to pay Paul. That’s what we’ve been doing for years and it won’t work."
Whether the new network of reserves will work is also at question, but one thing’s for sure, Mike Chrisman et al will not rest until a large percentage of the prime fishing habitat along the California coast is under lock and key.
The process could be coming to your backyard soon, with the next project site already under consideration and the final piece of the reserve network to be in place by 2011.
Marine Protected Zones
bajadan2000
Linear Mode
