OPAC Meetings Newport March 27,28

[Salty Walty]

I put the draft agendas on the event calendar;

http://www.ifish.net/board/calendar....=2008-3-27&c=2

I put them there to save space on this thread and to also get myself used to using the calendar. It is good to see what other things are going on there too.

There will be a lot of stuff to go over because of the Govs Office cancelling the Feb. OPAC Meeting.
I look forward to the update from Chip Terhunes visit and hearing some of the preliminary comments from the Outreach Effort.
Hope to see some of you there.

[black magic]

These meetings are exciting and entertaining. They are like a sporting event where you can compete. It is political combat at its best. You must navigate throught the maze while being pummeled with rhetoric, hidden agendas, condescending cordial facades, and dubious claims of noble purpose. If you reach the flag you win a point toward the playoffs which is another competition at the legislature where you get to compete for the funding. If you are able to control the funding you will be crowned champion of the legislative session.

[Salty Walty]

Very well attended Meeting and did have some fireworks.

Ginny and Jeff did a great job of summarizing the results from the Outreach Meetings.
Full report here;
http://seagrant.oregonstate.edu/outr...es.html#report

In a nutshell almost all of the reservations that many here have as far as science, trust, funding, necessity, fast track, and others.

There had been talk of an Executive Order from Salem regarding Marine Reserves and it was given out. The long and the short of it is that the process has been dumped into ODFWs lap. Meetings and responsibility for success are now tasked to them. They have been given an extra month as far as the deadlines but no extra funding or staff. There have been some small changes to the process but in essence it is the same animal but with a different head. It is most unfortunate that the results of the Listening and Learning was not taken into consideration nor was the STAC report;

March 6, 2008

TO: Oregon Ocean Policy Advisory Council
FROM: Science and Technical Advisory Committee
SUBJECT: Marine Reserves Development Process
We are writing to express our concern about the pace of the OPAC marine reserves development process. The objective of having a set of preferred alternatives by November 2008 is creating an unreasonable timeline for a public process of this magnitude.
The STAC supports the OPAC in its efforts to develop a proposal for a system of marine reserves. However, we are concerned that the rate at which development is being pursued will prevent the proposal from being well informed by science. Experience in natural resource policy tells us that effective public policy implementation results from a development process that includes key elements:
· Measurable objectives
· Scientific information base
· Analysis of options
· Scientific review
· Public education
· Public involvement
· Transparency
· Predictability
These elements are deliberative and have associated time and budget requirements that may seem excessive in the short run. However, attempts to fast-track the process may lead to uninformed decisions and unintended consequences, leading to higher costs in the long run.
As OPAC’s science advisory committee, the STAC considers it within our charge to advise OPAC of the importance of rationalizing the development process and ensuring that it is based on a solid science foundation. We are concerned that the pace of the process is precluding the incorporation of adequate scientific information and review, leaving open the potential for inadequately informed decisions and unintended consequences.
Experience with development and implementation of marine reserves in other areas provides guidance on the components and timelines of planning processes. The STAC stands ready to assist the OPAC in defining a process for Oregon that incorporates effective public involvement and allows adequate time for the development, analysis and review of scientific information.
_____

Scientific and Technical Committee Members: Jack Barth, College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Science, Oregon State University: Susan Hanna, Agriculture and Resource Economics, Oregon State University; Selina Heppell, Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State University; Richard Hildreth, School of Law, University of Oregon; Jay Rasmussen, Oregon Sea Grant, Oregon State University, chair; David Sampson, Fisheries and Wildlife, Oregon State University; Craig Young, Oregon Institute of Marine Biology, University of Oregon


An article from the local paper;

http://www.newportnewstimes.com/arti...ews/news02.txt


It is my feeling that if the Process is now under the direction of ODFW and thus responsible for the success of the Process. They should be able to develop the plan and process instead of being responsible for going forth with a process that has caused so much polarization. It would also be nice that they were also given adequate time, staff and funding to see this through.

I will be attending the full OPAC Meeting tomorrow also.

[Nordic Sun]

I will be attending the full OPAC Meeting tomorrow also

We owe you big time Walter, and John!
Thank You!

Bob

[Chromaflage]

Thanks to both of you!!!!!

[Salty Walty]

You are more than welcome Bob. RFA/ORAnglers had 4 members in ttendance and a couple of more tomorrow.

One other item worthy of note is this article from the Eugene paper;

http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms...02&sid=4&fid=1

The item of note is that this edition of the paper was the Thursday edition and the author was able to comment on the Executive Order (EO) in time for the morning paper. But the OPAC members and attendees were told at the meeting that the EO was not available for distribution until that morning. It is obvious to me from the quotes in thiarticle that the EO was available before this morning. But only to a select few and given to one of the only papers that might give it a positive spin. Transparency, honesty and trust are not built by these types of actions.

[Net fun]

Walter, Yesterday I twice heard a news report on the local fm station a report about marine reserves that had a pro reserve spin:

MARINE RESERVES
March 27, 2008 Experts say in a new federal report that progress is being made nationally in the move towards a system of marine protected areas. Along the Oregon Coast the talks of marine reserves are continuing with the marine reserve working group meeting today to review information obtained from the OSU extension outreach meetings.

(from the kytefm website).
Seems to be a selected press release from the guv.

Originally Posted by Salty Walty

You are more than welcome Bob. RFA/ORAnglers had 4 members in ttendance and a couple of more tomorrow.

One other item worthy of note is this article from the Eugene paper;

http://www.registerguard.com/csp/cms...02&sid=4&fid=1

The item of note is that this edition of the paper was the Thursday edition and the author was able to comment on the Executive Order (EO) in time for the morning paper. But the OPAC members and attendees were told at the meeting that the EO was not available for distribution until that morning. It is obvious to me from the quotes in thiarticle that the EO was available before this morning. But only to a select few and given to one of the only papers that might give it a positive spin. Transparency, honesty and trust are not built by these types of actions.