Posted on 12/22/2010 5:57:43 PM PST by smokingfrog
The California State Fish and Game Commission adopted sweeping closures of ocean waters off the Southern California coast, eliminating sportfishing and most other uses in these areas in a vote Dec. 15 in Santa Barbara.
In adopting the regulations, mandated as part of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA), three words come immediately to mind about the process: corrupt, unfunded and unnecessary. The process has been flawed from the beginning.
First, there is massive conflict of interest that should disqualify two of the commissioners from voting: Commissioner Michael Sutton, whose employer stands to gain financially with the passage of massive closures, is violating conflict of interest laws every time he votes on MLPA issues, but the body that investigates these issues has been silenced by the governor’s office.
New commissioner Jack Baylis has ties to Heal the Bay, an environmental group that has lobbied for massive closures and also should have recused himself. He only was recently appointed to the commission, when it appeared another appointee would vote against the closures, sending the plan back to the drawing board.
Second, the “science” outlining the need for the closures is dubious at best. George Osborne, representing the Partnership for Sustainable Oceans, a sportfishing group formed to respond to the MLPA closures, said it clearly and succinctly: “Proponents of the MLPA will have you believe that California marine resources are in dire straits. This is simply untrue. There is not one marine fish stock experiencing overfishing in California’s waters.”
Third, the idea of reserves in both oceans and on land for preserving fish and wildlife populations is proving false where there have been experiments in reserve creation. The reserves on land or in water don’t help appreciably.
In fact, in California there are “game reserves” all over that state that ban hunting, the equivalent of what is happening to fishing in the ocean. The Department of Fish and Game’s biologists have examined many of these areas and have been unable to find any benefits to them. In fact, they have pursued legislation that would eliminate them statewide, because there is no scientific justification. Yet Commissioner Sutton pointed to the shining example of terrestrial “reserves” throughout the MLPA process, ignoring the facts.
Fourth, management options outside of complete closures to fishing, were off the table from the beginning. An area couldn’t be managed, for example, with catch-and-release fishing or reduced bag limits to protect species, proving the process was flawed from the start. The reason California’s marine environment is so healthy (outside of pollution) is because we do manage fish stocks with commercial and sportfishing regulations based on science – not whim or feel-good closures.
Fifth, there has never been funding approved by the legislature to implement the MLPA. The money for the work done so far has largely been redirected from other Department of Fish and Game and agency programs, much of that money diverted illegally from earmarked funds with slick accounting moves.
The bottom line is that implementation of the MLPA has been corrupt (if not downright illegal), unnecessary biologically and a huge waste of funds from other programs that needed the money.
Can’t farm, can’t fish, can’t generate power, can’t have factories. Hmmm? What’s left?
Bow to your overlords. They may feel merciful and throw you a crumb once and a while. /s
selfping for later
Curious, if it is anything like the Chesapeake what is probably happening is now that the fish are gone the commercial guys want the gummint to force the sport fishermen to stop fishing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.