Love the wording for the South Coast region

[Tman]

Two year public planning process? Who are they phooking kidding...


Funny how they have the numbers down to a %, but when Richards wanted the numbers they couldn't provide them (on % of area closed).

The south coast MPA regulations are anticipated to go into effect in mid-2011 after appropriate filings with the Office of Administrative Law and the Secretary of State. Good luck with that...

The California Department of Fish and Game, the lead agency charged with managing the states marine resources, will be responsible for implementing the MLPA program which will include enforcement, education, monitoring and research activities....And good luck with that as well...



California Marine Life Protection Act Initiative Announcement

Who: California Fish and Game Commission

What: News release (see below) regarding the adopted marine protected area regulations for the
MLPA South Coast Study Region (Point Conception in Santa Barbara County to the
California-Mexico border in San Diego County) and certified final environmental impact
report (EIR, prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA) for proposed
south coast marine protected areas

When: Regulations are expected to go into effect in 2011; the final EIR is available now
Where: A message will be sent to this list when the south coast marine protected area regulations have
been approved by the Office of Administrative Law; the final EIR is available at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/finalimpact_sc.asp


-----Original Message-----
From: Marine Management News [mailto:MarineNews@dfg.ca.gov]
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2010 9:47 AM
To: Undisclosed recipients
Subject: CDFG News Release - California Fish and Game Commission Gives Final Approval for South Coast Marine Protected Areas
California Department of Fish and Game News Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - December 15, 2010
Contacts:
Adrianna Shea, Fish and Game Commission, (916) 508-5262
Jordan Traverso, DFG Communications, (916) 654-9937
California Fish and Game Commission Gives Final Approval for South Coast Marine Protected Areas
The California Fish and Game Commission (Commission) has adopted regulations to create a new suite of marine protected areas (MPAs) in Southern California. At a Commission meeting in Santa Barbara today, the regulations were adopted as part of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA), which requires California to reexamine and redesign its system of MPAs with the goals to, among other things, increase the effectiveness of MPAs in protecting the states marine life and habitats, marine ecosystems and marine natural heritage.
Informed by recommendations generated through a two-year public planning process, the regulations will create 36 new MPAs encompassing approximately 187 square miles (8 percent) of state waters in the study region. Approximately 116 square miles (4.9 percent) have been designated as no-take state marine reserves (82.5 square miles/3.5 percent) and no-take state marine conservation areas (33.5 square miles/1.4 percent), with the remainder designated as state marine conservation areas with different take allowances and varying levels of protection. In addition to approving the MPA regulations, the Commission also certified the environmental impact report prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act.
The public planning process for the south coast region, from Point Conception in Santa Barbara County to the California border with Mexico, began in July 2008 and included more than 50 days of meetings with formal public comment held for a 64-member Regional Stakeholder Group, a Science Advisory Team and a Blue Ribbon Task Force appointed by the Secretary of the California Natural Resources Agency. In addition, more than 12,000 written public comments were submitted through the regulatory and environmental review processes to help inform recommendations on south coast region MPAs.
The California Department of Fish and Game, the lead agency charged with managing the states marine resources, will be responsible for implementing the MLPA program which will include enforcement, education, monitoring and research activities. The south coast MPA regulations are anticipated to go into effect in mid-2011 after appropriate filings with the Office of Administrative Law and the Secretary of State.
The south coast study region is the third of five study regions to complete the planning process under the MLPA. Once implemented, the south coast MPAs will join the MPAs currently in place from the central and north-central coast study regions to form a network ranging approximately 875 miles from the California border with Mexico to Alder Creek near Point Arena in Mendocino County. The Commission will receive recommendations for the north coast study region from the north coast blue ribbon task force in February which will mark the start of the formal regulatory process. Planning is under way to develop the process for San Francisco Bay, the fifth and final study region.
The existing MPAs in the northern Channel Islands, which encompass an additional 168 square miles and 7 percent of state waters in the study region, were not modified as part of this decision.
A map of the decisions made today can be viewed at www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/pdfs/scmpas121510.pdf.


Note: This e-mail account is used to distribute information to the public. Do not reply to this e-mail. Direct questions or comments regarding the information contained in this e-mail to the Department staff listed as points of contact for this subject.

- Subscribe to DFG News via e-mail or RSS feed -- go to www.dfg.ca.gov/news
- Subscribe (or unsubscribe) to DFG Marine Region News Service (e-mail notification of ocean-related news and information) at www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/subscribe.asp .

[bellcon]

Friggen fraken FFFF....

I got one,
who said this->
Quote:
"We may not be able to do much about climate change in the near term but we can damn well control fishing better than we do now,"

[CurtyL]

is this the final map? for LJ?
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/finalimpact_sc.asp

[m1k3midg3]

whats the difference between a state marine reserve and a state marine conservation area?

[Aaron&Julie]

What's the penalty for being found fishing in an MLPA area?

If it's not too severe, I like what Montie at M & M Rods suggested. If the La Jolla prime areas gets lost to closure, every private boater, kayaker and even the 1/2 day boats, pick a day where we swamp the area. The Moyer tournament has had as many as a 175 kayakers alone. With that many or more, plus all the private boaters, and sport boats, what are they gonna do? Arrest us all?
We can all even agree to just be holding rods with no hooks, or jigs attached, just sinkers. Since we can be in the area, we can deny actually fishing. The rod is just a symbol of protest.

Maybe some TV news reports about this is just what we need.

And you know what, if we lose that area for fishing, they can f*^%$ take away the $57.00 2011 license I just bought, because it will about be worthless. I'll go albie fishing instead.

[mtnbykr2]

I personally would be all over this idea, no matter what, count me in, but I am in ventura so give me a heads up....

[Gino]

Originally Posted by bellcon

Friggen fraken FFFF....

I got one,
who said this->
Quote:
"We may not be able to do much about climate change in the near term but we can damn well control fishing better than we do now,"

all take note, that the most important word in that statement is "control"

[Iceman]

"Poaching" in a reserve, they can confiscate all your gear and your yak if they wanted to really come down hard.

[GregAndrew]

CurtyL, it is in there under Appendix A. Not real clear though because it is actually 2 MPAs, a reserve and a conservation area.

M1, in a reserve there is no take or disturbance of any kind allowed. In a conservation area 1 or more things may be allowed. Some examples of allowed activities in specific conservation areas are: recreational bait fishing, commercial bait fishing, sand replenishment, recreational fishing for pelagics only, harpooning billfish (no really!!).

TMan, I think that "open and transparent" has got to be is the biggest joke of all. Either that, or calling the idiots a "science advisory team". The top 2 of them stated at the last BRTF meeting that the WSB were on the decline at the beginning of this incredible year of fishing for them.

[dsafety]

I expect that there will be a lot of sifting and shifting that goes one before we have to raise the angry banner of defiance on this issue. First there will be the legal challenges. If we lose that battle, there will be issue of enforcement. Is an unenforced regulation really a regulation. The 55 mph speed limit comes to mind.

Politicians will come and go before this thing gets sorted out. We can help influence who is in power when things really come to a head. The next few years will be an important time to make sure that we all make intelligent and well informed choices when we visit the ballot box.

While I am disappointed that a corrupt commission that does not represent the will of the people has issued this bogus decree, I do not believe that it will survive the challenges that have been mounted against it.

If I am wrong, and this thing really becomes law, you will surely see me in the fleet of defiant fishers who test the will of those who will try to make these proposed regulations stick. If I were a betting man, I would put my money on our side.

Bob

[Hunters Pa]

Originally Posted by Iceman

"Poaching" in a reserve, they can confiscate all your gear and your yak if they wanted to really come down hard.

And whatever vehicle brought it there if they wait til you put as much as a hook back in your truck.

[dfroggy54]

Talked to two game wardens last night. Both think entire process is bull. Both seemed to be completely over it and not looking forward to it.

[Aaron&Julie]

Originally Posted by Iceman

"Poaching" in a reserve, they can confiscate all your gear and your yak if they wanted to really come down hard.

Well, we certainly wouldn't want our gear confiscated. But, without a hook on the line, is it fishing?
"But, officer, I'm just straightening out my line, which is why I only have a sinker on".
I don't know, just the possibility of losing La Jolla is frustrating. If we all did get together for one massive protest on the possible closed area, maybe we'd get TV coverage (especially if they're contacted). But, by
then it'd probably be too late to overturn the decision.
In the future, we might have to go to Rocky Point to get our yellows and whites

[Iceman]

In the future, we might have to go to Rocky Point to get our yellows and whites

They took that one too.

[PAL]

^They took Dume, not Rocky Pt.