1
CA Regulations / Email F&G Commission to oppose MPA expansion petitions
« on: February 02, 2024, 09:12:06 AM »
Now is your chance to email the F&G Commission to oppose several of the MPA decadal review petitions. You have until February 9 to ensure that the Commissioners have a chance to read your letter prior to the February 14/15 meeting.
Petitions (any of those ending in MPA, e.g. 2023-23MPA):
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=201924&inline
Email: fgc@fgc.ca.gov
Email format:
1. State your name, area of residence and whom representing.
2. State your major points first.
3. Briefly support major points with factual data, rationale, and/or logic.
4. Conclude with a brief summary of your major points.
Particularly bad petitions relevant to norcal/socal kayak, most important in bold IMO:
2023-23MPA: This petition will effectively ban fishing and spearfishing from the entire north side of the Monterey Peninsula by converting existing SMCAs to no-take SMRs. These SMCAs provide important nearshore opportunities for various consumptive stakeholders. The petitioner, as he attempted in a prior petition rejected by FGC (petition 2023-02), incorrectly claims eliminating finfish take will benefit kelp. This petition is not grounded in scientific reasoning or sound fisheries management and should be rejected.
2023-24MPA: This petition will effectively ban fishing, spearfishing, and all other take in the entirety of Laguna Beach. The petitioner cites ease of enforcement and anecdotal overharvesting and substrate degradation as rationale. This is unfair to consumptive stakeholders, essentially saying "it is too hard for city enforcement to learn the different regulations between different areas, so we want to impose a blanket ban on all consumptive stakeholders rather than addressing the root problem of educating the public." Lazy.
2023-26MPA: This petition aims to protect intertidal habitat and simplify enforcement but will effectively ban lobster diving from the productive reef at the southern end of Cardiff State Beach. This petition should be rejected and the petitioner advised to propose a smaller, intertidal-take-specific MPA in its place if that truly is the concern.
2023-29MPA: This petition will effectively ban all take off Carpinteria in Santa Barbara County. This is a popular and important nearshore access opportunity for low impact recreation like lobster diving, which is limited to shallow reefs like those found here.
2023-32MPA: This petition will severely limit shore angling opportunities and some kayak opportunity off the Marin coastline by expanding Duxbury Reef SMCA outward and northward and converting to SMR for easier enforcement.
2023-33MPA: This petition will severely limit consumptive stakeholder opportunities in several important kelp forests in Southern and Central California. It is inappropriate for a single petition to propose changes to seven unrelated areas; this petition should be split into seven distinct petitions to weigh stakeholder input for each specific area. The petition cites warm water events and pollution as threats to kelp forests, yet expanding MPA areas do nothing to mitigate these threats. Particularly:
Petitions (any of those ending in MPA, e.g. 2023-23MPA):
https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=201924&inline
Email: fgc@fgc.ca.gov
Email format:
1. State your name, area of residence and whom representing.
2. State your major points first.
3. Briefly support major points with factual data, rationale, and/or logic.
4. Conclude with a brief summary of your major points.
Particularly bad petitions relevant to norcal/socal kayak, most important in bold IMO:
2023-23MPA: This petition will effectively ban fishing and spearfishing from the entire north side of the Monterey Peninsula by converting existing SMCAs to no-take SMRs. These SMCAs provide important nearshore opportunities for various consumptive stakeholders. The petitioner, as he attempted in a prior petition rejected by FGC (petition 2023-02), incorrectly claims eliminating finfish take will benefit kelp. This petition is not grounded in scientific reasoning or sound fisheries management and should be rejected.
2023-24MPA: This petition will effectively ban fishing, spearfishing, and all other take in the entirety of Laguna Beach. The petitioner cites ease of enforcement and anecdotal overharvesting and substrate degradation as rationale. This is unfair to consumptive stakeholders, essentially saying "it is too hard for city enforcement to learn the different regulations between different areas, so we want to impose a blanket ban on all consumptive stakeholders rather than addressing the root problem of educating the public." Lazy.
2023-26MPA: This petition aims to protect intertidal habitat and simplify enforcement but will effectively ban lobster diving from the productive reef at the southern end of Cardiff State Beach. This petition should be rejected and the petitioner advised to propose a smaller, intertidal-take-specific MPA in its place if that truly is the concern.
2023-29MPA: This petition will effectively ban all take off Carpinteria in Santa Barbara County. This is a popular and important nearshore access opportunity for low impact recreation like lobster diving, which is limited to shallow reefs like those found here.
2023-32MPA: This petition will severely limit shore angling opportunities and some kayak opportunity off the Marin coastline by expanding Duxbury Reef SMCA outward and northward and converting to SMR for easier enforcement.
2023-33MPA: This petition will severely limit consumptive stakeholder opportunities in several important kelp forests in Southern and Central California. It is inappropriate for a single petition to propose changes to seven unrelated areas; this petition should be split into seven distinct petitions to weigh stakeholder input for each specific area. The petition cites warm water events and pollution as threats to kelp forests, yet expanding MPA areas do nothing to mitigate these threats. Particularly:
- Expanding Natural Bridges SMR (and intertidal-focused MPA) to 3nm offshore will eliminate large swaths of groundfish and salmon opportunity from anglers, completely unrelated to the inshore kelp.
- Designating the Pleasure Point SMR as proposed will result in divers and anglers losing access to important inshore reefs and kelp in eastern Santa Cruz County.