Here is a story about how bad science and corruption helped create massive MPAs on the west coast. Notice how fishing is the only industry impacted by these closures.
http://www.theecoreport.com/green-blogs/area/usa/california/former-mlpa-initiative-science-co-chair-pleads-guilty-to-embezzlement-charge/
I don’t quite see a connection in the story between any “bad science” and MPA’s, only a story about some lawyer promoting MPA’s who, in an unrelated cause, was accused of embezzlement and burglary. Am I see it the wrong way?
Also, don’t forget the SAFMC port meeting Monday afternoon at Haddrells Point in West Ashley.
Sea Hunt 207CC,Yam 150
www.abfishcharters.com
Get there early for the port meeting. Probably going to be a full.house.
experience noun \ik-#712;spir–#601;n(t)s
-
the fact or state of having been affected by or gained knowledge through direct observation or participation
-
that thing you get just moments after you needed it.
Thanks for the question Beaufort Boy. Here is the part that makes me think the MPA science was bad.
"Many North Coast residents believe the charges against LeValley call into question the legitimacy of the ?science? used to close vast areas of the North Coast to fishing and gathering under the MLPA Initiative ? while doing nothing to stop pollution, fracking, oil drilling, wind and wave energy projects, military testing and all human impacts on the ocean other than fishing and gathering.
?I would like to know how the state of California is going to revise the science advice LeValley provided for the North Coast MLPA Initiative process, based on him filing false documents,? said Jim Martin, West Coast Regional Director of the Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA).
He suggested forming a ?truth and reconciliation commission? to unravel ?what really happened? in the MLPA Initiative.
MLPA Initiative science is ?incomplete and terminally flawed,? according to Tribes
The validity of the science employed by the MLPA Initiative Science Advisory Team under LeValley?s leadership becomes even more suspect when one considers that LeValley and the Team repeatedly and inexplicably refused to allow the Yurok Tribe to present their scientific studies regarding ?marine protected areas.?
The Tribe exposed the questionable science of the MLPA Initiative in a statement on June 6, 2012 that questioned the ?protection? provided in the so-called ?marine protected areas, showing how two species, Pacific eulachon and mussels would be ?summarily mismanaged.? (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/06/17/18715613.php)"
The science or lack thereof being used by the SAFMC for the proposed MPAs in RA17 is based on “fatally flawed data” and the highly suspect precautionary principal. I am actually a supporter of MPAs in a few small key spawning areas (4 square miles or less) as long as they are marked and monitored by data buoys. These MPAs should be offset with equal areas of new artificial reef habitat. A discussion w
Well- once again the turnout for the meeting from this website members and local fisherman in general was pathetic!!! There were some good voices there and it went well. Those who didn’t attend missed out.
It was a GREAT meeting, probably the best SAFMC event that I have attended.
Sea Hunt 207CC,Yam 150
www.abfishcharters.com
Thank you both for attending. Wish I could have made the trip. I plan on going to the NC port meetings. Could you guys provide a summary of what was discussed?