Finaddict

MPA's Are Coming

7 posts in this topic

I agree with you this is not a joke. It makes me so mad:evil1:that this is happening.So if there is anyone out there that is not supporting what god gave us please do!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Packard Foundation contributed over $123 million over three years to the Monterey Bay Aquarium. And the Packard Foundation has contributed over $18 million to keeping the MLPA process afloat in California.

They are paying for the science that is closing the Calif coast and the state is letting them do it because they say the state doesn't have the money to do the scientific studies.

Fish and Game commissioner Michael Sutton is a corporate officer with the Monterey Bay Aquarium and has a "material financial conflict concerning the Marine Life Protection Act."

Sutton serves as corporate officer of the Monterey Bay Aquarium, and was paid $138,357 in 2006, plus $30,832 in employee benefits and deferred compensation.

Aquarium Trustee Margaret Caldwell who is a Blue Ribbon Task Force member, is also is conflicted or compromised because she's a member of the governing body of Sutton's employer, has influence over Sutton's direct financial interest and yet serves as an advisor to him on matters regarding the MLPA.

"The views of the Aquarium in actively supporting Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are widely known as the Aquarium is a vocal advocate for ocean closures through the imposition of MPAs," the document reads. "The Aquarium was actively engaged in lobbying for adoption of the Central Coast MPAs and currently is engaged in lobbying the Commission for the adoption of the Integrated Preferred Alternative (IPA) for the North Central Coast over all other alternatives presented to the Commission by the Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF), an advisory body to the Commission regarding the MLPA.

"Commissioner Sutton, as the Aquarium's Vice President and Director of the Center for Future of the Oceans has been equally vocal in his advocacy for the IPA. The public record of Commission meetings leaves no doubt that Commissioner Sutton advocates for ocean closures through imposition of MPAs and advocates for speedy adoption of regulations to implement the IPA for the North Central Coast. In fact, the Aquarium has posted on its website an electronic communication (Attachment B) asking the Commission to 'Please approve the IPA with no further cuts to protect California's North Central Coast . . .' One only needs to add one's name and address and click on the website to transmit this communication to the Commission."

The recreational fishermen are way out gunned by the Packard Foundation and they are coming to your neighborhood nextclear.gif

<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->__________________

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Morty this country is no longer of the free because it seems like to me more and more of our rights are being taken away from us the goverment and politicians have put this country in a mess where the taxpaying people have to pay for there screw ups they created our govenor here in Delaware wants to either cut 1500 jobs for state employees or cut our pay by 10 percent by wants to legalize sports gambling who in the h ll going to money to gamble with if the gover is already taken money from us this is all B.S. :BangHead:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear ya.:angryfire:

But if I'm gonna down, I'm going down swinging:icon_salut:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first thing sportsmen need to do is to stop voting for the party that keeps siding with Peta and the other envirowhacko fern fondlers who only seem concerned with the "rights" of the salt marsh mouse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the law that is going to require us to get salt water fishing licenses was supposed to protect the interests of recreational fishermen! Isn't that what they told us last year? Who is looking out for us? I know I stimulate the economy with all of the tackle, bait, etc I buy when I fish. Do they realize the economic implications of this type of plan? We need a fishing equilvalent of the NRA. I don't think RFA and IGFA have the capital to fight this kind of stuff. The tackle industry (Penn, Shimano, etc...) need to step up and start fighting with us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lic. was to be imposed for better studies for MNFS and NOAA by rec. anglers. IMO, this was another way to tax the fishermen. Having said that, we really had no choice. A fed lic. is to be instituted by 2011. Monies generated from the fed. lic. would have went to the US Treasury.

Some states oppted to insitiute thier own GFL. Those states that did so, got a $3 to $1 fed match money to be spent on LOCAL resources. This was a no brainer IMO. That is where the FIN also came from, to comply with the MSA signed in 2007.

I don't remember ever hearing about the lic protecting our rights, but I wish it would.

I agree with you about major corperate sponsor to fight the eco-terrorists. :happy7:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now