|Re: Re: MLPA Update, BRTF guidance on proposed MPA's|
Posted by ken Kurtis on July 31, 2009 at 09:53:41:|
In Reply to: Re: MLPA Update, BRTF guidance on proposed MPA's posted by Sumit on July 31, 2009 at 06:34:00:
Sumit said: "The path forward had already been decided and all the comments were nothing more than a dog and pony show . . . or am I misinterpreting?"
I can't speak for Steve but I can speak as a member of the SIG (Statewide Interests Group) of the MLPAI and tell you that I think you're misinterpreting.
Don't forget that this process is now in what we call Round Three. That means there was ample opportunity in Rounds One and Two for people to voice opinions when things were in a more formative stage.
As the process wends on (and winds down), what you're generally doing is trying to narrow things down, find consensus, and narrow focus.
What I hear Steve saying is essentially is that if you are just now starting to pay attention to what's going on and intend to make comments and ask for changes, you're going to be fighting the inertia of a desire to reach a conclusion. It's not that you won't be listened to but, as with the Titanic, the time to give the order "Hard to port!!!" was early-on in the voyage, not as the iceberg was about to slice the hull open.
The SoCal version of the MLPA is going to affect more people than the previous two regions combined. For months now, people like Steve. myself, Kelly Sayce, the MLPA Initiative staff (who also post here), and others have been urging/encouraging/begging people to get involved. Our pleas have either fallen or largely deaf ears or simply not been effective, based on who we see showing up to speak at the various meetings.
I can tell you that one of the greatest frustrations we have heard in the SIG meetings (our job is to monitor the effectiveness and mechanics of the process) is the inability to get people outside of the standard interest groups (fishing, conservation, consumptive, non-consumptive) involved in this thing.
And what's going to happen (and this is also what Steve sort of alludes to) is that decisions will be made by the RSG, BRTF and DF&G will aprove, and then people will go, "Hey!! What's this??? No one asked ME what I thought!!!"
Well . . . we did. But a lot of people haven't been paying attention. As the saying goes, "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink."
If you want to be heard, my best advice - especially at this point - is to put it in writing and send it to MLPAComments@resources.ca.gov . Written comments are not restricted in length and they are distributed to all RSG and BRTF memembers as well as (I think) posted on the website. Written comments - especially ones that are WELL-written and focused on a single theme or point - will likely be better-received and heard that oral arguments.
You can certainly choose to go speak - and I would encourage you to do so in addition to written comments - but realize that you're going to be limited in time, perhaps to only a minute or so, and there will be dozens and dozens of others who will also want to speak.
But very few people take time time write. So written comments not only tend to stand out more but, since there's a hard copy, they have a life that extends beyond the time alloted for verbal comments.
|Optional Link URL:|
|Optional Link Title:|
|Optional Image URL:|
|Post Background Color:||White Black|
|Post Area Page Width:||Normal Full|
|You must type in the
scrambled text key to
This is required to
help prevent spam bots
from flooding this BBS.