Darrell Ticehurst/Fisheries Issues
.jpg)
MLPA Process Continues Its Biased Approach
Jun. 4 2009, 3:51 PM
Jun. 4 2009, 3:51 PM
PSO Leads Fight to Stop the Politics
I've been saying for some time now that the MLPA process is tainted by the RLFF funding source. Now they have gone out of their way to prove it.
I've been saying for some time now that the MLPA process is tainted by the RLFF funding source. Now they have gone out of their way to prove it.
The latest idiocy occurred as the Blue Ribbon task Force asked the Regional stakeholders to winnow the outstanding proposals to a manageable six. After much heartache and hours of negotiation the Regional Stakeholder Group held a vote and forwarded the six proposals they felt had the most merit. Good politics you might think. Get everyone in a room and have them hammer out a compromise that they can live with. But that isn’t how this process works.
When the six proposals were forwarded the proposal backed by the environmental groups representing the RLFF desires didn’t pass muster and was voted out. So the “I-Team”, composed of representatives appointed by the state(that is, funded by the RLFF) and led by executive Director Ken Wiseman, decided to ignore the RSG and to add back in the RLFF backed radically environmental proposal. Politics at its worst and so much for the “public private” funding joke that Secretary of Resources Chrisman keeps saying is so good for us.
So PSO has written a hard hitting three page letter documenting just how lame this process is and requesting that the controversial proposal, labeled External Proposal C, be tossed out and the RSG wishes to be respected. In addition, the letter goes on to say: “I-Team Executive Director Ken Wiseman and his staff have said numerous times that the goal of the RSG process is to develop proposals with wide cross-interest support, and that cross-interest collaboration means no one is thrilled with the result. This includes members of the “consumptive” community who are the only members of the RSG who are being asked to sacrifice anything due to this whole process.” In other words, and the PSO is right on with this, we anglers (the largest part of the consumptive community) are being asked to take it in the neck and make all of the compromises. When, just once, the environmental community has a vote go against it, there are strings pulled and the RLFF gets its funding justified and the rejected proposal reinistated. Bah!
It’s a clearly flawed process and I am beginning to think that we don’t have much to gain by participating. Now it looks like the PSO is getting worried that the process is too rigged to continue. In the letter they state: “Absent a response, the PSO will vigorously resist MLPA efforts until it can be proven that this process is truly science-based and well balanced, and that scientific monitoring and enforcement is adequately funded.” Given all of the time, effort, dedication, and expense the PSO has expended on behalf of us within the fishing community, for the PSO to come up with such a strong statement it is obvious that the whole process is completely off track. It is more apparent than ever that the current administration is married to the RLFF money. It looks to me that the legislature will have to step in, stop the process, and get back to the original intent of the bill when we can afford it.
When the six proposals were forwarded the proposal backed by the environmental groups representing the RLFF desires didn’t pass muster and was voted out. So the “I-Team”, composed of representatives appointed by the state(that is, funded by the RLFF) and led by executive Director Ken Wiseman, decided to ignore the RSG and to add back in the RLFF backed radically environmental proposal. Politics at its worst and so much for the “public private” funding joke that Secretary of Resources Chrisman keeps saying is so good for us.
So PSO has written a hard hitting three page letter documenting just how lame this process is and requesting that the controversial proposal, labeled External Proposal C, be tossed out and the RSG wishes to be respected. In addition, the letter goes on to say: “I-Team Executive Director Ken Wiseman and his staff have said numerous times that the goal of the RSG process is to develop proposals with wide cross-interest support, and that cross-interest collaboration means no one is thrilled with the result. This includes members of the “consumptive” community who are the only members of the RSG who are being asked to sacrifice anything due to this whole process.” In other words, and the PSO is right on with this, we anglers (the largest part of the consumptive community) are being asked to take it in the neck and make all of the compromises. When, just once, the environmental community has a vote go against it, there are strings pulled and the RLFF gets its funding justified and the rejected proposal reinistated. Bah!
It’s a clearly flawed process and I am beginning to think that we don’t have much to gain by participating. Now it looks like the PSO is getting worried that the process is too rigged to continue. In the letter they state: “Absent a response, the PSO will vigorously resist MLPA efforts until it can be proven that this process is truly science-based and well balanced, and that scientific monitoring and enforcement is adequately funded.” Given all of the time, effort, dedication, and expense the PSO has expended on behalf of us within the fishing community, for the PSO to come up with such a strong statement it is obvious that the whole process is completely off track. It is more apparent than ever that the current administration is married to the RLFF money. It looks to me that the legislature will have to step in, stop the process, and get back to the original intent of the bill when we can afford it.
Post a Comment
All comments are moderated by the administrators.All fields are required.
