Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has placed the implementation of the Marine Life Protection Act as a centerpiece of his environmental policy. The MLPA mandates an "improved" network of marine protected areas - including no fishing zones in the ocean.

The Recreational Fishing Alliance has been active in the battle against all the proposals for broad-scale, arbitrary and blanket closures of our fishing grounds. As a grassroots political lobby protecting the public's recreational fishing opportunities, the RFA works with the California Department of Fish & Game and the Fish & Game Commission, the Pacific Fisheries Management Council, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Bureau of Land Management, the state legislatures, and politicians on Capitol Hill.

The MLPA is the most important issue facing California saltwater anglers today. We have many challenges and problems with our marine fisheries, but when the state implements no fishing zones, or "marine reserves," it is very unlikely that these areas will ever be re-opened to fishing. It's in our interest to participate in this process, and make sure that the impacts of the MLPA are minimized to take into account the economic engine provided by $2.5 billion in direct expenditures by California's marine anglers every year.

On October 23rd and 24th, I was invited to speak to the newly appointed Blue Ribbon Task Force for the MLPA in Sacramento. The panel is chaired by former Assemblyman Phil Isenberg, and consists of a balanced group of individuals who are known for their ability to assimilate a broad range of information and develop policy.

The Blue Ribbon panel made several remarks about the Governor's fast-tracking of the MLPA process, and openly questioned whether they had enough time to complete their mission to make recommendations for a Draft Master Plan Framework for consideration by the Fish & Game Commission by March 2005.

The RFA drafted a letter to the Blue Ribbon Task Force, and I assembled a briefing book of scientific papers that questioned the usefulness of MPAs in fishery management. This letter was signed by most of the Sportfishing organizations in California as well; including Coastside Fishing Club, United Anglers of California, Sportfishing Alliance of California, the Golden Gate Fishermen's Association and the Central California Fisheries Conservation Coalition.

Our letter focused on the unusual funding arrangement for the new MLPA process - the Packard Foundation and several other private charities have put up the money to hire staff at the DFG to finish the process. Thus, a widely-known proponent of marine reserves is funding the process, and the public perception among anglers is that the process is tainted. While such public-private partnerships are not new, and may be legal, the Governor got off to a bad start with the fishing public with this deal.

Our concerns turned to alarm by the conclusion of the two-day meeting of the Blue Ribbon Task Force. For most of the fishermen in attendance, both recreational and commercial, there was a sense that the cards were stacked against us from the beginning. While the meeting's purpose was to take input from the public on how to better include fishermen in the MLPA process, the meeting was lightly-attended.

The average fisherman may be completely unaware that the MLPA process has started up again, with immense consequences for the future. Imagine if the percentage - nearly 20% - of the area that was closed to all fishing around the Channel Islands was extended up the entire coastline, arbitrarily denying public fishing access to huge sections of the coast. While most commercial fishing occurs offshore, beyond the three-mile limit of state jurisdiction, recreational fishing will be disproportionately affected by nearshore closures.

Commercial fisheries like crab, salmon, and sea urchin will also be affected by MPAs in state waters. There was a consensus among the fisheries activists at the meetings that commercial and recreational organizations needed to pool their talents and resources to form a coalition to fight the more extremist MPA proposals, like the one from Steve Shumak of the Sea Otter Project, who said that "the state ought to consider closing down fifty-mile stretches of coastline, including ports."

Other environmental representatives didn't go that far, but I had to correct some of the misinformation they presented to the panel. In one case, Karen Garrison of the Natural Resources Defense Council was corrected by Chairman Isenberg when she claimed the only purpose of the MLPA was to "protect biodiversity." Isenberg pointed out that the MLPA listed several other goals and objectives for MPAs under the law.

In mid-November, Pete Halmay, a commercial sea urchin diver and representative, invited a number of interested recreational and commercial fishing organizations to a meeting in San Pedro to discuss a unified strategy for fishing groups on the MLPA. Sportfishing organizations were represented by Joel Greenberg RFA-SoCal Chair, who attended the meeting on behalf of the RFA, Bob Fletcher on behalf of SAC, Don Hanson for the Dana Wharf Sportfishing, and Tom Raftican of UASC - who declined to work with the coalition at the meeting.

At the meeting, it was decided that we would form the "California Fisheries Coalition" with the specific purpose of defending ourselves in the MLPA process. This historic coalition brings together fishing interests that are traditionally antagonistic - not only between sportfishing and commercial fishing sectors, but between commercial fishermen and processors, aquaculturalists and fishermen - and it presents a special challenge as well as a unique opportunity for communication.

The Coalition has decided to hire Al Petrovich, former marine division manager at the DFG, now retired, as a consultant to guide us through the stakeholder process. We also retained the services of Vern Gehring, veteran lobbyist, to work for our interests. It speaks volumes about the level of concern among fishing groups about the threat posed by the current fast-tracked implementation of the MLPA. We are making every effort to put aside our differences for the task of participating in this process.