danbacher by Dan Bacher
Watergate’s “Deep Throat,” Mark Felt, advised investigative reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein to “follow the money” to uncover the truth behind the Watergate scandal.
Nils E. Stolpe, a muck raking journalist, has done just that. Stolpe asks the hard-question: How many millions of dollars are environmental non governmental organizations (ENGOs) receiving from corporate-funded foundations in their drive to take over NMFS and NOAA, to run fishermen’s lives and to destroy fishing communities that have been viable for generations?
A new website - http://www.fishtruth.net - will give you some idea. “The odds are that unless you’re a foundation/ENGO insider, you’ll be staggered by the answer,” said Stolpe. “Hundreds of millions of dollars just barely cover it.”
“These so-called grass roots organizations have roots that appear to go in only one direction – towards the board rooms of a handful of multi-billion dollar ‘charitable’ foundations,” he emphasized.
“Just as it was important in the Watergate investigations, following the money is also important in determining who is doing what and why in fisheries management and where the impetus for a management ‘revolution’ is coming from,” noted Stolpe. “In order to help untangle what seems to be an overly tangled web, I’m putting together information on the mega-foundations behind the anti-fishing juggernaut and the individuals and organizations that are most heavily involved.”
The above link will take you to the introduction page. From it you can get to the database of granters, grantees, years of the grants and (except for the Walton Foundation, which omits this information on their website) the purpose of the grants.
The “Connections” link in the middle of the page will take you to a web page on which Stolpe has started to list the involved foundations, the involved organizations, the involved individuals and anything else that “fits into this tangled and incestuous web.” He notes that this project is “far from complete and will continue to be a work in progress as long as it’s there”
“The calculations that are now possible provide a perspective of the fishing-related funding of these foundations – and the ENGOs that depend on them – that beg to be shared,” he stated.
For example, in 2008, the ‘Big Four’ foundations poured over $70 million into the ENGO treasuries. These foundations are the Pew Trusts (Sunoco Oil Company), the Walton Foundation (Walmart), the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation (Intel Corporation) and the David and Lucille Packard Foundation (Hewlitt-Packard Corporation).
I can very much relate to Stolpe’s research. Environmental politics in California have become severely corrupted by all of the corporate money that flows from Hewlett Packard, Intel, Getty Oil and the Bechtel Corporation into foundations. The corporations’ agenda for putting so much money into big NGOs is to coopt, corrupt and eviscerate what passes for “environmentalism” in California today, not to “save” fish populations.
The shadowy Resources Legacy Foundation, a “money laundering operation” for corporations according to North Coast environmental leader John Lewallen, is the prime example. This private corporation funds Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s corrupt Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative, a process rife with conflicts of interests, corruption and institutional elitism and racism.
The Packard Foundation has contributed $8.2 million to fund MLPA hearings through the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, while the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation has donated $7.4 million to the widely-contested process. The Laguna Beach-based Marisla Foundation, founded by Getty Oil heiress Anne Getty Earhart, gave another $3 million.
The Keith Campbell Foundation’s contributed $1.2 million to the MLPA Initiative through the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation. Finally, the Annenberg Foundation contributed $200,000 ( (http://www.lbindy.com/2011/02/11/marine-hearings-buoyed-by-nonprofits/).
It is very important to note that organizations that do good work on behalf of recreational anglers, commercial fishermen and Indian Tribes such as Earthjustice, Save Our Wild Salmon and the Institute for Fisheries Resources also receive money from the big foundations, as you can see from the information on this site. However, the big corporate environmental groups that support the MLPA Initiative, catch shares program and the peripheral canal – all attempts by corporate interests to privatize the public trust – definitely receive the overwhelming bulk of foundation funds.
Stolpe added, in reference to the reliance of ENGOs on corporate money to support ocean privatization efforts such as catch shares, “No wonder none of them will admit that our domestic fisheries are in really good shape and getting better. How would they replace those tens of millions of bucks that come rolling in every year like clockwork if they didn’t have a fisheries crisis to fix?”
I agree with Stolpe that many fish populations are rebounding. Rockfish and lingcod populations on the West Coast, after being hit hard by an over-capitalized commercial fleet encouraged by federal government low-interest loans, are definitely on the rebound, due to the most stringent fishing restrictions of any place on the planet.
Unfortunately, Central Valley salmon and Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta pelagic (open water) species have declined dramatically in recent years. Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations have collapsed because of record water exports from the Delta and declining water quality, not because of fishing. A total 798,770 adult chinooks, including 94,223 hatchery fish and 704,547 natural spawners, returned to the Sacramento River and its tributaries to spawn in 2002.
The Sacramento River fall chinook run, the driver of West Coast salmon fisheries, declined from 798,770 adult chinooks in 2002 to only 39,530 fish in 2009. The unprecedented collapse prompted the federal and state governments to close recreational and commercial salmon fishing off the California and southern Oregon coast in 2008 and 2009. This closure caused economic devastation to coastal communities already besieged by the housing market crash and high unemployment levels.
Due to improved ocean salmon numbers, a severely restrictive commercial season and short recreational opened in 2010.
The National Marine Fisheries Service forecasts an ocean abundance of 729, 893 Sacramento fall chinooks this year, based on modeling derived from a 2010 jack (two-year-old) salmon escapement to Central Valley rivers in 2010. Due to the increased salmon abundance, recreational and commercial fishermen are likely to see more liberal salmon season seasons.
At the same time, the Sacramento adult winter chinook population, an endangered species, plummeted to only 1,596 fish in 2010. To preserve this fragile population, the seasons will have to be crafted around avoiding impacts upon the winter run. Federal biologists recommended that be done through either raising the recreational size limit to 24 inches or reducing the length of the season – or a combination of both.
As we watch corporate-funded ENGOs campaign to privatize the public trust through catch shares and fake “marine protected area” programs, Stolpe’s site will be invaluable to journalists, activists and members of public desiring to “follow the money” behind corporate “environmentalism.” I applaud Stolpe for setting up http://www.fishtruth.net.
danbacher Media Advisory: February 26, 2011
Contact: Sacramento Action for Latin America (SALA), 916-457-5018 or caac2 [at] copper.net
Ben Dangl to discuss Dancing with Dynamite, a new book about Latin American social movements
Award-winning journalist Ben Dangl discusses his new book, Dancing with Dynamite, on the dynamics between social movements and progressive governments in Latin America at the Southside Park Co-housing Common House, 434 T St. Sacramento, on Monday, March 7 at 7 pm. Eric Vega, Chicano community activist, will introduce the speaker.
In the past decade, grassroots social movements played major roles in electing left-leaning governments throughout Latin America, but subsequent relations between the streets and the states remain uneasy. In Dancing with Dynamite, award-winning journalist Benjamin Dangl explores the complex ways these movements have worked with, against, and independently of national governments. From dynamite-wielding miners in Bolivia to the struggles of landless farmers in Brazil and Paraguay, Dangl discusses the dance between movements and states in seven different Latin American countries. Using original research, lively prose, and extensive interviews with workers, farmers, and politicians, he suggests how Latin American social movement strategies could be applied internationally to build a better world now.
Benjamin Dangl has worked as a journalist throughout Latin America for the Guardian Unlimited, The Nation, and the NACLA Report on the Americas. He is the author of The Price of Fire: Resource Wars and Social Movements in Bolivia, the editor of TowardFreedom.com, a progressive perspective on world events and UpsideDownWorld.org, a website on activism and politics in Latin America. He teaches South American history and globalization at Burlington College. Email: Bendangl(at)gmail(dot)com.
The event is sponsored by the Sacramento Action for Latin America (SALA), formerly the Central America Action Committee (CAAC). For more information, contact: 916-457-5018 or caac2 [at] copper.net
“Ben Dangl breaks the sound barrier, exploding many myths about Latin America that are all-too-often amplified by the corporate media in the United States. Read this much-needed book.”—Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now!
“Dancing with Dynamite dares to navigate the cloudy waters of Latin American social movements in the wake of the neoliberal wave, something which increasingly fewer thinkers and activists dare to do, but which turns out to be urgent.”—Raúl Zibechi, Uruguayan journalist and author of Dispersing Power: Social Movements as Anti-State Forces
“Dangl brings complicated politics to life by infusing them with the magic, mystery and unbridled joy that invigorate social movements and permeate Latin American life in general.”—Kari Lydersen, author of Revolt on Goose Island: The Chicago Factory Takeover and What it Says About the Economic Crisis.
danbacher Every year the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) holds a meeting regarding California salmon stocks and the upcoming salmon fishing seasons – and this year is no exception.
The DFG’s 2011 Salmon Information Meeting (DFG) will be held March 1 from 11 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. at the Sonoma County Water Agency Building located at 404 Aviation Boulevard in Santa Rosa. The public is invited to testify at this meeting about California salmon populations and the 2011 ocean and river salmon fisheries.
“The rebound of Sacramento River fall Chinook salmon in 2010 has sparked intense public interest in the possibility of less restrictive salmon seasons this year,” according to a DFG news release. “Preliminary data indicates approximately 125,300 adult fall Chinook and 27,500 jacks (two-year-old fish) returned to the Sacramento River Basin.”
In 2009, the returns of adult Sacramento River fall Chinook salmon were an all time low of approximately 39,500 and all salmon seasons were closed. Limited recreational and commercial fishing seasons were allowed in 2010.
“Salmon biologists and managers will provide the latest information on California salmon escapement in 2010 and the outlook for ocean and river Chinook fisheries in the coming 2011 season, including the possibility of an April 2 opener for sport fisheries south of Horse Mountain,” according to the DFG. “They will discuss data that shows, for the first time since 2003, that Sacramento and Klamath rivers fall Chinook salmon stocks both exceeded their minimum spawner goals of 122,000 and 35,000 adults, respectively. In 2010, more than 37,200 Klamath River fall Chinook adults returned to spawn in natural areas.”
The 125,300 Sacramento River adult fall chinooks included 43,360 fish that returned to the hatcheries and 89,654 salmon that spawned in Central Valley rivers. The 27,500 jacks included 15,482 hatchery fish and 14,699 river spawners.
This is an improvement over the 2009 and 2010 record low years, but still nowhere near normal for the river that has historically been the driver for West Coast salmon fisheries. The 10 year (1997-2006) pre-disaster return averaged roughly 475,000 fish. A total 798,770 adult chinooks, including 94,223 hatchery fish and 704,547 natural spawners, returned to the Sacramento River and its tributaries to spawn in 2002.
A California salmon management panel will hear public comment and testimony. The panel is comprised of individuals directly involved in the upcoming Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) meetings in March and April. The panel includes members of the PFMC, Salmon Technical Team and Salmon Advisory Subgroup.
The input from this meeting will help California representatives negotiate a broad range of season alternatives at the PFMC meeting March 5-10 in Vancouver, Wash. Salmon fishing seasons are developed through a collaborative regulatory process involving the Fish and Game Commission, the PFMC and the National Marine Fisheries Service.
More information on west coast salmon returns and ocean fisheries can be found online in the PFMC’s “Review of the 2010 Ocean Salmon Fisheries” athttp://www.pcouncil.org/salmon/stock-assessment-and-fishery-evaluation-safe-documents/review-of-2010-ocean-salmon-fisheries/.
The March 1 meeting marks the beginning of a two month long management process used to establish ocean and river salmon seasons. A list of additional meetings to be held throughout the season setting process can be found on DFG’s website at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/oceansalmon.asp
For more information, call James Phillips, Marine Biologist, (707) 576-2375, or Harry Morse, DFG Communications, (916) 322-8962.
While state and federal government representatives claim that the unprecedented Central Valley salmon collapse resulted from “poor ocean conditions,” representatives of fishing groups, Indian Tribes and environmental organizations point to record water exports out of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and decreasing water quality as the key factors behind the collapse.
Meanwhile, the Brown and Obama administrations are pushing for the construction of an environmentally destructive and enormously costly peripheral canal to export more Delta water to corporate agribusiness and southern California. Delta advocates fear that the construction of a peripheral canal/tunnel will lead to the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green sturgeon, Sacramento splittail and other species.
danbacher Photo: The open sewer New River runs past many low-income homes in Calexico, CA. Photo courtesy of the Environmental Justice Coalition for Water.
dscf0213.jpg
by Dan Bacher
Sacramento, CA – Legislators, safe water advocates, and residents of California communities without access to safe drinking water will gather for a press conference this Monday, February 28, at 2 pm on the North Steps of State Capitol to announce the introduction of the Human Right to Water bill package.
Speakers will include Assembly Member Mike Eng, Assembly Member Paul Fong, Assembly Member V. Manuel Pérez, United Nations Independent Expert on the Human Right to Water, Catarina de Albuquerque, community advocates, and affected community members.
“The six-bill package includes AB 685 (Eng), which would make it a policy of the state that every Californian has a human right to clean, accessible water for basic human needs,” said Debbie Davis, policy director of the Environmental Justice Coalition for Water. “The five additional bills make changes in state law to begin implementing the human right to water policy and promote access to safe water for the health and well-being of all Californians.”
More than 11.5 million Californians rely on water from suppliers that experienced at least one violation of State Drinking Water Standards as reported to the Department of Public Health in 2004, according to Davis. As many as 8.5 million Californians rely on supplies that experienced more than five instances of unsafe levels in a single year.
“In far too many communities, the sole water supply is contaminated, and families unable to afford treatment are left entirely without safe water,” stated Davis. “In the Central Valley and Central Coast regions, more than 90% of communities depend on groundwater for drinking while nitrate levels in groundwater are sometimes well above safe limits. These communities are at particular risk of adverse health impacts from contaminated water supplies.”
The Human Right to Water Bill Package includes the following bills: AB 685 (Eng) Human Right to Water; AB 938 (V.M. Perez) Language Access on Public Health Notifications; AB 983 (Perea) Access to Clean Up and Abatement Funding; AB 1187 (Fong) Drinking Water Plan; AB 1221 (Alejo) Drinking Water SRF; and SB 244 (Wolk) General Plans.
“The Human Right to Water bill, AB 1242 (Ruskin), passed the Legislature and was vetoed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2009,” said Davis. “We are hopeful that with Brown’s experience on California water issues, we’ll have a different outcome this year.”
The Environmental Justice Coalition for Water is a network of more than fifty grassroots and intermediary organizations. EJCW works to empower community members to become strong voices for water justice in their communities. The priorities of the member organizations range from indigenous sovereignty to immigrant rights.
For more information, contact: Debbie Davis, Environmental Justice Coalition for Water, (916) 743-4406, http://www.ejcw.org.
danbacher “When Californians voted down Governor Brown’s proposed peripheral canal 30 years ago, they decided that the safeguards included in that package were not strong enough to protect this valuable and irreplaceable resource,” said Senator Lois Wolk (D-Davis), an outspoken advocate for the protection of the Delta’s environment, economy, and communities.
delta_stewardship_council…
by Dan Bacher
Two Delta legislators, Senator Lois Wolk (D-Davis) and Assemblyman Bill Berryhill (R-Ceres), have introduced legislation to ensure that the imperiled Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta is protected from potential conveyance projects to export water to San Joaquin Valley agribusiness and southern California.
Wolk’s legislation, coauthored by Berryhill, establishes specific criteria and assurances that will enable the state to meet its “co-equal goals” for the Delta as established by a package of laws, enacted in November 2009, that canal opponents criticized for creating a “clear path” to the construction of the peripheral canal.
“Those goals are to provide a more reliable water supply for California—and to protect, restore, and enhance the Delta ecosystem,” according to a news release from Wolk’s office. “By law, these goals must be achieved in a manner that protects and enhances the unique cultural, recreational, natural resource, and agricultural values of the Delta as an evolving place.”
In 1980 during his second term as Governor, Jerry Brown negotiated the legislative package that included several important protections for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, according to Wolk. Thirty years later, Wolk and Berryhill are revisiting Brown’s proposed safeguards for the Delta “as a means of protecting the region from future attempts to siphon off its water.”
“When Californians voted down Governor Brown’s proposed peripheral canal 30 years ago, they decided that the safeguards included in that package were not strong enough to protect this valuable and irreplaceable resource,” said Senator Wolk, an outspoken advocate for the protection of the Delta’s environment, economy, and communities.
“Now, a new canal or tunnel is being proposed with even weaker protections for the Delta then were promised before,” Wolk explained. “Our legislation ensures that, at a bare minimum, if a new facility is built, critical guarantees are written into State law to provide real, enforceable protections for the Delta ecosystem and the Delta communities, while also enhancing water reliability statewide.”
Wolk’s Senate Bill 200 would provide unequivocal commitments to maintain water quality within the Delta in order to support vital Delta agriculture, recreation, and drinking water. Additionally, the bill would ensure that communities within the Delta have access to adequate water supplies—and would encourage the development of alternative water supplies in regions that rely on imported Delta water, and improvements in the efficiency of the State and Federal projects within the Delta.
The bill, supported by the Delta Counties Coalition, would also:
• Require planning, specific operational criteria, and other measures that contribute to the recovery of Delta fish species and protect beneficial uses of water within the Delta to be in place prior to construction of any new water conveyance infrastructure in the Delta.
• Establish enforceable water flows and reductions in Delta water exports to protect water quality and other environmental conditions in the Delta, the Suisun Marsh, and the San Francisco Bay.
One provision would authorize the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) to administer a study to “determine the interrelationship between Delta outflow and fish and wildlife resources in the San Francisco Bay System and waste discharges into the San Francisco Bay system.” For decades, federal and state officials have avoided studying this complex relationship that is essential for understanding the decline of Central Valley salmon and Delta pelagic (open water) fish species.
The bill would also require the Department of Water Resources to study the possible interconnection between the State Water Resources Development System and water supply systems serving the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San Joaquin, and San Mateo, and the City and County of San Francisco.
Dante Nomellini, a Stockton attorney and veteran of the battle against the peripheral canal in the previous Brown administration, hasn’t reviewed the specific language of the current legislation, although he is familiar with the language of the original SB 200. He did emphasize that any protections can be overridden once the peripheral canal/tunnel is in place.
“All of these protections can be circumvented through the use of emergency powers both at the state and federal level,” said Nomellini. “An isolated conveyance system, once in place, will take the water and destroy the Bay Delta ecosystem.”
He also noted that the House of Representatives has passed a Continuing Resolution Bill that has stripped funding to protect Central Valley salmon under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This legislation would prevent the National Marine Fisheries Service from enforcing the biological opinions that protect the Central Valley salmon and steelhead from extinction, letting Delta export pumping go back to maximum levels.
“We think the intentions of the Senator and Assemblyman in sponsoring the legislation are good,” commented Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, campaign director of Restore the Delta. “We look forward to Delta leaders working with them to strengthen the bill.”
Barrigan-Parrilla added that Delta advocates need to work for the passage of an amendment to the State Constitution to protect flows in rivers and recognize that water is a public trust resource.
Senate Bill 200 has been introduced at a time when the Delta ecosystem is in its biggest crisis ever. Central Valley salmon and Delta pelagic (open water) fish populations have collapsed to record low levels, due to increased water exports and declining water quality in recent years. Fishermen, members of Indian Tribes, environmentalists, family farmers and Delta residents fear that the construction of a peripheral canal/tunnel would lead to the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail, southern green sturgeon, southern resident killer whales and other species.
The Brown administration, like the Schwarzegger administration that preceded it, supports the construction of a peripheral canal/tunnel. The Obama administration has also officially endorsed the peripheral canal, being the first federal administration to do so. Even the G.W. Bush administration didn’t endorse the canal’s construction.
Wolk said she will also be introducing legislation this session intended to reduce reliance on water from the Delta, as well as another bill to reform water financing in California to make it “more efficient, transparent, and effective.”
For more information about SB 200, call Craig Reynolds, Senator Wolk’s Office, 916-651-4005.
danbacher John Lewallen, a prominent North Coast environmentalist and co-founder of the Ocean Protection Coalition and the Seaweed Rebellion, applauds the lawsuit by United Anglers of Southern California, the Coastside Fishing Club, and Robert C. Fletcher against the corrupt Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative. Unlike some corporate “environmental” NGO leaders who support greenwashing under Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s fast-track MLPA process, Lewallen sees the MLPA for what it truly is – a resource grab by corporate interests.
“All the new Marine Protected Areas in Southern California and the North Central Coast are null, void and unenforceable, because they were created by an illegal and corrupt Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) process,” emphasizes Lewallen.
Please circulate this excellent article widely!
mlpa2.jpg
by John Lewallen
All the new Marine Protected Areas in Southern California and the North Central Coast are null, void and unenforceable, because they were created by an illegal and corrupt Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) process.
In a 55-page petition filed January 27 in San Diego Superior Court, United Anglers of Southern California, the Coastside Fishing Club, and Robert C. Fletcher ask that the works of the MLPA be nullified because they were created without legal authority by a process which did not follow state law.
The defendant in this lawsuit is the California Fish and Game Commission. The petition states that the privatized MLPA process, directed by the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, did not follow the requirements of the 1999 Marine Life Protection Act. No final Master Plan for the state has been approved by the commission, as required by the Act before the creation of any new Marine Protected Areas.
Moreover, states a lawsuit press release, “The privately-funded ‘MLPA Initiative’ process has been conducted in a manner inconsistent with the process the state legislature directed in the MLPA, and meetings held by MLPA planning groups that should have been open meetings were closed to the public.”
Also, according to the petition, the MLPA process violated the California Environmental Quality Act, did not apply for a required Coastal Commission permit, and there was no required review of its works by the State Interagency Coordinating Committee.
“From the outset, it was clear that the MLPA process was set up to reach a predetermined outcome under the fiction of an allegedly open and transparent process,” said plaintiff Robert C. Fletcher. “In a rush to establish regulations based on political timelines and a pre-determined agenda, the Fish and Game Commission has ignored the legal requirements it must follow.”
Every Californian has a vital interest in the outcome of this landmark lawsuit challenging the legitimacy of government process run by private foundations in violation of state laws. Information on the lawsuit is on the website: http://www.oceanaccessprotectionfund.org; the plaintiffs’ phone number is (562)494-9900.
For more information, call John Lewallen, Philo, California , (707)895-2996.
danbacher | Representative Devin Nunes (R-Visalia), a fanatical supporter of the war on salmon and salmon fishing communities by the Corporate Welfare Queens of San Joaquin Valley agribusiness, has inserted amendments into the Continuing Resolution Bill to defund restoration efforts for Sacramento and San Joaquin River salmon. The House of Representatives passed the bill with these amendments on February 19.Please act now to ensure that these salmon killing provisions are eliminated in the bill in the Senate version. Please forward this action alert to everybody that you know!
Dan To: California Salmon Supporters From: The Recreational and Commercial Salmon Coalition Dear Salmon Supporter: Once again our Central Valley salmon need your help. On Saturday February 19th the House of Representatives passed a Continuing Resolution Bill which is needed to keep the Federal Government running after March 4th 2011. The bill included two fatal amendments for Central Valley salmon. The first stops the activities of the National Marine Fisheries Service in enforcing the biological The second takes away the funding from the San Joaquin River Restoration project. The amendments were inserted into the bill by Representative Devin Nunes of Visalia and were supported by the Republican majority. Our salmon supporters in the House fought hard against the amendments but were overruled in the vote. We now need to get the amendments out of the bill in the Senate. Our political advisors suggest we try to get hundreds of letters telling of our plight to go to our two Senators and to the involved agencies. The following procedure gives you an easy way to write a letter. The letter is addressed and formatted. Please do your part to ensure that these salmon killing provisions are eliminated in the bill in the Senate version. Instructions for Sending Letters Opposing the Salmon Riders in the House Continuing Resolution Bill We suggest you start with the letter to Senator Feinstein. It includes copies to the key agencies. Call up the letter and then fill in your personal comments. The objective is to demonstrate the personal and business hardships fishermen and the salmon industry has endured. When you are done please fax the letters to the Legislators and then be sure to include the other leaders copied. They will use our stories to help. A fax list is included below. A fax is better for members of congress. Mailed letters have to go through the security procedure and sometimes take weeks. If you want addresses, go back to “Send letters to Legislators” and click on “Addresses for Continuing Resolution Letters” in the blue.. For questions or help call or email Dick Pool (925) 963 6350 rbpool [at] protroll.com Thanks for your help. Dick Pool, Water4Fish Fax Numbers |
danbacher by Dan Bacher
In a groundbreaking investigative piece in the Laguna Beach Independent on February 11, Ted Reckas exposed the private money that is behind the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative, a widely-contested program to create a network of “marine protected areas” on the California coast.
“Five non-profits, including one based in Laguna Beach, donated a total of $20 million to see the drafting process to completion since the state legislature never budgeted adequate funding for the marine-protection law, which was enacted in 1999,” according to Reckas in his article, “Marine Hearings Buoyed by Nonprofits.” (http://www.lbindy.com/2011/02/11/marine-hearings-buoyed-by-nonprofits/)
The Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, a shadowy organization that North Coast environmental leader John Lewallen describes as a “money laundering operation” for corporate money, received the funds from these foundations to implement the unpopular MLPA process.
The David and Lucillle Packard Foundation contributed $8.2 million to fund MLPA hearings, according to Reckas. The Packard Foundation is not only the biggest funder of the MLPA, but also funded studies to build the peripheral canal, including the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) report in July 2008 calling for the construction of a canal. The peripheral canal is opposed by a coalition of fishermen, environmentalists, Indian Tribes, family farmers and Delta residents.
Julie E. Packard, the executive director and founder of the Monterey Bay Aquarium, serves as Vice Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the foundation. Carol S. Larson is the President and Chief Executive Officer, while Susan Packard Orr serves as Chairman.
The Laguna Beach-based Marisla Foundation, founded by Getty Oil heiress Anne Getty Earhart, gave another $3 million over several years, according to the Resources Legacy Fund Foundation. “The most recent tax records show Marisla donated $12 million in 2008 to 50 causes, including $1.1 million towards the MLPA. A foundation spokeswoman declined comment,” noted Reckas.
The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation donated $7.4 million. Gordon and Betty Moore are the founders of the Foundation, and Gordon also serves as chairman of the board. Gordon Moore is co-founder of Intel Corporation and Chairman Emeritus of the Corporation’s Board of Directors. Prior to Intel, Gordon co-founded Fairchild Semiconductor in 1957.
The Keith Campbell Foundation’s contributed $1.2 million. D. Keith Campbell founded Campbell and Company in 1972, and currently serves as Chairman of its Board of Directors.
“Campbell and Company is now one of the largest derivative investment managers in the world. Headquartered in Baltimore, Maryland, it employs more than 130 skilled professionals, and manages approximately thirteen billion dollars. Its worldwide client base includes institutions, corporation, and individuals,” according to the foundation’s website.
Finally, the Annenberg Foundation contributed $200,000. The Annenberg Foundation is a private foundation established in 1989. It is the successor corporation to the Annenberg School at Radnor, Pennsylvania founded in 1958 by Walter H. Annenberg.
Fishermen, seaweed harvesters and grassroots environmentalists contend that the MLPA process was rigged from the start and that funding a public process with private funding is a huge conflict of interest.
MLPA critics, including fishermen, environmentalists and Indian Tribal members, have charged the initiative with corruption, conflicts of interest and institutional racism since Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger privatized the initiative in 2004 by directing the Department of Fish and Game to sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Resources Legacy Fund Foundation.
The MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Forces that implement the law are dominated by oil industry, real estate, marina development and other corporate interests. Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the president of the Western States Petroleum Association, served as chair of the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force for the South Coast and on the task forces for the North Central Coast and North Coast.
MLPA opponents also slam the MLPA process for setting up marine protected areas that fail to protect the ocean from water pollution, oil spills and drilling, military testing, wave energy projects, corporate aquaculture and all other uses of the ocean other than fishing and gathering.
Until June 2010, the initiative made no provisions whatsoever to protect Tribal gathering rights. No Tribal representatives were appointed to the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force until 2010 and no Tribal scientists have ever been appointed to the MLPA Science Advisory Team, in spite of the fact that the Yurok and other Tribes have large natural resources departments that employ numerous scientists.
MLPA officials contend that the private funding of a public process is “good public policy.”
“They wanted the law implemented and were willing to put up $20 million to ensure that we had a public process and everyone was heard. That’s good public policy,” Ken Wiseman, executive director of the MLPA Initiative, told Reckas.
However, Wiseman’s claim that private funding of the MLPA is “good public policy” is countered by the documentation of numerous violations of state law now being exposed through a landmark lawsuit by United Anglers of Southern California, the Coastside Fishing Club and Robert C. Fletcher.
George Osborn, spokesman for the Partnership for Sustainable Oceans (PSO), on February 2 presented the California Fish and Game Commission with a 25-page report containing numerous emails and correspondence documenting illegal private, non-public meetings of Marine Life Protection Act Initiative officials.
“After reviewing the documents turned over to us, which previously the BRTF had improperly withheld from the public, we now have evidence, indicating that the public meetings of the BRTF have been an elaborately staged Kabuki performance, choreographed and rehearsed down to the last detail, even to the crafting of motions, in scheduled private meetings held before the so-called public meetings of the BRTF,” said Osborn. “Clearly, this has not been the most open and transparent process, as it has so often been described.”
To see the entire set of BRTF private meeting documents, go to the San Diego Freedivers website:http://www.sandiegofreedivers.com/MLPABRTFofflinemeetingdocumentation.pdf
danbacher The marine “protected” areas adopted along the South Coast under Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative do nothing to protect the marine ecosystem from water pollution, oil drilling and spills, military testing, corporate aquaculture, wave energy projects, coastal development, habitat destruction and other human impacts on the ocean other than fishing and gathering.
south_coast_mpas.jpg
Ten Big Questions about the MLPA Initiative
by Dan Bacher
Assemblymember Wesley Chesbro (D-Arcata) chaired an oversight meeting of the Joint Legislative Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture at the State Capitol in Sacramento on February 17 from 10 am to 12 noon focusing on the South Coast Study Region of the controversial Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative.
Recreational anglers, commercial fishermen and grassroots environmentalists exposed the many flaws of the MLPA Initiative, while representatives of corporate environmental NGOs lauded the process for being “open, transparent and inclusive.” About two thirds of the speakers were critical of the MLPA, while about one-third praised the South Coast process.
After the public comment period, Chesbro noted the divergent perspectives presented by those who testified. “People here today described the process as both the best and the worst process they have experienced,” said Chesbro.
Chesbro said the Legislature doesn’t have the authority to change the already adopted network of marine protected areas for the South Coast. However, Chesbro emphasized that to make marine protected areas work, it is important that users of the ocean serve as partners in the process. “It is very good for the Committee to shine the light on this process,” he concluded.
The controversial marine protected areas imposed under the MLPA Initiative, the unprecedented collapse of Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail and green sturgeon, and the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build a peripheral canal are all part of the unfortunate environmental legacy of Arnold Schwarzenegger, the worst Governor for fish and the environment in California history.
Below is a transcript of my testimony before the committee in which I pose the 10 questions that proponents of the controversial, privately funded process refuse to answer:
Assemblymember Chesbro, thanks so much for convening today’s hearing.
In my 28 years of journalism covering fish and water in California, the MLPA Initiative is the most corrupt process that I have ever covered. Here are the 10 questions I have posed to MLPA Initiative advocates and officials regarding the many flaws in the South Coast MLPA process. To date, they have failed to answer these questions.
1. Why did Schwarzenegger and MLPA officials install an oil industry lobbyist, a marina developer, a real estate executive and other corporate operatives with numerous conflicts of interest on the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force for the South Coast to remove Indian Tribes, fishermen and seaweed harvesters from the water by creating so-called “marine protected areas” (MPAS)?
2. Why was Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the president of the Western States Petroleum Association, allowed to make decisions as the chair of the BRTF for the South Coast, a panel that is supposedly designed to “protect” the ocean, when she has called for new oil drilling off the California coast?
3. Why has the MLPA Initiative taken water pollution, oil spills and drilling, military testing, corporate aquaculture, habitat destruction and all other impacts on the ocean other than fishing and gathering off the table in its bizarre concept of marine protection?
4. Why is a private corporation, the shadowy Resources Legacy Fund Foundation, being allowed to privatize ocean resource management in California through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the DFG?
5. Why do MLPA staff and the California Fish and Game Commission refuse to hear the pleas of the representatives of the California Fish and Game Wardens Association, who oppose the creation of any new MPAs until they have enough funding for wardens to patrol existing reserves?
6. Why were there no Tribal scientists on the MLPA Science Advisory Team and why were there no Tribal representatives on the Blue Ribbon Task Forces for the Central Coast, North Central Coast or South Coast MLPA Study Regions?
7. Why does the initiative discard the results of any scientists who disagree with the MLPA’s pre-ordained conclusions? These include the peer reviewed study by Dr. Ray Hilborn, Dr. Boris Worm and 18 other scientists, featured in Science magazine in July 2009, that concluded that the California current had the lowest rate of fishery exploitation of any place studied on the planet.
8. Why did the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force hold illegal secret meetings, including those held in April 2007 and on November 3, 2008, December 10, 2008, February 25, 2009, October 20, 21 and 22, 2009, as revealed in a 25 page document presented to the California Fish and Game Commission on February 2?
9. Why did it take a lawsuit by a coalition of fishing organizations to get the emails and correspondence by MLPA officials documenting these private, non-public meetings disclosed to the public?
10. Why did it take the outrage over the arrest of an independent journalist last spring to open work sessions of the MLPA to coverage by video-journalists?
I urge you and other Legislators to think hard about these questions and begin a formal investigation into the violation of laws that may have occurred under the MLPA as soon as possible.
danbacher “Few industries are more heavily regulated than California’s petroleum industry,” said Catherine Reheis-Boyd, president of the Western States Petroleum Association. “While the environment, workers, and consumers have benefited from many of these regulations, other regulations are duplicative, no longer needed or are unduly expensive. They often require costly solutions to problems that could be solved more easily and less expensively if our industry had the flexibility to do so.”
Photo of BP oil spill from space courtesy of NASA.
bp-gulf-oil-spill-0517-md…
by Dan Bacher
Catherine Reheis Boyd, president of the Western States Petroleum Association and Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative official, believes that the oil industry is too heavily regulated in California.
Citing President Obama’s order to federal agencies to review existing regulations and to streamline or eliminate those regulations “that are not smart, unnecessary, unreasonably costly or no longer needed,” Reheis-Boyd, argues for reducing “costly” regulations imposed on the oil industry in a statement, “Review of Regulations a Welcome Development,” on the association’s website (http://www.wspa.org).
“Few industries are more heavily regulated than California’s petroleum industry,” says Reheis-Boyd. “While the environment, workers, and consumers have benefited from many of these regulations, other regulations are duplicative, no longer needed or are unduly expensive. They often require costly solutions to problems that could be solved more easily and less expensively if our industry had the flexibility to do so.”
“California, with an unemployment rate stuck at more than 12 percent, would do well to take a serious look at reducing the crushing load of regulations it imposes on businesses. Surely there are ways to ease that burden, promote job creation and restore economic vitality without putting the environment or consumers at risk,” she notes.
However, this call for less regulation of the oil industry is extremely hyprocritical, when one considers Reheis-Boyd’s role as the chair for MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force for the South Coast.
During this widely-contested process, she and other task force members went out of their way to take water pollution, oil spills and drilling, military testing, wave energy projects and other all other human impacts on the ocean other than fishing and gathering off the table in the so-called marine protected areas.
This unjust implementation of the law under Schwarzenegger violated both the letter and the spirit of the Marine Life Protection Act of 1999, a landmark law that aimed to comprehensively protect the ocean by creating a network of marine protected areas along the California coast.
Her attitude is to impose the burden of “protection” on recreational anglers, commercial fishermen and the public, who are more heavily regulated in California on any place on the planet, and let everybody else off the hook.
I find it beyond shameful that the “leaders” of corporate “environmental” NGOs who claim that the MLPA process is “open, inclusive and transparent” refuse to speak out against the travesty of having a big oil lobbyist chair the South Coast MLPA task force and sit on the task forces for the North Coast and North Central Coast.
The MLPA process has been ridden with corruption, conflicts of interest and institutional racism since Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger privatized the initiative in 2004 by directing the Department of Fish and Game to sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the shadowy Resources Legacy Foundation, a private corporation.
The initiative, until June 2010, made no provisions whatsoever to protect Tribal gathering rights. No Tribal representatives were appointed to the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force until 2010 and no Tribal scientists have ever been appointed to the MLPA Science Advisory Team, in spite of the fact that the Yurok and other Tribes have large natural resources departments that employ numerous scientists.
The MLPA officials have violated numerous state, federal and international laws, including the California Public Records Act, the California Administrative Procedure Act, the Bagley-Keene Open Meetings Act, the American Indian Religious Freedom Act and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
However, the corruption and violations of law are finally being exposed. George Osborn, spokesman for the Partnership for Sustainable Oceans (PSO), on February 2 presented the California Fish and Game Commission with a groundbreaking 25 page report containing numerous emails and correspondence documenting illegal private, non-public meetings of Marine Life Protection Act Initiative officials.
“After reviewing the documents turned over to us, which previously the BRTF had improperly withheld from the public, we now have evidence, indicating that the public meetings of the BRTF have been an elaborately staged Kabuki performance, choreographed and rehearsed down to the last detail, even to the crafting of motions, in scheduled private meetings held before the so-called public meetings of the BRTF,” said Osborn. “Clearly, this has not been the most open and transparent process, as it has so often been described.”
The PSO, a coalition of national and regional fishing organizations including the Coastside Fishing Club and United Anglers of Southern California, filed suit in San Diego Superior Court in late January, seeking to overturn South Coast and North Central Coast MLPA closures, alleging violations of the State Administrative Procedure Act.
To see Osborn’s testimony, go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7_04BC1acA
To see the entire set of BRTF private meeting documents, go to the San Diego Freedivers website:http://www.sandiegofreedivers.com/MLPABRTFofflinemeetingdocumentation.pdf
