MLPA: Pro and Con 

Editor:

Pursuant to your March 3 article, 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 Jan. 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 that did not follow state law.

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 www.oceanaccessprotectionfund.org.

John Lewallen, Philo (Mendocino County)

Editor:

I appreciated Ryan Burns' story on the Marine Life Protection Act ("Tribal Seas," March 3). The North Coast's accomplishment in crafting a unified Marine Protected Area (MPA) proposal that has earned support from the Fish and Game Commission is a great example of the power of finding common ground. Resource Secretary John Laird's commitment to protecting both the coast and traditional tribal use of coastal areas is also very good news.

One point of correction, however: Although "virtually every resident with a toe in the Pacific" may have passionate feelings about the ocean, most state residents want to protect it. Independent polling results consistently show a strong majority of Californians support protecting 10 to 20 percent of coastal waters in MPAs. Tens of thousands of Californians have submitted public comment, written letters, signed petitions and otherwise spoken out in favor of the process and its outcomes throughout the state.

Jennifer Savage,
Ocean Conservancy North Coast Program Coordinator