On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 02:25:14 GMT, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

Group I belong to has a couple of people appointed to the Stakeholders
advisory board. We also, though out attorney, have thrown a large monkey
wrench in the MLPA workings here in Calif. There was no money for the
studies, etc. required by the MLPA's. A couple of enviro extremists stepped
up with money, and they only give money as the project moves along and seems
to be in their favor. We have threatened to sue, as this is the first case
of direct regulation via purchase in the states history.

Good luck with it.

I'm not against MPAs per se - in fact, I'm sort of for them in a
roaming, targeted sense. I wrote up a detailed revolving resource
protection plan - the short of it was that a series of MPAs would be
set up and rotate depending on ground stock levels and the health of
the general populations. It would be a five year least, ten year max
rotation for marked areas in which it would move on to the next
species or area.

It was actually pretty well received, but the whole study/idea never
got off the ground as the commercial interests killed the whole study.

Later,

Tom