Lead Ban Chronicles – Interesting News on the Fish and Game Commission
Editor’s Note: Check out Holly’s update in the Comments section.
Once again, I’m indebted to Holly who picks up stuff that never even pings my radar.
In this case, it’s the news reported in the Sacramento Bee that CA Fish and Game Commission President, Cindy Gustafson, is stepping down immediately. The reasons appear to stem from some conflict or perceived conflict of interests between her “day job” and her position on the Commission. She actually raised the questions herself, and acted immediately on the findings, so that’s not particularly stimulating.
What is stimulating however, is what this departure means to Wednesday and Thursday’s Fish and Game Commission meetings. Ms. Gustafson was Commissioner #5… the tie breaking vote. There are now only four commissioners on the board at a critical time for both CA hunters and for fishermen.
As many Hog Blog readers know, this meeting is supposed to address the lead ammo ban. At stake is whether or not the Commission will expand the ban to include small game and upland birds in the “Condor Zone”. Two of the Commissioners, Dan Richards and Jim Kellogg are fairly practical about the expansion and appear to support taking no action. The other two, however, Richard Rogers and Michael Sutton are clearly in favor of expanding the ban. Sutton has even gone so far as to push the idea of expanding the ban statewide. Unless things have changed recently, that leaves an even split on the issue.
Also at stake during this meeting is an issue that I haven’t spent much time discussing… changes to the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) which would potentially close off a large part of the CA coast to fishing. This is a hotly contested issue, with the potential to do a lot more damage to local economies and livelihoods than the lead ban ever dreamed of. Here’s the Wikipedia page about the MLPA. A quick Google search will turn up plenty of info about the controversy.
The FGC has also been largely split over this issue as well, with particular concerns expressed by Kellogg and Richards about implementing more marine sanctuaries with the current budget situation in this state. These concerns are echoed in a letter to Ms. Gustafson from the CA Warden’s Association, in which the Association take no action on new regulations or other actions that would place additional responsibilities on CA’s over-stressed wardens. Enforcing new or expanded laws would be too much for the limited law enforcement resources currently in place.
So the departure of the President of the CA Fish and Game Commission at this particular time should be making a lot of people nervous. Not only is there a strong likelihood that the Commission will deadlock on these important issues, there’s the question of who Schwartzenegger will appoint to replace her. Which way will the new Commissioner swing the votes on these, and other, critical issues.
You know the old blessing/curse, right? “May you live in interesting times.”
We do.
The latest news – a press release from the governor’s office:
For Immediate Release: Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Governor Schwarzenegger Announces Appointment
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today announced the following appointment:
Donald Benninghoven, 76, of Santa Barbara, has been appointed to the Fish and Game Commission. Prior to retiring, he served as executive director and member of the board for the City-County-School Partnership from 1998 to 2000, a cooperative venture of the California State Association of Counties, the California School Boards Association and the League of California Cities. Prior to that, from 1958 to 1998, Benninghoven held several positions at the League of California Cities including executive director. He served on the Marine Life Protection Act Blue Ribbon Task Force from 2007 to 2009. Benninghoven also previously served as secretary for the City-County-School Partnership, chairman of the California Center for Civic Renewal and a member of the Institute for Local Self Government Executive Committee. In addition, he was a member on the Governor’s Commission on Transportation Financing, vice chair of the California State Constitution Revision Commission and member on the Governor’s Commission on Local Government Financing. Benninghoven is a member of the California Game Wardens Foundation and is a lifelong outdoorsman, fisherman and hunter. This position requires Senate confirmation and the compensation is $100 per diem. Benninghoven is a Republican.
So, lifelong hunter and angler – good.
Member of MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force – potentially worrisome for anglers on the MLPA issue (or so I’ve heard – not my area of expertise).
Guess we’ll see how this affects the lead ban on Thursday. I’ll be there.
August 4th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
Thanks for the update, Holly! I was just about to make another post.
Yeah, I just don’t know anything about this guy. His presence on the MLPA task force is interesting, but he’s also a Republican. Could go either way. Any word from CWA or Delta about him?
August 4th, 2009 at 6:42 pm
Nope. But by the time Thursday rolls around, I bet someone’ll know more!
August 4th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
‘May you live in interesting times – and get to be a part of them’
I’m a bit disappointed that Arnie didn’t appoint you fella.
He must have seen your coverage of the issue.
SBW
August 5th, 2009 at 12:34 am
[...] Lead Ban Chronicles – Interesting News on the Fish and Game … [...]
August 5th, 2009 at 2:10 am
Wow, this definitely sounds like it could pan out to be quite interesting. And the new president looks decent from the surface, but I guess only time will tell as to how he really stands on these particular issues.
These are definitely interesting times we live in. I hope that all of the board members, including the new president, use a clear head and really put some thought into the issues at hand before casting their votes.
Keep us updated Phillip.
August 5th, 2009 at 4:00 am
Mr. Benninghoven was chosen because of his partiality toward the Marine Life Protection Act process, so how he will vote on lead is really up in the air. He may not even stay around afterward.
It’s particularly interesting that he is a member of the Wardens’ Association, when that group has asked that the MLPA process be stopped due to a lack of funding and enforcement. You see, (and here is a bigger story you might be interested in), California has the smallest number of wardens, per capita, of any state (about 200 for a population of 36 million). And yet, wardens are being furloughed, which amounts to losing the equivalent of about 25 game wardens.
August 5th, 2009 at 7:25 am
Self-correction: He is on the Game Warden Foundation, whereas it’s the Wardens’ Association that is asking the MLPA be suspended. Sorry.
August 5th, 2009 at 11:10 am
Benninghoven voted as expected today on MLPA; we’ll find out tomorrow what happens on the lead ban. I’ll try to remember to tweet from the meeting – twitter.com/norcalcazadora.
August 5th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Joshua, you were right the first time. He was appointed by Arnold because he had already made up his mind about closing down the ocean. The vote came out 3 to 2 for the most restrictive option of the two that were on the table. This will devastate the local community economies. It will also devastate the fish species in the few small areas left open for fishing.
Just like the lead ban. No scientific justification.
August 6th, 2009 at 6:37 am
SBW, thanks for the vote of confidence, but I am pretty sure I wouldn’t want to be saddled up on that Commission. The measly $100 per diem isn’t exactly gonna pay for the aggravation, and since I don’t own a major construction, logging, or mineral extraction corporation, I wouldn’t stand to gain much at all from the appointment except more gray hair.
As far as Benninghoven and the MLPA… well, that’s a sad turn of events. I’m not well versed on the entire solution, but it sure strikes me as another ill-advised decision that doesn’t really address the real problems facing the coastal fisheries.
August 6th, 2009 at 10:59 am
I feel that the state fish and game commission should be a paid position instead of a voluntary position. The reason is that if it is a paid position you would have to bring some knowledge to the table on the subject of hunting and fishing in the state of California. A fair amount of individuals who have served on the commission in the past had no business serving on the commission to begin with. Their lack of knowledge concerning hunting and fishing in this state was an insult to the sporting community. Good example would be commissioner Sutton who is currently being investigated for conflict of interest while he is serving on the commission. Sutton’s boss is Julie Packard of the Monterey Bay Aquarium. I am also not overly impressed with commissioners Kellog or Richards. But they are better then that useless individual Rogers. How he ever got appointed is beyond me. One sorry commissioner that I was glad to see go was Judd Hanna. Now maybe you will understand why the State commission appointment should be salaried position. Bring something to the table other then a brown nose.
August 6th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Hmm. Well, yesterday, Rogers was the most articulate voice against expanding the lead ban – said the science wasn’t there, and a group of opponents had brought forth convincing evidence that the original science leading to the ban wasn’t so hot either.
I don’t think pay is going to make the difference – the kind of difference you’re talking about is professional v. citizen (hired v. appointed), and the nature of a commission is that it’s supposed to be made of appointed citizens. The staff is what’s supposed to provide the professional expertise.
August 7th, 2009 at 6:29 am
Thanks for dropping in, Kevin.
In some ways, I agree with your point that there should be something like a salary attached to the Commissioners’ roles. There definitely needs to be more accountability, because right now there’s nobody really over-seeing these guys except the Governor… and we all know that he’s got way bigger fish to fry than worrying about a handful of pissed off hunters.
The thing is, they all have special interests in their backgrounds, including transportation, real estate developers, environmental organizations, etc. Suttons ties to the Monterey Aquarium and Packard Foundation certainly raise eyebrows (especially in light of the MLPA actions), but take a look at some of the others. At least Ms Gustafson was honest enough to step down when she recognized her own conflicts of interest.
For what it’s worth, Rogers apparently got some kind of message, because his tone has changed a lot in the last couple of meetings. I’d like to think some of the many letters sent, not only to the Commission, but to the Fish and Game Director, and to the Governor’s desk, may have had an impact.
Or it could just be that he finally took the time to read the reports and research provided by folks like Anthony Canales, the NRA, and the CRPA. He’s come a long way from his earlier declaration of lead ammo as a threat to condors, the environment, and human health.
I also agree with Holly’s take re: the intended nature of the Commission. They do have a professional staff with expertise to help guide their decisions… but from what I have seen, the Commissioners have shown a tendency to ignore the input of the staff and rely, instead, on their own predilections. Maybe that’s changing, and the recent vote on the lead ban is an indication of how it’s changed. I’d like to think so… but I don’t have a great feeling about it.
August 7th, 2009 at 7:39 am