All hail to John Peschong and his crony partners Lynn Compton and Debbie Arnold. The twisted logic supporting an argument against a marine sanctuary seems “fishy.” In a Viewpoint published in The Tribune two years ago, he cites Ruth Vreeland and her feelings toward the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. To suggest she was against a marine sanctuary is specious at best considering she died tragically in 2004 and is no longer here to defend her comments. Vreeland was active in Democratic Party politics and was not afraid to bring progressive political causes to Monterey. The Sierra Club recognized her in the 1980s for fighting offshore drilling and sewage spills.
Peschong’s and the other two supervisors’ belief that creating a sactuary off our coast would cede local control to the federal government doesn’t square with the fact that the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council is composed of all local Monterey Bay area citizens. So what is it that the aristocrats are opposed to? Dan Haifley said it best in a Santa Cruz Sentinel piece (“Our ocean, our backyard: Stories of revival in Monterey Bay,” Feb. 19, 2011), “In September 1992, Monterey Bay became the fulcrum for a stretch of ocean—today covering 6,094 square miles—newly christened as a national marine sanctuary. The work of a few thousand individuals to prevent offshore oil helped provide this outcome.” Yes, offshore oil to which Mr. Peschong and his crony aristocrats are deeply indebted and should be of concern to us all. Are you listening fishermen?
-- Steve Lacki - Nipomo