NOAA Facts Forum Parts 8-14 The Q and A

My apologies both for the delay in posting the remaining videos and for the lack of captioning.

 These videos are the questions that the public in attendance at this meeting had for the speakers.

In spite of the fact that this effort has been ongoing for a number of years, many of these people - including this blogger - had only found out about the proposal to create a National Marine Sanctuary out of the part of Lake Michigan that are adjacent to this section of shoreline(at least for now - who knows how much of Lake Michigan NOAA wants under it's jurisdiction? ) in March of this year.
     

That is not due to a lack of effort on the part of NOAA and etc, but to the fact that most people don't have the time to keep tabs on the machinations of federal government agencies. Most have other, more immediate interests - until those interests are directly threatened. And that is where we are today.

The waters of  Lake Michigan are shared with the state of Michigan. The Wisconsin half belongs to the people of Wisconsin. The federal government wants to control it and this is one way they can do that. By tempting the people of Wisconsin to give up responsibility for our half of the lake to NOAA for this "good" cause - even though we are already preserving those shipwrecks. We don't need to give up our sovereignty of our half of Lake Michigan to do that.

Freedom and responsibility are two sides of the same coin. You cannot spend one without giving up the other.

Those who rose to question the proposal all made good points. This blogger, however, opposes the establishment of a National Marine Sanctuary on the constitutional principle that the federal government is constitutionally limited to owning/exercising sovereign control over forts, ports and ten square miles. The federal government is not to exercise ownership like control over the states. As mentioned earlier in this series states like Nevada have given up their sovereignty over so much of their land to the federal government that it is laughable to even call them a state.

From Article 1, Section 8, this is what the US Constitution says:
" To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;" 

There is already a Coast Guard station in Sheboygan. It is across the street from where this meeting was held. 

"And it came to pass after these things, that Naboth the Jezreelite had a vineyard, which was in Jezreel, hard by the palace of Ahab king of Samaria.

2 And Ahab spake unto Naboth, saying, Give me thy vineyard, that I may have it for a garden of herbs, because it is near unto my house: and I will give thee for it a better vineyard than it; or, if it seem good to thee, I will give thee the worth of it in money.

3 And Naboth said to Ahab, The Lord forbid it me, that I should give the inheritance of my fathers unto thee."~ 1 Kings 21:1-3

NOAA facts forum - part 3 - Stephen D Kroll

Stephen D. Kroll - Diver and Member of the Thunder Bay National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council, Alpena, MI - speaking at the NOAA Facts Forum held at the Sheboygan Yacht Club on September 21st, 2017.

Mr. Kroll, while sincere, is currently working with NOAA. He also seems to sincerely believe that those who oppose this will and should change and nothing else is reasonable. That, in itself is an unreasonable position.

He, and some of the other speakers, say that NOAA has changed from a top down organization to a bottom up agency. Yet they do not bring out any rule/regulation changes to show that the agency will no longer have the authority to impose unreasonable fines or incrementally take over property adjacent to the sanctuary.

(Some current maximum NOAA imposed fines - for those who may be interested:
"B. Criteria for Determining Penalty and Permit Sanction Initial Base Penalty and Permit Sanction – two factors are considered in determining the initial base penalty and permit sanction amount (collectively, the “initial base penalty”): 
(1) the gravity of the prohibited act that was committed; and (2) the alleged violator’s degree of culpability, based on an assessment of the alleged violator’s mental culpability in committing the violation. These two factors constitute the seriousness of the violation.3 Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. § 2431, et seq). 

The current maximum statutory civil penalties permitted by the seven statutes most commonly enforced by NOAA are as follows: 
Magnuson-Stevens Act – $140,000 per violation 
National Marine Sanctuaries Act – $140,000 per violation 
Endangered Species Act – $32,500 per violation (knowing violations - endangered species) 
Marine Mammal Protection Act – $11,000 per violation 
Lacey Act – $11,000 per violation 
Northern Pacific Halibut Act – $200,000 per violation 
Antarctic Marine Living Resources Conservation Act – $11,000 per violation

And these are, by NOAA's own document - the MOST commonly enforced statutes.)

Nor do they bring out any regulatory changes in the agency that specifically state that the state's constitution (And any other laws of the state)  will overrule any and all rules and regulations of the agency that may trouble the citizens or restrict their constitutional rights in a way that is inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the laws of the state of Wisconsin.

This blog has also posted video from a meeting held in March to organize some opposition to the proposed sanctuary. (Which was the first time this author had heard about it even though the process has apparently been going on for some years.) That video may be found here. 

My apologies for the shakiness of the video.

"18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God." ~ John 3:18-21