YOUR ACCESS AND FISHING IS ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK!

[klynds]

These maps just came out so if you still want to catch your near shore yellowtail, white seabass or bugs, you may want to pay attention to the areas the enviro's are trying to close off to all. These boundaries go 3 miles out.

SD, say goodbye to ALL of the kelp, all of PL, everything from Mission Beach to Torrey Pines. ALL OF IT!

Talk about this in your clubs, friends, etc. and start ramping up for a fight. This is happening faster than you think.

this is the link to the general site
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/meeting_030309.asp

these are the maps that are being proposed by ENVIROS
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/pdfs/agenda_030309n6ii.pdf

these are the maps proposed by our constituents
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/pdfs/agenda_030309n5ii.pdf
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/pdfs/agenda_030309n4ii.pdf

[cioppino]

Have to ask yourselves where the money is going to come from each and every year to maintain and protect these areas. This state cant even pay a damn tax refund let alone protect bodies of water that dont need protecting.

Look at the Childrens Pool as an example. If its less of a financial strain to close areas down then thats what will happen.

[PAL]

All of the large, preservationist proposals show La Jolla as a state marine reserve totally closed to fishing. The fishing-friendly plans retain the existing MPAs virtually as-is, without expansion. You'll find the same situation up and down the coast.

This story is far from over. If you don't want to lose your key fishing areas, please plan on attending upcoming public workshops and meetings. More info on the proposals and meeting schedule in this post:

http://www.bigwatersedge.com/bwevb/s...ead.php?t=4684

[Aaron&Julie]

Holy crap!

If the Enviros proposal went through, that ends ocean fishing for good. Might as well not wet a line.
It's like they are eliminating all the best places to fish.
Rocky Point gone, La Jolla gone, a good percentage of Catalina & San Clemente Islands gone, etc. All the places I've had great memories and experiences.
This sucks.

[undrH2Ohntr]

It's getting worse guys..........check out the photos on this page, kiss South Casa goodbye as well if the enviro-seal whackos have their way like they did with the Children's Pool.

See pics here:
http://www.spearboard.com/showthread.php?t=79478

they are already laying claims to the beach at S.Casa

[DESTROYER]

If this goes through I will be offering spots on my boat to fish the Nados. Only problem is I can only fit about 2 kayaks on it. This is lame! They need to just make stricter take rules.

Matt

[DENNYh]

Wow, proposal 'C' looks far more nastier than proposal 'A'

[Billy V]

Originally Posted by undrH2Ohntr

It's getting worse guys..........check out the photos on this page, kiss South Casa goodbye as well if the enviro-seal whackos have their way like they did with the Children's Pool.

See pics here:
http://www.spearboard.com/showthread.php?t=79478

they are already laying claims to the beach at S.Casa

That bitch is a psycho. LOL She is The Head Instigator down there at the Children's Pool.

Pay no attention to Her, She need to stay home and clean her dirty bloomers.

[undrH2Ohntr]

Originally Posted by Billy V

That bitch is a psycho. LOL She is The Head Instigator down there at the Children's Pool.

Pay no attention to Her, She need to stay home and clean her dirty bloomers.

I agree 100% but my point is that they (FOS) are after more of our fishing/diving spots. They have already convinced the city council to amend the charter for the Children's Pool. Now that there are a couple of seals hauling out at S.Casa they will want to claim that beach too.

[dorado50]

Perhaps state gov'mt. has already predetermined closures and these meetings are just a formality to satisfy us true americans? Don't know,don't wanna know... closures or not I'm still fish'n !

[jimbo]

Originally Posted by MOYER THE FISH DESTROYER

They need to just make stricter take rules.

Matt

I agree, and I am all for stricter limits and banning certain commerical harvesting techniquess instead of no fish zones. That strategy has been proven to work in other fisheries (such as FL). But I think at least some of the people on the "other side" actually want 100% closures to all fishing - period. They're just against fishing and prefer we all eat tofu. I don't think stricter limits would satisfy them. That being said, I'd personally like to get more involved and don't want to discourage anyone else from getting involved by going to meetings, voice their opinion, etc.

[landwhale]

PLEASE!!!

Click here
Add Yourself to the MLPA Initiative Mailing List

or here
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/mailinglist.asp

This will keep you up on the latest on the process. You can also view online arcives of the last meetings which will give you a feel of what they are like.

Then be ready to give the time to come to the Stakeholders meeting in late June or early July and October to show your support for our fishing areas by attending these meetings.

[aguachico]

Originally Posted by dorado50

Perhaps state gov'mt. has already predetermined closures and these meetings are just a formality to satisfy us true americans? Don't know,don't wanna know... closures or not I'm still fish'n !

YUP!

Viva La Baja!

[Tman]

This is what I find a bit amusing....CA is broke, IOU's on state taxes, DFG is already understaffed...

Has anyone even pondered the financial burden and strain of enforcing this so-called closure agreement?

Maybe those in favor of the closures who have the financial backings that are enabling them to create their Utopia should foot the bill for the added DFG personnel to enforce their dreams...

As for me, I'm claiming Squatter's Rights...I've been fishing LJ for well over 7 years...

[Matt]

Not that I really think any of this will be taken into account but.....how about the economic impact the closure could have upon local business?? The entire sportfishing fleet, the tackle stores, the kayak stores, the spearfishing stores, bait barges...etc..?????? It may not completely close some businesses but it will definitely affect all to some degree. Let's all thank the boys representing our rights and try to put a stop to these closures. I am all for slot limits and seasonal take etc... but as if our economy isn't in enough trouble?? Ya gotta wonder what they are thinking.

[linghunter]

Get out early come back late... I just started catching YT from the yak last summer only 4 total. I'm all for tighter regs but this is way to tight. I thought my license was pricey this year I Can't wait to here how much it is going to cost me to fish after the closer.

Originally Posted by dorado50

Perhaps state gov'mt. has already predetermined closures and these meetings are just a formality to satisfy us true americans? Don't know,don't wanna know... closures or not I'm still fish'n !

[PAL]

Has anyone even pondered the financial burden and strain of enforcing this so-called closure agreement?

and

Not that I really think any of this will be taken into account but.....how about the economic impact the closure could have upon local business?? The entire sportfishing fleet, the tackle stores, the kayak stores, the spearfishing stores, bait barges...etc..??????

Yes! Well, sort of.

The state spent $700,000 on a fisheries use survey - the Ecotrust maps quite a few of us filled out. Its a great tool, and at least for the sportboats and commercial guys, a real-world cost can be derived from potential closures. Unfortunately, it would have cost a lot more than $700k to estimate the on and off the water costs to the wider recreational boating and fishing economy.

The Ecotrust data is good stuff that isn't getting much attention at the RSG, except in the three proposals that deliberately minimize economic damage (your fishing reps hard at work). The three maximum conservation proposals will be analyzed and you can bet the results will predict economic armageddon. That might change the climate at the RSG; in any case, the Blue Ribbon Task Force, the committee that will recommend a network to the Fish and Game Commission, will likely take the economic impacts seriously.

Nancy Foley, the state's chief warden, estimated that the MLPA reserves will cost $40 million / year for enforcement, scientific monitoring, and public outreach. It's money the state doesn't have. This is a hot issue at the Commission. Suggested public letters will follow in a week or so.

[Tman]

Thanks Paul for tackling this battle.

I don't think they have seriously thought about the potential monetary ramifications involved, I tend to think those involved are only looking at their agenda and not the big picture.

Where is the funding going to come from to enforce regs, and who shall they target first?

Boaters? Yakkers? Spearers? Coastal surf anglers?

That would be alot of ground to cover.

I remember years ago (many years) seeing persons hitting Sunset Cliffs at low tide, reaching under rocks, with plastic bags, filling them. DFG couldn't control them then, how are they supposed to monitor the masses with their current plan?

To me, it seems as if they have a controlled agenda, and not thought out very well. There has to be a give and take mentality for the benefit of all parties involved, one which would appease the parties involved.

I seriously doubt that they are seeing the big picture. I think it is more of an ego type mentality, they want to get their way. And if they don't, they'll take their ball and go home...