anyone you know?

[Oolie]

Originally Posted by so cal shaggy

Hey guys, anyone any of you know?


Marine Life Protection Act is needed to sustain fish populations
Jul 15, 2010




By Eric Brickenstein
Ocean Beach resident, La Jolla kayak guide
I love fishing. Whether I'm fly-fishing a backcountry stream, or in my kayak a mile offshore, a bent rod tip always brings me into the moment and calms my mind. I got my first rod and reel when I was 4, caught my first tuna when I was 10 and have had a line in the water ever since, both recreationally and professionally aboard charter boats.

Yet I've grown increasingly concerned that we're fishing too aggressively to sustain over the long run. We're seeing fewer and smaller fish, and fish being listed as threatened, or outright disappearing from California's coastal waters.

I want to see our fishing industry thrive, and for future Californians to have their chance to fish. For that to happen, we have to create a savings plan for our ocean - setting certain places aside where fish and wildlife can grow and mature. Impartial scientific research and practical examples have shown that even small marine reserves can exponentially increase the reproductive capacity of fish populations, resulting in more and bigger fish within the reserve, and in surrounding waters as well.

There are also economic benefits: Fishing gets better in the area surrounding the reserves, and the protected areas themselves attract visitors just like parks on land.

For these reasons, I support the Marine Life Protection Act. By developing a network of protected zones along the coast, we're taking a big step forward in our journey toward sustainable fishing in California.

Some claim that with profits on the decline and the tough economy, now is not a good time to create new protections. Yet we've seen the damage short-sighted decision-making can cause: the housing market crash and a devastating oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

We're nearing the conclusion of the MLPA process for Southern California, and I look forward to the Fish and Game Commission's final decision on new protected areas for our coastal waters over the next few months.

If our fisheries collapse, no government bailout is going to bring them back. I challenge my fellow fishermen to consider the future of our fishing industry and the treasured pastime of sport angling.

interesting.

"Impartial scientific research and practical examples have shown that even small marine reserves can exponentially increase the reproductive capacity of fish populations, resulting in more and bigger fish within the reserve, and in surrounding waters as well."

really?

i'd love to see a source for this, because i've never heard of such a thing.

"There are also economic benefits: Fishing gets better in the area surrounding the reserves, and the protected areas themselves attract visitors just like parks on land."

again, i've seen no evidence to show that fishing gets better in surrounding areas, and that reserves attract visitors because they are reserves.

"Some claim that with profits on the decline and the tough economy, now is not a good time to create new protections. Yet we've seen the damage short-sighted decision-making can cause: the housing market crash and a devastating oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico."

short sighted decision making would be banning areas to fishing without justification, and not seeing the consequences. the housing market crash is much more complex than just being caused by a short sighted decision.
and the devastating oil spill has nothing to do with with short sighted decision making and everything to do with people not doing their jobs.

this eric guy seems to be basing his whole argument off of la jolla.

la jolla is the way it is for many reasons, but having a preserve is not one of them.

i like that the part of lajolla that is off limits to fishing is the way it is, it's an important area for many marine organisms, and reducing boat traffic and harvesting of fish in that small area has a few benefits, but overall, la jolla is the way it is due to geography, not the preserve.

[dsafety]

Oolie's perspective is right on.

For those who did not take the time to read every word, the bottom line is... Jeff, show us some justification for the stuff you say in your article.

In my view these are just more made up "facts" used to try to justify an otherwise unjustifiable initiative.

Bob

[Oolie]

Originally Posted by dsafety

Oolie's perspective is right on.

For those who did not take the time to read every word, the bottom line is... Jeff, show us some justification for the stuff you say in your article.

In my view these are just more made up "facts" used to try to justify an otherwise unjustifiable initiative.

Bob

i don't always want to be right, but i always play devils advocate and see all sides.

i see where he's coming from but none of his justifications are proven, or at least to my knowledge, i would love to see some articles that support his claims, my point of view is always open to change.

see everyone at the meeting in a week.


BTW, i'm an enviro too, but a sustainable, logic following, enviro.

[Nic D]

Originally Posted by Oolie

BTW, i'm an enviro too, but a sustainable, logic following, enviro.

I think we all are to some degree. We'd all like to see this place stay the way it is...

and Oolie, its ok to be right dude! and I really like how you said it...

Im going to try and make the next meeting, when and where is it?

[Gino]

James,

I absolutely agree with you that drag boats are a major problem and menace to the health of our ecosystems. They should definitely incur more expansive restrictions and be more closely regulated. As for poaching, its a no brainer. It should not be tolerated, and those caught engaging in it should be severely punished. That said, to pretend that sport angling does not play a major role in declining fish populations is naive and flat wrong.

I have worked as a deckhand on sport fishing charters. Time and again we would pull up on a rock, make a drop, and in two minutes every line would have 3 or 4 reds on it (this by the way in less than 120'). By the fourth or fifth pass no one was catching anything. Do you know why that is??? It's because there were no more fish on the rock. How screwed up is that? We would just wipe out an entire local population in an hour and move on down the line. Why? Because you NEVER tell a customer to stop fishing. Guys would fill multiple sacks and keep right on fishing. As I'm sure you know, limits are NOT respected. "Extra fish" are just hidden up in the bow until Fish and Game is clear. If the mentality of fisherman was different, maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we're in. But unfortunately its always been about taking as much as you can today, and to hell with tomorrow. So here we are.

I'm sure you personally, like me, respect limits and the health of the ocean. I'm sure you are also aware that we are the exception not the rule. All the MLPA will do is set aside small areas of critical habitat to allow it to rehabilitate and help undo decades of damage. There will still be more than enough prime fishing grounds left open to sport angling. Not least among them, areas adjacent to reserves where research has shown that fishing consistently improves.

Please think about it. This is not about picking on sport anglers. I wouldn't support it if it was. If anything its largely about protecting sport angling for our kids and theirs.

Best,
Eric

Hes blaming sportboats for hiding fish over ther limits? anyoen seen this themselves?

He claims to be a deckhand on a charter boat at one time... So if he saw customers stuffing fish why didnt he stop them himself if he thought it was wrong?

[Oolie]

Originally Posted by Gino

Hes blaming sportboats for hiding fish over ther limits? anyoen seen this themselves?

He claims to be a deckhand on a charter boat at one time... So if he saw customers stuffing fish why didnt he stop them himself if he thought it was wrong?

i've never seen this in all my years of sportfishing, which isn't many, but indeed more than average.

i think whoever believes what he is saying is naive, and should definitely question him.