anyone you know?

[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.

[GregAndrew]

Don't know him, but he is reading right off of the econazi playlist. With all the crap I have heard them spew over the last year or so, it would not surprise me if the had a bunch of their ranks pretend to be "concerned fishermen".

[Gino]

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...

...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.

The MLPA is a bailout... Just like the last 2 economic bailouts we got, they did nothing...Thats exactly what the MLPA is... a failing bailout. And thats only If you Assume it needs a "bailout"

But hes comparing Barney Franks incompitence of the Housing Market and basic economics, to the Kayakfishings fight agaisnt the MLPA, Nice try.

You work all day, the goverment takes there peice...
You buy food to feed your Family, Goverment takes there peice again...
You pay the goverment for a fishing liscense...they get another peice...

Then you get on the water, 100% freedom, to get away from it all, the stresses of life, the hardships of the economy. 1 day to yourself with friends to catch fish. your escape...

But no... The goverment wants to take there peice again, they want to tell you where to fish...then tax you so they can enforce it. Nice...

That guy can go smoke a pole...

[Riskey Water]

well if he is concerned with over fishing of ocean waters then maybe he should do his part and quit fishing and guiding

[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

[robmandel]

don't these f***ing morons think we know how to use the internet?

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/...p?id=517397442

says he's in santa barbara. which is, you know, really close to LJ. and not ocean beach. and there's no website or any information of him as a kayak guide.

so he's a liar.

here's his "likes and interests"

Kona Brewing Company - Official Page, Old Soul Surfboards, VAVi Sport and Social Club, Safari Surf Careers, Environmental Defense Center, Save South La Jolla, Café Bleu in San Diego, Save Naples Reef

don't see any fishing pics. but alot of enviro links!!

so he's also what's called "astroturfing".

searched google

http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...c+Brickenstein

and I see his article is published lots of places.

journalistic integrity my ass!! well, they hid climategate, lie about jobs "saved", and on and on and on.

and of course they'll take his "expert" opinion and ignore us. I'm so pissed reading this crap, I could scream.

[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.

[Gino]

i sent that asshole a message on Facebook, I think hell get the message...

Thsi crap is exactly what thsi state is up against... enviormental nazi party folks.

They have to LIE to push there Agenda... People like this need to be hung

The guys on Meg Whittmans website replying to peoples post questioning Meg Whitmans stance on the MLPA...

[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.

[dsafety]

Originally Posted by Gino

The guys on Meg Whittmans website replying to peoples post questioning Meg Whitmans stance on the MLPA...

Meg Whitman has a stance on the MLPA? What is it? I have been hounding her for months on this issue with no response.

If she has stated a position, please share the link.

Bob

[robmandel]

Originally Posted by dsafety

Meg Whitman has a stance on the MLPA? What is it? I have been hounding her for months on this issue with no response.

If she has stated a position, please share the link.

Bob

don't expect one from her. she's a political hack. but, for the sake of your time, I'll give you her position.

she supports fishing and supports conservation efforts. she respects the differing positions and realizes there's no easy solution. she recognizes that although the MLPA process was not perfectly clear, open, and without issues, it was nonetheless a difficult and arduous task, and she respects the members of the various task forces for the efforts. and she respects the various members of the public who came forward to offer their voices and support for the varying proposals. she desires a balance between environmental and economic interests, and supports a healthy balance, a compromise between the two. while california needs to promote a healthy business climate, neglecting california's wonderful ecosystem would be imprudent.

in other words, she says everything and nothing. she's like all the rest. and even if she does say the right things, once in office, she'll turn us around, bend us over, and give it to us without so much as a reacharound. (btw, I belong to no political party. I hate them all. I'm a proud [little "L"] libertarian.)

right now california is falling into the shitter faster than a malibu mudslide after a rainy season. there are serious issues that the next governor has to deal with, like our bonds being junk status, our streets looking like tijuana, our cities looking like mogadishu, public employee unions running the state, and $400 billion, or thereabouts of a deficit. the mlpa is like #512 on the list of top things to deal with.

as for the sportboat BS, once again, the guys a lying mofo. I've been on hundreds of boats, and I've NEVER seen that happen. they're not perfect, but they do a damn good job. but, as they say, repeat a lie enough times...

[roadx]

did you have to go there... really now

public employee unions running the state ...
repeat a lie enough times...

[Gino]

Rob is 100% right, Look at her position on more national spotlighted issues like Illegal immigration.

She tells people one thing....then on telemundo as well as during the world cup games puts adds out in spanish saying the other thing. That is a classic politician. At least jerry brown says shit he means what hes saying. however crazy and rediculously liberal it may sound...

You can try to get kayakfisherman together and try to pressent the MLPA as an issue and get her support for it etc. Its a little late in the game for that.

The MLPA is a pretty easy concept to understand for people who havent been involved in the process. Thats why you get people like this Eric Brickenstien... running a muck flapping there jaws and making shit up. I called him out on Facebook, I asked him what sport boats he was a deckhand on, and whos he knows from La Jolla Kayak Tours. And why hes located in Santa Barbara. Many of his added "friends" have some pretty hardcore charged Enviormental propaganda all over there pages.

our enemys in this process have to lie and cheat there way to winning. That guy is a perfect example of that... Making shit up on politicians websites.

Here you can read more of this guys crap on the direct link, I poste din response to it a couple times.
http://talktomeg.ning.com/forum/topi...ource=activity

Basically its a guy who was asking for what meg whitmans stance ont he MLPA would be, hes a norcal guy. and the enviormental Erick Brickenstien comes in to save the day for the envios

[CurtyL]

this dude is an MLPA shill. the new "captain obvious."

[blitzburgh]

[dsafety]

Originally Posted by Gino

You can try to get kayakfisherman together and try to pressent the MLPA as an issue and get her support for it etc. Its a little late in the game for that.

I have been trying to get a response out of Whitman's campaign for months. I have sent several emails which explain the MLPA issue and ask for a statement of her position. No response. I have also called her offices and spoken to a bunch of people. Everyone in the Whitman campaign whom I have spoken with told me that someone would be getting back to me soon with answers to my questions. Yeah... right.

To be fair, I got the same lack of response from Brown's campaign.

I think that this is one of those issues that these politicians simply want to ignore. If they take a position, they are going to piss off some potential voters so why chance it.

Maybe my efforts are just a waste of time. Even if I got a hand signed letter from Meg telling me that she was in our camp, what would that be worth. The first time the political winds started to blow the other way, she would probably jump ship and support the other side. After all, she has spent more money than the annual budget of the DFG trying to will this election. Why risk screwing things up by actually listening to the citizens.

When I started trying to pin down some politicians on this issue, PAL told me that I would get really frustrated trying to get something out of Whitman and Brown. Well, Paul was right. I'm there.

Maybe if hundreds of people sent letters and emails on this subject, we might get some attention but a single voice during an election campaign makes as much noise as a tree falling in a distant forest.

Bob