Page 1 of 2
Posted on June 20 at 2:22 p.m.
So it's for conservation or fishing? You state that it will enhance lobster and calico bass. Not if there's fishing on it. If its to enhance fishing, just say it. If it's to get back the area that's now in MPAs, you should say that.
Mainly I'd suggest covering your ass by informing KEYT that you are not in the process of dumping unpermitted material in the ocean off Hendry's. That's what they said and what is on their website.
On Fish Reefs Nurture New Life
Posted on June 14 at 11:33 a.m.
I completely understand Francisco and Hotchkiss' need to bash grassroots enviro groups who do stuff like identify problems and push for solutions. Y'know, who do their jobs. Dale and Frank have their stock in tea party anti-environmentalism .... Cathy and Bendy joining them in hand-wringing over having to raise rates a couple bucks to deal with the City's having been asleep at the switch is horrendous!
Bendy and Cathy WTF? There's a long discussion to be had about the relationship of progressive organizations and the council members who serve a similar role within government. Bottom line is, guys, do YOUR job and for chrissake stop bashing your natural allies for doing theirs. Really, have you gotten sucked into the City Hall's obnoxious insulated culture that quickly? We did not elect you two for this. Remember who you are and what you are there for. Damnit, this is why people don't believe in government and don't support you when you need it.
Good job ChannelKeeper -- cut it out Bendy and Cathy.
On Channelkeeper Tagged for Fee Hike
Posted on December 14 at 6:04 p.m.
Squid harvest is hardly limited; its management plan set the harvest quota at the level = the highest landing ever in a year. Meanwhile, they are critical prey for tons of the most important animals out there -- white sea bass, the birds and mammals, the other big game fish. Well I suppose at least there's a point where they say "enough." Reducing squid take would help the other fisheries a lot. It remains the highest value fishery we have in CA, and by the way 95% is exported to China. When you get calamari, it's typically been harvested at the channel islands, frozen whole, shipped to asia, unfrozen, processed, cut, refrozen and sent back to the US to a wholesaler who sells it to your restaurant. Neat huh?
On Commercial Market Squid Fishery to Close December 17
Posted on December 11 at 7:33 p.m.
I actually liked the hoo ha stuff in there about wisdom and humanity ... But the over the top claims about freedom and culture-killing are so overblown and the facts so distorted you'd think the conservation folks didn't compromise what science and morals demanded in order to "weigh the human cost." They did. You have this need to snatch defeat from the jaws of a good deal. violation of use policy, indeed.
On Fishing Culture Bygone?
Posted on December 11 at 4:30 p.m.
Pretty fair treatment of the issues in this historic struggle. One note: the proposed Kashtayit state marine park isn't near Cojo; it's around Gaviota State Park, and is primarily aimed at protecting/honoring Chumash culture. Cojo Anchorage is, however, within the Pt Conception reserve (proposed).
On The Final Chapter Approaches
Posted on December 11 at 4:15 p.m.
This is a nicely put together piece but the analogy does not hold. Unlike early big wall climbers like Chouinard who managed to get control of their sport's membership and do the right thing, today's recreational fishermen talk about the traditional fishery management measures (bag limits, gear restrictions...etc), but are simply not there when the time comes to implement them. The tackle industry and the big rec fishing lobbies oppose them and they die. You can talk about slot limits, catch and release and so on all you want, or even talk about water quality as a equal villain in the obvious decline of fish over the decades, but it means nothing until grassroots rec fishermen who SAY they support better management do something, get involved, and have the guts to demand better management when their leadership disagrees. I'm not so much calling you out as saying this is the prevailing history of fishery management. And, in this context, the majority of citizens, who own the resource together, are tired of it being 100% allocated to the two sectors of extractors (rec and commercial fishing), with zero area applied to non consumptive recreation. MPAs directly address that issue, end up strengthening the productivity of the ocean for everyone, and guess what, protect those half dome's of the sea for the future.
On Fishing and Rock Climbing
Posted on December 10 at 2:19 p.m.
PS. Know why no one answers your claims that the science is "bad" or the process is corrupt? Cause you aren't fooling anyone and you're damaging your own case. You'll learn that this is a community that knows what's what and believes real university science more than special interest science. And they get that people who wouldn't play fair and trade in cheap-shots always call the process corrupt.
On Local Marine Protected Areas May Increase
Posted on December 10 at 2:16 p.m.
Looks like the conversation moved over to Yvon Chouinard's piece ffool. I think it would be wise for you to help the young spearos on here with some of your experience in finding those spots you talk about that have no fishing pressure. What the pro mpa folks are asking for -- what they have a right to -- is a couple reefs that have some semblance of what their fathers and grandfathers saw. Especially if you're worried that one reef out of five being set aside for appreciation, science, posterity will have those effects you predict.
Are you willing to designate those artificial reefs to preservation? If not, they'll add more habitat for more smaller, picked over fish and not give us what we know we can and should have and see at the mpas on the islands.
What is it about the ocean that's so different than anywhere else. Want to build a factory? Can't put in in a residential area, there's a place for that. Want to hunt a bear? get a permit and hunt in a place open for that. Not in the ocean, you can fish anywhere there's fish. That's dumb. You don't seem to get that your pastime and non consumptive people's pastimes don't always mix so well, the second group wants at least a few areas where the fish aren't reduced. That's what's on the table. Many of em allow pelagic spearfishing too. If yall continue to be that unreasonable, you might never learn to count to three and serve your true interests. That's a shame. Spearfishing is great and I intend to have a good time doing it alongside the MPAs. At Latigo and the open section of BKR too, when the current isnt ripping.
Posted on December 7 at 5:54 p.m.
Hi Swami -- To put yourself out there as a freediver and then say fish populations are booming is either one of two things: either you are such an incredible novice and/or newbie you have zero perspective of what the ocean has looked like over time, or you are hoping no one else does. Dude. Ask one of your elders.
Nevermind that the efforts to increase management on specific species that you suggest are ALWAYS fought and usually defeated by sport fishing folks (such as yourself?), the fact is that we don't know or have the money to know the status of every fish stock out there and create proper management for each of them, all the while defending these steps against people who won't admit or don't care about a declining ecosystem.
Also, the biggest proposal for MPAs on the table leaves 75% of the ocean area open. This same basic figure applies to the available rock reef, kelp, etc -- there are no more than a fifth or so of your fishing spots under consideration for setting aside for conservation.
By the way, what you call "closure" is viewed by the majority as "opening" some waters to experiencing our ocean heritage the way our grandfathers did. The hearing on the 15th will be historic, it's only a shame that the protection given to our land under the Parks hasn't until now been considered for our ocean. Come be a part of this history on Dec. 15. And many thanks once again Mr. Chouinard!
On Set Gold Standard for Ocean Health Care
Posted on December 6 at 9:46 a.m.
Nature does tend to itself. That is the core concept behind marine protected areas... let some areas alone to recover and, evidence shows, healing happens. To the benefit of surrounding areas as well as the protected area. Good point.
Traditional fisheries management needs help. Just look at the first post about sheephead. What happened there my friend is that government set up a new fishery on them and their nearshore cousins, and they got beat up. Serious, sudden decline. So recreational fishermen like you demanded a plan and a reduction in effort there, and you guys then turn that into a anti-MPA talking point. Really.
This argument that really its a heavy fraction of fishing area proposed for MPAs is the worst lie. Here in SB ... just as an example, we can go thru the list of hotspots.... everyway you slice it, its 20% or one spot out of five. Naples - tiny protected area proposed. Open: Tajiguas, ellwood rocks, Refugio, St Augustine, one mile, mohawk/mesa, Carpinteria reef.
Meanwhile...freedom? The call to just go with fishery managment while asking for freedom is bogus on its face. Is there no room for the public to access their resources in a few places free of commercial and recreational fishing pressure? For the majority who appreciate and want to experience our heritage without taking ... in a couple places? Yes, the history is that the ocean is completely allocated to those who take. It is a major change to cut the public into the deal through MPAs, and certainly a bummer who had such an exclusive deal for so long. But the results have been so bad for so long that even fishing is suffering.
Every nursery school kid learns core values early. You speak of freedom and culture. Here's one you forgot: sharing.
Spend an afternoon enjoying memories of the past with eighty ... Read More
Previous Month | Next Month