pierfishing.com :: FAQ :: search :: memberlist :: album
  Sign-up as new user :: log in



Sign-up as new user | I forgot my password

PFIC Message Boards >> Fishery Conservation, Management and Politics Reply to this topic
>> California Needs a Balanced Plan for Ocean Protection [topic: previous/next]
PostPosted: Fri Aug 08, 2008 1:12 pm
Ken Jones


Posts: 8022
Location: California

Published: August 06, 2008
http://newsblaze.com/story/20080806175221zzzz.nb/topstory.html

California Needs a Balanced, Scientific Plan for Ocean Protection

By Vern Goehring

Governor Schwarzenegger recently joined the governors of Oregon and Washington to announce ambitious goals to safeguard critical marine resources along the West Coast.

Among other things, the plan calls for cleaning up coastal waters, restoring fisheries, combating climate change, reducing the impacts of offshore development and fostering economic development in coastal communities.

These are all laudable ambitions that, if done correctly, can make a real difference to protect the Pacific Ocean off these state's coasts and sustain marine resources.

But protecting these important resources will take more than an announcement from three governors. We've heard these bold statements and goals before, but the follow through has always fallen short. Rather than looking at the full range of impacts on the ocean, officials have singled out one thing or another in adopting new, narrow regulations. Usually it's the thing of least benefit and least resistance.

These piecemeal approaches certainly give the appearance of progress, but don't do the real work of identifying and equitably addressing the problems facing the Pacific.

Coastal development and the many other things that deliver pollution to our ocean from land have been largely ignored; for example California is far behind where it should be in enforcing the Clean Water Act. Instead, the focus has largely been on closing off parts of the ocean to fishing - recreational and family-run fishing businesses alike.

Sometimes this is done as a needless precaution, many times, however, as a last ditch effort to cover up a failure to address the real problems - remember the extreme closures of Klamath River and Sacramento River salmon fishing in recent years.

Ironically, fishing already is one of the most highly regulated activities involving the ocean. New regulations imposed recently add one thing - redundancy - but bring little environmental benefit. People who spend every day on the ocean waters and who study and know our oceans find their input rejected out of hand by decision makers with little real world experience.

What's more, communities that depend on fishing and tourism suffer under unbalanced regulations. Since the enactment of ocean closures along the central coast of California , commerce and tourism in places like Morro Bay are down significantly.

Local families who fish for themselves or to provide fresh seafood to California 's citizens are not the problem and shouldn't bear the brunt of any short-sighted policies that provide an illusion of protection and let the real culprits off the hook. The vibrancy of our coastal harbor and beach communities and thousands of family jobs depend on a balanced approach and timely protections.

Recent polls show that most people strongly agree.

A 2007 poll for the Alliance of Communities for Sustainable Fisheries shows that two-thirds of Californians support small, independent fishermen and recreational fishing activities. Californians don't think fishing is the primary threat to our oceans. Instead they support allowing fishing throughout the State - backed up with science-based limits to ensure sustainable harvest.

Californians want smart management of marine ecosystems and fish resources, not total ocean closures that simply hurt local economies without delivering real environmental benefits.

The three governors' ocean announcement can be a new beginning for our ocean waters and the communities that depend on clean oceans and clean beaches.

California leaders involved in this important effort should commit themselves to evaluating all the impacts on our ocean waters and crafting fair, equitable solutions that preserve a balance: healthy oceans, sustainable seafood resources and economically strong coastal and harbor communities.

We've been given a chance to make history rather than repeat failed attempts to equitably look at the real problems facing our ocean.

If we fail again, we may forever harm our ocean and everyone that depends on clean ocean waters and abundant marine resources. If we succeed, we will deliver a cleaner ocean for future generations - and thriving ocean communities as well.

Vern Goehring is manager of the California Fisheries Coalition, an association of 26 marine-related organizations whose members advocate for cleaner oceans and sustainable marine resources, and contribute more than $5.5 billion annually to the state's economy. Please see www.cafisheriescoalition.org for more information.

To comment on this story, email to comment@newsblaze.com

Click here to get NewsBlaze News in your email
Copyright © 2008, NewsBlaze, Daily News

_________________
Support UPSAC! Preserve pier and shore angling in California.
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 2:57 pm
Throwitback


Posts: 25

Quote:
These are all laudable ambitions that, if done correctly, can make a real difference to protect the Pacific Ocean off these state's coasts and sustain marine resources.

But protecting these important resources will take more than an announcement from three governors. We've heard these bold statements and goals before, but the follow through has always fallen short. Rather than looking at the full range of impacts on the ocean, officials have singled out one thing or another in adopting new, narrow regulations. Usually it's the thing of least benefit and least resistance.

These piecemeal approaches certainly give the appearance of progress, but don't do the real work of identifying and equitably addressing the problems facing the Pacific.

Coastal development and the many other things that deliver pollution to our ocean from land have been largely ignored; for example California is far behind where it should be in enforcing the Clean Water Act. Instead, the focus has largely been on closing off parts of the ocean to fishing - recreational and family-run fishing businesses alike.

Sometimes this is done as a needless precaution, many times, however, as a last ditch effort to cover up a failure to address the real problems - remember the extreme closures of Klamath River and Sacramento River salmon fishing in recent years.

Ironically, fishing already is one of the most highly regulated activities involving the ocean. New regulations imposed recently add one thing - redundancy - but bring little environmental benefit. People who spend every day on the ocean waters and who study and know our oceans find their input rejected out of hand by decision makers with little real world experience.

What's more, communities that depend on fishing and tourism suffer under unbalanced regulations. Since the enactment of ocean closures along the central coast of California , commerce and tourism in places like Morro Bay are down significantly.

Local families who fish for themselves or to provide fresh seafood to California 's citizens are not the problem and shouldn't bear the brunt of any short-sighted policies that provide an illusion of protection and let the real culprits off the hook. The vibrancy of our coastal harbor and beach communities and thousands of family jobs depend on a balanced approach and timely protections.


I completely agree with these statements you've made. When I fish or see other fisherman fishing on the shore I rarely see them even actually keep fish. How are a bunch of scientists going determine that shore/pier fishing is a factor in a decline of the fish population and that banning beach fishing along the coast is the solution. It sounds to me like the places that are left open will be seriously over fished. What then is to take place? Aren't size and and take limits there to protect the fish population? Really, how much impact do a select out amount of people along the coast really have? I believe there are other environmental protection measures and alternatives that can make our fisheries better in the future.

I propose if we want to improve the quality of marine life we should look at what actual factors keep marine life from flourishing and come forward with reasonable solutions that wonít take away freedom from people who like to fish in a exploratory and/or respectful manner.
I believe certain places should have fishing restrictions imposed. Just as there are protected areas in La Jolla there could possibly be a few places up the coast that could possibly bases for marine life. Making a bunch of different random beaches up and down the coast off limits to fishing sounds confusing and not focused. We should look at La Jollaís natural reserve structure and try to make comparable places spread in a few areas along the coast.

A few of the things that I believe could be worked on are regulating pollution into the oceans by offering steeper fines for pollution in the various different sources. Have people actually test the water up and down the coast and investigate on sources of pollution and reprimand and/or fix the problems.

Arenít there dead zones being created? Places that have faced large scale declines in fish population need to be brought to the attention of the public. Why havenít these places been focused on with intent of positive stimulation by cleaning and better regulating and punishing contributors who pollute the ocean?

Am I just waisting my breath or do other people agree? What can we do to protect ourselves from these drastic and none good forming rules? From what I sense and sincerely believe, If we fully regulate the rules that we already have and see what other factors are keeping the marine life from flourishing, act upon sensible solutions, we can make a combined impact to improve the quality of marine life.

_________________
To the few people who keep guppies - Throw it back - They have limits for a reason
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:17 pm
Ken Jones


Posts: 8022
Location: California

Good post. If you live in the San Diego area try to follow the So Cal MLPA process as close as you can. I believe the premise behind the MPAs is flawed and while good results have been seen in some areas, there are others that are much less convincing. All of these arguments were brought up in the North Central MLPA meetings and ultimately, after hundreds of hours and seven thick notebooks of material, mixed proposals were sent forward that are still being worked upon. Try to follow the meetings (they're usually televised); try to get hold of some of the materials; and try to speak up when you have an opportunity. You will learn more than you ever knew about the region and the various marine environments and you may change some of your views but it's an interesting process. It can also be very frustrating but such is the nature of such political events.
_________________
Support UPSAC! Preserve pier and shore angling in California.
Top of page
Send private message Make a quoted reply on this post
PFIC Message Boards >> Fishery Conservation, Management and Politics Reply to this topic
Page 1 of 1  
Display posts from previous:   
Jump to: