Date; August 25, 1999
To: Pier Fishing In California
From: turin
Subject: Seals
I have been wondering if seals really are good or bad. Usually seals are around because a lot of fish are around but then if you catch one they'll eat it. I guess if a seal comes to your spot, that means there were fish there but then it could mean it scared them away or is waiting for them to be caught by you. If the seal leaves, then maybe the fish will return.
So are seals good or bad?
Posted by fongster
They are an important part of the marine eco system, however, too many now exist because of tree hugging eco-sensitive animal rights activists that rescue those that should have died due to disease and other natural causes. These are typically the same people who want to stop your fishing, too. i.e. PETA, a well organized, well funded animal rights group. So are they good or bad? If left to flourish like they are, they are bad---whole salmon fisheries are disappearing due to too many seals wiping out spawning runs. My 2 cents...
Posted by turin
I meant is there presence a good or bad thing in terms of catching fish or the presence of fish.. etc.
Posted by fongster
Kill em all if I care. Ooh...sorry misunderstood...they basically ruin the fishing once they show up...scaring off fish, or eating the ones you hook as you mentioned. Sometimes we'll even move the boat and those suckers will follow.
Posted by Ed Burns
Well, this IS the Internet after all, so I guess we have to expect a little baseless ranting even in this group. Allow me... “fongster” wrote: They are an important part of the marine eco system. You should have stopped here. It’s the only factual statement you made. However, too many now exist because of tree hugging eco-sensitive animal rights activists >that rescue those that should have died due to disease and other natural causes. I've been involved with the California Marine Mammal Center for more than 15 years, including actually working there, and I can tell you that as rewarding as the work is for some, the number of animals returned to the wild is insignificant compared to the wild population. The increase in their numbers is actually do to other factors including, but not limited to the Marine Mammal Protection Act signed by Richard Nixon in 1972 (a time when Republicans still cared about the environment), and the extreme overfishing of sharks which are their only natural predators in this area. These are typically the same people who want to stop your fishing, too. i.e. PETA, a well >organized, well funded animal rights group. Generally not my experience. Virtually every hunter and fisherman I know is concerned about the environment, but obviously they’re a far cry from your typical animal rights extremist. And just for informational purposes, I can honestly say I've never seen a one of them hug a tree or kiss a frog. >So are they good or bad? If left to flourish like they are, they are bad. I completely disagree. Like any link in an ecosystem, they have their highs and lows. If the shark population rebounds with some of the protections being discussed the seal population will go down accordingly. >whole salmon fisheries are disappearing due to too many seals wiping out spawning runs. I defy you to point to some proof of this. Study after study have shown that the salmon are in danger from overfishing, dam building on their rivers and logging in the watersheds which causes silting of their spawning beds. >My 2 cents... You've got some change coming. Ed (no splinters in these lips) Burns
Posted by DiehardStriper
From a biological stand point, we have mess with nature and therefore providing an unnatural habitat for the seals. The entire marine ecology and food chain have been altered due to actually the presence of humans. We do have the responsibility now to regulate them as like of having a home aquarium. I believe they should be regulated by the DFG like deer and elk. If not, soon we will see more of them and then perhaps extinction will follow due to over population. The increase in great white’s in our area might be just due to seals. Perhaps we can develop an artificial birth control method to regulate them instead of killing or have more GW in the bay! Or... its us, its the seals, or THE GWs?
Posted by daurer
Well, wasn’t it PETA that came out against fishing because it was cruel to the fish? They especially targeted the catch and release because they thought that it was MORE cruel to hook a fish and tire it out and release it than to kill it outright. Go figure! You got some change coming also!
Posted by Eric
Gotta agree with Ed, I think more salmon are dying due to human activities such as overfishing, dams, and pollution than they are dying from seals. And while fishing for mackerel, a seal can get up to about 25 feet from your bait and I would still catch mackerel, and I’ve also seen shovelnose, halibut, stingray, bat ray all caught while a seal was no more than five feet from the pier, so I am saying that probably the only fishing affected by seals is mackerel (very slightly) and some baitfish. Just my opinion. And I am no environmentalist either. Eric
Posted by fongster
All I know is what I’ve read regarding hordes of seals intercepting spawning salmon in Oregon, Washington, Canada, Alaska. Sorry, I’m way too busy to have archived those articles both in print and cyber, so I can't reference them if you were gonna ask. Working with the seal people probably gives you a slant that way, just as those working with fisheries gives them a slant that way. No further comments from me on this thread.
Posted by Ken Jones
Well, this is an interesting discussion and one that is very relevant. I must admit that I am biased since my son and daughter-in-law volunteered for a period of time at the Marine Mammal Rescue Center (same as California Marine Mammal Center?) and I would never knowingly harm a seal or sea lion. However, I’ve had salmon ripped from my hooks while fishing in the north, seen yellowtail ripped from hooks in the south, and even seen fish from piers grabbed, so it obviously is a problem for anglers.
Yes, humankind probably created the ecological imbalance and no one really seems to have a good solution although birth control has been mentioned. I do know that studies show that salmon at the mouth of the Russian River are not responsible for the loss of the fish in the river — even though they are blamed for it. Probably true at many other streams. I also know that sea lions are responsible for a tremendous loss of fish in some Washington tributaries (or at least near Lake Washington where the fish get trapped and are eaten by the sea lions).
I also know that as a general rule when the sea lions show up around a pier some types (or schools) of fish will disappear. At the same time, I've fished down in the fish wells out at the end of the Santa Cruz Wharf and caught large lingcod, greenling and rockfish even though the sea lions were diving in and swimming right around my line, and the noise practically required ear plugs. So, even this generalization has no easy answer.
To: Pier Fishing In California
From: turin
Subject: Seals
I have been wondering if seals really are good or bad. Usually seals are around because a lot of fish are around but then if you catch one they'll eat it. I guess if a seal comes to your spot, that means there were fish there but then it could mean it scared them away or is waiting for them to be caught by you. If the seal leaves, then maybe the fish will return.
So are seals good or bad?
Posted by fongster
They are an important part of the marine eco system, however, too many now exist because of tree hugging eco-sensitive animal rights activists that rescue those that should have died due to disease and other natural causes. These are typically the same people who want to stop your fishing, too. i.e. PETA, a well organized, well funded animal rights group. So are they good or bad? If left to flourish like they are, they are bad---whole salmon fisheries are disappearing due to too many seals wiping out spawning runs. My 2 cents...
Posted by turin
I meant is there presence a good or bad thing in terms of catching fish or the presence of fish.. etc.
Posted by fongster
Kill em all if I care. Ooh...sorry misunderstood...they basically ruin the fishing once they show up...scaring off fish, or eating the ones you hook as you mentioned. Sometimes we'll even move the boat and those suckers will follow.
Posted by Ed Burns
Well, this IS the Internet after all, so I guess we have to expect a little baseless ranting even in this group. Allow me... “fongster” wrote: They are an important part of the marine eco system. You should have stopped here. It’s the only factual statement you made. However, too many now exist because of tree hugging eco-sensitive animal rights activists >that rescue those that should have died due to disease and other natural causes. I've been involved with the California Marine Mammal Center for more than 15 years, including actually working there, and I can tell you that as rewarding as the work is for some, the number of animals returned to the wild is insignificant compared to the wild population. The increase in their numbers is actually do to other factors including, but not limited to the Marine Mammal Protection Act signed by Richard Nixon in 1972 (a time when Republicans still cared about the environment), and the extreme overfishing of sharks which are their only natural predators in this area. These are typically the same people who want to stop your fishing, too. i.e. PETA, a well >organized, well funded animal rights group. Generally not my experience. Virtually every hunter and fisherman I know is concerned about the environment, but obviously they’re a far cry from your typical animal rights extremist. And just for informational purposes, I can honestly say I've never seen a one of them hug a tree or kiss a frog. >So are they good or bad? If left to flourish like they are, they are bad. I completely disagree. Like any link in an ecosystem, they have their highs and lows. If the shark population rebounds with some of the protections being discussed the seal population will go down accordingly. >whole salmon fisheries are disappearing due to too many seals wiping out spawning runs. I defy you to point to some proof of this. Study after study have shown that the salmon are in danger from overfishing, dam building on their rivers and logging in the watersheds which causes silting of their spawning beds. >My 2 cents... You've got some change coming. Ed (no splinters in these lips) Burns
Posted by DiehardStriper
From a biological stand point, we have mess with nature and therefore providing an unnatural habitat for the seals. The entire marine ecology and food chain have been altered due to actually the presence of humans. We do have the responsibility now to regulate them as like of having a home aquarium. I believe they should be regulated by the DFG like deer and elk. If not, soon we will see more of them and then perhaps extinction will follow due to over population. The increase in great white’s in our area might be just due to seals. Perhaps we can develop an artificial birth control method to regulate them instead of killing or have more GW in the bay! Or... its us, its the seals, or THE GWs?
Posted by daurer
Well, wasn’t it PETA that came out against fishing because it was cruel to the fish? They especially targeted the catch and release because they thought that it was MORE cruel to hook a fish and tire it out and release it than to kill it outright. Go figure! You got some change coming also!
Posted by Eric
Gotta agree with Ed, I think more salmon are dying due to human activities such as overfishing, dams, and pollution than they are dying from seals. And while fishing for mackerel, a seal can get up to about 25 feet from your bait and I would still catch mackerel, and I’ve also seen shovelnose, halibut, stingray, bat ray all caught while a seal was no more than five feet from the pier, so I am saying that probably the only fishing affected by seals is mackerel (very slightly) and some baitfish. Just my opinion. And I am no environmentalist either. Eric
Posted by fongster
All I know is what I’ve read regarding hordes of seals intercepting spawning salmon in Oregon, Washington, Canada, Alaska. Sorry, I’m way too busy to have archived those articles both in print and cyber, so I can't reference them if you were gonna ask. Working with the seal people probably gives you a slant that way, just as those working with fisheries gives them a slant that way. No further comments from me on this thread.
Posted by Ken Jones
Well, this is an interesting discussion and one that is very relevant. I must admit that I am biased since my son and daughter-in-law volunteered for a period of time at the Marine Mammal Rescue Center (same as California Marine Mammal Center?) and I would never knowingly harm a seal or sea lion. However, I’ve had salmon ripped from my hooks while fishing in the north, seen yellowtail ripped from hooks in the south, and even seen fish from piers grabbed, so it obviously is a problem for anglers.
Yes, humankind probably created the ecological imbalance and no one really seems to have a good solution although birth control has been mentioned. I do know that studies show that salmon at the mouth of the Russian River are not responsible for the loss of the fish in the river — even though they are blamed for it. Probably true at many other streams. I also know that sea lions are responsible for a tremendous loss of fish in some Washington tributaries (or at least near Lake Washington where the fish get trapped and are eaten by the sea lions).
I also know that as a general rule when the sea lions show up around a pier some types (or schools) of fish will disappear. At the same time, I've fished down in the fish wells out at the end of the Santa Cruz Wharf and caught large lingcod, greenling and rockfish even though the sea lions were diving in and swimming right around my line, and the noise practically required ear plugs. So, even this generalization has no easy answer.