Obama just created a 582,000 square mile area no fishing off Hawaii. Fishermen are not happy! Who’s next?
Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper
Interesting, after a brief google search i found that the original preserve was founded by in 2006 by bush. Its my understanding that it will still be open to recreational fisherman. I’ve got to wonder though, who (other than commercial) even fishes it to begin with other than japanese and chinese vessels probably. It’s a huge flippin area on the map. Huff post puts a picture up to give it some scale http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57bf8f32e4b085c1ff28c654
Twice the size of Texas is pretty dang large!
Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper
Twice the size of Texas is a postage stamp in the Pacific. I personally believe there is value in preserving some of the few remaining wild areas on this planet. Just my opinion.
What would you feel about it if they closed 582,000 square miles off of Charleston? There is no difference, except Hawaii is not in your back yard.
Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper
quote:Oddly enough Bush's original proposal had no fishing allowed. Obama's redraft lets you fish recreationally and let's native Hawaiians Harvest things that they need for cultural significance. Not a fan, just sayin.
Originally posted by Cracker LarryWhat would you feel about it if they closed 582,000 square miles off of Charleston? There is no difference, except Hawaii is not in your back yard.
Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper
Maybe the fact they still keep billfish and everything else has something to do with it
quote:
Originally posted by Cracker LarryWhat would you feel about it if they closed 582,000 square miles off of Charleston? There is no difference, except Hawaii is not in your back yard.
Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper
Cracker, I understand your reserve on this and it is specially easy for anyone not near the area to brush it off as not significant. This closure area has been in the works way before Obuma comes in and takes credit (or to some discredit) to it.
I actually think it may be a pretty good idea with the massive Human growth and the demands it puts on Earth. I’d love to see some of this same stuff enacted on our Rain Forests. We as a Human Race have not seen a massive plague or major war in a long time to help decrease our population, all we’ve done is grow, grow, and grow some more. With the majority (Global) having little thought on bringing more babies into this world.
My likes with MPA’s are that is stops Commercial over fishing, my dislikes is that it stops fishing. Until we can get a group of people controlling MPA’s that actually understand how important Fishing is to locals for economic and pleasure reasons I’ll never fully agree with them. IMO the people controlling them really have no true understanding of what they do. After all the Oceans are a renewable resource, if managed properly. Maybe one day the entire World will come together and work as one… Don’t think it will be in our lifetime.
“If Bruce Jenner can keep his wiener and be called a woman, I can keep my firearms and be considered disarmed.”
This is another example of what Politicians do when they do not fully understand economics.
quote:
Originally posted by Cracker LarryWhat would you feel about it if they closed 582,000 square miles off of Charleston? There is no difference, except Hawaii is not in your back yard.
Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper
Look at the map. Kaua’i is about 125 nm from the edge of the expanded preserve. I don’t call that my backyard. How many people on this forum regularly fish 125+ miles out? I get it. Some people are going to be opposed to any regulations, others will be opposed to any action by an elected official from a different party. It’s your right. I’m just saying I see long term value in preserving some of the very few wild places on this Earth that God has given us.
MPA basically stands for “I’m too lazy or incompetent to think of any other solution in a world driven by technology”. Again, why let a scientist do an engineer’s job? You tell a scientist or a politician to create more fish and you get answers like restrictions and closures. You tell a group of engineers to create more fish, and they look at technology, hatcheries, etc.
Let’s say that there are 8 of us sharing a pizza… The obvious solution is to cut it into 8 pieces and we all get one slice… Now, 2 more people join the party. We run to scientists and say, “what do we do?” Scientists say, “Easy. Either 2 people are going to have to go hungry, or we need to cut it up into 10 slightly smaller pieces than before”… Then you ask an engineer and he says, “Well, why don’t we cook another pizza?”
In the computer science community it’s called “garbage in = garbage out”. Meaning, if you input is trash, then the output is garbage…
There is so much we can learn about fish and we just refuse to do it…
It’s not so much that we refuse to do it, it’s that it costs a lot to do it. Creating MPA’s are much cheaper up front than the cost to develop a new solution from scratch. It’s going to be very interesting to see how this works out in Hawaii.
There will be less fish caught, so less tax dollars collected. Less fish means higher prices. The consumer pays more. Fisherman will have to catch fish elsewhere. Other areas will become overfished. They will have to somehow enforce this protected area, which costs a lot of money given the size of this protected area. So they will collect less in taxes and have to spend more to enforce it. Who pays for it? We do. Taxes will have to go up. It would have been better to just pay for a smarter solution up front.
quote:
Originally posted by dreamin-onIt’s not so much that we refuse to do it, it’s that it costs a lot to do it.
refuse to spend the money = refuse to do it…
We already have the facilities in many cases… Take the waddell center for instance… We could be punching out gag groupers there by the millions with reasonable funding from the federal government.
Heck, the science is already out there. All of the hard work has been done.
NOAA fisheries has a $971M budget next year… Imagine what SC could do to our local fisheries if we just had a couple million of that each year…
Let me show you were the priorities are:
“Species Recovery Grants” -> 1 MILLION
“Electronic Monitoring and Reporting” -> 7 MILLION
Any questions about that?
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/mb/financial_services/docs/noaa_fisheries_2017_budget_briefing.pdf
When you give a scientist an “MPA hammer”, unfortunately, everything around them looks like a nail…
quote:
Originally posted by skinneej“Species Recovery Grants” -> 1 MILLION
“Electronic Monitoring and Reporting” -> 7 MILLION
My hunch is that an MPA costs more to maintain and enforce than developing a new way to recover population. But the up front cost is much cheaper and therefore easier to implement. When all you have to do is draw four lines in the ocean, draft some new laws and you’re done, then it’s pretty clear why we have these.
Also they(NOAA)want to keep their jobs, so if a species does not recover they basically cover their ass by creating an MPA rather than having to explain why their new method to recover fish stocks did not work.
While I don’t disagree with that, I would just like to bring up a few more points for consideration (things that people should know)…
-
Locally, “red snapper” is the achilles heel to our fishery. That is the catalyst for MPAs around here. That being said, Alabama has been restocking red snapper for several years. To “gain” this know how, all we need to do is make a phone call. All of the hard work has been done. You could argue that “deep water species” such as warsaw and kitty mitchell are a catalyst too, but that doesn’t carry the same punch as the red snapper debate.
-
More importantly, the council has been talking about MPA’s (used to be called “Marine Reserves”) for at least 20 years now in the SAMFC council meetings. Some of these guys LIFE’S WORK is about MPAs. Technology has evolved in the past TWO DECADES, but can you imagine the hit to the self-esteem\ego that would be necessary to turn ship and admit that MPAs are NOT the best solution? In investing, you don’t “throw good money after bad”. You basically cut your losses and pull out… However, if you literally have dedicated your ENTIRE LIFE’S WORK to MPAs, then what incentive would you have to look at other approaches? You would pretty much have to admit that you have been chasing your tail for twenty years and that your work didn’t amount to a hill of beans. This is REALLY the problem as I see it, and why we need “term limits” in the SAMFC and to get fresh blood in there to look at old problems. Right now, the “influencers” who have long controlled every council meeting conversation for the past 20 years are about an inch away from getting their “ecosystem based management” plan pushed through. That’s really what this is about… Someone needs to have the NUTS to step up and say, “We were wrong. There is a better way”. I mean, let’s call a “spade a spade”… What would our artificial reef system look like if SC was granted 1-2 million each year to build it? I’ll give you a hint… The current budget for building new re
quote:
Originally posted by skinneejThere is so much we can learn about fish and we just refuse to do it…
You contradict yourself a little, an engineer is not going to learn about fish like a true scientist would.
Maybe we just need to tweek the MPA’s with a little common sense. I think we all know recreational fishing in our back yard is not going to put a dent on the fishery except maybe around some of the artificial reefs so many only know to target. But even then that doesn’t hurt all the live bottom we have that so many recreational guys never touch.
The bottom line is Commercial Over Fishing is what hurts Marine resources. edit: + pollution in many areas.
I do love your Idea for more artificial reefs off our coast Skinneej. Lot’s of barren sea floor out there, and we know Artificial reefs help.
“If Bruce Jenner can keep his wiener and be called a woman, I can keep my firearms and be considered disarmed.”
So what can an individual do to combat this insanity?
Probably nothing 
Check out the latest now!! Coming soon to your back yard.
Will Obama fence off more of the ocean? US fishermen are fearful</font id=“size4”>
Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper
quote:You should hear offshore. People(Captains) calling out fish to see if they're legal. What kind of porgy is that for PSA...3 types are closed...I fished for grouper and BSB specifically and stayed away from snapper drops...if a shark cuts off half the snapper, are they gonna fine me for keeping the fish? My boy asked me and I didn't know.
Originally posted by Cracker LarryProbably nothing
Check out the latest now!! Coming soon to your back yard.
Will Obama fence off more of the ocean? US fishermen are fearful</font id=“size4”>
Capt. Larry Teuton
Swamp Worshiper