Solution: Learn to Dive so hogfish, lobster, sheepshead that are worth cleaning, and lionfish can put some meat on the table. This sucks bad, but there are still plenty of fish in the sea. Start taking measurments now to see how big the gags will be when we tear back into them. In the mean time lets make some trips down to Florida during their open seasons to put the hurting on the fish that really ARE disappearing. I like the idea of a nice offshore grill too ;).
An offshore wind farm would be rooted to the seafloor (much like the Ravenel bridge pilings) and reinforced with rock to support the base of the windmill. The base and reinforcing rocks would create a hard substrate for soft corals to attach to thus creating an artificial reef and more habitat for bottom fish species. The wind farms would never be allowed to destroy any existing live bottom. They will most likely be installed further to the north where the live bottom is more spaced out.
quote:Thanks for the intel. I have mixed emotions about them. The #1 cause of natural live bottom destruction is from upcurrent dredging type of activities. Any sand or mud displaced is carried by the current and re-deposited elsewhere.
Originally posted by OceanlegareAn offshore wind farm would be rooted to the seafloor (much like the Ravenel bridge pilings) and reinforced with rock to support the base of the windmill. The base and reinforcing rocks would create a hard substrate for soft corals to attach to thus creating an artificial reef and more habitat for bottom fish species. The wind farms would never be allowed to destroy any existing live bottom. They will most likely be installed further to the north where the live bottom is more spaced out.
I am all about artificial reefs, but windmills would seem a bit unsightly above the surface. In addition, they don’t seem to be a very efficient way of harvesting natural energy. If I remember, it would take 1800+ of the most powerful windmills to equal the output of one mediocre nuclear plant.
I know that people are expecting them to function as oil rigs do in the gulf, but those guys will tell you that in those depths, all they expect is kings, cudas, cobia, spades, etc. Sure, we do get some grouper, etc in 60 feet, but some of these windmills will be in 40’. That means you can probably also see them from land.
I guess it’s the “not in my backyard” syndrome, but it’s one of those things that I don’t think people should blindly accept without questioning. Sure, if they come and I see a benefit, then I will be convinced, but until then, I will be skeptical.
In general, it’s really the depth (location) that they will be placed that make me skeptical. They just seem a little too shallow to make me say “WOW”…
You also like to keep them out of flyways. The bykill of birds is quite high if they have to go through turbines. As I recall, >35 Golden eagles killed in Cali last year.
The federal regs that encourage the wind turbines also, by report, protects them legally if protected species are killed by the turbine.
some humidity,salt spray,I imagine they would hardly be seen.visibility sucks during the warmer months
Its only illegal if you get caught with one? Right?
Wind mills offshore is a great idea, 1800 to = a nuc plant, thats a trade I would make any day. You get the engery and new fish habit is created win win there.
Local Boy, Just having fun.
YEAH, THEY PROBABLY MAKE A GOOD REEF BUT, YOU CAN ALSO FORGET ABOUT FISHING NEAR THEM TOO. WITH TERRORISM OUT THERE THEY WON’T WANT ANYONE NEAR THEM. NOT WORTH PUTTING THEM UP IMO. CATCH UM UP…MIKE
quote:
Originally posted by AQUASPORTYEAH, THEY PROBABLY MAKE A GOOD REEF BUT, YOU CAN ALSO FORGET ABOUT FISHING NEAR THEM TOO. WITH TERRORISM OUT THERE THEY WON’T WANT ANYONE NEAR THEM. NOT WORTH PUTTING THEM UP IMO. CATCH UM UP…MIKE
That is worth shouting about:smiley:
S 34
507 sq. ft.