Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
The Fish & Game Commission has literally just now (at 3:15PM) passed the South Coast MPAs. They adopted the BRTF's IPA (Integrated Preferred Alternative) with some modifications.
It will still be a while until these take effect, but now it's on to the next step.
- Ken -------------------
Ken Kurtis
Member - SIG (Statewide Interests Group)
MLPAI (Marine Life Protection Act Initiative)
I hate to be narrow minded on this important piece of legislation, but do you know the specific outcome of the Palos Verdes Peninsula & Catalina MPA's? Were they changed in any way? The Intergrated Preferred Alternative seemed to protect more southern zones "Laguna & San Diego" while leaving Palos Verdes & Catalina with only small areas. I hope this was addressed
Absolutely Agree. I'll always vote for some protection v.s. no Protection.
Ok. I found the updated map: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/mlpa/pdfs/scmpas121510.pdf
I see some areas which were proposed as State Marine Reserves "Red" are now changed to this new purple type of SMCA. This includes the Marineland to Pt.Vicente MPA! The new "purple" SMCA's allows take through "specified activities" permitted by other agencies. Pardon my vulgarity, but WTF is this?
please don't be offended by this or take it the wrong way. only from observation by intimate contact with our inshore fisheries along southern calif, have i come to a surprising realization that always is disregarded when legislation is being made. number one, does anyone remember 15 yrs leading up to the 1997 el nino and how our waters were called "dead sea?" all of a sudden the fish counts and record sizes of all species practically grew over one season to epic proportions and remained even resident species not known to stay in cooler waters, without the help of any bay keeping projects. they flourished without man's help. white sea bass were practically non existant. albacore migrations were far away and far in between.then el nino's nutrient rich waters made ground dwelling, migratory ground dwellers and palagics this place. to create the closures only makes the fishable areas hit with extreme pressures, and it creates illegal fishing. is the dfg gonna lower license fees? i know i wont be buying licenses for no fishing areas. then the funding for dfg will have to come by way of other means, after alot of quit buying them also. it definately seems to be going in the wrong direction, much like the rest of the country's and california's failing solutions to recover anything.
These "closures" ensure that both the sport and commercial fisheries can be sustained in the future. If we continue to take take take with no thought of what were doing, these industries will surely disappear. MPA's have shown to increase the abundance of many target species. Australia went through similar legislation and the fisheries tried to block it from being enacted. Years later the fishermen changed their tune when catch levels skyrocketed from the spill over from the protected areas. Why must we be so short sighted?
I understand your fear that the areas left available will now be fished more frequently & more intensely. I hoped that the MPA's would be more evenly distributed between the Islands and the mainland, both north and south and that there would be more Reserves then Conservation areas. But inaction and the continuing allowance of mass commercial take everywhere can only result in disaster.
I do believe that Casino Point (The Dive Park) is now officially a No Take, SMCA. I have the same wonder as FrankPro1, what does: State Marine Reserve (SMR) changed in designation to State Marine Conservation Area (SMCA) that prohibits take except pursuant to specified activities permitted by other agencies mean?
Actually . . . no. And it's a common misconception.
The Park has never had any legally-enforcebale protected status. It has always been a sort of "gentlemen's agreement" that it was no-take. But if a gentleman chose not to honor that . . .
I remember one of the first times this came to light was maybe 15-20 years ago and a diver was taking abs or lobster or something like that and was politely asked to stop. He declined. A passing Sheriff was flagged down who explained that he couldn't cite or arrest the guy because there was no law or statute prohibiting it.
One of the great things about the new MPAs (and my recollection is that this was in all of the proposals) is that the Park and Lovers Cove will now (once this all takes effect) officially be no-take zones.
The one issue that they still had to resolve today (and I missed the vote on this though I think it passed) was to add language to specifcally allow fish feeding for the purpose of viewing marine life. Without that language, my understanding is that fish feeding would be prohibited. So my hope is that they got that cleaned up.
One thing to remember in all of this is that this is all supposed to be what's called "Adaptive Management." In other words, this is where we'll start and as things progress, we throw out the things that don't work and make better than things that do work. But nothing's going to be perfect from the git-go.
- Ken -------------------
Ken Kurtis
Member - SIG (Statewide Interests Group)
MLPAI (Marine Life Protection Act Initiative)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
