Marine reserves in Southern California

[drbill]

That area around the Kennedy Space Center has been the focus of studies regarding the effectiveness of the no-take marine reserve there and the results are among the many that speak to the effectiveness of marine reserves in increasing species density and diversity, as well as providing spillover to adjacent areas.

 

[Tailchaser]

If I am understanding Rex the kennedy space center reserve also limits total human contact? Lets say just for fun that after the MPA's shut down all fishing they then go after divers...

 

[Teamcasa]

Wildlife can recover if we give them space and leave them alone.

noticeable in our region being the apparent recovery of the giant sea bass, as an indication that IF pressures are removed completely in some areas, systems CAN rebound...

many that speak to the effectiveness of marine reserves in increasing species density and diversity, as well as providing spillover to adjacent areas.

Human interaction does have an impact either way. None of us really know with any degree of certainty if that interaction will work out in the long run. But based on what we do know, marine preserves most certianaly seem to be healthier than areas where there are no controls.

What is our responsibility to future generations vs the people that depend on fishing for their livelhoods? My vote would be the close off some sensitive areas altogeather, others on a rotating basis (5 years +/-) and more restrictions on take and bag limits.

public sportfishing boats should not be allowed to charge for fish cleaning...

I too like the idea that fish should not be cleaned aboard sportfishing charters. Each fisherman should leave the boat with their catch intact.

 

[diverrex]

If I am understanding Rex the kennedy space center reserve also limits total human contact? Lets say just for fun that after the MPA's shut down all fishing they then go after divers...

I'm not sure exactly how much KSC limit's human activity in the reserve, I just know for obvious security reasons it is limited and perhaps complete. I would have no problem if some MPA's limited divers completely or on a rotating basis. Would it be the worst thing for instance if a site like Farnsworth was closed for 2 years out of every 5, or even if some reefs were completely closed?

But these questions do show the difficulty of reconciling various interests. As divers, we want reasonable access, but I can understand non-divers thinking we should be shut out. The same debate is easy to see with the fishermen vs. non-fishermen. It seems clear to me that many people will not be happy with the final decisions, either from limiting MPA activity too much or too little. Perhaps no one will be happy.

Jeff I sympathize with you. I've seen you hunt. I know you take very limited amounts and eat what you take. It wouldn't surpise me if you ate less fish each year (purchased and caught) than many other people. I respect your right to keep fighting for your fishing rights. I do think you have a tough battle as so much more information is spread (accurately or inaccurately) about how drastically the fish stock has been declining. It's possible that sports fishermen have a negligible impact on fishing stocks and simply get caught up in an over correction.

 

[drbill]

The point is that no one is going to lose their fishing "rights" because of closures in MPAs... they still have the "right" to fish elsewhere. If those other areas aren't as good, perhaps the fishers should ask themselves why not. I look towards the "rights" of those who are no-take like myself, and to the "rights" of future generations to have a choice.

Anyone who knows me knows I'm not against responsible fishers. I eat fish too. However, it is the cumulative impacts of 100+ years of improperly controlled fishing that has led us to where we are today.

 

[Tailchaser]

The point is that no one is going to lose their fishing "rights" because of closures in MPAs... they still have the "right" to fish elsewhere. If those other areas aren't as good, perhaps the fishers should ask themselves why not. I look towards the "rights" of those who are no-take like myself, and to the "rights" of future generations to have a choice.

Anyone who knows me knows I'm not against responsible fishers. I eat fish too. However, it is the cumulative impacts of 100+ years of improperly controlled fishing that has led us to where we are today.

every area that is in the current mpa is a reef the rest of the areas still left open are mud or sandy bottoms... how would you like to loose your right to dive every reef and only be allowed to dive in the mud...

Bill you say that you do not take fish yourself yet you eat fish? I bet you that you are more apart of the "problem" than me based on consumption. And in fact you are more the problem then the average sport fisher by contributing to commercially caught fish.

I have a dive friend who is so opposed to the fisheries that he will not eat anything from the ocean. I can respect that but for you to say you eat fish but are against fishing that's bull****...