The Blue Heron Bridge a Marine Sanctuary?

[dumpsterDiver]

So do we all want more regulation of diving activity? We used to be able to night dive whenever we want, somehow they took our rights away and make them contingent on working with a private corporation... a dive shop. we have to go to a private company to get permission to "trespass" on public property and we can only go when it is convienent to a few specific corporations. Is that even legal?

A few years ago the county took away a considerable amount of the public parking and instead fenced it off from the public and made it parking only for police etc. They don't need half that room and we could not afford the expensive buildings they constructed.

Then the County finds out they don't have enough money and begin to charge everyone to launch their boats at the public facility. We now have a county ramp fee.

A few weeks ago, they took away our rights to drink a beer after a dive. The county abandoned the patrol of the park and turned it over to the city and now no drinking at all. It sucks.

There are signs up there now about collection. Do we need MORE regulations? What benefit will more regulations have? I'm confused why we want to give the local government more control over our activities?

If it does become a "preserve" how long until they determine that too many divers are there and we have to get a permit to dive in the day.. you know to protect the resource and make sure that the site is not over-run with novice divers.

If the county wanted to do something for the site, they could do something about all the oily rainwater that runs dirctly off the parking lot into the water....

 

[danvolker]

So do we all want more regulation of diving activity? We used to be able to night dive whenever we want, somehow they took our rights away and make them contingent on working with a private corporation... a dive shop. we have to go to a private company to get permission to "trespass" on public property and we can only go when it is convienent to a few specific corporations. Is that even legal?

A few years ago the county took away a considerable amount of the public parking and instead fenced it off from the public and made it parking only for police etc. They don't need half that room and we could not afford the expensive buildings they constructed.

Then the County finds out they don't have enough money and begin to charge everyone to launch their boats at the public facility. We now have a county ramp fee.

A few weeks ago, they took away our rights to drink a beer after a dive. The county abandoned the patrol of the park and turned it over to the city and now no drinking at all. It sucks.

There are signs up there now about collection. Do we need MORE regulations? What benefit will more regulations have? I'm confused why we want to give the local government more control over our activities?

If it does become a "preserve" how long until they determine that too many divers are there and we have to get a permit to dive in the day.. you know to protect the resource and make sure that the site is not over-run with novice divers.

If the county wanted to do something for the site, they could do something about all the oily rainwater that runs dirctly off the parking lot into the water....

On this topic I am inclined to agree with you.
And the preserve status is unlikely to help much against any one that would really hurt the resource...

 

[Shcubasteve]

Repost from another thread...

I have to admit that I loved collecting $100 worth of critters on a free shore dive but for the greater good of divers everywhere I support marine preserve idea for sure- 10 years ago, less divers were aware of the amazing life the bridge holds- now folks travel cross-country to see it- commercial fish collectors included

If a marine park were to be designated, I'd like to see some points addressed-

The fishing double standard
I have issue with the fact that a fisherman on the pier at Phil Foster can collect a fish by legal means and keep it while an otherwise legal diver cannot collect fish?? What about lobster? If I found a legal one at the bridge, I'm keeping it!.. Outlawing collection should apply to all organisms by any means, IMO

Fish caught outside of proposed boundary
Right now, if I catch my limit of critters out on the reef, I can land them at Phil Foster no problem. What if I launch my kayak and paddle outside of current OR proposed boundary (peanut island, other areas of the lagoon), collect fish, then paddle back to the beach to land my catch? As it stands now, I should be able to do that??? Sounds like a slippery slope... Even if a new marine park is enacted, I would like to have the ability to land fish caught outside of current/proposed park boundary at Phil Foster Park. I understand that the burden of proof should be that of the collector; which is solved with a gps in track mode- similar to how fish illegal in state waters can be harvested in federal waters legally.

The Boundary Itself
?
Just the waters immediately surrounding Phil Foster? The entire blue heron blvd bridge span from east to west (Hate to say, but I agree with this one)? Right now, I can take my speargun and shoot sheepshead and other legal fish on the west side of the boating channel and break no FWC RULES.
"...You may NOT spearfish...within 100 yards of a public swimming beach, any commercial or public fishing pier, or any part of a bridge from which public fishing is allowed.


No public fishing, no problem. Same goes for collection...

Again, I want to support a marine preserve but, as Orlando points out, it may take a political miracle to do it correctly and fairly for everyone involved... Maybe the 'Do Nothing' approach modeled by the G.O.P. isn't so bad...

 

[djtimmy77]

We used to be able to night dive whenever we want,

Just curious, when was this? Prior to them renovating Phil Foster Park? Did they not have the rule about not being on the beach area after sunset?

 

[jet126]

Another interesting thing will be the reaction of the local Riviera Beach community. There's a lot of old Florida history with that beach.

We all know what a madhouse the park is on weekends. Nothing to do with diving or even fishing - just families enjoying a picnic and swim. And I've even been there on a summer weekday morning and found it over run with daycamps.

Most national parks charge an entry fee. They can't make some cars pay and not others ... I wonder how the locals would feel about having to pay to use their beach.

I plan to take notes at the meeting and post as accurate a summary as I can. I hope others will too, so that between us we'll be able to communicate all the issues presented to those of you who cannot attend.

 

[dumpsterDiver]

Just curious, when was this? Prior to them renovating Phil Foster Park? Did they not have the rule about not being on the beach area after sunset?

I don't know, maybe 3 yrs ago. I have no doubt that you were not allowed on the beach at night, but if you could park there, no cop is going to bother with a scuba diver crossing the beach and leaving. Hell we used to be able to park on the east bridge and enter there too.

 

[Scubarus66]

Copy your writings from all forums and send them to the link I'm providing even if you are going to the meeting tomorrow night.......

Contact Us

 

[Splitlip]

thanks! Did it.

I am eating my words. I essentially told Pete a couple months ago that Parks "does not care about divers"

I guess County DERM stepped in. Rich and John, thanks.
When I worked for the County I was part of DERM's Reef Research Team.

 

[Splitlip]

Hell we used to be able to park on the east bridge and enter there too.

That was sweet wasn't it?

I never found out why it was changed but for traffic studies and future widening of A1A.

 

[jet126]

Just home from the meeting. Standing room only: I'm guessing 100 inside and that many more outside. Speakers had two minutes to state their views. I will post a recap by the weekend.


The park district will continue to accept emails for another week: pbcparks@pbcgov.org.