Posted on 08/15/2006 10:34:08 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
A network of reserves to protect California's rich array of marine wildlife moved closer to becoming a reality on Tuesday after a state panel selected a plan to put large swaths of coastal waters off-limits to fishing.
The Fish and Game Commission voted at a packed meeting in Monterey to ban both commercial and recreational fishing across more than 200 square miles between Santa Barbara and Half Moon Bay, just south of San Francisco.
The plan still must undergo a final environmental review before it goes into effect. The new protected areas likely would not become official until at least early 2007, said Bill Romanelli, a spokesman for the state Department of Fish and Game.
California has created various marine reserves over the years, but their boundaries and restrictions often have conflicted. The latest effort seeks to develop a systematic, statewide approach to protecting coastal habitat.
Florida and Hawaii have established similar marine protected areas.
Marine reserves, mandated by the Marine Life Protection Act of 1999, aim to restore populations of fish, crustaceans, squid and other marine life depleted by overfishing, pollution and other human activities. They are designed to safeguard key ecosystems such as kelp forests and rocky reefs rather than the more traditional approach of singling out specific species for protection.
Environmentalists said the California commission should have gone further, calling marine protected areas as important as national parks on land.
"The network is not as strong as we wanted, but we're hoping we can all work together now to protect the underwater gems of the Central Coast," said Karen Garrison, who co-directs the oceans program in San Francisco for the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Fishermen, meanwhile, worried that any limits on fishing could hurt their livelihoods.
The panel considered four plans that differed mainly over how broad an area to set aside for preservation.
A plan proposed by fishermen themselves would have barred them from 5 percent of Central Coast waters. Environmentalists supported placing 13 percent under protection.
The final plan chosen by the commission would put 8 percent off limits.
Scientists believe habitats protected from fishing give fish and other wildlife a chance to grow larger and replenish their numbers.
Protected areas under the plan would include underwater canyons and coral beds near coastal landmarks like Point Lobos, Point Sur and Ano Nuevo.
I hope they won't mind the million gazillion off-shore oil rigs I plan to put there when I become King. (Oil rigs are good for fishies anyway.)
Or, environmentalists masquerading as fishermen through fancy sounding non-profit organizations.
what are legislators for anyway?
what are (some) legislators (good) for anyway?
chum?
whatever it takes to help the fish get fat
Bloomberg or someone just fully funded the creation of a 'gun rights' organization that will be anti-gun for them.
Just one? /sarcasm
The infiltration continues.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1683659/posts
there is the link
Great job keeping that on topic! ROFLMHO!!!
Funded solely by New York City dot-com billionaire Andrew McKelvey probably a Bloomy buddy.
the American Hunters and Shooters Association is its name. Its replacing the old Americans for Gun Safety as their front group apparently, according to that NRA release.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1453800/posts
here is the entire press release
Thanks for the link.
There are a couple of anti-hunting bills working their way through the California legislature.
I'll keep an eye out for these guys campaigning.
They might be more of a NY area thing but the NRA did send out the warning so you should.
Thanks!
On that note, I bid you G'nite.
Other than the NRA and a few others, you can't count on too many anymore.
gnite
Any made up leftist group by 3 people can get their 'study' in the news while the media ignores real conservative think-tanks
You have to admire their organization skills. I've often thought "why don't conservatives do that"? The only thing I can conclude is that conservatives just can't bring themselves to adopt the same sleazy, dishonest tactics of the leftists. That, and being too busy trying to make a living doing a real job.
The fisherman were not phony, just outgunned by all the sky-is-falling Chicken Little's, in all their various guises, including the so-called "scientists", whom are every one of them, products of our way-far-left educational processes.
They lack much in the way of real data, concerning this area, too. One gal wanted to close the whole thing down, so they could "study" it!
I sat in on, or watched, many of the "Marine Interest Group" meetings, personally. It was painful to watch these ninnys discuss things like "where are the areas to be defined", "where will the Northerly, and Southerly borders be". After a couple of hours, a whole room full of these geniuses finally recognized that Pt. Conception, is a place where there is the biggest change of marine species. Uh, I could have told them that ---- in fact--- I did --- had already --- when the question was posed to me by a NMFS Biologist, I answered the same as they did (except that I also stated the "why" of why this is true, which they never got around to mentioning(!)) but it only took me about 15 seconds to respond...long before they ever began to discuss it.
The State is choking the live out of the fishing industry in this part of California. They are being pushed to do so by many well funded environmental groups. All they know, is they think they must "save" it, somehow. From what, I don't know any more...as it is now, we are down to about 15 percent of the commercial boat licenses, State-wide, compared to about a dozen years ago. Of those who are left, effort is way down, per boat, due to OTHER restrictions, already in place during that same time period.
Ever heard of the "Rockfish Conservation Area"? It only goes from the Mexican border to the Canadian border!!! Though the regulations have fluctuated somewhat, as far as depths in which fishing was prohibited, it's most generally from 50-150 fathoms. It's been in place for what, EIGHT years now(?), only the largest fishery closure in the history of the Nation, and now one has ever HEARD of it!!!!!!!!!!
(I don't even pay attention anymore, I'm tired out by it all, and haven't fished in a year...it could be more restrictive, now, since they always liked to fiddle with it, damn their eyes...) And this portion, in this last general area where they want to put this latest additional"new" "exclusion zone" is as healthy as any other wide area, except for those parts it is MUCH better than, in terms of health of fish populations. But they just had to pick on us, right here.
They've killed me. Oftentimes, I think of just going ahead and finishing the job, and shooting myself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.