Printable View
Are you aware that the Gateway National Park Area has been nominated for MPA status with permanent year round restrictions on both Commercial and Recreational fishing?
Public comment is open till February 22, 2010.
Here is the announcement and details:
http://mpa.gov/pdf/national-system/f...ice_jan710.pdf
Here is the document listing sites and more details:
http://mpa.gov/pdf/national-system/n...s_jan_2010.pdf
go to page 11 for Sandy Hook details.
Yep they are doing this to many parks in NC and rumor has it if you made the list it's more or less a done deal.People wanted change and they are getting it:burn:
I did a quick review of those MPAs, NJdiver.
Some observations:
31 National Park areas in the US and its territories are now designated as MPAs, which say "Fishing Restricted". What that means to me is that they'll allow you to fish but have the authority to restrict fishing in the future as they see fit.
5 of those are designated "No-take" areas for both Recs and Comms.
The "no-take" MPAs and locations:
1. Buck Island... USVI, pg 1
2. Cabrillo....Ca, pg2
3. Kaluapapa...HI, pg15
4. Kaloko-Honokohau...HI, pg 16
5. St Croix E End...USVI. pg 31
Here are some that E Coast anglers might identify with:
"Commercial and Recreational fishing restricted"
!. Sandy Hook NJ, pg 11
2. Cape Cod, MA
3. Cape Hatteras, NC
4. Cape Lookout, NC
5. Fire Island, NY
I'm assuming that in the 5 above, fishing will be status quo for awhile. This does give them the power to shut it down if they want to. It seemed pretty scary to me. I guess they can get away with it because they're federal parks.
Another thing that concerns me is the PCO - Priority Conservation Objective. Seems like a pretty fancy way of saying:
"We're going to do what we want, fishermen be damned, we have the mandate of Conservation on our side" :2flip:
NJdiver, how will you as a diver be affected by these or any other MPAs?
I'd like to hear about it and any other thoughts you have on this matter.
I heard no fishing.
National Park Service News Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: DATE: January 13, 2010
CONTACT: Cyndy Holda, 252-473-2111, ext. 148
North Carolina’s Two National Seashores among the 21 National Park Units
Being Considered by NOAA’s Marine Protected Areas Status
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Marine Protected Areas Center, in cooperation with the Department of the Interior (DOI) has created a first ever inventory of the nation’s marine protected areas. This unique, comprehensive inventory catalogs and classifies marine protected areas within US waters. Thirty-two sites, including twenty-one units of the National Park System and several national wildlife refuges, have been nominated to join the national system of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). Cape Hatteras and Cape Lookout National Seashores are among the national seashores listed in the Federal Register last week.
Developed in response to Executive Order 13158 on Marine Protected Areas, the final framework for the national system was published on November 19, 2008. Comments on the nominations to the national system are due February 22, 2010. For more information, check NOAA website at: www.mpa.gov or submit comments to: mpa.comments@noaa.gov .
Do MPAs close access to fishing and other recreational use of the resource?
There are many types of Marine Protected Areas in the United States, and most do not prohibit fishing and recreational uses throughout their boundaries. Existing MPAs encompass a wide range of characteristics and have been established for a variety of different purposes. While a few sites exist as no-take marine reserves, the vast majority of MPAs, both in terms of numbers and area, are open for fishing, diving, boating, and other recreational and commercial uses.
Taken from mpa.gov
Rumor has it this will be phase 1 to gain acceptance
Phase 2 will be no fishing
That is bad news. I wonder how far out into the water the MPA will extend and how you would enforce it. The Navy Pier has marked buoys ringing the perimeter in front. I would be very interested in hearing exactly how they propose to do that.
stupidest crap i ever heard of. it will push all the people into the back of rb in the spring. then in the rest of the spring they will go to the rocks. you cant put hundreds of people fishing on one spot its gonna be like one big cluster ****. our great state of nj fu!:2flip:
fu:2flip:fu:2flip:fu:2flip: and double fu!:2flip::2flip: :burn:
Too depressing. Just when I learn Sandy Hook and have a great fall there, they are talking about closing it down. I went to the public comments section.
njdiver, finchaser, dark, is there anything else we can do? Do we have the power to stop this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by wish4fish
This is Federal from Obama not the State
Ok, calm down everyone. The government is not at this moment increasing or further restricting anything. The MPA's they are referring to are already in place. Most people don't know this but they have been in place for years.
What they are trying to do is get them all under one governing body to better manage what they have. They are not taking nominations for new MPA's just proposing that those that are in place join the national system instead of state run, USWF, etc.
Here is amap of MPA's in the NY/NJ area. This is not a new map by any means. I am not that familiar with Jersey but NY has a lot that I fish regularly and these aren't about to change. For instance the entire Fire Island National seashore from Democrat Point to Moriches Inlet, Jones Beach, Gilgo, the entirety of Jamaica Bay and many others.
For the most part these are simply wildlife refuges. They are designed to protect migrating waterfowl. Granted, in the future, they could shut down all waters along the whole eastern seaboard but I am not too worried about that. These MPA's have been in place and will continue to be in place and it has not affected any of us in the fishing sense.
List of National System Marine Protected Areas - National Park Service Federal Sites
Site Name: Gateway National Recreation Area
Management Agency: National Park Service
Management Plan Type: Site-Specific Management Plan
MPA Category: Natural and Cultural Heritage Conservation Area
Primary Conservation Focus: Natural Heritage
Natural Heritage: MPAs or zones established and managed wholly or in part to sustain, conserve, restore, and understand the protected area’s natural biodiversity, populations, communities, habitats, and ecosystems; the ecological and physical processes upon which they depend; and, the ecological services, human uses and values they provide to this and future generations.
Examples: Natural Heritage MPAs include most national marine sanctuaries, national parks, national wildlife refuges, and many state MPAs.
Level of Protection: Zoned Multiple Use
Zoned Multiple-Use: MPAs that allow some extractive activities throughout the entire site, but that use marine zoning to allocate specific uses to compatible places or times in order to reduce user conflicts and adverse impacts.
Examples: Zoned multiple-use MPAs are increasingly common in U.S. waters, including some marine sanctuaries, national parks, national wildlife refuges, and state MPAs.
Permanence: Permanent
Permanent: MPAs or zones whose legal authorities provide some level of protection to the site in perpetuity for future generations, unless reversed by unanticipated future legislation or regulatory actions.
Examples: Permanent MPAs include most national marine sanctuaries and all national parks.
Protection Focus: Year-round
Year-Round: MPAs or zones that provide constant protection to the site throughout the year.
Examples: Year-round MPAs include all marine sanctuaries, national parks, refuges, monuments, and some fisheries sites.
Protection Focus: Ecosystem
Ecosystem: MPAs or zones whose legal authorities and management measures are intended to protect all of the components and processes of the ecosystem within its boundaries.
Examples: Ecosystem-scale MPAs include most marine sanctuaries, national parks and national monuments.
Fishing Restriction: Commercial and Recreational Fishing Restricted
Commercial Fishing Restricted : MPAs or zones place some type of restriction on commercial fishing, which might vary throughout the MPA according to different zones or areas. Recreational fishing may be unrestricted.
Example: Rotating MPAs, which are still rare in the U.S. They include some dynamic fisheries closures created for the purpose of serially recovering a suite of localized population to harvestable levels.
Recreational Fishing Restricted : MPAs or zones place some type of restriction on recreational fishing, which might vary throughout the MPA according to different zones or areas. Commercial fishing may be unrestricted.
Example: Seasonal MPAs, including some fisheries and endangered species closures around sensitive habitats.
http://mpa.gov/pdf/national-system/nominated_sites_jan_2010.pdf Page 11.
http://mpa.gov/pdf/helpful-resources/factsheets/final_class_system_1206.pdf
http://mpa.gov/pdf/helpful-resources/termdefinitions.pdf
Only when they make them:Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkSkies
No Take
No impact
No Access
well maybe you're right then but the real story is it looks like were gettng effed up the butt. if they ever shut fishing down at that place they will just go to the jetties and the bridges in the back. u cant win in the state of nj, how about the night permit, do they think guys will pay to go there if you cant fish?:burn:Quote:
Originally Posted by finchaser
I don't see how they can do this. There are thousands of people who enjoy Sandy Hook. I think there must be at least a thousand people who fish it over the course of the year, or maybe it only seems like that. As mentioned, they would lose all that night fishing money. It doesn't make sense.
Why not they had no problem closing down 250 miles of prime coast in CA which is used much more than Sandy Hook
The beaches in CA are also free to use. Plus to be fair it is not all closed down to everything. There are certainly some areas that are closed to all fishing. Most areas are not, there are many that are closed for commercial only.
I do not know a lot about this guys. From reading this I see it is federal matter, so maybe that's why they will not be able to do that to Island beach, a state park. That doesn't give me any more security to kind of understand that it may or may not happen. What kind of guarantee do we have that it won't happen? There looks to be nothing. what can we do about it, nothing? Isn't there a Congressman or someone at that level who can help us if it gets to the stage where they close it to fishing? I would not go there with my family if they did close it.Quote:
Originally Posted by njdiver
"The national system does not bring state, territorial or local sites under federal authority, nor does it restrict or change the management of any MPA."
http://mpa.gov/national_system/nominating_mpas.html
For the moment, all that this is doing is adding the Gateway National Park Area to a list (inventory) of national MPAs. The "MPA" already exists. The restrictions that are in place now qualify the Park areas for inclusion in the national inventory. For now that is all this nomination does.
The review of the Management Plan is what may change the restrictions.
http://www.nps.gov/gate/parkmgmt/gmp.htm
"The national system does not bring state, territorial or local sites under federal authority, nor does it restrict or change the management of any MPA."
http://mpa.gov/national_system/nominating_mpas.html