Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: MPA's Are Coming

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Default MPA's Are Coming

    I wasn't sure where to post this, so if it needs to be moved, feel free.

    I have been telling everyone the Marine Protected Areas (MPA) were coming. This is yet another attempt to limit our access to the fisheries and resources. If you do not belong to an organization fighting for your access rights, we need your support today.

    Please click on the link to see where in your state MPA's have been proposed. I am working on counter measures here in DE.

    What is a Marine Protected Area?
    Some people interpret marine protected areas to mean areas closed to all human activities. Others interpret them as special areas set aside for recreation and commercial use, much like national parks. In reality, “marine protected area” is a term that encompasses a variety of conservation and management methods in the United States.
    The official federal definition of an MPA is: “any area of the marine environment that has been reserved by federal, state, tribal, territorial, or local laws or regulations to provide lasting protection for part or all of the natural and cultural resources therein.” -- Executive Order 13158 (May 2000)
    In practice, MPAs are defined areas where natural and/or cultural resources are given greater protection than the surrounding waters. In the U.S., MPAs span a range of habitats including the open ocean, coastal areas, inter-tidal zones, estuaries, and the Great Lakes. They also vary widely in purpose, legal authorities, agencies, management approaches, level of protection, and restrictions on human uses.
    The link below outlines all the areas in your state that have been nominated as an MPA. Take the time to read and check out what can happen in your area:http://mpa.gov/pdf/national-system/nomsites_state3_17_09.pdf

  2. #2

    Default

    This is no joke my friends. Look what is happening on the west coast.

    http://www.976-tuna.com/e107_files/p...0_scan0009.jpg

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    12,822

    Default Re: MPA's Are Coming

    Quote Originally Posted by Finaddict View Post
    This is no joke my friends. Look what is happening on the west coast.

    http://www.976-tuna.com/e107_files/p...0_scan0009.jpg
    And it continues....thanks for raising the awareness, Finadict....way back when folks didn't think it was possible.....





    As submitted by Finchaser, thanks!

    RFA RAISES CONCERN ABOUT SANCTUARY EXPANSION
    New No-Fishing Zones Coming to Northern California?


    The proposed expansion of the Cordell Bank and Gulf of Farallones National Marine Sanctuaries set off alarms in the fishing community when the federal government published a map of the area that also contained all the marine protected areas (MPA) established under the Marine Life Protection Act.

    According to the Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA), anglers have been bracing themselves against the extension of these MPAs in state waters, into federal waters outside 3 miles.

    The National Marine Sanctuary system was established with the support of many fishing organizations because they wanted to protect critical fishing grounds from oil drilling and other industrial uses that could degrade the habitat our fished species depend on. Over time, however, anglers have witnessed a kind of "mission creep," with Sanctuary staff seeking authority to make their own fishing regulations.

    An example of this was the establishment of no-fishing zones around the Channel Islands. Indeed the Gulf of the Farallones management plan contains outlines of a system of marine protected areas within its boundaries.

    One well-known charter skipper said that NOAA Sanctuaries' regular support for efforts and proposals which either create or expand no-fishing zones and MPAs is indicative of an agency which is ignoring both the recreational and commercial fishing community. "There may be no current agenda items related to no-fishing zones at the time that boundary expansion is being considered, but it is certain that such agenda items will come up in the future and NOAA Sanctuaries has an unwavering history of ignoring fishermen during battles over closing areas to fishing," the captain noted.



    Recreational fishermen can find out more about the proposed plan to expand (more than double) the existing National Marine Sanctuaries in Northern California by visiting http://farallones.noaa.gov/manage/northern_area.html where you can also submit your own public comment.

    "The RFA submitted a comment questioning why the map originally posted by the Sanctuaries on their website contained the MLPA maps," said Jim Martin, RFA's West Coast Regional Director. "If this is all about protecting the coast from oil drilling, why were they referencing all the new marine reserves?"

    According to Martin, within 24 hours of RFA submitting questions, a new map was posted without the MPAs.

    "Poof, just like that," Martin said. "I wished it were so easy to get rid of them in reality - and that's what has us worried about this proposed expansion."

    Josh Russo, President of the Waterman's Alliance, a statewide divers' advocacy group, pointed out that the sanctuaries have a regular process by which they can propose new regulations, or expand their boundaries, but in this case they aren't following their own rules. "If these sanctuaries can circumvent their own established procedure, folks in other areas of the country ought to be concerned that similar moves will be made in other states as well."

    That's why the RFA is asking our members, across the nation, to weigh in with a brief comment opposing the sanctuary expansion until there are written guarantees for our continued access to public fisheries. Oppose this "land grab" and demand guarantees for fisheries within the Sanctuary boundaries.

    There are two public meetings in Northern California coming up in February where you can comment in person and ask questions about the plan.


    Pt. Arena, CA
    DATE: February 12, 2013
    LOCATION: Point Arena High School
    ADDRESS: 185 Lake Street, Point Arena, CA 95468
    TIME: 6 p.m.

    Gualala, CA
    DATE: February 13, 2013
    LOCATION: Gualala Community Center
    ADDRESS: 47950 Center St., Gualala, CA
    TIME: 6 p.m.




  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,956

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Finaddict View Post
    This is no joke my friends.

    Nice call FA. Way back in 2009 the alarms were being sounded and no one thought it would happen in NJ.

    http://www.examiner.com/article/sena...habitat-bill-1

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,486

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hookset View Post
    Nice call FA. Way back in 2009 the alarms were being sounded and no one thought it would happen in NJ.

    http://www.examiner.com/article/sena...habitat-bill-1

    That absolutely sucks.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    836

    Default

    They are so serious about more MPAs they are forming more committees. The latest
    from noaa


    Seeking New Members for the Marine Protected Areas (MPA) Federal Advisory Committee (FAC)
    NOAA is seeking nominations to fill ten (10) vacancies on the MPA FAC for 2014. The Committee advises the Departments of Commerce and the Interior on the development and implementation of a national system of marine protected areas to connect and strengthen the nation's MPA programs. In particular, nominations for representatives of ocean industries, commercial and recreational fishing, Tribal and/or Pacific Islanders, State coastal or ocean agencies, natural and social science, cultural resource management, non-consumptive uses and conservation interests are sought by May 30, 2014.

    Nominations should provide:

    (1) The nominee's full name, title, institutional affiliation, and contact information;
    (2) The nominee's area(s) of expertise;
    (3) A short description of his/her qualifications relative to the kinds of advice being solicited, and
    (4) A resume or CV not to exceed four pages in length.

    Nominations may choose to include letters of support (no more than three) describing the nominee's qualifications and interest in serving on the Committee. Self-nominations are accepted, and emailed nominations are preferred

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Ocean County,NJ
    Posts
    4,619

    Default

    Obama su_ks

    Pay attention to what history has taught us or be prepared to relive it again

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    789

    Default

    I thank you for your diligence in putting this up, Finaddict. For now I think we will leave these discussions in the main forum. As laws and legislation arise relating to this issue, we will try to keep those legislative alerts in the "Laws and Legislation" forums.
    http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/...play.php?f=108

    MPAs are commonly accepted on the West Coast and other areas. It would be disastrous to surf fishermen to implement the same types of restrictions here on the East Coast. I think when folks hear the word MPA, the significance escapes them. Once they are in place, they are a way for folks whose interests are other than fishing to control access decisions regarding all fishermen. For that reason alone, I am strongly opposed. There are other means to handle an overfishing issue rather than shutting down a complete area, or restricting fishing so severely that it serves as a defacto shutdown.

    There are some politically connected people behind the idea to impose MPAs, folks. These groups are driven to achieve their goals of taking away the rights of fishermen. They are very manipulatiive and much more organized than the splintered fractious fishermens' groups out there. For that reason it is important to align ourselves with other groups when possible and try to put aside the minor differences in opinion. Whether we fish from a boat, the surf, or a beach buggy, we all suffer collectively when one of these groups loses access.

    I am asking all who read this to please take a few minutes and go to the link Finaddict has provided here.
    http://mpa.gov/pdf/national-system/n...ate3_17_09.pdf


    If you have any questions and concerns after reading, or even if you don't agree with the opinions here, I invite you to share your opinions with the community. This is an issue that will not go away, certainly concerns all fishermen, and is worth fighting with all the resources we have. Kudos to Finaddict for bringing it up here.

  9. #9

    Default

    I couldn't agree with you more. Your comments are right on the money. Everyone needs to band together now.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    12,822

    Default

    Thank you, FA, I checked it out for NJ. Seems they're all related to wildlife and birds so far, but they could decide to make inner bay areas off limits for fishing to test the waters.

    In Cali the closures are on the coast. I know people who live there who say it's not that bad, but they don't live near an actual area and have other coastal places to fish. In NJ, NY, Del, Md, or Va, the outer coastline is smaller, and closing parts of them would put pressure on other areas. Not good.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Deliverance River, NJ
    Posts
    2,732

    Default

    Good thread Finaddict. Joe and you are right on target here. The groups that want to make these types of areas permanently closed to fishermen are dangerous. I have mt some of them at cocktail parties, elite snobs who are well organized and with millions to support this stuff. I fish on my boat more than anything else. I know I bb you surf guys all the time, but I have been out there in the suds too. I know what it's like to have people with no manners around you. We do all need work together on this.

  12. #12

    Default

    The Packard Foundation contributed over $123 million over three years to the Monterey Bay Aquarium. And the Packard Foundation has contributed over $18 million to keeping the MLPA process afloat in California.

    They are paying for the science that is closing the Calif coast and the state is letting them do it because they say the state doesn't have the money to do the scientific studies.

    Fish and Game commissioner Michael Sutton is a corporate officer with the Monterey Bay Aquarium and has a "material financial conflict concerning the Marine Life Protection Act."

    Sutton serves as corporate officer of the Monterey Bay Aquarium, and was paid $138,357 in 2006, plus $30,832 in employee benefits and deferred compensation.

    Aquarium Trustee Margaret Caldwell who is a Blue Ribbon Task Force member, is also is conflicted or compromised because she's a member of the governing body of Sutton's employer, has influence over Sutton's direct financial interest and yet serves as an advisor to him on matters regarding the MLPA.

    "The views of the Aquarium in actively supporting Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are widely known as the Aquarium is a vocal advocate for ocean closures through the imposition of MPAs," the document reads. "The Aquarium was actively engaged in lobbying for adoption of the Central Coast MPAs and currently is engaged in lobbying the Commission for the adoption of the Integrated Preferred Alternative (IPA) for the North Central Coast over all other alternatives presented to the Commission by the Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF), an advisory body to the Commission regarding the MLPA.

    "Commissioner Sutton, as the Aquarium's Vice President and Director of the Center for Future of the Oceans has been equally vocal in his advocacy for the IPA. The public record of Commission meetings leaves no doubt that Commissioner Sutton advocates for ocean closures through imposition of MPAs and advocates for speedy adoption of regulations to implement the IPA for the North Central Coast. In fact, the Aquarium has posted on its website an electronic communication (Attachment B) asking the Commission to 'Please approve the IPA with no further cuts to protect California's North Central Coast . . .' One only needs to add one's name and address and click on the website to transmit this communication to the Commission."

    The recreational fishermen are way out gunned by the Packard Foundation and they are coming to your neighborhood next
    __________________

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    1,137

    Default

    There is a lot of misconception on MPA'S. People assume that that if an area is protected than you can not fish there. In reality there are many MPA'S that have access for recreational purposes including fishing.

    Here is a link to the government MPA site and it discusses misconceptions.

    http://mpa.gov/pdf/helpful-resources...nceptions2.pdf
    Last edited by DarkSkies; 01-15-2010 at 11:37 AM. Reason: Basshunter, I merged your thread with this one we already had, same discussion.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    12,822

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Finaddict View Post
    I wasn't sure where to post this, so if it needs to be moved, feel free.

    I have been telling everyone the Marine Protected Areas (MPA) were coming. This is yet another attempt to limit our access to the fisheries and resources. If you do not belong to an organization fighting for your access rights, we need your support today.

    Please click on the link to see where in your state MPA's have been proposed. I am working on counter measures here in DE.

    http://mpa.gov/pdf/national-system/nomsites_state3_17_09.pdf

    4 years ago Finaddict had the foresight to warn us about this.
    Many anglers believed it could never happen on the East Coast.....

    The latest issue of the RFA electronic newsletter, sent in by Finchaser, details such MPAs on the East Coast,
    1.Florida
    2. and Mass.....
    (pages 17-23)
    http://issuu.com/recreationalfishing...398763/4717047









    **Is there anyone out there who still doubts some enviro groups will propose MPAs in NJ in the near future?
    Would appreciate any further thoughts or opinions.......

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    836

    Default

    I think that due to the sheer nature of the environmental groups, they are very well organized and committed. Hard to find that level of committment among fishermen so in the future I think they could be successful in getting these mpas in NJ. My .02

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    248

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Jersey
    Posts
    1,909

    Default

    njdiver thanks for posting. I went to the link at the top and this is what it said.

    "As New Jersey’s first Marine Conservation Zone, the Sedge Islands/Island Beach State Park Marine Conservation Zone was designed to reduce the environmental impacts of personal watercraft and better manage wildlife, recreation and traditional uses of the area. "

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Island_Beach Sedge Is MPA.jpg 
Views:	1 
Size:	63.7 KB 
ID:	17530

    When I look at that map and the restrictions there is puzzles me. I fish down there a lot and am telling you the PWCs ride in there all the time. I don't see any marine police busting them. If the language above says they are restricted how come nothing is done about it?
    As far as fishing I don't think there should be restrictions there it has some of the best night fishing on the Island.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •