!!!MLPA reserve process coming to SoCal in 2008

[Jim Sammons LJKF]

The tree hugging PETA types have deep pockets and I think they would be more than happy to have you hang up your fishing licenses. I think they would be celebrating in the streets if this was our form of protest.
There must be a better way to fight it than that.

[jscott]

In comparison to the entire CA fishing population relative to us kayakers who fish LJ--- we are a spec of sand. The DFG will not feel the financial sting if we (SD Kayakers) all stonewall and hold back buying licenses. Most people (other fisherfolk) will just shift their areas. I don't feel it is productive, and neither will it put any emphasis on our position or make us more likely to be heard. Has to be another way...

[psudocromis]

I think the word Slot Limit is a foreign word to them. its eather open or closed to finfish no exceptions. talk about crapy research.

[aguachico]

Originally Posted by Jim Sammons LJKF

The tree hugging PETA types have deep pockets and I think they would be more than happy to have you hang up your fishing licenses. I think they would be celebrating in the streets if this was our form of protest.
There must be a better way to fight it than that.

Jim;

I'm having trouble finding out how much and by whom the MPA's were privately funded. The fish lovers have deep pockets - yes, but we have deeper. Fisherman spend thousands if not more per year to fish. The problem is that we are segregated between inshore/offshore, yak/boat and fresh/salt.

We need to consolidate our buying power and put it use. The state of Californnia is in financial trouble. We need to make this happen for fy'09.

These are questions I could used answered to contine this project:

1. How are the sportfishing licensing fees distributed?
2. What private organization funded the reopening of the MPA's?
3. How much was used from private funding and public to reopn the MPA's?
4. How much additional monies are needed by the DFG to implement the MPA's.
5. Over the past 10 years, what is the break down on levied fines to fisherman? Commercial, recreational - poaching, licensing.

The 4th point is a big one. If we can prove that the DFG has acted in their own best interest by embracing the MPA's - then they will have lost any argument that they are here for the fishermen. I feel the DFG has embraced the MPA's to increase their patrolling duties. The increase in duties allows them to ask for more funding(job security).

We need to take it to these fuckers and hit them hard. As I start to gather more information I can then start small polling projects to see if this is actually feasible. I can't do this alone and will need help from all that are interested.

We are 1 million strong and need to be heard.

Fuck the DFG. Let's remove their power by removing their money

Yes Jim. the PETA would love the for us to not buy licenses. But the PETA types are not making the laws. I believe the State would not want us to stop buying licenses and would have to recognize our buying power. So even if you have to buy a license, like yourself and your customers - creating and funding the PAC would get this train moving.

Creating and funding a PAC is not enough. We just become another special interest group. By removing funding from the state, then we are recognized and powerful.

We have to remember someone has to pay for these MPA's to be implemented. What keeps the state from increasing you licenses fees to $200-$300 per year over the next couple of years?

[lamb]

Art,

I can see how cutting DFG funding through boycotting license could work in theory, I think it’s a big Utopia in the real world.

It would be impossible to organize and recruit enough people to actually make an impact.

Realistically - even if you’d hear or read from enough folks claiming they would support the idea and stick to it, I'll bet you it wouldn’t happen.

[Jim Sammons LJKF]

Art,
I bet PAL could help get you the information you want, I am sure United Anglers has much of this info also.

[aguachico]

Originally Posted by lamb

Art,

I can see how cutting DFG funding through boycotting license could work in theory, I think it’s a big Utopia in the real world.

It would be impossible to organize and recruit enough people to actually make an impact.

Realistically - even if you’d hear or read from enough folks claiming they would support the idea and stick to it, I'll bet you it wouldn’t happen.

Adi;

your probably right. I've spoken with enough people to understand that even though we (fisherman) will not give up our right to fish, even if there are no fish in the area we are allowed to fish.

What a glorious fantasy it was thinking that we, as a collective, could undo the unjust.

Without the support of the small congregation of yak fisherman, the ones most impacted by the MPA's, what chance would I have with the power boaters. The power boaters in SoCal are least affected by the MPA's with the access to Mexico.

The access to Mexico is shrinking. You will see limited or no access to the Nados in the near future. You will see the tuna and YT farming increase in size and efficiency limiting the schools in number. I've seen first hand dodo's and yt being netted, chopped and iced to feed the BFT in the cages. The eco-reserves are starting to be implemented in Mexico argeting recreational fisherman without commercial impact - stupido pendejos.

I hope with this mini series of lunatic ranting, I've been able to press a few buttons and turn on a few light bulbs about our future yak fishing.

Bueno suerte cabrones and cabronas

[FISHIONADO]

I'm joining United Anglers of Southern California and PAL's Kayak Fishing Association of California. If you don't like their policies than you should join them and try to influence things your way using their member surveys and voting.

http://www.unitedanglers.com/news.php

http://www.kfaca.org/

[aguachico]

Originally Posted by FISHIONADO

I'm joining United Anglers of Southern California and PAL's Kayak Fishing Association of California. If you don't like their policies than you should join them and try to influence things your way using their member surveys and voting.

http://www.unitedanglers.com/news.php

http://www.kfaca.org/

ditto

[Grego]

Paul, let me know how I can help. You know I'm familiar with the political process involved, and one route that should be entertained when dealing with the state is through our district representatives.

Unfortunately, I'm not working with any state lobbyist at this time for the City , otherwise I'd have someone to get a little insight. I'm not sure if we can find a nexus between the beach cities and negative effects of the closure to their constituents, but if so, they should be willing to have their state lobbyist investigating those issues and supporting our stance.

Anyhow, give me a call anytime to discuss.

Grego

[aguachico]

Originally Posted by FISHIONADO

I'm joining United Anglers of Southern California and PAL's Kayak Fishing Association of California. If you don't like their policies than you should join them and try to influence things your way using their member surveys and voting.

http://www.unitedanglers.com/news.php

http://www.kfaca.org/

I joinied UASC. Talked to Lenny. MLPA meetings for SoCAl are in the spring '08.

angry person.

BTW: for those that have big boats and plan on motoring outside the reserves to areas they can fish:

In addition, there is a particular need to measure changes in recreational and commercial fishing and non-consumptive uses, not only as part of the evaluation of social and economic impacts, but also to determine if displacement of fishing activity is increasing biological impacts outside of MPAs. Further, cost-benefit analysis can give managers a better understanding of the impact of the marine protected area on stakeholders.


you can run, but you can't hide.

[Useful Idiot]

Originally Posted by aguachico

displacement of fishing activity is increasing biological impacts outside of MPAs.

Art, that's one of the fundamental flaws with reserves. It consolidates the fishing pressure elsewhere. Either you close everything or close nothing and manage the overall area with the regulatory system we already have in place. This poka dot of reserves would work great if nobody was fishing in between them, but that's not the case. I doubt fishing will ever be completely shut down, despite some activists wish lists, so this halfway in between system of reserves doesn't help anything. But, with that said, there's nothing we can do about it so we have to work within the system. Hopefully 20 years from now it'll be seen that the reserves do more harm than good and this whole thing will be put to bed once and for all (or at least until the cycle repeats itself 20 years after that...)

[Tman]

Here's a thought...if the stakeholders (or shareholders, depending how you look at it) or entities have deep enough pockets to fund this project, why not try something that will be useful and beneficial to the local waters ~ hire on more DFG!

Give them more manpower and equipment to go after the poachers, the ability to keep the 'bigger boats' in check, the resources to keep foreign countries from entering our waters, and make a move to stop trawlers.

I personally do not mind the DFG, and we've all seen news accounts of poaching, or the killing of a protected species, just to have the guilty get a slap on the wrist. And inevitably, one comment that always stands out is how the DFG doesn't have enough manpower. Maybe they should first address that issue.

Then, for good measure, throw in what Hubbs has been doing. I remember when it was a very rare day to hear of a WSB catch. Now look at what's in the counts, esp out of LJ's waters.

And, is there some loophole we can use, since LJ already has an area that is protected?

Just some thoughts, welcome the replies, maybe I am missing something...