Re: Mr. Sonke if you please....

Outer Bamnks diving on the Great Escape Southern California Live-Aboard Dive Boat

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Peter P on February 20, 2004 at 21:30:52:

In Reply to: Re: Mr. Sonke if you please.... posted by Sonke on February 19, 2004 at 13:19:20:

Excuse my cynicism, but I don't exactly find your comments to be unbiased.

"Why do the sports and commercials not like reserves? I like simple questions. The basic answer is that reserves remove areas available for fishing. Probably no different than how you might feel if you were prohibited from diving in an area you have loved to dive in for years."

Comparing an activity that has negligible impact upon the system to one that can radically alter the system is not exactly a fair comparison.

My aswer is greed. The type that blinds to the point where a person can no longer see what is truly in his best interest overall.

"I know that most fishermen are conservationists and do support restrictions to opportunity to protect fisheries."

As in: new competition from other fisherman is harmful but for me to catch all I can is fine.

"Why are squid limits so unrealistically high? Not sure that they are. However, the uncertainty and need to bring some order to this fishery is the reason we are going through the management plan process."

So why not a 250k ton or 500k limit? What is the reason for 118k? Is it to pretend that there is some type of management plan in existance?

I'm glad to hear the issue is being addressed. However, setting a limit far beyond the historical catch appears to place the emphasys on protecting the finacial interests of the fishermen, as opposed to protecting the vitality of the squid population. I think that if the squid could have their biased say in this matter they would place the limit much lower.

I note that the preliminary squid management proposal of a couple of years ago said other squid populations had declined placing a greater load on the California population. The last propsal changed the wording from a declining population to variable one. I just don't think the Japanese rather buy squid or urchins from our fishermen over theirs. Has Asian demand increased so much or has their catch decreased?

"Are we sitting on our butts? No. Fishing, both commercial and sport, has undergone unprecedented changes and restrictions in the last 5 years to deal with the ever-changing circumstances. Fishing has never been more restricted than today. We do believe these measures will restore our fisheries to sustainable levels"

The ever changing circumstaces today present us with a significant decline in many marine life species. We can look to what has occured to land species as possible guidance in outcome. I wish I could share in your optimism.

Most divers primarily dive to see thing underwater. I don't think you will find many who say they see too many fish. But, you will find most divers who have been diving for awhile saying they see less, smaller fish. You are one of them. What do you see?

The following figures could be off, please correct if so. Before 1997 there was no license fee for commercial squid? 98' to 00' was $2500. Now its $400. There are about 250 license holders. This would bring in $100,000 for a resource who's commercial value is $18,000,000. No wonder DFG is broke!

Hope you continue to share with your fellow divers in this forum. It's always good to hear from someone in an official post in an area of great interest to us. I may disagree with your opinions, but I respect them.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup




[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ California Scuba Diving BBS ] [ FAQ ]