Some MLPA in Malibu observations...

[Toad Patrol]

Since it's wet and dreary here on Pt. Dume and I've got a wicked cold (my nose is running like John Belushi's) no White Sea Bass hunting for me today. Instead I wrote a letter to the Malibu Surfside News regarding the MLPA meeting last Wednesday-
Dear Editor,
Last Wednesday the Malibu City Council hosted a presentation by the Dept of Fish and Game at the City Council to inform Malibu residents of their Marine Life Protection Act and its impact on our coastline. In theory a great program to help our over harvested coastal fishery recover. It has unfortunately pitted the pro consumption groups; sport fishermen, divers, and commercials against the environmental groups who would prefer no fishing at all anywhere. The whole MLPA process is a perfect example of government in action. So incredibly convoluted and exasperating; a real tangled web of mumbo jumbo, with the opposing public groups as well as state appointed scientists and various representatives all trying to come to a consensus.
I need an Advil just thinking about it. Which is probably what they hoped for.
A number of concerns crossed my mind while listening to the rep from the DFG attempting to explain the process.
I was especially disappointed to see they regard all fishing groups the same and do not take into account the amount of fish harvested or the different methods of catch. I'm unfortunately in the same camp as the commercials who have devastated the squid, sardine and anchovyfishery, (shipping over 80% of the catch to Asia and Europe or as cattle feed) bottom trawling the Santa Barbara channel for shrimp, (one pound of shrimp results in three pounds of bycatch that can't be sold, and is dumped overboard, dead) and live-fish trapping for Asian markets and restaurants, (the shallow water rockfish, Sheepshead , and any other small edible fish that fits on a plate, sit dismally alive, crammed side by side into huge filthy aquariums until killed and served up.) Where’s PETA when you need them.
As a licensed kayak fishing guide and instructor, I attempt to educated people on Catch and Release, especially the large breeding females of various species, which fish are depleted, and a general knowledge and appreciation of ocean ecology and stewardship. I point out the damage done by irresponsible commercial and party boat over-fishing. Certain species are in healthy numbers and are appropriate to keep a few for dinner, while others should be released, like the larger Calico Bass, Threasher Shark, Sheepshead, and Halibut. (That statement alone should get pleanty of fishermen's panties in a bunch)
One proposal closes off all fishing from Coral Beach, Paradise Cove, Pt. Dume, and the deep canyon off Westward. Another proposal would move the reserve west to the Mugu area, which provides the same varied ecology as Pt Dume but in a much less appropriate area for kayaking. Mugu has rougher wind and seas, stronger currents, and no beach access for launching, while the other provides easy launch and low surf at Coral Beach, Escondido, and Westward. That zone could be easily designated a conservation zone (not a no-take reserve) that would allow limited low impact individual sport fishing but no commercials.
The truly sad thing is that we're incapable of policing ourselves. There wouldn't be a need for reserves if we could understand what is happening, educate ourselves and act accordingly. But we've put a dollar sign on fish and measure our success in tons. Our ego driven, trophy hunger demands taking the largest fish, usually the biggest breeding females. Convincing people to rethink these parameters is the tough sell. Will posting "no fishing" signs in the best fishing spots accomplish this? Doubtful. Will we, once again, make a law abiding public into criminals, crowding the over-burdened courts? Probably.
Many people refuse to believe there is global warming, severely diminished fisheries, global ocean pollution; they just want their calamari, their sashimi, their surf and turf, and their Mcfish sandwiches. Regardless of the cost. Stronger education and alternative aquaculture is the key, but we live in a punitive country that loves to pass laws and punish those that don't obey.
What will I do to discourage the MLPA from taking our own backyard from us? I'll write e-mails to every person with any responsibility, the California Natural Resources Agency, the MLPA Planning Group, everyone on the MLPA Initiative Staff, and the DFG Staff, not to include the Pt. Dume Area as a reserve (no take) but a conservation area (limited take). Let them have the Mugu area or Topanga as a reserve if they must. The Escondido/ Paradise Cove/ Pt. Dume area is too important a launch site to lose. It's still undecided. Check out the DFG website, click on Attend workshop meetings, and raise your voice.
Kayak fishermen could be strong allies and teachers of Catch and Release principals if we were’t lumped with the commercials and chased off the water.
Hope I didn't bore you with my ranting...
Scott Winner
Pt. Dume

I e-mailed Garth Wilson, an esteemed marine biologist and stakeholder on the MLPA team to verify my take on the process. Here's his response-

Scott,
I read your letter and mostly your observations are correct. There have been a lot of problems in the running of the RSG who are designing the MPAs and one of the main ones is, as you observe, the lumping of all take activities together, and all conservationists together. The take side, including commercial sports fishermen, boat builders, tackle mfg etc, lobster, urchin, crab, trawlers and big wealthy seining companies have joined together in a tight voting block or cartel that makes any compromise dificult. They oppose all attempts to allow sport fishing and not commercial. I am sure you noticed there are no SMPs planned, the one designation that is for individual sports fishing only. Any SMCA proposed, they pile on commercial fishing takes until the conservationists give up and have to go to reserves to keep them out. They are well financed and organzed, meet after each meeting to plan strategy, and vote as a block.
Conservationists are individuals, mostly do not have a financial interest and are totally unorganized, mostly interested in one local area or species and frustrated by each other as well as the Sell-fishermen.
Dume is singled out because it has the best potential to preserve and conserve because of the total ocean ecosystem representing all habitats available in one small area. That is why it is such good fishing. The shelter on both sides depending on wind also works for fish larvae retention. What is good for us is good underwater creatures too. Alternatives to Dume require a spread out area much larger to get the habitats of rocky and sand bottom at all depths, and are opposed by commercial fishermen everywhere. The sell-Fisheries cartel have reduced the possible reserves to only two or 3 between PV and Pt Conception! so they have to be in really productive, habitat-rich areas or they do not meet science guidelines.
I totally agree on aquaculture. My college roomate grows as much fish in 11 acres by the Salton Sea as all the fish taken in S C not counting sardines, mackerel, anchovies and squid, the largest fisheries.
200 million pounds as opposed to 4 million. Another group grow 3 million pounds of hybrid striped bass a year in 3 acres. My personal view is there should be no professional/commercial fishing allowed at all. Why should the public resource owned by 35 million CA residents be exploited by a handful (450) of people?
I have been fishing since I was 4 and do not take any fish any more. They just are not enough to go around. I am 65 and knew CA when it was bountiful even of abalone. Sometimes you have to give up the thing you love in order to save it. Every local fisherman, rec or commercial says NIMBY to reserves. I am as territorial about my ocean stomping grounds, La Jolla and Encinitas-Carlsbad as any fisherman. I simply would rather see a lot of fish every time I go in the ocean than take them out, kill and eat them. Which is our natural instinct as hunters. Seeing abundance is just as rewarding once you get used to it..
Right again that MPAs would not be necessary if we set low limits, (always opposed by fishing groups) policed ourselves, were educated and not greedy, and did not try to make a living off a dwindling resource.
No easy solution and as the people running the MLPA keep telling us, if everyone is unhappy they are doing their job. And everyone is unhappy.
The only solution for the casual sportsfisherman is to get together to ban commercial fishing in state waters, which will happen eventually. Too many people not enough fish was my father's most famous saying. And big fish are for breeding, small fish are for eating. Fishing is too much fun to allow people to make a living off it. the joys have to be spread out with the population wanting to fish.
thats it for now...Garth

For what it's worth
TL
-Scott

[Laukia]

Scott,

What do mean exactly by Garth Wilson being a stakeholder on the mlpa team? I don't see him listed as being on the Regional Stakeholder Group, he's not listed on the Science Advisory Team or on the Statewide Interest Group. What is his connection to the process? He's flat out wrong in his assessment of "the Conservationists are individuals, mostly do not have a financial interest and are totally unorganized, mostly interested in one local area or species and frustrated by each other as well as the Sell-fishermen". The fact is that the enviros/preservationists control this process. Many of the conservationist RSG members are paid career environmentalists. They are generously salaried functionaries of corporate environmental organizations. They receive benefit packages and all expenses to participate in the Stakeholder process and attend BRTF meetings. That is their job, their only job. Likewise the Science Advisory Team member Steve Gaines received a Pew Fellowship of $150,000 specifically to participate in the MLPA. both Gaines and Mark Carr belong to PISCO, which is subsidized by the Packard Foundation, the same outfit that is footing much of the the bill for the current process. They are well paid to ADVOCATE for marine reserves, and their grants and academic work are directed at advocating for reserves. This was very evident at the last SAT team meeting on Thursday. I'm also struck by Garth Wilson's observation that the reason Pt. Dume is such a good fishery is because of larval retention. But the SAT team is basing the need for such large reserves on a theory of larval dispersal. So which one is it? Interesting also his references to aquaculture. There are many who suspect the reason the Packard Foundation is funding this process is to remove the fishermen so they can ultimately be in a position to financially benefit from any future large scale industrial aquaculture ventures. It is fine for Mr. Wilson to choose not to take fish. But his portrayal of California coastal fisheries as being in some sort of crisis is false. According to the PFMC there is presently no California fishes experiencing overfishing.

And finally his description of the "sell-Fisheries cartel" is both bogus and insulting. The fact that Paul Lebowitz and Mike McCorkle can reach agreement is as much proof of cross interest and compromise as with any other RSG members. That the BRTF does not recognize this is further travesty.

[DrySack]

Originally Posted by Toad Patrol

the commercials who have devastated the squid, sardine and anchovy fishery,
Scott Winner
Pt. Dume

"My personal view is there should be no professional/commercial fishing allowed at all. Why should the public resource owned by 35 million CA residents be exploited by a handful (450) of people?"
...Garth

For what it's worth
TL
-Scott

Squid, sardine & Anchovy are healthy, sustainable well managed resources
in So. Cal. Anchovy is less plentiful due to warming ocean, not overfishing.

The "450" commercials are not the only ones "exploiting" (utilizing?) the resource. The harvest is enjoyed by millions of people in the form of healthy, nutritious protein. As obviously environmentally conscious individuals, you should recognize the value of a wild caught product versus a factory farmed one.

[wils]

Holy Cold Medicine, YakMan!

You're supposed to sleep a full 8 hours AFTER polishing off a bottle of nyquil.

[edsofish]

Thank you Dave.

It really is amazing how much misleading information is taken for granted as the truth. The funding used to further the agendas of corporate goals seems endless. I guess if these guys tell lies long enough enough, people believe them. Problem is the burden of proof always falls on us. Very appropriate reply.

[rojodiablo]

Toad Patrol (Scott) -For what it's worth, be really careful what you think when you consider an SMCA. (Conservation area.) In an SMCA, you as a kayak fisherman will NOT be allowed to fish any shallower than 50 METERS deep. That's 164 feet deep. I don't make the rules, I just have been up on them for 10 months non-stop now.

As for commercial fishermen, get your facts straight when you talk about SoCal fisheries, please. Shrimp?? No trawling here. It's all done with traps on the bottom, in 400-1200ft of water.

Squid, sardine, anchovy are decimated?? I think not. You can run across several multi-ton spots of bait in every county in SoCal, on any given day. Sardines WERE wiped out in the 1970's, but they were also hit by disease, and that was the reason for the crash. Yes, the fishing level was too high, and it is now managed much tighter.

Abalone?? Well, at Catalina and San Clemente Island, abalone are making massive strides toward a comeback. Along the coast? I see very few, and the reason is simple. Water quality is not good enough along the coast, plain and simple. And I am a diver who spends a tremendous amount of time looking for them all over the place, from County line to La Jolla. There are pockets of abs, in a few places, but there is no volume, and I see very few small abs, meaninf they are not recruiting new abs easily. And not to pick on anyone, but when people target CPFV boats, and say they are depleting an area by hitting it too often, realize the CPFV are very limited on time constraints, and they are the ONLY viable option for a great many people to go ocean fishing. Not all can afford their own boats, or kayaks. Many live in places where they can not store a kayak. The primary target species for local CPFV are sand bass, sculpin, rockfish, and then the barracuda and bonito. Do you see something of note there?? Almost EVERY one of those species are either pelagic, or migratory. When do they target sand bass on the flats? When they are in during summer. They don't bother to fish those spots when the sandies are not in. Barracuda?? They come in the early summer, stack up, and then move on.

Regardless that I am just giving you some corrections, and some things to think about, I want to say your letter was realy good, and well written. And it does show the glaring deficiency of the MLPA; it does not deal with pollution, and it does not use fisheries management as a serious part of the process. And that is wroong.... Peace out! Paul.

[Toad Patrol]

Paul, thanks for your remarks and facts. I don't think I have near the scope of knowledge you have in this subject. Yes, the anchovy and sardine populations appear healthy and abundant, at least around my boat, and here in So Cal. For those fish it's more of a global issue, with some countries catching far too many fish usually ground for meal in fertilizer and cattle and chicken food. (Or so I've read and heard. Is all this blah,blah,blah about anything anywhere near the truth? Depends, I guess)
When in doubt, go fishing....
TL
-Scott

[rojodiablo]

Yes, fish are used as pet food all over. Our dog food, cat food all have commercially caught baitfish processed into it. What is really tough is the fisheries here have a lot of regulatory oversight, and many people just fail to recognize it, or they believe the problems of the world are of our own doing. It's simply not the modern reality. Chile has an incredible baitfish population, and sardinas and acovy are major exports for them. When the next big El Nino hits hard, they will see a massive drop in their baitfish and their commercial fishing will take a major hit. The one sardine fishery threat here on the west Pacific face is the tuna pens. A couple years ago, they were netting the sardines inside Ensenada from Todos down to La Bufadora, to the point that the local sardine fishermen were getting up in arms. They have since moved outward, and there is still bait in the bay. What sucks about that is the super seiners who work the area don't stay there, they don't worry about long term repercussions for smaller local fisheries. And, they surely don't care about US, wanting to run out 40 miles and catch a few tuna. I am hoping they will look more to fisheries management than these total closures. An east coast motto: Protect. Preserve. NOT PROHIBIT. It's just a shame that The PEW trust can't understand that.

[BigJim]

You are totally correct. Remember, the MLPA Initiative is only the guise of conservation. The actual goal is to stop and eventually eliminate recreational fishing entirely from the Left Coast.

[rojodiablo]

Well, as a purely recreational member of the FIN/FIC, I CAN tell you that we lobbied hard to get economic data included by private recreational fishermen, divers, etc. The fact that there is no real reckoning for the 2 billion a year in fishing gear sales is a travesty, and shows a major flaw in the MLPA's socio-economic valuation process. I PERSONALLY argued for it on 3 different occasions, and was rebuffed each time.

UASC's model was novel, but it was built off the FIN platform, and the only realistic difference was the SMRMA, which the DFG TOLD them was not going to fly. They did it anyway. And, when it came up to review, UASC made no real moves toward meeting SAT guidelines. Their habitat STILL falls short. And, they still have the SMRMA, even after the DFG told UASC that it was not going to fly. That's not the SAT talking. That's not the BRTF talking. That's the DFG themselves talking.

We know you wish Tom still ran UASC. But he doesn't.

As for people all C&R calicos, if you average it out, and you were to go to the landings and check every boatwell, private, kayak, spearfish, all of them, you'd find that a great many of them are taking calicos home to eat. As for beating up on SAC (Shows your true colors a bit...) Why be SO down on the very boats that give tens of thousands of people access to fishing that they can not otherwise afford? It's easy for Ivory Tower fishermen to say "Everyone else should do what I do, get your own boat and go fish." But the reality is, most people can NOT afford a boat. And so, they ride CPFV and go catch their own seafood to eat. They just happen to have a good time doing it. For a second, think of all the people you would disenfranchise with that kind of attitude. One thing you can't gloss over is that FIN/FIC worked our asses off to get EVERY type of fisherman in Ca. represented. From the guy who scubas 2 times a year for lobster, to the evil commercial fisherman whose catch happens to be the way most peoplr get their seafood. And our record shows, we got the overwhelming support, plain and simple. Don't be a sore loser, join those who are fighting for EVERYONE'S access to the ocean.

[wils]

nice on-going discussion. May I speak on your C&R point (and expand into marine conservation areas)

Originally Posted by rojodiablo

As for people all C&R calicos, if you average it out, and you were to go to the landings and check every boatwell, private, kayak, spearfish, all of them, you'd find that a great many of them are taking calicos home to eat.

Yes, a "great many" people ARE taking 1 or 2 calicos home to eat. But...and this is a major "but"...this is a great reduction from "a great many people are taking home limits of calicos." same goes for yellowtail, White Sea Bass, halibut, sheephead, tunas, etc. C&R is coming into its own across the board on fish that can easily be C&R'd.

The problem with a non-closure argument based on C&R is when rockfish are brought into the equation.

This is where the marine conservation areas come into play. The marine conservation area at anacapa can be fished year-round for "pelagics". Any designated "pelagic fish" can be kept. If the non-targetted calico is caught, it can be easily released. Commericals are only allowed to fish for lobsters in their lobster season. There is no depth limitation for kayaks...that I have read about. This area is also relatively shallow just in case an extremely lost rockfish is found.

Marine conservation areas are a good thing for recreational fishermen - PBers, yakers, and - to a point - spearos. Not so good for the commercial-type sportfishing boats.

[rojodiablo]

Yes, except that in SMCA (State Marine Conservation Area) there is NO calico bass take, no sheephead, sand bass, etc. allowed. Furthermore, there is NO FISHING allowed shallower than 50 meters. That, my friend, is 164 ft deep! SMCA are fishermen traps, not fish traps. Do I wish it was different?? Yes. So, if you want to have everyone relegated to 164ft or more, then ask for it. But I will say now, I warned you, and " You asked for it!!"