Bend over and grab your ankles...

[Pocoloco]

If there isnt enough money for a review then there isnt enough money to enforce the areas. I say f@ck em, Fish it.

[Denis_Ruso]

I personally don't see this as a bad thing. I don't mind set aside sanctuaries where marine life has an opportunity to regenerate and grow. Its a similar concept as national parks to preserve a natural habitat. For example no lobster cages are being dropped to destroy the reef or every legal lobster are being pulled by the commercial boats.

Fish do grow and swim out of these areas you know It's a big ocean

The only thing I have a problem with is how promises were made to enact the MPA and then they went back on their word due to short funds. Too typical for a government agency.

On a side note, if MPA areas were under constant review, and reopened it's a safe bet that new areas would also be closed. Maybe your favorite fishing spot?

[Hunters Pa]

Reviews at the 5-year mark were part of the plan. You need data points for course correction. The more frequent the data points the more accurate a picture you have of success/failure of a course of action.

"For example, Mastrup said that if a marine protected area isn’t producing bigger fish, the scientists would have to ask: Why is it not producing?"

Yeah - God forbid we actually bring science into this thing. Why not wait 20 years? 30 years? Most of the Malibu & Laguna money thrown at this thing would LOVE that, keeping those pesky, smelly fishermen off of THEIR beach and out of THEIR view.

Trying to maintain the natural state of the coast? Yeah, that's why they truck in loads and loads of sand to cover up the naturally rocky shoreline.

& lets think about WHY there is less $ for the study. What is the primary source of funding for DFW? LICENSES! Take away areas you can fish and you will have less licenses sold. Then they can demonstrate a decline in public interest in the activity, logically progressing into reduced impact of present and future closures.

[bolocop]

I would never expect the Gov to ever shrink the MPA. I see as a good thing, at least they won't be expanding the MPA within those the 10 years, right?

[taggermike]

The whole mlpa "process" was a political feel good thing rather than a scientific ecological endever. The process was rammed thru at a speed that didn't allow science or data collection to be done. If asecements are done evety 10 years, or 5 or 100, the process is fundamentally flawed because initial pre-protection data was not collected. How can you claim, or even know, is things have changed when you don't have at least 2 things to compair. the 10 to 20 year period will provide data but again, with out the beginning data this data will be much less valid. Mike

[Silbaugh4liberty]

Originally Posted by taggermike

The whole mlpa "process" was a political feel good thing rather than a scientific ecological endever. The process was rammed thru at a speed that didn't allow science or data collection to be done. If asecements are done evety 10 years, or 5 or 100, the process is fundamentally flawed because initial pre-protection data was not collected. How can you claim, or even know, is things have changed when you don't have at least 2 things to compair. the 10 to 20 year period will provide data but again, with out the beginning data this data will be much less valid. Mike

Not only that, but it violates California's Constitution, but what politicians actually read the law these days? We know good old Barry doesn't.

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS


Section 25. ]The people shall have the right to fish upon and from
the public lands of the State and in the waters thereof, excepting
upon lands set aside for fish hatcheries, and no land owned by the
State shall ever be sold or transferred without reserving in the
people the absolute right to fish thereupon; and no law shall ever be
passed making it a crime for the people to enter upon the public
lands within this State for the purpose of fishing in any water
containing fish that have been planted therein by the State;
provided, that the legislature may by statute, provide for the season
when and the conditions under which the different species of fish
may be taken.

So basically the DFG is only allowed to make rules regulating the seasons, and what equipment we can use to fish (# of lines, hoopnets, speargun, etc.).

No where does the law state that by statute they may they allow designated (NO FISHING ZONES). I'm not necessarily against having an MLPA within reason, (i.e. scientific data, research and proof they are working, and length of time imposed). We need to protect the nature we enjoy, but they aren't representing the people when they make executive decisions like this. They need the people to vote on it.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_1

[2-Stix]

after fishing for 30+ years, its enough time to know better. that places only close, never open or reopen. its happened to me on so many fronts. offroading and dirt bike racing, hiking, climbing areas, flyfishing spots, rivers, lakes, trails, you name it, etc....the amount of wilderness areas are insane. for me it all boils down to this...if we can not recreate, and thats all people, mountains to ski on, rivers to fish, all out door types need a place to do their sports. ALL. i dont frisby golf, but those guys need their place...if not... then we all just sit on the couch doing drugs and watching football...well some do that anyway.

parts of both sides of my family are off the reservation and they poach salmon and steelhead often. been fined and jailed over it even. i dont like that, but i do a lot of that type of flyfishing, offroading on my dirt bike and hiking and snowboarding in the "out of bounds"....all the illegal fishing is catch and release. always.

this topic burns me up. i fished areas in the mid 80's with my dad that are 20 mins from my house, not illegal and my son that is 3 will never legally get too.

what every sport you do...stick around it for 10 years and then tell me about how much better it got. it takes time to watch the BS roll out. I could go on for days about this pertaining to riding dirtbikes in the mojave desert, fishing in the backcountry in ventura county, the eastern sierra etc...

[taggermike]

Well said Josh. Once areas are closed that's pretty much the end of them. Even if, some how, mlpas were proven to not benefit fish populations they would still remained closed.

And Silbaugh, the mlpa planners did an end around the state constitution. The part about only controlling season and the conditions of take was used to have no season and no conditions of take in certain areas. The state constitution clearly protects the peoples' right to fish but our politicians and a group of lawyers found a way to f it up. Mike

[Silbaugh4liberty]

Originally Posted by Pocoloco

If there isnt enough money for a review then there isnt enough money to enforce the areas. I say f@ck em, Fish it.

X2!

Your FIRST MISTAKE Jim, was trusting Government.

Your SECOND MISTAKE, was expecting them to keep their word.

Having been on Uncle Sam's payroll, I learned at a very young age not to believe crap until you see it happen when it comes to Government. Whenever higherups (SNCO's and CO's) say something is going to happen, we don't hold our breath expecting it to really happen.

[Mahigeer]

Originally Posted by Pocoloco

If there isnt enough money for a review then there isnt enough money to enforce the areas. I say f@ck em, Fish it.

I would not recommend it.

I just got back from fishing the Mole in Catalina. There I heard about others, and actually talk to two anglers that had to come to Catalina to pay fines.

All due to fishing in MLPA area around Catalina.

[chris138]

Good. Keep them closed. MPAs are working. Anyone who disagrees probably hasn't fished next to one lately. I see 50 boats and yaks in the cove just crushing the YT, fishing frozen squid in the middle of the winter, taking more fish than they can eat, not even thinking about releasing a fish, and yet complaining about how their rights are being violated? Please. You don't even realize how good we have it. I say lower the YT limit to 3 per angler and keep the MPAs permanently.

I do agree there should be more of an effort to demonstrate the effectiveness of the MPAs, since it's tax dollars and license revenue which pay to enforce the laws.

[ctfphoto]

I am a tree hugger and I kill a lot of really Big fish.

I absolutely Love having MLPA's in La Jolla, PROTECTING that awesome biodiverse undersea world and fishery.

Sometimes really Big Fish venture out from these protected areas

[rhyak]

WOW, some responses amaze me.

But to respond to the original post. As I have said before WELCOME to the Club. We have been dealing with this BS for 10 years and the first review is just starting up so we shall see what happens.

RH

p.s. Chris138 not sure if your aware but the MLPA and the fish being caught have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Its CALLED EL NINO
Water temps are still at a all time High for January even after all these storms. The Bonita I caught in Monterey County on New Years must have been caused by the MLPA as well. Those post are just what they love to see.

[chris138]

Originally Posted by rhyak

WOW, some responses amaze me.

But to respond to the original post. As I have said before WELCOME to the Club. We have been dealing with this BS for 10 years and the first review is just starting up so we shall see what happens.

RH

p.s. Chris138 not sure if your aware but the MLPA and the fish being caught have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Its CALLED EL NINO
Water temps are still at a all time High for January even after all these storms. The Bonita I caught in Monterey County on New Years must have been caused by the MLPA as well. Those post are just what they love to see.

I guess you have been missing out the last 8 years then. By the way our warm water is not due to El Niño per say...

http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/news/featu...nino/index.cfm

[GregAndrew]

Originally Posted by chris138

I guess you have been missing out the last 8 years then. By the way our warm water is not due to El Niño per say...

http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/news/featu...nino/index.cfm

Chris, MPAs have nothing to do with YT and WSB fishing catches over the last several years (nor were they ever designed to). 3 years of good Squid spawns followed by a couple of warm water years (even in winter) have brought and kept more YT year round. Are your trying to claim that there has been 8 years of great fishing? I can tell you that in 2010, all of the participants of the WCW were unable to submit just a single fish per month. Whether you call it El Nino or the Blob, it is warm water that has enabled the great wintertime YT fishing the last 2 years.

I would agree that MPAs can be a great thing in the right area, at the right time and instituted correctly. Unfortunately, this is not the case in the MLPA process in Ca. They did not even follow the basic guidlines set forth by the MPA Handbook. The biggest irony of the process was that they were saying there would be "spillover" outside to the MPAs while the design of the size of the MPAs was to prevent the resident fish from roaming outside. Some might argue that the eggs are the spillover, but that holds little water. The tiny critters that hatch from the eggs (if they survive that long) will be greeted by millions of hungry predators with little to nowhere to hide (the MPAs encompass most kelp and structure around them).

[Saba Slayer]

rhyak said..."WOW, some responses amaze me."
Me too...really makes me wonder what side of the table some of these kayakers would have been on during the stakeholder negotiations.

[cabojohn]

Originally Posted by chris138

Good. Keep them closed. MPAs are working. Anyone who disagrees probably hasn't fished next to one lately. Please. You don't even realize how good we have it. keep the MPAs permanently.

/\
blah blah blah...STFU
shame on you for posting this chit donkey show.
Your MPA loving ass should be banned.