MLPA in OC Register this morning
 

Article did not say much, pontificating that more time is needed. There were a couple comments that they see more, and bigger fish/crustaceans in MPA zones than non-MPAs. I submit that this is due to selecting preferred habitat for protection over lesser areas. It's like saying we are protecting a mountain from logging pine trees, then saying "see, there are now more and bigger pines on this protected mountain that in this unprotected zone that just so happens to be in the Mojave Desert".

I found it especially interesting that it was alongside an article on the beaches losing sand, proposing replenishing the beaches. Laguna beach is not, by nature, that nice sandy beach the tourists and locals seem to love. Sand is trucked in, destroying/covering the natural rocky coastline (i.e. preferred habitat) that MPA proponents so vehemently defend from we "destructive users". Trucking in sand destroys the natural state that is supposed to be protected, but that is acceptable (and paid for) by the city in the name of drawing in the tourists.

Try pointing this out to one of the self-appointed enforcers that threaten to have children arrested for climbing on the rocks. See how fast the names and profanity fly.

OK, rant (temporarily) over. :mad:

As far as whether fishing is reducing the fish population along the coast, I don't have the data so can't say one way or the other. But that long term study with MPAs isn't going to tell us much either, because there's too much other stuff going on that's not fishing related. Have you guys seen the articles about the kelp disappearing? Has the kelp been disappearing down by San Diego? Up here in Long Beach the kelp along the federal breakwall is just about gone. It used to be 30 yards thick and solid. . Now there's just a few patches. The calico bass bite has been pretty poor lately too. Plus I've noticed a steady drop off in quantity and size near the breakwall in the last three years.

Here's one of the many articles on the kelp disappearing. 93% gone. That seems like a really big deal.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/vital-calif...arming-1566542

The kelp decline might be due to the higher temps we had before?

That's exactly the cause - there is a reason Macrocyctis only ranges to about mid/southern Baja, then picks up again down in South America. It does not do well in warm water at all.

Another article in the Reader. http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2...on-area-study/ Doesn't say much either.

Liberals are always scewing data to suit their agenda. Your example is perfect. Through their manipulation of data, they often, as you also point out, gloss over the great many problems and conflicts they conveniently ignore. All this in hopes of the ignorant masses patting them on the back for a great job as that natural reef is being engulfed by the sand they bring in. Good job guys! You killed a reef (Probably many), completely altered the natural habitat, but as long as your property values are high (Thanks to that nice white sand beach you made), who cares, right?