Quote:
Originally Posted by wavster
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that when fishing spots are
divulged, the MLPA will analyze the reason for that. Simply stated,
people don't normally fish where there aren't any fish.
That being said, it seems to me that they would then use those
spots as a basis to setup closures because that's where it's believed the fish are.
Just thinking out loud...
|
My thoughts initially also, as well as every representative from the different associations that attended. The process of selecting MPA's actually depends on knowing those areas so that they can be defended. It would be difficult to make a stance and argument to keep a certain place open if there's no data to back it up.
A very simplistic example.....nobody says they fish LJ kelp with the intent of keeping it off the radar, so the scientist and consultants say "great" cuz that's a recorded area of known breeding and feeding (additionally supported by the reserve already in place) so since no one is against it, let's enlarge it and close it off and everyone will be happy.
I'm not going to go into detail on any matter. Paul is our lead and I'm going to let him discuss issues and concerns when he's prepared. There were handouts that I'm sure Paul will be posting on his site for everyone to view. Fishing grounds WILL BE LOST, that's the fact jack. How much and where is the question, your support will help Paul gain a seat on the stakeholders group where our input can make a difference in influencing the how much and where.