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.
