Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge  

Go Back   Kayak Fishing Adventures on Big Water’s Edge > Kayak Fishing Forum - Message Board > General Kayak Fishing Discussion

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 09-29-2010, 07:22 PM   #11
jhook
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stan K G View Post
Most of these are weak or aren't specific to south CA MPAs



He says the US MPA isn't a general result that would be the same in the rest of the world....which isn't the issue here...we are talking about another US MPA so the study is relevant
No. What he says is "Before implementing new reserves, it would be wise to ask whether a reserve is the best strategy for managing a particular fishery..." He also points out that less extreme measures are also working.


Quote:
He also admits that, yeah, it might have increased the size of catches near the area (which you decided not to bold, convenient)
You caught me! Cleverly trying to hide the truth by posting his entire response.

Quote:
The Fishing magazine writer (no conflict of interest there!) decided to ignore the statistic of biomass inside the MPA surpassing outside biomass in the same time frame.
And what about the interests of the authors of the original article? Do you think they would have been published in one of the most prestigious scientific journals in the world if their results would have found no effect?
In fact "the fishing magazine writer" addresses the point you accuse him of ignoring, directly: "However, before being closed to the public, the reserve waters (part of what was established as the Cape Kennedy security zone) were already known to harbor record specimens of certain species because of prime habitat." Which illustrates one of the biggest flaws of the study. No controls.

Quote:
Also, yellowstone is heavly regulated, some rivers are closed to fishing year round, some are fly fishing only, there is no fishing for several months every year, and yellowstone isn't fished as heavly as our coastal waters simply due to population density, being a state park, and freshwater anglers these days being more likely to practice C&R.
All measures that are short of MLPA-style outright bans.


Quote:

This guy doesn't seem to know that biomass isn't fish count....fish grow bigger every hour of every day...they don't need to spawn to grow bigger.
He seems to know it quite well, which is why he says: "Regarding the second point, proponents of marine protected areas argue that spawning stock will build up inside reserves and eggs, larvae, and juveniles will then be exported to areas outside the reserves."
The whole point is more fish, right? Not an equal number of bigger fish (that will then be caught outside the MPA).
Quote:
Aww, don't like it when the enviromentalists you guys like to talk smack about so much give it back a little?
Everyone was more than civil with you before (and even after) you starting implying that they were racist, islamaphobic, homophobic, extremists. One guy even gave you his phone number! It's pretty clear who's doing the smack talking.
jhook is offline  
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 2002 Big Water's Edge. All rights reserved.