Arnie and his enviro cronies screwed us--AGAIN

[jhook]

Originally Posted by Stan K G

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.

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

[Gino]

Stan. What fisheries are in trouble right now? Specifically in the Southern Section of the MLPA (were the folks on this froum fish)

Im interested to hear what information you have.

[Gino]

Originally Posted by Stan K G

Southern California Steelhead (endangered)

Black Abalone (endangered)

Bocaccio

cowcod

green abalone

pink abalone

Yelloweye Rockfish

Canary rockfish

Giant (black) sea bass

I'm sure I missed some.

Cowcod If i remeber right are off limits to take... so thats ones solved. And if you were a kayak fisherman youd know damn well the Black Sea Bass arent endangered, those are also off limits to take so problem solved there.

Dont think anyone here has caught any Abalone from there kayak... thats right becuase they restrict the take on those too And they dont take fin bait...
The rockfish Fisheries are just fine. and the kayak take of those specieies mentiond is very small (less than a ton a year statewide)

Stealhead? those are endanrged due to damning the rivers and turning them into drainage systems for farming irrigation. Whats funny is there used to be Stealhead ay the rivermouth here in Dana point. they destroyed the san juan river. so no more stealhead. no MLPA is going to bring that back...

So there you ago, any other endangered species? many of thsoe rockfish species are caught well outide the MLPA map zones anyways so the MLPA doesnt help them either.

You still have no case!

[The Kid]

Originally Posted by Stan K G

Except you're wrong...can't even follow existing regs.

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/bfregs2010.asp#south

COWCOD ARE PROTECTED,you cant keep them, says in the info you provided! we arent misinformed you are

[Billy V]

[bellcon]

Sitting here remembering that list I was taught in class...
"The list of fallacious arguments"... Stan the man reeks of them...

one of the most common:
Ad Hominem (Argument To The Man): attacking the person instead of attacking his argument.
For example, "Stan's fews about MLPA's are worthless because he is an asshole" (Which is true, but that's not why they're worthless.)

Only on the super friendly site of BWE could this guy go on for so long...



P.S.
Stan,
sorry for being unfriendly... But I really think you are an asshole

[Gino]

Maybe if we give this guy a Joint and a Guitar hell go away.

[deepdvr]

Stan, why so much flip-flopping?????

Remember this thread you started?

Stan K G
Member

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 56


san diegito lagoon/river?

---

anyone take a yak to fish in there? any luck?

-----------------------------------------

deepdvr
Senior Member

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Carlsbad
Posts: 221




All this info is on the DFG website. There are maps as well:

Existing Marine Protected Areas in California: Regulations

San Diego County	SPECIES PROHIBITED For Recreational Take	SPECIES ALLOWED For Recreational Take
Buena Vista Lagoon State Marine Park (estuarine)	Kelp	Marine aquatic plants EXCEPT kelp; Invertebrates in designated times and in designated areas; Finfish by hook and line during designated times and in designated areas
Agua Hedionda Lagoon State Marine Reserve (estuarine)	All	None
Batiquitos Lagoon State Marine Park (estuarine)	All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates	Finfish by hook and line from shore
Encinitas State Marine Conservation Area	All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates	Finfish
Cardiff-San Elijo State Marine Conservation Area	All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates EXCEPT chiones, clams, cockles, rock scallops, native oysters, crabs, lobster, ghost shrimp, sea urchins, mussels, and marine worms1	Chiones, clams, cockles, rock scallops, native oysters, crabs, lobster, ghost shrimp, sea urchins, mussels, and marine worms1; Finfish
San Elijo Lagoon State Marine Park (estuarine)	All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates	Finfish by hook and line from shore
San Dieguito Lagoon State Marine Park (estuarine)	All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates	Finfish by hook and line from shore and the Grand Avenue Bridge
San Diego-Scripps State Marine Conservation Area	All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates	Finfish
La Jolla State Marine Conservation Area	All	None
Mia J. Tegner State Marine Conservation Area	All marine aquatic plants; All invertebrates	Finfish

-------------------------------------------

Stan K G
Member

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 56




Booo!

-------------------------------------

Stan K G
Member

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 56




bummer...is the san diego river outlet off limits too?

---------------------------------------

Stan K G
Member

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 56




I just want a winter sight fishing spot once the corbina take off.



It's all about you isn't it Stan. You're a freakin hypocrite.

[The Kid]

Originally Posted by Stan K G

So, I have to love the closures?

Sorry, guess I'm just more grown up than most of you guys; I can not like something, while still understanding its purpose, and not throw a tantrum calling the government tyranical...for protecting a lagoon.

but do you really think it serves a profitable purpose

[The Kid]

Originally Posted by Stan K G

I don't really care about profit, conservation on its own is good.

conservation in the end is encouraging a bountiful ocean which in turn profits those who seeks to harvest from it and that's what the MLPA and such acts like it are doing they are ensuring future profit. But the method, MLPA, used to accomplish it is rash when there are better methods to accomplish the same goal.

[robmandel]

stan, guess you have no idea who the sophists were. ought to investigate that one. might have a moment of self discovery. (not that this ought to be a maslow moment for you though. I'm pretty sure you've achieved that already!!)

ok, I'll give up the ghost. sophists were pre-socratics in ancient greece (socrates was accused of being one, though he rejected them), who argued for the sake of arguing, could take any side and argue indefinitely, without facts or evidence, "winning" as much as by taking apart their opponents arguments rather than constructing one of their own. they would use rhetorical tricks to gain the upper hand. rather than reaching a logical conclusion based on facts, evidence, and reason, they instead would show how an opponent made a mistake or something and thus, "win". yes, they were hated, cf the clouds. also, truth was relative (i.e. man is the measure of all things) and something that could change or existed in one mind different from another. in fact, there was no truth, simply what one thought to be, was.

even the ancients knew the to be what we so eloquently refer to as, bullshit artists.

[jhook]

Originally Posted by Stan K G

We have the other measures, apperently they aren't enough. (and no anecdotes about how you think the fishery is fine)

Which fishery?

Yeah, the result you don't like has gotta be the only one the journal would accept...those evil scientists HATE when things don't work.

Honestly you highlight the exact problem with bringing up factual evidence to convince you people. Everything counter to your view must be some conspiracy, not anything you can proove, but, you know....It has to be!

The whole point of my response was to point out the flaws in the "factual evidence". One flawed study should not be enough to convince anyone. And, I can assure you that non-results do not get published in top-tier journals. Science also has a definite editorial bent (like all journals). You have far too much faith in experts. Scientists are human, and have personal conflicts and biases, just like everyone else. That doesn't make them evil. Scrutinize the data. Don't just trust the experts.

Where are your exhaustive, double-blind, US-based MPA studies anyhow?

Shouldn't the burden of proof be on those that are trying to change the rules?

How are rivers being off limits to fishing different from MPAs that are off limits to fishing?

For one thing, the data are much better for relatively small, relatively closed systems like freshwater lakes and streams.

Another person with those awesome rose colored shades.

I'm not surprised that the discussion devolved into ranting and name calling. I just wanted to point out that you started it. Too bad really, as I'm trying to learn more about the MLPA process as well.

[Gino]

Acually Your Mexicans and Muslims comment I think was what really turned it sour. That was a Colorfull display of ignoramus.

not all lagoons a man made

Steelhead dont spawn in Lagoons. certainly not Lagoons in Southern California. We would have Stripers down here too if they had acess to brackish water to spawn. I caught one in Dana point.

What? Now you're just being dense.

juvie fish will live IN the MPAs, if you cannot fish in the MPAs, you can not catch the juvie fish IN the MPAs.

No one on this forum is fishing for Juvi Rockfish. If any are caught on a rare ocasion. they are released, and the death to release ratio is pretty small. Becuase the catch ratio of juvi rockfish is very small.

Kayakfishing has a very low impact on the Rockfish populations The MPA does not protect agaisnt even 90% of the rockfish take in Southern California. Kayakfishing has little effect on most of these fisheries. Protecting Juvenile Rockfish does not improve the Rockfish Fishery, Regulating a lower limit or size Requirments does. There is no Juvenile Rockfish if there is not Big rockfish spawning. We have a good amount on Rockfish Spawning Protection now. That Fishery is closed a good portion of the year. and Regulated even by Depth in certain areas. lowering the daily limit would be leaps and bounds, not an MPA. You want to increase rockfish populations point your fingers at the Commerical Fishing. Not at us.

Did you get that degree yet?

I dont need a Degree to know Big Squid, eat little fish. For an animal that grows from a Fry to 5 feet long in a little more than year, it has to eat alot of fish. Im willing to bet if there was a study, Im sure youd find a Substancial amount of Small Rockfish in there Diets. I never said i was expert. But Logic trumps reason.

There is very little enforcement in the already Existing MPAs... The MLPA does not have anything in that legislation that increases enforcement or enforcement personel. How do the police uphold the law without policemen patrolling the streets? a Law means nothing without enforcement. Theres not enough enforcement now... theres no tax dollars going around to increase enforcement tomorrow. Most of the newly expanded, or aquired MPA will have no enforcement when they become implemented. DFG is plenty understaffed. and Local Law enforcement wont pick up the Tab. They cant even Enforce protecting the Local Tidepools from the public stepping all over Sea Anemones.

And that Black Sea bass guy, He got his sure fare share of criticism on this forum and many others.. Acually it was alot of the Kayakfishing community who got the DFG and DA to investigate. The Fishing Community in general was what gave those videos the exposure, Which lead to him being charged.
Besides there was no kayak fisherman in the making of that film.
And since there was no MPA around that pier to save that fish, i guess it was just his unluckly day! he musta wandered away from his protected Kelp...


The MPA hurts fishing access for us. It limits us on where we can fish. We are the ones most effected by it. just becuase you see alot of empty coastline apart form the closures on a map. doesnt mean there is efficiant or safe public access to it. The people who endanger our natural Resources the least are the ones being restricted the most. And were somehow supposed to apreciate the MLPA? or accept it for all its specualted goodness? I wish i could say our Tax dollars were funding this but its not, its Packard and Moore, and Special intrest groups, While Big oil gets involved to make sure its future buisness adventures are well protected. Its all upside down.

You maybe could have looked at the MLPA on its face and say hey its a good thing. Funny Enough at First i sure did. Until i started going to the meetings... And when i started to see and learn about some of the crooked side of it.

As far as pole #s go. If you put a poll up for califronians asking who they feel about more Oil drilling of the coast. after that BP and the goverments mess back in the Gulf. Im sure youd find folks would be "strongly agaisnt" Well even they are using the process to there advantage. I know a good deal about that i happen to have connectons involved in Big Oil.


You can post up here all your NOAA and your missworded poll Data. We are just recreational Fisherman, No some billion dollar Enviormental Lobbyist or monster coporations coalition trying to get there peice of the pie. We just want to fish and not be botherd.

[dorado50]

please, no name calling. It will not be tolerated on this forum.

[bellcon]

Originally Posted by dorado50

please, no name calling. It will not be tolerated on this forum.

I seem to remember that rule Dave...

maybe this is a "special" case

Come on guys, by now
We all know there is no "reasoning" with stan
This whole post is like looking at porno for a guy like him...
he has his pants down around his ankles,
typing shit he would never say in person, face to face with anyone here.

Keep it simple
stans a douche bag leaf licker

As you get "older" you realize kicking someone ass for being an obnoxious, argumentative little piece of shit, who doesn't know when to shut up or leave... just isn't right...

then a guy like Stan comes along
and kind of makes you rethink the whole idea


I wonder how many other boards stan is sharing these little rants with...
"oh look at me... look how upset I got all those mean kayak fishermen"


He doesn't deserve to hear us re-hash our arguments
or our logic
if he wants to see what we have said on this subject he can go back in the DFG archives and watch us speak at the meetings...

[AquaticHunter]

Guys. He fishes with a fly rod. Enough said?

[Ohana]

Originally Posted by AquaticHunter

Guys. He fishes with a fly rod. Enough said?

Hey I fish with a fly rod!

Just for that remark, I now support the MLPA's most restrictive plan. Now I have to go cut my nose off to spite my face!

Kevin