Jeff Crumley

This hits the nail right on the head !

The debate over implementation of the Marine Life Protection Act of 1999 (MLPA) and Marine Protected Areas (MPA’s) has become the hot marine resource debate of the year. It seems for the past few years, each year there is a new crisis of one sort or another heaped on commercial and recreational fishermen Meeting after meeting after meeting must be attended, all over the state. And even thought the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) knows what days they allow fishermen to fish, meetings always seem to be scheduled for those few work days. It’s amazing how often this happens.

Each year, new laws are imposed, yet, time isn’t given to see how they work, before the next new law is introduced.

The State of California has approximately 90 marine parks, reserves, preserves, etc. Most have been around for decades. At Pismo Beach, for example, we have had an Invertebrate Reserve since 1977 and a Pismo Clam Preserve since 1985. DFG established these next to areas open to clam fishing to measure human use versus sea otter predation. Locals and DFG know the results: sea otters have eliminated most legal clams in both areas. While this result remains a subject of debate, DFG has published these findings by several scientists.

In the rush to impose even more restrictions on commercial and recreational fishermen, DFG, environmentalists, politicians and others seem to ignore two even larger impacts on coastal fish: pollution and marine mammals.

Commercial fisherman Tom Capen raised these issues with DFG marine biologist, John Ugoretz in Morro Bay July 17th. Mr. Ugoretz responded by explaining that DFG had no jurisdiction over water quality (pollution) and that marine mammals were protected by the federal Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and so DFG had no authority there either. No, but what they can do is regulate fishermen.

To me, restricting sewage disposal, dog and pet waste, urban run-off, etc. would do far more to protect the nearshore marine environment. My marine reserve would run along the coast for miles and extend inland, not out to sea.

As for marine mammals, one species, California sea lions are now thought to be above historic numbers. There are probably more California sea lions now than 500 years ago. The lack of mainland predators– grizzly bears and wolves– has allowed sea lions to occupy habitat not formerly used. And, there are five other species of seals and sea lions common to California.

In 1995, DFG estimated the California sea lion population at 186,000 and consumption at 500,000 tons (1.billion lbs.) annually of squid, salmon, anchovy, rockfish and flatfish. Commercial fishing for these species in 1995 totaled 281.million pounds or 28% of California sea lion consumption. Yet, the MLPA does not address marine mammals, it only targets humans use fisheries when it can be demonstrated humans take less than some marine mammals.

If these laws are truly to address suspected declines in fish stocks, they must be holistic, meaning they address all sources of fish mortality. Unfortunately, the current examples of good intentions and wishful thinking by politicians will predictably continue to fail, just like the Pismo clam preserve failed.

5 Responses to “A Letter by Steve Rebuck…”