January 07, 2005

1/7 - Reply from a Fisherman: No, we're not crazy about MPAs

Okay enviros, time to hear from the other side on the MPAs issue, particularly with regard to the Florida study cited in the last item.

The following is from a fisherman, posted on one of the website forums I took part in this past week.


The Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) has released a study that seems to refute contentions of some antifishing ``conservation'' groups that no- fishing zones will result in greater overall fish populations and more fish for anglers.

The study, conducted with tagged fish between 1990 and 1999, concludes that ``recapture rates ... suggested that more individual fish may move into the protected habitats than move out.
These data demonstrate that although no-take reserves can protect species form fishing, they may also serve to extract [fish] from surrounding fisheries.''

In short, the reserves, which are being pushed hard by some federal biologists as well as groups that are more or less opposed to all sport fishing, are acting much like no-hunting zones in woodlands; the animals quickly migrate into areas where they can't be harvested, resulting in poorer hunting ashore - and now, it appears, poorer fishing in our waters where more of these no-fishing zones are popping up every year.

In fact, the study indicated that the reserves act as a resource ``sink.'' According to the study, tag recovery around a no-fishing area near Kennedy Space Center, which has been touted as evidence of replenishment from these zones, indicated that 52 percent of tag returns came from inside the zone and only 5 percent from outside the zone, indicating net migrations inward.

To be sure, some areas should be permanently off limits to both commercial and sport fishing. Areas where grouper and snapper congregate to spawn are some of these spots; they represent the fountainhead for most of the fish that supply both fisheries, and killing the goose that lays the golden egg is never a good policy.
The same is true for seasonal closures to prevent fishing on easily targeted aggregations. For instance, the four-month closure of summer snook fishing has worked wonders, eliminating most of the pressure on large schools of fish gathered around the passes.

But the current craze among some federal regulators to paint whole areas of ocean and bay habitat as off-limits is unnecessary. Most species of fish targeted by recreational anglers in Florida are increasing thanks to 20 years of good management by the FFWCC. Yet marine protected zones already block anglers from 29 zones up to several hundred square miles in area, and four more are proposed for Florida waters.

``No-fishing zones should be the last course of action, not the first,'' says Florida Coastal Conservation Association chairman Michael Kennedy. ``Proven management measures are working. There is no reason to go to the extreme of prohibiting fishing in these areas.''

Posted by Randy Olson at January 7, 2005 07:52 PM