January 11, 2005

1/11 - Commentary from a California Fisherman

One of the best things to come out of last weekend's dialogue with fishermen has been some very good e-mails. Here is one that arrived this morning. Please take a minute to listen to this fisherman from the California coast.

FROM A FISHERMAN:
Guess I just don’t know who to say Hi to.  You won’t get any angry tirade out of me, quite the contrary.  There are many things we can agree on.  We agree our fish stocks are being depleted, and that something must be done about it.  What we probably don’t agree on is what method to use in correcting the situation.  The act of fishing for commercial and recreational purposes have taken place for as long as history has been recorded.  My main reason for this letter is simply to create some dialog between two segments of our society that understand things from a different point of view but have a sincere desire to correct the problem. I feel both entities can work together and be very successful.

You may have already guessed I am a fisherman.   What you may possibly not realize is most fishermen like myself have a deep respect for our natural resources and their sustainability.  People like myself will do all they can to return fish to their habitat unharmed if it is a fish that is not wanted, not needed, or is a protected species.

You may be aware of the following but in case you are not I will share the main reasons for our depleted fish stocks as I see it.

1. Trawlers that throw back more dead by catch than sport fishermen will kill in a lifetime.

2. Destruction of habitat by commercial fishing.

3. Pollution from over population.

4. Water that is needed to sustain fish fry and juveniles in our rivers, bays, and ocean is being pumped out for other purposes.  The massive pumps kill millions of fry each year.

5. Our California Dept. of Fish and Game Commission has approved a smaller mesh size for the commercial Herring fishermen’s nets in the S.F. Bay when their own scientists told them not to approve the change.  These Herring are being used to feed farm raised Salmon and Tuna.  This is the bottom of the food chain in our ocean’s eco system.  These Herring have shown they cannot sustain themselves under the prior regulation.  How are they to survive if commercials are allowed to net smaller and smaller Herring?   If you remove enough Herring from the food chain the sustainability of most of our ocean’s fish will be suspect.  Nature governs propagation of itself based on food supply and habitat.  If you remove or change either of these there is an immediate reaction from what depends on them for survival.

6. MPA’s  (Marine Protected Areas).  These, in my honest opinion, absolutely are not needed and will create a host of other problems.  MPA’s will not have any effect on pelagic fish such as Salmon and Tuna.  Any fish that orientates itself to habitat is already protected by an off limit depth of only 120 feet.  Many fish live in depths greater than this.  The fish that live within the 120 foot range have proven themselves to be sustainable
under current regulations.

7. These are just some of the major reasons I see that have a negative influence on our fish and none of them can be laid at the feet of the recreational fisherman. I am sure I could provide contacts with others from the fishing community who are much more knowledgeable about these issues and share our mutual concerns.  My opinion is if we all work together we can make things happen much faster.  That would be the best thing for our natural resources.   Thank you very much for taking the time to read this.  I most certainly would be interested in your reply.


Posted by Randy Olson at January 11, 2005 03:28 PM