BajaNomad - Loreto fishing and Netting

Loreto fishing and Netting

flyfishinPam - 3-1-2006 at 04:13 PM

I always post a brief report on the allcoast Sportfishing site, www.allcoast.com and usually keep it very brief. This week's report needs to get out into the public so I have added it here today~

*********************

Wednesday; 1 March, 2006 In a nutshell- The sardinas are still scarse. ~~We've just entered a calm weather period thats expected to last a few days.~~ Make that a windy period now as of this morning.. There's good Yellowtail fishing waaay to the north off Isla San Ildefonso. Captain Francisco Mu?oz invents new technique at landing Yellowtail off Punta La Cholla...By the way the entire La Cholla point is being thouroughly netted for Yellowtail, big bummer.
Click here for full report http://bajabigfish.com/conv_report.html
The boundries of the Loreto Marine Park with La Cholla identified. La Cholla is at the center of contraversy and where the netting of Yellowtail is currently taking place.

27 February, 2006 Captain Francisco Mu?oz holds an egg sack from one of the Yellowtail caught off La Cholla on Monday. They are still turgid and appear to have a few weeks of development left. "These fish are being netted away right before they have a chance to spawn and create more fish", says Francisco

I apologize for not having better news about the fishing, but the truth needs to be addressed. Within our report you will find e-mails to the Marine Park and the Loreto Bay Marine Park fund where you can voice your opinions. We will be adding a blog spot to our Marine Park page and we will be announcing when the upcoming park management decisions meeting will take place. We are hoping to bring the sportfishing community together to make beneficial changes in our favor. In my next report here, I will be making a couple announcements on positive changes that will take place with our business. We're growing!

Thanks for checking in!

The Baja Big Fish Company
http://www.bajabigfish.com
Loreto, BCS MEXICO

Bruce R Leech - 3-1-2006 at 04:18 PM

thanks for the nice report Pam. keep them coming.

Skipjack Joe - 3-1-2006 at 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by flyfishinPam
We are hoping to bring the sportfishing community together to make beneficial changes in our favor.

Thanks for the report, Pam. I have always appreciated that your reports tell it like it is.

Good luck with the conservation movement. I hope you get the results you seek.

Skipjack

Capt. George - 3-2-2006 at 07:52 AM

Thanks for fighting a bad situation...similar problems with nets in Estero Coyote..The by-catch (kill) is horrendous..

The future of the Mexicano's children is being sold at pennies a kilo...What's the answer???

Again, thanks. A brave decision on your part to jump into the fray.

Capt. George

richard nauman - 3-2-2006 at 09:21 AM

Hey Pam - Thanks for keeping us posted. That is sad to hear they are netting that school of Jurel. I had a great day with Francisco chasing them around in January. To the baja nomads that didn't see the report - me and a friend caught a flat calm day in January and Francisco found surface boiling yellowtail at La Choola. We didn't have any sardinas so were unable to get them close enough to get them on flies. They were nice big fish. My knees turned to butter when Francisco said they were world record size (for a fly rod) and he should know having guided multiple Jurel world records. The day before we saw guys setting nets on the shallows SW of Coronado. Francsico said they had wrapped a large school of roosterfish prior to my arrival. Many of the local capitans that I spoke with were unhappy about the situation.

There are people working on changing things. I used to think nothing would ever change in Baja regarding conservation but after the progress that the Groupo Tortuguero de las Californias has made with Sea Turtle conservation I think it can be done for fisheries as well. A growing group of people is forming and we hope to try to put together a meeting next year. I'll post information as I get it.

Anyone who wants to know more can send me an email or U2U.

Capt George - you should talk to Isidro Arce in Abreojos he's a good guy, and is one of the cooperativa members opposed to netting Estero Coyote.

Butt Out!

Skipjack Joe - 3-2-2006 at 11:41 AM

Pam,

I wrote a letter as you requested and was told essentially to butt out. They state that their plan for the marine park includes the right of the commercials to continue to net in the area. Here is the body of his response:

I appriceate your concerns about the park. However, as far as my park
rangers and other authirities inform me, the fishing activities that
are
carry on within the park, in especific on the yellowtail, are legal and
allowed this time of the year as stated in the management plan of
Loreto
marine park. This park was concibed to provide welfare not only to
visitors, or tourist, but to local communities to mantain their way of
living as far as their activities are within the law.

Thanks again for your concerns and we invite you to let us know any
ilegal activities and reporting them to PROFEPA, CONAPESCA, and us.

I sort of expected this. They treat our concerns about the fishery as a 'tourist' need, not something that helps them. We are the meddling tourists only interested in our catch rate and not in the welfare of the Mexican people. Supporting the commercial endeavors, the argument goes, directly helps the Mexican community. We, on the other hand, are selfish gringos out to meet own interests.

Pam, I'm afraid that writing as a concerned American citizen that doesn't even live in Baja has little value to these people.

Skipjack

Capt. George - 3-2-2006 at 06:28 PM

RN

Isidro is in a bind, as is most of the fishermen here :no:

. The decision to net comes from Ensenada, they rule the roost and call the shots :coolup:

. If the fishermen complain to loudly they'll find themselves mixing cement for a living :wow:

.They need to supply fish for the Samana Santa holiday and they will take it from wherever they can... :smug:

Money rules, money rules! Not much different up north in many of the same ways.....money, money, money...

Hook - 3-2-2006 at 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skipjack Joe
Pam,

I wrote a letter as you requested and was told essentially to butt out. They state that their plan for the marine park includes the right of the commercials to continue to net in the area. Here is the body of his response:

I appriceate your concerns about the park. However, as far as my park
rangers and other authirities inform me, the fishing activities that
are
carry on within the park, in especific on the yellowtail, are legal and
allowed this time of the year as stated in the management plan of
Loreto
marine park. This park was concibed to provide welfare not only to
visitors, or tourist, but to local communities to mantain their way of
living as far as their activities are within the law.

Thanks again for your concerns and we invite you to let us know any
ilegal activities and reporting them to PROFEPA, CONAPESCA, and us.

I sort of expected this. They treat our concerns about the fishery as a 'tourist' need, not something that helps them. We are the meddling tourists only interested in our catch rate and not in the welfare of the Mexican people. Supporting the commercial endeavors, the argument goes, directly helps the Mexican community. We, on the other hand, are selfish gringos out to meet own interests.

Pam, I'm afraid that writing as a concerned American citizen that doesn't even live in Baja has little value to these people.

Skipjack

Amazing! Park Rangers that condone the netting of the YT at the time of the spawn. What short-sightedness!

Is this really the principles the Marine Park was founded on?

Thanks for informing us, Joe.

Pompano - 3-3-2006 at 08:06 AM

Then check islands offshore Pacific Panama...incredible and reminds one of Baja in the early 70's when you had to really want to get there...you had to prepare and work at the adventure. Nowadays, Baja affords an easy fishing trip...a place to revisit old times. Can't say much about the rules and regs...it is, after all, Mexico, with Mexican laws. If we want to spend time here, we will comply.

Phil S - 3-3-2006 at 08:27 AM

This reminds me of the times when we first 'discovered' Loreto area. We camped at Rattlesnake Beach (Puerto Escondido) every winter for about nine years. Can remember almost every night listening all night to the drumming sounds of diesels on the "long liners" working the islands. At least that isn't happening now that I'm aware of. If incorrect. Someone please advise. This is a subject that makes me think that long before we are tourist started coming down here, the mexican fishermen were providing for their families in their pangas. Then comes along, tourist fishermen. Providing jobs as 'guides'. A new industry for the locals has been started. But for those who choose their 'old tradition' of netting, and selling commercially, I do 'feel' for them. I know I'm still a tourist, because I go home every summer, and I don't fish like I used to when I first came here. I could support their netting, but absolutely disagree with their timing during their spawning season. And absolutely support the refusal of long lining & large netting boats. Without the park, where would we be today with number of fish decreasing every year anyway. Viva la fisheries, but OUT OF THE PARK!!!!! And Pam. I do support the businesses such as your providing.

Economic reasons for netting visited:

flyfishinPam - 3-6-2006 at 02:41 PM

OK so netting stimulates the economy here:

I can buy one kilo of fresh Yellowtail down the street from my shop for 60 pesos. Lets say that one Yellowtail weighs 30 pounds and fillets translate to 50% of that fish:

40-60 pesos, I'll figure on the high end = 6 USD
15 pounds * 6 USD = $90.00 USD per fish

keep in mind that the fishermen sold that fish for less than $8USD! (prior to filleting) nice markup and to one business that is probably not even from Loreto (most of the commercials are based in BCN or La Paz)

Now consider this:

Two fishermen come to Loreto and fish for two days. Lets say that they catch four fish over these two days. They spend the following:

They stay at a midrange local Hotel, lets say Hotel La Pinta. Apart from their airline fares they spend~

$20 each on transportation to and from the airport
$300 for the three nights in one standard room
$450 in charter expenses
$46 in Mex fishing permits
$8 in Marine Park permit fees
$100 combined per day in meals, tips, beverages ($300)
$150 each in souveniers...
(these are very conservative figures)

Total: $1,444.00 USD

Each fish is worth $361.00 USD

..of which is spread out over at least 7 different LOCAL businesses (and their employees) and three government agencies (PESCA, Marine Park, Hacienda).

Keep in mind that Loreto has ONE industry and that is tourism. Real Estate is the other major industry that is closing in fast on the tourism but without tourism the value of the real estate would be much reduced as many buyers are investing hoping to rent out their properties.

richard nauman - 3-6-2006 at 03:24 PM

Pam - great analysis. It would be valuable to extend it in a more formal way. Don't forget Bait for 2 days = $40! Plus all that beer and Tequila!!!

Don Alley - 3-6-2006 at 04:39 PM

"This park was concibed to provide welfare not only to
visitors, or tourist, but to local communities to mantain their way of
living as far as their activities are within the law."

I suspect that the park was conceived largely to evict out-of-area, large scale commercial fishing operations that were taking fish that local people thought were "theirs." So the management plan will still allow destructive fishing, just as long as it is local fishermen who do it.

I too have been told that there would be a revision of the management plan every five years and one would be this year. And I plan on commenting.

So far, as a "resident tourist" I see no benefit or "welfare" from the marine park. Makes no difference to me if the fishery is destroyed by locals or people from Guaymas or Japan.

edit:
I hear Agundez (the governor) came through with 6 new four-stroke outboards for some lucky local fishermen...at a cost to those fishermen of about 30,000 MN. That's about 3 grand for a 10-12 thousand dollar motor. And many of the captains are upgrading to larger pangas (I have heard there are subsidies available?); there are some really good deals on their older boats. So, there is great potential for increased numbers of commercial fishermen.

The current BCS government is big on commercial exploitation of the fishery.

[Edited on 3-7-2006 by Don Alley]

Osprey - 3-6-2006 at 07:48 PM

Mr. Alley

Tell us more about the current BCS government being big on commercial exploitation of the fishery. By commercial fishing do you mean pangas or trawlers/seiners? How did you come by that information?

Thanks

Don Alley - 3-6-2006 at 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Osprey
Mr. Alley

Tell us more about the current BCS government being big on commercial exploitation of the fishery. By commercial fishing do you mean pangas or trawlers/seiners? How did you come by that information?

Thanks

By commercial fishing I mean the current local panga-based fishing, which includes netting and hook and line. I have heard from local fishermen and Mexican neighbors that the previous government administration lobbied the marine park to allow this commercial fishing to continue: "You can ban commercial fishing in the park when you find jobs for these people." The current Agundez regime is of the same political party and has provided funding to help pay for boats and motors.

A panga salesman with several new pangas on display here in Loreto, told me that the government was subsidizing part of the cost for local fishermen, sport or commercial. Motor subsidies were available too; today a neighbor who is well versed in local politics told me that six motors were just made available, and, as is a common practice, a politician took credit, in this case Agundez.

It's a small town and I don't want to drag people-friends and neighbors-into public discussions by name. I am not a journalist and they are not news sources. You can simply file it all as opinion or gossip.

Bottom line:

1.There are many nets in the water here. I see them, consider it an eyewitness report.

2. I have friends who rely on tourist sport fishermen for a living. So I don't like to post reports of poor fishing all over the internet. But there's a lot of poor fishing here. When it's good, it often involves trips far outside the park, like long trips to Pulpito and Isla Ildefonso. Go to Pam's site and read the whole report. The nets are devastating the local fishery.

3. The nets IN A MARINE PARK are declared LEGAL. That's a pretty good indication of government policy , imo.

msawin - 3-6-2006 at 10:41 PM

Hey Pam,
Do you think that we can do any thing here in the States to help?
Do you think any pressure with Vagabondos or the like will help.

We need to keep the fisherman coming down. I know last year with the low fish results a lot of charters where dropped. A lot of capitans missed income.

Please give us a post of any needs.......Martin-o 1-week

flyfishinPam - 3-6-2006 at 10:48 PM

Richard I forgot all about the bait and the tequilia!

Skeet:
"Pam How long has it been since the you have seen the Navy patrol boat anchored out Front.?"
-Do you mean the large boat, if so about a year ago when Pres Fox was supposed to innagurate the Pemex at Pto Escondido, but I'm talking visible from the town not offshore visible to the pangueros.

How long has it been since one of your Pangas has been Boarded and Searched, and Lic. and IDs checked?
-boarded out to sea last July, 2005 licenses and ID's of anglers and captain were checked

How long has it been since there was a Park Ranger at the Boat Ramp checking Fish Limits?
-two weeks ago

Don is right about the subsidies and the credit the politicos take. They definately don't believe in "if you give a man to fish he can eat for a day, if you teach a man to fish he can eat for life" concept.
I especially love the "find them jobs". This is partially the fault of the government who chooses not to educate the people and the people for not demanding they be educated. I see it as the "you gotta change and evolve with the times and environment or you'll never survive" concept.

So shall I bring coffee or beer to the next park management revisions meeting?

I don't mean to scre folks away from the poor fishing we currently have within the park. Heck, outside the park its getting pretty good again. But if Ijust need to know what our playing field will be like in the future then I can plan on not fishing during February and March or when the damn nets are out. Of course this also means that folks I usually employee during these times, won't be employed, vicious cycle, no?

YES!

flyfishinPam - 3-6-2006 at 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by msawin
Hey Pam,
Do you think that we can do any thing here in the States to help?
Do you think any pressure with Vagabondos or the like will help.

We need to keep the fisherman coming down. I know last year with the low fish results a lot of charters where dropped. A lot of capitans missed income.

Please give us a post of any needs.......Martin-o 1-week

Remember right after the establishment of the Park the VAgs gave them a donation. They should be made aware of where that went and reconsider future donations and let the park know why they are reconsidering. That's how you can help from up there. Like I said in my report, there are dozens of donors who fund it and I will post them soon. Your job is to contact them and make them aware of what their funding does (or doesn't).

Let the YT spawn out

Skipjack Joe - 3-7-2006 at 04:52 PM

Allowing netting of spawning yellowtail is a poor fisheries management practice. It's short sighted. It hurts both the commercial fishery and sport fishery in the long run. By removing the spawn from a fish stock you're destroying it's future.

The laws permitting this in that marine park should be changed. It's not just the netting that's the issue, it's the netting of the spawners. The commercial pangueros need to be convinced that such a ban is in their very own interest.

Hook - 3-7-2006 at 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skipjack Joe
Allowing netting of spawning yellowtail is a poor fisheries management practice. It's short sighted. It hurts both the commercial fishery and sport fishery in the long run. By removing the spawn from a fish stock you're destroying it's future.

The laws permitting this in that marine park should be changed. It's not just the netting that's the issue, it's the netting of the spawners. The commercial pangueros need to be convinced that such a ban is in their very own interest.

Of course we all know that, Joe, and I expect that Pam will push for that at the meetings.

Still, the economics of feeding a family NOW are hard to ignore for the commercial pangueros.

It's more than a little ironic that the Mexican government would give such large subsidies on 4 stroke engines; a subsidy that will only hasten the loss of their jobs if they continue such fishing practices. The subsidy would easily feed the families for quite a few years during the actual spawn.

This is the usual result when politicians get involved....never seems to matter what country. Shortsighted gains at the expense of the long term good.

I just met with the park again

flyfishinPam - 3-8-2006 at 02:17 PM

and thought I was going to get chewed out for putting this to everyone's attention. turned out it was a very positive meeting and now I have more homework- to draw up some proposals on park management from a sportfishing point of view. Unfortunately during the last meeting which set the rules (5 years ago) our industry was never represented. This will not be the case next time. We will go head to head with the commercials and present arguments every bit at good as theirs, if not much better.

They argue that sportfishers can catch any kind of specie they want- I argue that there are limits on those catches. They argue that foreigners can catch lots of fish then sell it when they leave Mexico- I argue that that is the case in rare instances and that increasing airline baggage restrictions prevents this from happening for the most part
They say sport anglers are fishing for fun and the commercials are fishing for their food - I say if they don't like it, find another line of work. If sporfishing dies here altogether that's what we'll have to do. Nobody owes us anything but we'll fight till the end. :cool:

Skipjack Joe - 3-8-2006 at 05:19 PM

GO PAM!

They're exagerating the negatives of sportifishing and minimizing those of the commercial industry. Now, it's your turn to do the same, but in reverse. That's the way people get their points across in life.

It's not that much different from our OFF TOPIC board.

It's a wonder anything moves forward in life, really.

A little 'mordida' could go a long way right about now.

Osprey - 3-8-2006 at 08:14 PM

Pam, I hope you'll keep reminding them that the government of Mexico has sold all the fish there is to sell "outside the park" to the highest bidder (mostly people who live far from Mexican waters) for more years than we can count. The fish that remain, those that swim all the oceans of the planet, the fish that do not belong to Mexico or Mexicans have been sold if they swim in or near Mexican waters including this little sea. Only those that have escaped capture and sale, come close to or into the park are the ones left to argue about. Sportfishing has not decimated the dorado or the yellowtail. Remind them that all the really big money from the environmental disregard that led to the need to meet and decide anything local is in dirty pockets in D.F., that's a long way from Loreto.

Do not want to here this.....

msawin - 3-8-2006 at 09:34 PM

Well I got to tell you..
5 years ago my Bass fishing partner and I went Lake Huetes to do some bass fishing. We caught and released each day 100- 125 large mouth bass. At that same time we had seen at least 300 fisherman a day, with nets working to make a buck. Did the fish we release make a differnce?

They made more money per pound for the bass versus the other crop... No catch and release...

My point here is.......

A year ago after the fire we had at Tripui. I came back down south with a group that would do the July Dorado fishing. Three weeks after the fire, one of my partners had a heart attack witch left my 84 year old buddie with out a mate. So I made it back in the three week span to piddle thru the burnt crap...

Anyways... The point.

Fishing was Ok. Fished with Placido. We caught fish. Quite a few. We limited each day...Released all but two. ate'em

At our cleaning staion at the Oasis a gal came in with her catch.... A 5lb hen Dorado.. As it was being cleaned, with her standing there, I said "do you know what is"? the golden eggs... "Its the fish"... all 1 .25 lbs she put in the pastic bag....

I said:
"That is the FUTURE OF OUR FISHING.... " She stormed away mad at me...... The next day she came up to me and said " thank you so very much. I did not know."

That may not make an impact on the life of the fish in the Sea of Cortez.... But if you ain't going to eat it.. lettem go..

martin-o

Hook - 3-8-2006 at 09:40 PM

Very valid points, Osprey, but I think a better tact is to get all the businesses in Loreto that will suffer from the loss of sportfishing behind Pam. She needs to use those financial equivalencies she mentioned in an earlier post and show the monetary infusion that fishermen bring. NO ONE COMES TO LORETO TO BUY FISH OR SEE THE COMMERCIALS NET. They come to have a realistic chance of catching fish or seeing marinelife, if they don't fish. The potential bycatch is also an issue.

If the hotel owners and the restaurants owners and the store owners AS WELL AS THE SPORTFISHERS COME OUT IN SUPPORT OF A MODIFIED SEASON FOR THE COMMERCIALS, it will put all kinds of pressure on the local officials. The amount of people engaged in commercial fishing in Loreto can't be nearly as large as those supported by the sportfishing community. Quite possibly, some of them aren't even locals.

Hmmm.....I am wondering if we could get the support of the Carnaderos or whether they are too tight with the boats netting the spawners. I suppose it's likely that some of them are one and the same.

If we need to mount a groundswell in the US of A through fishing websites, it can be done. But we need to be realistic. The commercials will have to get something in return.

When is the meeting Pam?

Capt. George - 3-9-2006 at 07:18 AM

Nets/traps vs. rod/reel hook/line NO CONTEST

seen it for the last time in Cape Cod MA. Striped Bass, a hook and line species only! Limited tonnage per year commercial (again only hook and line) limited daily catch numbers. Licenses mandatory...reports from fisherman and fish buyers....

The bass were on a terrible downward slide...their numbers today, after GOOD SCIENTIFIC DATA & MANAGEMENT, are no less then awesome. Almost back to the sixties!

Hook and line managed fisheries work....everyone gives a little and everyone gains a lot. Win, win..... Capt. George

Skipjack Joe - 3-9-2006 at 11:40 AM

Wow, a lot of good posts since I last looked at this thread.

Quote:

Originally posted by Hook
I think a better tact is to get all the businesses in Loreto that will suffer from the loss of sportfishing behind Pam.

I would go a bit lighter with the economic argument. Yes, you can count the dollars, do the math, and show that one provides more money than the other. But you are dealing with a way of life that's existed for generations, long before we came along. You don't want to alienate these people by 'proving' to them that their way of life has little future so 'let's get on the bandwagon'. The way to convince your opponent is to understand and respect his point of view. I believe that there is room for both in the park. I believe that the commercials should be convinced that banning spawning YT will INCREASE their catch in the long run.

Quote:

Originally posted by Captn. George
The bass were on a terrible downward slide...their numbers today, after GOOD SCIENTIFIC DATA & MANAGEMENT, are no less then awesome.

I agree with this statement completely. I believe that PESCA has NO scientific data on it's fish stocks and is managing it's fisheries by compromise between competitors for these fish (mordida plays a big part). Otherwise, how can you explain a daily fish limit of 5 for baja grouper. Any bimbo can see how destructive such a law will be to these fish.

Quote:

Originally posted by Captn. George
Hook and line managed fisheries work....everyone gives a little and everyone gains a lot.

Kudos to Captn George again. I believe that these pangueros are not netting spawning YT because they prefer to do so, nor that they don't care. I think that spawning yellowtail may be the only time that these fish are on the surface and available to that form of fishing.

I have stood on the docks at Loreto and watched a panguero unload his yellowtail caught with hook and line at Pulpito. He unloaded I would say between 50 to 100 fish. He had spent 4 or 5 days up there catching this load. The boat ride to Pulpito is about 3 hours I believe. Now compare that to a netting episode off the east side of Carmen. A 45minute ride is a big savings in gas. The panguero probably caught more fish in half a day than the hook and line guy did in a week.

So netting these spawners is much more profitable in the short run. You need a very compelling argument to convince such an individual that what he's doing is wrong. The SCIENTIFIC DATA is just that, I believe. It would show that he (not the sport fisherman) is destroying his own way of life.

[Edited on 3-9-2006 by Skipjack Joe]

Kudos to Pam

Sharksbaja - 3-9-2006 at 02:21 PM

For this well positioned and thought out post. It is a cryin' shame the folks in control of regulations shirk responsibility of managing or otherwise deciding the fate of species within the Sea of Cortez.
THe pure fact of the matter is that these same law making officials have not the knowledge let alone the expertise necessary to protect from the collapse of fisheries within their realm and jurisdiction.
Pam, since you are an authority on sportfish landings in the Loreto area I would look to you for numbers based on tallies generated by your business, particularily if I were a researcher involved in fishery management. Do you know of (any) programs aimed at deriving fish numbers through sportfishing and commercial sources on a local level.. It may be prudent to enlist University grad-students or other experts who would possibly join the ranks. A letter of concern stating their position on closures regarding spawning YT. It helps to get important letterheads.
Other species deserve similar protection and provisions should be made concurrently with the overall request(s) for consideration.
IMHO, the weight and leverage used against the netting advocates should be proportional to the amount of attention required to make significant changes. In other words, if the hurtles are high and stubborness prevails more dramatic interest could be summoned in the way of media or other coverage.
Of course money usually helps steer Mexican policy faster. Attracting wealthy business alllies could help greatly. As much as I dislike the new project in Loreto , it would be a good place to seek endorsement of new legislation. Even though the principles of Loreto Bay may not be Mexican National the fact remains they are a powerful entity in the area. I would think they would whole-heartedly support a plan to restrict or govern sensitive (and politically correct) issues. Just my three cents.

I think you have a clear mission Pam. Who says they can't learn from others.

The discussion here certainly looks black & white from my vantage point 2 thousand miles away. Strange that those up-close and personal have a different spin. THe reply to Skipjack underscores serious animosity in which fishing tourists are painted as the bad guys with their concerns.
It is ludicrous that the politicos drive a wedge between the indiginous people fishing for a living and those out for fun.
The notion that Americans profit from caught and transported fish fillets is unbelievable at best. The real issue of netting pregnant or spawning fish and their ignorant initial response demonstrates their lack of professionalism with sweeping generalizations regarding the legality of the practice.
The real problem it seems to me is the lack of modern education at the grassroot level. It seems more like a self-education process to me.
Let's face it, the pangueros know the problems and loss of fish. They won't set nets in areas previously denuded. But should they move on to the next spawning area without thinking hard about the last? Who will steer these folks towards a sustainable resource?
Don't forget about the tuna ranches and their voracious appetite for baitfish. Yellowtail and other tuna species try to seek out the food by following temperature gradients favorable to sardines and other plentiful baitfish. When this is interrupted by uncontrolled harvests the effects can be dramatic as witnessed in So Cal duing the 70s & 80s.
Keep yer fingers crossed. The rebound will only happen with education and enforcement.
It's a bad rap targeting the wrong folks. WE all know it is the commercials doing the harm. When does a resource become precious?
Unfortunately most of the time, when it's gone.

Well, Joe.....

Hook - 3-9-2006 at 02:39 PM

...you seem to be implying that my post advocates a total ban on the commercials. I'm realistic enough to know that that's not likely to happen. A compromise will have to be worked out.

But I still think the economic argument is the most valid. So what if the commercials have been there for generations? So have some of the shop owners and the other land based businesses. Situations change. One upon a time there was NO bag limit in Mexico. THAT'S the way it was for generations; does that mean it should continue?

The economic argument will be most persuasive to the land based businesses that depend on tourism; in a lesser sense to the park officials or the PESCA people. Win the support of the land-based businesses and carry that support to the meeting in some tangible way, assuming it is a public meeting. Torches and pitchforks, maybe????? How about fishing poles with peso notes taped to the eyes? :lol:

If it's a private meeting, then Pam could show up with a resolution signed by any and all who support a "sportfishing-friendly" option.

Finally, you mention use of SCIENTIFIC DATA as a defense for the sportfishers. What scientific data? None really exists. All we can do is make the deductive argument that mass killing of ANY fish during the spawn will result in a greater loss of fish than if a limited number are taken.

If there is a precedent for a spawning ban in some other fishery in Mexico, it could be valuable. Maybe the totuaba? If there is scientific evidence that they were decimated while in the shallows during their spawn (I don't know if that's the case), it might be the kind of reasoning that park officials and PESCA understand.

Capt. George's striper analogy COULD be a possible argument. A rather nomadic type of fish that strict hook and line management proved to be very successful.

Ultimately, it's ALL about economics, though. I just hope it isn't all about the mordida kind of economics.

Let's keep the discourse going, Joe. Good thoughts all around and the fisheries will be the winners.

It should be noted that this decision has the potential to affect yellowtail fishing from Gonzaga to Cerralvo. Certainly a large percentage of YT are highly migratory. This is a cause that affects the fishermen at San Lucas Cove, at Bahia de Los Angeles and at Mulege.

[Edited on 3-9-2006 by Hook]

Skipjack Joe - 3-9-2006 at 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hook
Ultimately, it's ALL about economics, though.

I couldn't disagree more with this statement, Hook.

If it was all about economics then we would all choose the highest paying career when considering a profession. Actually people like that suffer from having the lowest level of job satisfaction (and self esteem). A doctor's primary goal would be his salary and not his patient's welfare. As you know job satisfaction has very little to do with economics in the real world. And commercial fishing is no different. These people like their livelihood and I, for one, respect them for it. They have a right to defend their form of livelihood and not have it go to someone who can bring in more cash with it. I dare say that Pam didn't choose her profession for economic reasons either. So you end up doing what you like and then having to defend your choice with arguments about it's economic benefits.

Anyway, people need to eat fish so there will always be demand for seafood and a financial reward for those providing it. Sportfishing and commercial fishing are not mutually exclusive and I have never understood this polarity that exists between these groups. It's certainly counterproductive.

As far as the emphasis on hard census data of fish stocks. It's true I don't have it. It's true that an assumption is being made that removal of spawners would be harmful to the fishery. It's a fair assumption, I think. Although other factors should be considered. The fecundity of females varies from species to species. Also, life expentancy ... and the age at which a fish reaches maturity also play a big part in determining a take quota. Given all of these factors it may be possible that netting a certain amount of spawners is quite sustainable. I don't know. And I suspect that none of the participants in these management meetings do either.

Last summer I fished the sockeye runs on the Kenai River. All of those fish are spawners. The entire sportfishery is based upon catching gravid females. And yet it works. It works because they've got accurate fish counts and models predicting how much fishing pressure that fishery can sustain. When the runs drop and the numbers aren't right they immediately change the regs on the river. It's a finely tuned system. I bring it up because it's an example of a fishery that permits the sort of fishing I suggested should be banned in the park.

Another consideration: These fish have planktonic juveniles. The eggs are released in the sea and carried by currents. That means that the laws being implemented at Santa Rosalia is affecting the fish stocks in Loreto and vice versa. The protection being provided in the Loreto's marine park may actually bring very little benefit to the yellowtail in the park. The restrictions on cabrilla and pargo are probably way more beneficial to fish stocks.

Actually I agree with most of your arguments, Hook. I just decided to comment on the one I didn't. That's all. It's been a slow day at work ...

[Edited on 3-10-2006 by Skipjack Joe]

Don Alley - 3-9-2006 at 09:57 PM

A few thoughts...

The problems go far beyond netting egg-baring yellowtail. Many species are far scarcer than the yellowtail, along the shore and at the islands.

Sport fishing is not the problem: I don't entirely agree. While I am not big on fully protected areas, they are needed for big grouper and sea bass. Those slow growing species can suffer from sportfishing. A limit of one fish is probably too high. And I wonder, when I see fleets of sportfishers, if the harvest is all that benign to fish populations.

But, the impact of sportfishing is far overstated by the authorities, according to Pam. Americans selling their catch? I don't think that happens and I don't think it's legal. But I would not object to bargaining for less commercial catch with concessions of a reduced sport catch, through lower bag or size limits. I never understood the need to pack home coolers packed with frozen fillets.

Baseline data: A biologist from La Paz stated at a recent local meeting that there is no fisheries data.

Five year plans: The management plan, according to a park official, is subject to revision only every five years. And such a revision is needed before changing regulations. That can make it difficult to lobby for change; we get one shot and then they can blow us off for five years.

I believe the government authorization for the marine park did not include a budget of government funds. I think park employees must raise their own expenses-including salaries-from donations and fees. So Pam's idea to take the issues to donors may be very powerful.

It's been mentioned here that commercial fishing has been a "way of life" for a long time. Maybe...but Loreto sportfishing has a long history, going back to the Flying Sportsman's lodge, a time that I believe predates modern monofilament gillnets. We should also consider that Loreto is rapidly growing in population, and we could see (or maybe already have seen) commercial effort by newcomers in addition to a traditional local fishery. There should be protection against increased numbers of commercial fishermen, not a program of government subsidies to create new entries.

Economics: The timing could be better. Loreto is booming. Lots of work, new jobs, new construction, new cars on the streets. Restaurants are busy, and we even sold out ALL the hotel rooms a week ago. The airport's a zoo but lately there have been few rod tubes seen there. Baja is moving beyond the sportfishing economy to one based on real estate, golf, clubs, and bs marketing. I've seen rumors on the net that even one or two of the famous East Cape fishing resorts have sold and will become new resorts with little, if any emphasis on fishing.

What would I like to see out of this?
Annual reviews of regulations
Quality areas to fish inshore that are net free, year around
A cap on entries into commercial fishing in the park. Existing permit holders only, unless they agee to sell their permit on the open market, possibly a source of retirement income? And maybe the government, or a citizen's group, could buy out licenses and retire them?
Improved effort at basic biology...making population estimates, and estimating and recording catch rates. And quit playing with fads like mpa's.
Streamlined enforcement
Annual, monthly or weekly park permits (the wristbands) would be beneficial.

well, enough from me for now....

Osprey - 3-10-2006 at 07:34 AM

I'm not an ex Marine but the slogan "adapt and improvise" is a good one and might fit right here. Quietly open a School For Burglars. Offer cut rate tuitions for Mexican net fishermen. Show them the LB plan for 6,000 new, ritzy gringo homes full of valuable baubles and playthings. The fishery will be saved at a small per-insured cost to the insurance companies.

Bob and jane - 3-10-2006 at 07:57 AM

Good post, Don.
I'm glad you pointed out that the netting is actually a relatively new phenomena. Our captain grew up in Loreto and when he was young very little netting was being done. Because the highway hadn't been built, there was no economical way to market large numbers of fish. Only shark were caught in nets, and the nets were designed to just catch the largest fish and not damage the younger ones. The sharks were dried and shipped to La Paz. Many of those out there netting fish--with tighter and tighter meshed nets, are fairly recent arrivals. Yes, they are trying to scrape out a living, but how they do it is not a "local tradition." Local tradition is walking down to the beach and catching a yellowtail for dinner.
I like the idea of capping the number of people allowed to put nets out and working to eventually cut them out all together--at least during spawning seasons.

Canadians or ?

Sharksbaja - 3-11-2006 at 01:31 PM

Quote:

Everywhere there are semi-amorphous blobs of white flesh with plastic yellow wristbands ambling all over town.

haha, kidding!... really though, are those the potential financiers of the Loreto Bay project?

Don, I can envision the town and in particular the downtown and malecon areas with a ethnic make-over. To me, not a pretty sight. I would much prefer hangin' out in some outta the way ciudadocito (sp?)
The Disneyland crowd is boring. :lol:

THats' what kills me. Some of them want exactly that. And if you provide them with people movers and cyber crap enough then they will come. Just make life easy for em. Why else would they pay to use a beach in Mexico. What does that remind you of? :lol:

-----------
The condition and future use of the waters and their inhabitants will become issue when and only when the authorities and involved policy, law and regulation-making parties coalecse common goals with a clear future vision that translates into pesos.

Some would argue the Mexican govt has not the means and tools. I would disagree.
The system now appears as evolving at a slower pace compared to it's relative destruction. :no:

Making adjustments to fisheries on a 5 yr timeline is simply unfathomable in CA. and OR. WE have "real-time" closures and extensions all the time here where we live.
The good news:
It is at least on the table. How it is delivered(the spawn issue) is paramount with it being a one-shot deal. The information presented being succint and forthright & being underwritten by authorities and people of notoriety on the subject with some good data may be virtuous in the concideration and enactment of a new regulation. The whole system of monitoring and gathering numbers plus data from prior years is a world within itself. It takes many researchers thousands of hours and millions of dollars to track a specie and put it on paper(or maybe a computer). The demographics can be enormous not to mention the hundred of variables. This science of forcasting natures plethora of animals is so complex that the accuracy can vary widely. Overall IMHO I would jecture to say that the forcasters(here) have been pretty close as of late. At least in some fisheries.THe ebb and flow of fish populations is still a mystery much of the time.
If large reproductive fish are grouping, to me it would mean that spawning is taking place. It should be outright illegal to take them, period. Same with a ten foot Marlin

eoc.

Don Alley - 3-11-2006 at 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sharksbaja
If large reproductive fish are grouping, to me it would mean that spawning is taking place. It should be outright illegal to take them, period. Same with a ten foot Marlin

eoc.

True. But at the same time, we wouldn't want to get cornered into a discussion that is limited to that single issue. IMO, populations of many other inshore gamefish are in poor shape. I also think Loreto is lacking, compared to many other areas, in good areas to fish from shore. One of the most popular such places with local folks is Puerto Escondido, but even that is heavily gillnetted. Can't the gillnetters and the park leave anything for sportfishermen AND hook and line fishing local people? Just another problem with the 5 year timeline: you cannot give fair representation to all the issues in a single rulemaking session.

I realize thet the park personel are young, out of town folks with limited budgets and limited authority. Current regulations are "concensus" regulations, and as a result seem gerrymandered around the best opportunities to conduct high-impact netting. Hopefully if a constituency of sportfishing interests shows up the park folks may feel somewhat emboldened and more agressively pursue a more balanced management plan...but it remains to be seen if either the netters will come to terms, or, if not, if they can be overridden.

Lessons from los norteamericanos

Skipjack Joe - 3-12-2006 at 11:08 AM

I thought about this thread last night while reading this LA Times piece on the fishery at Morro Bay.

LA Times article on Morro Bay.

The fishery in California during the next 50 years I am sure will be greatly different than the last 50. Baja has the benefit of looking at our fishery with 20/20 hindsight. It's going through a growth period somewhat similar to ours. It can do things right if it chooses.

Quote:

Originally posted by Sharksbaja
Making adjustments to fisheries on a 5 yr timeline is simply unfathomable in CA. and OR. WE have "real-time" closures and extensions all the time here where we live.

Good point Sharksbaja. A 5 year management plan for Loreto's marine park is too slow. The area is growing too fast.

[Edited on 3-12-2006 by Skipjack Joe]

That's right Joe

Sharksbaja - 3-13-2006 at 04:37 PM

The learning curve has steepened. As Mexico struggles to implement and enforce existing laws here comes the avalanche of new problems and the fear of dealing with them. It takes thousands of hours to research and compile pertinent data on damn near anything. In fact most the time, too much info emerges and skews the whole study. Happens here regularly.
I think Mexico takes less info and translates that into law somewhat differently than the U.S. I believe they are on a good track but the lack of enforcement, education and a clear mission on a local level is more than obvious and major discprepancies can occur.
A presentation of the spawning problem alone must clearly offer acceptable alternatives and/or assistance in making the transition into other fisheries etc. Gill-nettting is a huge issue with huge ramifications.
Don is spot-on about the necessity to broaden the picture to include other important fish and their potentially compromised life-cycles. I also feel the blame blame game solves the problem of actually tackling some of the complex probs. Small town politics prevail in coastal Baja. That is a huge hurtle for the local enforcement who know the people affected by changes on a first name basis.

flyfishinPam - 3-14-2006 at 01:47 AM

I just added a detailed list of organizations that fund the park, have a look here:

http://bajabigfish.com/marinepark.html

I ain't lettin this one get away~

Don Alley - 3-14-2006 at 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by flyfishinPam
I just added a detailed list of organizations that fund the park, have a look here:

http://bajabigfish.com/marinepark.html

I ain't lettin this one get away~

Interesting stuff in that list, including websites with overviews.

Some of the sites are interesting...informatve sites with all kinds of info on the possible destruction caused by tourists, and sportfishermen, including those participating in Loreto's winter tuna fishery and summer swordfish fishery! God save us from ignorant busybodies. :mad:

Yeah very interesting indeed

flyfishinPam - 3-15-2006 at 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Don Alley

Quote:

Originally posted by flyfishinPam
I just added a detailed list of organizations that fund the park, have a look here:

http://bajabigfish.com/marinepark.html

I ain't lettin this one get away~

Once Sharkey returns to the US and can post again he can add what the head of PROFEPA told him. Now this is from Sharkey as he told me that sportfishermen have taken more tonalados of Yellowtail than all the commercials combined! Now THAT'S a load of crap as there is no valid data to back that up...

if there were valid data then my captains would have been checked daily on their catches and all that data would be recorded and made public thanks to the transparancy laws. Well none of that has ever happened so where does this claim come from I wonder?

So you gotta come on down now Don, as the Tuna and Swordfish bite is WFO now... what a joke! :lol:

Good Lord!

Sharksbaja - 3-15-2006 at 03:34 PM

If Profepas' stance on this issue is so clouded with bias that they actually believe this (gossip) then, shame on them! They need to be uprighted. Their source or wind-bag politco spewing such misinformation should be forced to cough up any and all data that shows the correlation and determination of such a preposterous notion.
I find that totally irresponsible and it smacks of cover-up.
Making the sportfisherman scape goats in order to appease a group and by ignoring the precarious situation the Parque faces will outrage most intelligent people. The fact that they can even say this openly is hard for me to believe.
I completely understand the hurtles you have before you Pam. You, my friend are the new vanguard of the Parque. It is a great thing you are able to represent the challenge. You should have no problem attracting and gaining support from the local community and from the sportfishing communities.
Say, does Profepa have a good relationship and standing with the local folks, the commercials?