| Pages:
1
2 |
69
Newbie
Posts: 3
Registered: 7-31-2004
Location: In Your Mind
Member Is Offline
|
|
Recreational Fishing Takes Big Bite of Ocean Catch
http://www.seaweb.org/whatis/8.26.04.release.html
Study in Science Reveals Recreational Fishing Takes Big Bite of Ocean Catch
U.S. saltwater recreational fishing catch rivals commercial fisheries for many depleted fish stocks including red snapper, black seabass, and lingcod
Taking a hard look at the common belief that recreational fishing accounts for only 2-3% of total landings in the U.S., a new study published in the
journal Science (August 26th) reveals that recreational catches account for nearly a quarter of the total take of over fished populations, including
many of the most economically valuable species such as red snapper, red drum, lingcod, and bocaccio.
For specific depleted populations in the U.S.?particularly the large charismatic fishes that people care about most?recreational landings outstrip
commercial landings. This is true for red snapper (59% recreational) and gag (56%) in the Gulf of Mexico, red drum in the South Atlantic (93%), and
bocaccio on the Pacific coast (87%), among others.
?The conventional wisdom is that recreational fishing is a small proportion of the total take, so it is largely overlooked,? says lead author Felicia
Coleman of Florida State University. ?But if you remove the fish caught and used for fish sticks and fishmeal (pollock and menhaden) ? two strictly
commercially caught species that account for over half of all U.S. landings - the recreational take rises to 10% nationally. And if you focus in on
the populations identified by the Federal government as species of concern, it rises to 23%.?
The study is the first comprehensive analysis of the impact of recreational saltwater fishing in the U.S. Using all available federal and state data,
the authors formally compare commercial and recreational landings for the past 22 years - first for all federally managed fish, and then for species
of concern (species officially classified by the National Marine Fisheries Service as ?over-fished? or ?experiencing over-fishing?) both nationally
and regionally. The Pew Charitable Trusts, one of the U.S.'s largest philanthropies, sponsored the study. Pew has sponsored major research on
fisheries, including a number of widely reported recent studies on the deterioration of the marine environment.
At the regional level, recreational catches for these species of concern made up 64% of landings in the Gulf of Mexico (west coast of Florida,
Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas), 38% in the South Atlantic (North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and the east coast of Florida), 59%
along the Pacific Coast (California, Oregon and Washington), and 12% in the Northeast (Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut,
New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia) in 2002.
?With over ten million saltwater recreational anglers in the U.S., and recreational fishing activity growing as much as 20% in the last 10 years,
their aggregate impact is far from benign,? says co-author Will Figueira of Duke University, currently at the University of Technology Sydney in
Australia. ?Recreational anglers are operating below the radar screen of management. While the individual may take relatively few fish, we show that
a few fish per person times millions of fishermen can have an enormous impact.?
?The large impacts of recreational fisheries surprised us, and they may startle many people, including fishermen, concerned about the health of our
oceans. But if anything, our results likely underestimate the true impact of recreational fishing because we did not include fish that are discarded
at sea or die from the effects of catch-and-release fishing,? says co-author Larry Crowder of Duke University.
There is a long held belief that the individual catches of recreational fishermen could never take a significant bite out of the ocean?s bounty. Most
people picture recreational fishing as a Norman Rockwell image of father and son in a dinghy, each with a single hook and line. But many recreational
fishermen today are equipped with sonar devices and global positioning systems to find fish, and powerful, far-ranging boats to travel far offshore ?
technologies that make them every bit as effective as their commercial counterparts.
?Recreational fishing in the ocean has lost much of its art,? says Coleman. ?Someone with absolutely no fishing ability can go out on a charter boat
and bring in a remarkable catch ? not because they know the environment, but because they rely on the professional, expert fishing knowledge of the
captain and crew.?
Recreational fishing targets large, top-level predatory fish in the ocean. Removal of these fish can create dramatic changes in ocean food webs and
cause cascading effects that alter the overall productivity and health of marine ecosystems. In addition, some fish populations have dropped to such
low numbers that they have been considered for placement on the threatened and endangered species lists, including bocaccio (a rockfish) on the
Pacific coast which is primarily caught in recreational fisheries (87%), and Goliath grouper which is currently protected from harvest in the
southeastern U.S., but is still caught by catch and release.
While the cumulative impact of commercial fishers is constrained by limits on who, where, when and how much fish they can catch, there are no controls
on the aggregate impact of recreational fishers. Current management of saltwater recreational fisheries focuses primarily on the individual fisherman
? setting limits on the number and size of fish one can bring in ? without restricting the number of people allowed to fish. Approximately 40% of
coastal states do not even require salt-water recreational fishing licenses. No states require a license for people younger than 16, and few require
it for anyone fishing from shore.
?Size limits and bag limits are well intentioned, but lead to discarding of fish that are likely dead or dying. Unlike hunting on land, where hunters
are licensed and the total take is controlled or managed by license lotteries, similar controls for saltwater recreational anglers simply do not
exist,? says Crowder.
Limiting fishing to catch and release may not solve the problem either. At least 20% of released fish end up dying, according to NMFS stock
assessments for many species. For deep water species, this number is much higher. In addition, impressively large species like goliath grouper may
well survive a catch-and-release encounter, but face repeated stress from successive catches. ?Because they tend to move very little outside of the
spawning season, an individual is easy to find and a single fish can be targeted repeatedly. A goliath grouper near one of my study sites had 20
hooks in its mouth,? says Coleman. ?Bringing up a 400 pound fish onto your boat creates a marvelous photo opportunity, but it undoubtedly causes
enormous physiological stress on the fish. And catching it is about as exciting as pulling up a Volkswagen.?
?In some ways, recreational fishing is where commercial fishing was 20 years ago with very weak controls and rapidly increasing numbers of fishermen,?
says Federal Ocean Commissioner Andrew Rosenberg, of the University of New Hampshire and former Deputy Director of NMFS. ?The challenge is to come up
with new ways to balance the increase in the number of people fishing with the need to reduce the number of fish caught and killed. The stocks can't
sustain the increasing pressure and the only way to ensure we will have fish in the future is to leave more in the water now."
?This study is a rigorous compilation and analysis of data about recreational fishing that is long overdue and much needed,? says Pew Ocean
Commissioner and marine ecologist Jane Lubchenco of Oregon State University. ?The availability of a credible analysis of such a controversial topic
will greatly assist decision-making. Policy makers and fishery managers should now be able to move beyond assertions and begin to address the
issues.?
Many recreational fishers have a strong conservation ethic and the good news is that, with the help of strong management measures, depleted stocks can
be rebuilt. ?Everyone has to be part of the solution. There?s little use in commercial and recreational fishers pointing fingers at each other,? says
author and ardent recreational fisherman Carl Safina, president of the Blue Ocean Institute. ?Commercial fishing is not all bad and recreational
fishing is not all good. A fish doesn?t care if you are a commercial or recreational fisherman. It only cares if it is surrounded by water -or on
ice.?
?Recreational fishing is important to many people,? says Coleman. ?For some it?s a way to commune with nature, for others it fulfills a deep desire to
hunt. But if folks want to continue recreational fishing, we all need to support management of both commercial and recreational fisheries that will
allow fish populations to recover and protect the structure and function of marine systems.?
|
|
|
jrbaja
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4863
Registered: 2-2-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
Like I was saying gentlemen!
and what did I hear back ? "It's not us"?
hahahahahahaha Rightyoh !
|
|
|
Germanicus
Nomad
Posts: 214
Registered: 6-13-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
well, I learned that the Indians were much smarter then many people believe.
When an Indian took some firestones from the earth making a speer head, he put one head back under the soil. (that's why we can still find them
today-sometimes)
And the old Indian saying is: "If I want something from the earth in the future, I got to give the earth something back."
And that's the same with the fish, I believe.
You got to give those fish back to the sea you can not eat.
I am a strong supporter of strict limitations for sportshiermen.
BUT: The commercial fishing is by far the more dangerous fact.
I just red an article in U.S. News:
Commercial fishing is destroying the seafloor in those depth, we haven't even explored.
It was said that we do not even know our planet in those depth, but we are already destroying it with miles deep fishing attempts.
The commercial fishing industries is fishing in depth of the oceans which we can not reach yet because we do not have the technology to explore those
parts of the oceans.
Or, if I am looking at my local grocery store and the fish department.
MAN! they do have a selection of everything. Divisions of sportfishermen can not catch that amount in a lifetime what the store is selling in a single
day.
And that's only one store in the U.S.
So I believe that such a study is well colored depending on who ordered it and pays for.
Neverheless a strict limitation for the daily catch of a sportsfisherman is very good start to " give the earth something back, that the earth can
give you something in the future "
Germanicus
|
|
|
jrbaja
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4863
Registered: 2-2-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
Except for the fact
that you have not seen the Sea of Cortez yet.
What you are trying to say would make sense, if it weren't for the numbers of these pleasure fishermen who fish the Sea.
Every year there are more and more people and boats in every sheltered (and even unsheltered) harbor/ cove/ marina up and down both sides of the
peninsula.
Here's an example.
Puerto Salina has a (new) marina. I guess about 6 or 7 years old. It is designed wrong and constantly needs to be dredged. There is no access
when there are big waves to get in or out.
Two of my friends have drowned there and it receives nothing but bad publicity.
When it first opened, there was one boat. Then a couple years later, another.
Within the last two years, there have been about 15 or 20 more boats that are now docked there.
And this marina has a bad reputation in the boating world.
The ones on the Sea of Cortez side are generally perfect except during hurricanes and most people spend their time out on the water fishing the rest
of the year.
Now, I am sure that commercial fishing is responsible for the majority of depletion. But to deny that the huge amounts of sport fisherman don't have
an effect is down right silly.
I bet for every commercial boat, there are 500 pleasure boats doing the same thing. It all has an effect!
I think that to point fingers and blame someone else is very gringo like.
And until we can all learn to accept responsibility and try and work together to solve these problems, things will just continue to get worse!
And, I can't wait to get down there and go fishing with my pangero buddies.
|
|
|
Cardon Man
Super Nomad
Posts: 1319
Registered: 8-28-2003
Location: Thetis Bank
Member Is Offline
Mood: !Al Chingaso!
|
|
There is no doubt sportfishermen must have some impact on fish populations world wide and in turn should take every measure to fish responsibly.
However, the scale of destruction by commercial fishermen is far and away a greater threat to all fish species. A longliner can set 2500 hooks a day.
That's just one boat. Imagine the many tens of millions of hooks set around the world each year. Every baited sportfishing hook in the world would not
even come to a fraction of those numbers. And that's just longliners we're talking about. Additionally imagine the millions of pounds of baitfish,
squid etc., to bait all those hooks. And lets not forget the untold millions of pounds of bycatch that most forms of commercial fishing generates...or
the terrible devastation that bottom trawlers cause to sensitive sea floor enviroments, possibly ruining them forever. There are indeed more and more
sportfisherman harvesting the sea but there is just no way they have the time, money, or ability to impact the world's fish populations the way
commercial fisherman can.
Commercial fishermen are represented by powerfull lobyists in Washington DC...Sportfishermen are not. If any serious limitations were to be put on the
sport harvest I'd bet good money you would not see those restrictions mirrored in the commercial catch. There's just too much money involved.
|
|
|
jrbaja
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4863
Registered: 2-2-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
So how can we help ?
Not by pointing fingers but by doing something.
Like the next time you "clip" one of those red lobster coupons, or feel like long john silvers, or ichibiri sushi, go get a quarter pounder with
cheese instead.
|
|
|
Germanicus
Nomad
Posts: 214
Registered: 6-13-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
C.M. that is exactly the point!
thanx for your posting.
But we all can help, I guess.
If 5 anglers are on the/one boat with 10 rods,
is it from any need that those anglers catch 40 fish that day, only for to kill the fish and on land > throw'em away?
if they would give those fish to the (in this case) mexican population for free, it would make sense to me.
It feeds some folks with sense.
But just for the thrill of catching and then dumping the fish >>>????????
That's what every so called "sportsman" should learn.
Germanicus
|
|
|
Cardon Man
Super Nomad
Posts: 1319
Registered: 8-28-2003
Location: Thetis Bank
Member Is Offline
Mood: !Al Chingaso!
|
|
I, like Whistler, have nothing against commercial fishermen. The Oceans are and should be a rich source of food for the planet. But they, like
sportfishers, need to be resposible for the future of the resource. Unfortunately, that is not what is demonstrated most often by the commercial
fishing industry. Take as examples the current state of: atlantic cod, bluefin tuna, billfishes etc. All have been hit too hard by commercial
harvests.
I don't mean to point fingers at commercial fisherman to divert blame from sport abuses. But there is definately a lot of greed and politics at work
behind the scenes of the commercial fishing industry which leads to overfishing on a huge scale world wide.
Jr raises a good point when he suggests doing something about it. I rarely, if ever, buy fish. I catch my own and take only what I can eat. And my dog
sees to it that not a scrap is wasted. The way I see it, no one needs to set a longline or a gill net or kill x-pounds of bycatch on my account.
|
|
|
jrbaja
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4863
Registered: 2-2-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
There is no restaurant
that can compare to the flavor of a freshly caught fish or mariscos bought right from the boat or diver and cooked over your own grill.
And, next time you go get some swordfish steaks at the store, squeeze them and see what happens
That oughtta cut down on seafood lovers hahahahahaha
|
|
|
Germanicus
Nomad
Posts: 214
Registered: 6-13-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
yea, yea, and you are eating corn-flakes all day, right?
I guess you are recommending those things for to have more catch to catch and less fishermen on the sea of cortez the time you are going fishing,
right?
Now its my turn >   :moon: :moon::moon:
Germanicus
|
|
|
elizabeth
Senior Nomad
Posts: 742
Registered: 7-30-2004
Location: Loreto, BCS
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by jrbaja
Not by pointing fingers but by doing something.
Like the next time you "clip" one of those red lobster coupons, or feel like long john silvers, or ichibiri sushi, go get a quarter pounder with
cheese instead. |
I don't fish, but I eat a lot fish my friends catch...I'm pretty careful about what I buy, though...if you want to know what fish/shellfish should be
avoided because of overfishing, bycatch, reef destruction, etc., and which ones are best choices go to www.montereybayaqaurium.org and click on the Seafood Watch icon.
|
|
|
Germanicus
Nomad
Posts: 214
Registered: 6-13-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
elizabeth, good advice.
But there is another reason why to avoid certain seafood.
Seafood (NOT: fish but crustaceans) do 'filter' the water for food.
free living osters and mussels i.e. are severely poisoned in most of the regions.
Same with some sort of crab.
The crustaceans do not feel the chemicals the are filtering out of the water.
But you will.
>>
maybe that's the cheapest way to purchese Viagra!
Germanicus
|
|
|
jrbaja
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4863
Registered: 2-2-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
This is very true
and an example for the south californians is, although almost all other mollusks were killed off, the mussels weren't even phased.
And any so. cal. surfer knows of or has had ear infections, or worse from those waters.
I know of two dogs that have died from eating bad mussels. One was mine.
|
|
|
Taco de Baja
Super Nomad
Posts: 1913
Registered: 4-14-2004
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain, CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Dreamin' of Baja
|
|
poison mussels
Are not poisonous because of 'chemicals' in the water, they are poisonous because, of filtering red tide microorganisms that are common during the
warm water months. The shellfish concentrate the NATURAL toxic chemicals from the plankton in their flesh.
Remember the old saying "only eat shellfish in months that contain the letter "R". All these months are in the fall and winter when the water is too
cold for the red tide plankton to survive, they have moved on to warmer waters. Personally I would wait until the middle of the period
(December-January) to consume shellfish from the west coast.
|
|
|
Germanicus
Nomad
Posts: 214
Registered: 6-13-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
No fingerpointing??
yes, I do fingerpointing to those so called fisherman doing commercial fishing like I saw it on TV Saturday night.
Title at the National Geographic Explorer:
Tuna Cowboys.
Here the fax-cts and figures.
From Australia 200 to 400 mls into the open ocean huge so called Motherships and a whole fleet of smaller catch-boats hunting down Tuna. Bluefin Tuna.
forcing them into huge round pens.
In only one session, which lasts for two month (then the mothership is full), they are catching 15,000 tunas.
1 tuna sells for $4,500 on the Asian market > make your math !!!!
NOW, a tuna can get about 40 years old and about 8 / 9 feet long.
BUT< there are no 40 years old tunas around anymore.
So they are catching already the 2 to 4 years old ones only 2 / 3 feet long.
It was not said how many fleets of these tuna-catching- robbery-convoys Australia has.
But it was said that Australia only has 1/4 of a commercial fishing fleet than the United States have.
Well, if one fleet catches 15,000 tunas in two month,
assuming they have maybe 10 fleets,
then the U.S. has 40 fleets
that makes (50X15000) 750,000 tunas every two month.
Only catched by the U.S. and Australia.
Bet'ya the Japenese are busy too,
and the Koreans,
qand the vietnamese,
and the Cambodians,
not to forget Europe > norway,England,Germany,France,Italy
MAN, did I forget the other million of tunas which have to be catched for the countries I forgot?
And who might say the sports-fisherman are the ones who are responsible for endangered spicies?
Yes, there are some countries who do not feel responsible for this desaster.
I red the article issued by the Florida State University in Tallahassee / Felicia Coleman.
The European countries are requesting a test from every man who wants to fish outside the 3 mls zone.
Including how to catch (no multiple hooks etc) !
While European countries restrict all catches done by sportsfisherman. the U.S. do not even have any license for a sportsfisherman the article says.
More than 10,000,000 sportsfishing guys are roaming the oceans around the US.
No license needed, no limitation in catch, just money makes it possible for these guys to rob our oceans.
Why is the U.S. always on top of everything when it comes to >
Environmental robbery of our planet?
Examples: Oil spills from cars / envoronmental mischief (no or little recyclyng of valuable recources) old cars in the backyard / Diesel to the soil
to fight Mesquite etc. etc. etc.
If somebody disagrees that the U.S.A are the greatest polluter of this planet, I can tell how all this is handled in Europe.
Irresponsible here, very responsible in Europe.
All fisherman (also the commercial) got to have a drivers license for various classes of boats.
If a fisherman is caught with illegal catch (undersize, limited numbers, on the 'black list' etc.) he looses his drivers license for the boat.
No license > no boating > no catching.
It's that easy.
America, where are your standards of responsibility for this world?
[ I'm expecting the outcry of some so called patriots because of this post, but don't care about it )
Germanicus
|
|
|
FrankO
Nomad
Posts: 301
Registered: 11-10-2002
Location: Ocean Beach
Member Is Offline
|
|
Germanicus
Better check your statements against facts.
|
|
|
gonetobaja
Nomad
Posts: 286
Registered: 1-4-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
The only answer is to limit all types of ocean harvesting to hand and speargun. No catch and release, no making it easy. You get a speargun, you hop
in the water(No tanks) and you shoot a couple of fish for dinner. If the water is too cold for you you get to eat chicken, which is also very tasty.
All of the blue water fish would start to thrive. It could be regulated just like hunting where you have to fill out your tag. The chicken farmers
would get rich, and the beef guys too.
People would spend time swimming in the ocean and would apreciate it more. Less fish would be taken because shooting a fish with a speargun and
reeling it up with a pole are mentaly two different things. Even though you end up killing the fish in both circumstances, shooting it seems meaner
so you tend to let small fish swim by and they are not harrased.
I could go on and on but I know that it is only my dream. People from all over the world are far too lazy to just give up and go get their own fish.
If everyone had to spear their own fish I think that there would be alot more fish...
I have never been in a situation where me or my family needed more than two fish per day.
By the way I go fishing with a pole all of the time and I love that to0, and I eat at seafood resturants which are purveyors of world sealife
destruction.
The only real answers life holds for me are in a SHRIMP Taco (another example of ecodestruction support) and a cold Beer(yea I said answers and beer
together).
Yet I consider myself a conservationist.
I need to dig my toes in the sand and ponder this some more, Im leaving friday and you guys know where Im goin..
GTB
"My only real worry down there is fresh limes..."
|
|
|
FrankO
Nomad
Posts: 301
Registered: 11-10-2002
Location: Ocean Beach
Member Is Offline
|
|
Yeah, and I used to wish
PCH would fall into the sea so just me and my buddies could surf the coast from Mugu south to Malibu point when we hit it on our mountain bikes. Still
waiting for the big one.
|
|
|
Germanicus
Nomad
Posts: 214
Registered: 6-13-2004
Member Is Offline
|
|
whistler, that's alsways the same with the U.S.
Making any attempt to lowering the amount of fish which can be catched in the Atlantic, as it hurts the European Nations. But the Americans can catch
whatever they want in the Pacific (from Fireland to the Artics) where no European trawler can go because of feasibilty aspects.
Sorry for bringing politics in here, but it was necessary to say.
Why don't you make a comment on the idea to restrict the catch on sportsfisherman in the U.S.?
Why don't U.S. so called sporstfisherman need no drivers license for their big boats?
A) A good way to adjucate those guys.
B) A good way to legally control the overfishing by those guys who just catch everything they can >overcatch< only for to make some pics and then
throwing the fish on the dump?
In France every sportboat entering the harbor has to report at the "Captainerie" >Harbor Authority< in person!
No phone calls!
They are making frequent checks on boats.
But you never know if you are selected for a check.
Did you not comply with the catch-regulations, the first time you get a warning and a penalty > $$$
That hurts right in the first place.
The second violation on catch-restrictions your drivers license for the boat is suspended for at least half a year.
That adjucates more than big words.
Do not fingerpoint on the Europeans.
They are far beyond any environmental adjucation and laws then the U.S.
They are much more severe and serious about protecting this world as the U.S.
Things you can not even imagine happening in the U.S.
Example:
In Germany every household has about 7 trash cans
1. for glass seperated by green/brown/white
2. for wood and paper products
3. for plastics certain categories
4. for styrophome
5. for metal/cans/etc.
6. for household trash wich is composable
7. for household trash not composable
One violation on the law to seperate recycable goods and your tax-stamp on the trash can is gone.
You have to go to the City hall and buy a new one.
Bet'ya you don't violate again.
Now, tell me, can you imagine that in the U.S.?
Number 1 through 5 are recyclable resources.
No need to just dump'em on the landfill.
so, what do you say?(but take it easy, will you?)
Germanicus
|
|
|
Capt. George
Super Nomad
Posts: 2129
Registered: 8-21-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
ROD & REEL
Have fished commercially for striped bass all my life, am 59 now. Still have not come close to one haul seine I saw taken from the shores of Montauk
Point NY 45 years ago! I have probably caught more striped bass, rod and reel, then most men alive today and still not close to ONE haul seine all
those years ago....nets will do the real damage, in stocks and ocean bottom...rod and reel won't...
Capt. George
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
|
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
