Hawaii Marine Life Conservation District being threatend

[scubadrewvideo]

Aloha fellow divers,
Although you may not live in Hawaii, many of you may visit the islands or are planning to visit.
On the the famous north shore of the island of Oahu, we have a treasure of a dive site called Pupukea Marine Life Conservation district (PMLCD). Most commonly referred to as "Sharks Cove" and "3 Tables", these sites are within the PMLCD and have been rated #2 shore dive location in the world according to Scuba Diver Magazine.
Although established in 1983, the complete ban on fishing and hunting has only been in effect for approx 6 yrs. The ban on fishing has created a vibrant marine enviroment with an increasing abundance of life, giving residents and visitors a clean, healthy and safe dive site.
The reason I am posting this is there is a group of resident fisherman who are pushing to lift the ban on fishing and close the park to commercial operations. In short, this will mean: The only section of north shore coast with healthy marine life will soon look like the rest of the north shore...barren and fished out, and this also means No more diving for visitors thru dive tour companies.
I believe this is of interest to ALL divers world wide who care about the condition of the marine ecosystem and its future. Allthough this may seem like a local problem, this area is enjoyed by many and this local desicion could effect beyond our island.
If you are interested in helping out, all I ask is that you email Peter Young (Director of Hawaii's Dept of Land and Natural Resources) and voice your disapproval of lifting the fishing ban.

Please help keep our little slice of paradise!!!

Mahalo,
Drew Wheeler
ScubaDrew VideoWorks

 

[Sniper08]

SD,
Hey man I'm with you. In my observations there has been a blatened disrespect to the POSTED DNR signs in that area. The revenue brought to that area not only by tourism but by the diving community has done much for the local buisness. To allow that area to be fished will devestate the aquatic ecosystem because like everything else the "Limits" will be ignored. The area will become dangerous for swimmers, snorkelers and divers because of the boat traffic, fishing lines and hooks throughout the area. As I stated earlier, the posted DNR signs and warning are already being ignored. But as we all know the outcome will be the all mighty dollar and whom ever has the most to offer will win the argument.

 

[Oceana Diver]

Actually, the odds are in your favor, especially if you can put it in terms of "the almighty dollar."

In the academic world, there are several published studies that collectively boil down to this: Divers are generally willing to pay to see lots of fish, pretty reefs and large or charismatic animals (sea turtles, for example); reefs/dive sites with healthy fish populations have a higher value over time than a landed fish, which has only that one-time value based on fish market prices; and protected areas have what's called a "spill-over" effect, which means that as fish populations increase, some may leave their reef in search of another, and leave the protected area in the process (fish have no sense of our boundaries). Plus, as fish within the MPA reproduce, their larvae may follow the currents and help populate reefs downstream (again outside the MPA). That's the theory.

With all that in mind, an argument in support of maintaining the protections could include how many dive shops are in the area, roughly how many divers come and how much money the industry makes, especially if it goes into the local community (everyone's all about sustainable development these days). This shows how your MPA benefits your area, as well as what could be lost to the community if your dive sites are opened. The dive operators may want to consider becoming an association, if they haven't done so already. In comparison, how many fishermen are you talking about? Are there other fishing options nearby for them? Are they commercial or recreational? Are they local?

And by all means, generate local and tourist public support. The more voices you have supporting the existing protections, the more your decision-makers will have to listen to you and weigh your concerns as well as those of the fishermen.

(BTW, I'm not against fishing, especially if we're talking about traditional fishermen whose families have been fishing for generations. They're just trying to make a living too. Large industrial (and possibly foreign) companies are another matter. And I'm sure our legal department would want me to say these are my views, not the organization's.)