Public Meeting to Discuss Proposed Marine Sanctuary in Riviera Beach(BHB)

[deeper thoughts]

For release: January 26, 2011
Contact: Eric Call, Director Parks and Recreation (561) 966-6614
County officials are seeking public input regarding a proposed resolution to request the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission designate an area adjacent to the Blue Heron Bridge a marine sanctuary.

The public meeting has been scheduled for Thursday, Feb. 10, beginning at 6 p.m. at Phil Foster Park in Riviera Beach. The meeting will be held in the marine center building.

A display illustrating the location and boundaries of the proposed marine sanctuary will be presented by county officials, and copies of the proposed resolution will be available for review and comments.

The Blue Heron Bridge area has become internationally recognized by scientists, scuba divers, underwater photographers and snorkelers for its abundance of unique marine life. Palm Beach County seeks to protect this exceptional and extraordinary resource by having it declared a Marine Sanctuary by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission.

Phil Foster Park is located at 900 East Blue Heron Boulevard in Riviera Beach. For information about Phil Foster Park or directions on how to get there, visit www.pbcgov.com/parks/locations/philfoster.

 

[Orlando Eric]

Anyone who goes to this if they have anykind of sancuary and still allow anykind of diving push for them to approve it that day. Anything that goes to the next meeting is canidate to go to the next next next next next.. oh nevermind...

 

[Wayward Son]

sounds fine by me, just make sure they include an exemption so lionfish can be killed

 

[BUGBAGGER]

Unfortunately I will not be able to attend but am very interested in the outcome as the diversity of marine life that I have observed at this dive site is far greater than any that I have seen throughout the Caribbean and Pacific oceans. This is a rare gem and should remain accessible with sanctuary guidelines that allow safe respectful enjoyment. Here are some of my thoughts. If any of you are going to the meeting and agree, please pass them on.

1) Hopefully private divers and not just permitted guided divers on dives sponsored by local shops or boats will continue to be allowed. It would be tragic to see the chaos that is now night diving at BHB become the norm for day dives as well. dhe site will be better served by divers dispersing and diving as their schedules allow than to be concentrated into supervised groups. As has been seen in other strictly managed sanctuaries when a guide is required, typically , the majority of divers who will participate are the lesser experienced with poorer buoyancy control and less understanding of the fragility of the marine environment. The more experienced divers will dive elsewhere. They will dive where they are not required to have a guide. Thus you remove the very divers that may be best suited for the site and the ones who would model good diving behavior and hel the more experienced to learn.

2) There needs to be a provision that allows the taking/killing of lionfish and any other invasive species that the Florida Fish and Wildlife Dept determines to be a significant hazard to indigenous marine life. A limit on the size or type of devices used should be established and bags to carry the caught/killed species should be mesh or clear plastic to reduce the opportunity for poaching. The penalty for poaching or collecting other than invasives needs to be significant. The officers patrolling the park from all law enforcemnet agencies need to be specifically trained to understand and enforce or facilitate the enforcement of sanctuary violations.

3) Entering the BHB "sanctuary zone" (should be marked by buoys and signage like no wake zones) for snorkeling, diving, and or swimming should only be permitted from the shore. If boats want to deliver divers they should remain outside of the sanctuary zone of the bridge. Divers/swimmers should not be allowed to exit a boat in the boating channel bordering the sanctuary either as this could create a boating hazard or cause boats to enter the zone to get around the stopped vessel. If it is determined that access to the sanctuary must be made available to boaters then there should be one or two buoys designated for boats accessing the sanctuary placed in the mooring area adjacent to the sanctuary. Once these are in use by a vessel no additional boats should be permitted until a properly moored vessel departs. Boats should not be permitted to pass or moor within the BHB marine sanctuary. No more cutting between the pilings outside of the channel and no more buzzing dive flags.

4) I think it will be difficult to designate a marine sanctuary with no take guidelines given the long standing and very popular fishing tradition there. Perhaps fishing could be limited to the old bridge section/fishing pier and only certain non-ornamental species could be kept. All others would be catch and release. Even better, perhaps a fishing pier could be constructed on the West side of the big bridge to alleviate congestion on the east side and reduce the opportunity for conflict between fishermen and divers, snorkelers, and swimmers.

5) The sanctuary should include both the main bridge east of the boating channel AND the area surrounding the small bridge on the East side that is currently under construction.

I hope someone will post their impression of the meeting once it is done. Will be interesting to see how this turns out.

 

[Shcubasteve]

...It would be tragic to see the chaos that is now night diving at BHB become the norm for day dives as well. .....


supervised groups....

What cohos? I've sponsored plenty of night dives and never had a problem...?

I have to admit that I loved collecting $100 worth of critters on a free shore dive but for the greater good of divers everywhere I support marine preserve idea for sure- 10 years ago, less divers were aware of the amazing life the bridge holds- now folks travel cross-country to see it- commercial fish collectors included

If a marine park were to be designated, I'd like to see some points addressed-

1. The fishing double standard

I have issue with the fact that a fisherman on the pier at Phil Foster can collect a fish by legal means and keep it while an otherwise legal diver cannot collect fish?? What about lobster? If I found a legal one at the bridge, I'm keeping it!.. Outlawing collection should apply to all organisms by any means, IMO

• Fish caught outside of proposed boundary

Right now, if I catch my limit of critters out on the reef, I can land them at Phil Foster no problem. What if I launch my kayak and paddle outside of current OR proposed boundary (peanut island, other areas of the lagoon), collect fish, then paddle back to the beach to land my catch? As it stands now, I should be able to do that??? Sounds like a slippery slope... Even if a new marine park is enacted, I would like to have the ability to land fish caught outside of current/proposed park boundary at Phil Foster Park. I understand that the burden of proof should be that of the collector; which is solved with a gps in track mode- similar to how fish illegal in state waters can be harvested in federal waters legally.

• The Boundary Itself

?
Just the waters immediately surrounding Phil Foster? The entire blue heron blvd bridge span from east to west (Hate to say, but I agree with this one)? Right now, I can take my speargun and shoot sheepshead and other legal fish on the west side of the boating channel and break no FWC RULES.
"...You may NOT spearfish...within 100 yards of a public swimming beach, any commercial or public fishing pier, or any part of a bridge from which public fishing is allowed.

No public fishing, no problem. Same goes for collection...

Again, I want to support a marine preserve but, as Orlando points out, it may take a political miracle to do it correctly and fairly for everyone involved... Maybe the 'Do Nothing' approach modeled by the G.O.P. isn't so bad...

 

[oceanicaudio]

The marine life near Phil Foster Park has been an ongoing cycle of life created on it's own terms that have been viewed and enjoyed by the public for years. The growth did not happen because of a law to protect it. It happened because "We The People" enjoy it without touching it. The reason we did not touch it, is because we are very intelligent human beings that honor and preserve other fascinating life forms of the sea. We don't need gov't regulation to preserve it, we are already doing it.

This is a direct mandate from the United Nations under the "Law of Sea Treaty" which falls under the "UN Agenda 21". This is not about preservation, it's about locking up a beautiful portion of our waterways and eventually over regulating it to the point where we will lose those water rights though conservation. Please understand the acronym of the Law of Sea Treaty, is spells LOST. Thats exactly what will happen over the course of a few years.

Arm yourself with education, go to the follwing link and actually read, rather then listening and obeying broadcast news. We never question it! Why? Because we are so busy in our lives that when something like this comes up, we have not the time, nor the energy to even begin to understand what is really going on.


Most of the people in America watch housr of sports, hours of Harry Potter and hours of other major tools for distraction while policies and laws are being passed under there noses. Most of which we vote on and help pass because of misinformation and lack of education. Please take the time to finally learn, Thank you.

Go to freedomadvocates .com and click on videos then select the video

"America's Choice - Michael Shaw - Overview of Sustainable Development (1 of 5)"

Look up Agenda 21
Look up Law of Sea Treaty
Goto Freedom Advocates .org and learn for yourself.

DO NOT ALLOW PHIL FOSTER TO BECOME A MARINE SANCTUARY!!!

YOU WILL EVENTUALLY LOSE YOUR WATER RIGHTS AND SO WILL YOUR CHILDREN!!!


Vern Rasmussen

 

[danvolker]

Issues facing people of Palm beach County regarding the Blue Heron Bridge Marine Park

· If you were to poll scuba divers ( a group particularly interested in the BHB area) the primary concern is that tropical fish collectors should be prevented from collecting off of boats
· Perhaps the 2nd largest concern is the desire to PREVENT over regulating or over-governing of the diving at the Bridge. As a group, we do not want ANY regulations changed at the park with the single exception of the prevention of collectors skirting the intent of the present law by using boats rather than beach access.
· The 2 principle user groups are competing for use of the park : scuba divers/snorkelers and Fisherman…however, the needs of the 2 groups do not need to become mutually exclusive….
o In many State Parks where Mountain Bikers are at odds with Equestrians over who can use the trails, the “Norm” is having mountain bikers on certain trails on 3 days, with horses on the other trails, and then on the other days it reverses…Divers would only use the Marine Park a total of 4 hours out of every 24 hours, typically, excluding special permitted night dives. Fisherman could have exclusive access for 20 hours of every day, but on the 2 hours before high tide, the hour of slack high tide, and the hour immediately following high tide, the fisherman EITHER have no access, OR have provisionary access ( where they agree not to drop lines anywhere within 100 feet of a dive flag, except north of the bridge and north of the fish cleaning station, where they have 100% access during all hours of park operation.
o Some divers feel that fishing is dangerous for divers
o Other divers feel that divers should have enough sense to avoid the areas where hooks are hanging, and that fisherman should not purposely try to hook divers---this is an area where divers and fisherman should be adult enough NOT to require government regulation or enforcement to behave with each other. Perhaps something as simple as a “Sign” posted in several obvious places around the park, stating that “divers should have enough sense to avoid the areas where hooks are hanging, and that fisherman should not purposely try to hook divers…”
o Many divers feel that the fisherman should become aware that there are only a few hours each day that divers want to be in the water—that sharing the resource should be easy. Maybe a few signs about this J
o Many divers feel that the fishing contingent is largely a family element, and therefore very good for the park--- when you have more families in the park, it helps keep the criminal element out of the park. Divers and fisherman alike have a common goal that they desire the park to be a nice family area, and they can help each other with “good neighbor style behavior.
o Promotion of the Phil foster Park area as a good , safe family fun location, one which is also free, is good for PB county residents, for Riviera Beach residents, and good for Palm Beach County Tourism.

 

[guyharrisonphoto]

Dan,

Thank you for your very thoughtful, common-sense views. I agree completely. Unfortunately business concerns keep me from attending tonight's meeting. I heard, though, that public comments were not to be taken at this meeting and that we can submit them online.

I wholeheartedly support the sanctuary absolute "no take" designation for divers -- of any species whatsoever even game fish and lobsters -- without any additional further regulation of diving at the bridge. I also like your idea about diver/fisherman mutual respect and limiting fishing to some degree around high tide (sometimes it is hard to spot the fishermen's lines and no one wants to get hooked).

I appreciate Vern's faith in humanity, but there were collectors reported at the bridge just last week. I don't want to see a situation where divers have to confront other divers over collecting in a vigilante type of system. Good laws can do good things and we the people can also be trusted to come up with good laws (I hope!).

Please post about what happens.

Guy

 

[D2Diver]

Issues facing people of Palm beach County regarding the Blue Heron Bridge Marine Park

· If you were to poll scuba divers ( a group particularly interested in the BHB area) the primary concern is that tropical fish collectors should be prevented from collecting off of boats
· Perhaps the 2nd largest concern is the desire to PREVENT over regulating or over-governing of the diving at the Bridge. As a group, we do not want ANY regulations changed at the park with the single exception of the prevention of collectors skirting the intent of the present law by using boats rather than beach access.
· The 2 principle user groups are competing for use of the park : scuba divers/snorkelers and Fisherman…however, the needs of the 2 groups do not need to become mutually exclusive….
o In many State Parks where Mountain Bikers are at odds with Equestrians over who can use the trails, the “Norm” is having mountain bikers on certain trails on 3 days, with horses on the other trails, and then on the other days it reverses…Divers would only use the Marine Park a total of 4 hours out of every 24 hours, typically, excluding special permitted night dives. Fisherman could have exclusive access for 20 hours of every day, but on the 2 hours before high tide, the hour of slack high tide, and the hour immediately following high tide, the fisherman EITHER have no access, OR have provisionary access ( where they agree not to drop lines anywhere within 100 feet of a dive flag, except north of the bridge and north of the fish cleaning station, where they have 100% access during all hours of park operation.
o Some divers feel that fishing is dangerous for divers
o Other divers feel that divers should have enough sense to avoid the areas where hooks are hanging, and that fisherman should not purposely try to hook divers---this is an area where divers and fisherman should be adult enough NOT to require government regulation or enforcement to behave with each other. Perhaps something as simple as a “Sign” posted in several obvious places around the park, stating that “divers should have enough sense to avoid the areas where hooks are hanging, and that fisherman should not purposely try to hook divers…”
o Many divers feel that the fisherman should become aware that there are only a few hours each day that divers want to be in the water—that sharing the resource should be easy. Maybe a few signs about this J
o Many divers feel that the fishing contingent is largely a family element, and therefore very good for the park--- when you have more families in the park, it helps keep the criminal element out of the park. Divers and fisherman alike have a common goal that they desire the park to be a nice family area, and they can help each other with “good neighbor style behavior.
o Promotion of the Phil foster Park area as a good , safe family fun location, one which is also free, is good for PB county residents, for Riviera Beach residents, and good for Palm Beach County Tourism.

WOW Dan Excellent thoughts here. Thank you for taking the time to post it
Deb

 

[jet126]

Just home from the meeting. Standing room only: I'm guessing 100 inside and that many more outside. Speakers had two minutes to state their views. I will post a recap by the weekend.

The park district will continue to accept emails for another week: pbcparks@pbcgov.org.