• Welcome to ScubaBoard


  1. Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

    Benefits of registering include

    • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
    • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
    • You can make this box go away

    Joining is quick and easy. Login or Register now by clicking on the button

Article: NOAA expands Cordell Bank and Gulf of the Farallones national marine sanctua

Discussion in 'ScubaBoard Articles' started by SB News Feed, Mar 20, 2015.

  1. SB News Feed

    SB News Feed News You Can Use

    92
    3
    0
  2. AFdivedoc

    AFdivedoc Instructor, Scuba Staff Member

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location:
    117
    74
    28
    To what end? Usually when the feds deem themselves "responsible" for an area or "expanding" their domains it means more permits required and less access.

    Any Cali divers want to weigh in on this? Is this really as well-supported by the public at large as the text of the article seems to infer? Were any of you actually asked or polled about this?
     
  3. jkbonner

    jkbonner Angel Fish

    38
    4
    8
    This is one reason why the Drakes Bay Oyster Company had to be removed. Who's next?
     
  4. SwallowReefer

    SwallowReefer Garibaldi

    # of Dives: 200 - 499
    Location: Ojai, CA
    3
    0
    0
    Personally, I signed a petition in support of this action a year or two ago... Fellow Cali divers I know also think it's a wonderful thing. The reality is, 90%+ of the world's commercial fisheries are in nearly complete collapse; do you think THAT is a good thing?! Full disclosure: I used to be a NOAA observer.
     
  5. AFdivedoc

    AFdivedoc Instructor, Scuba Staff Member

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location:
    117
    74
    28
    Just curious, where did you get the 90% figure? According to the UN FAO report of 2014, 71% of commercially important fish stocks monitored by FAO are within sustainable levels, and 29% are overfished. Not a great number by any means, but certainly not indicative of 90% in "nearly complete collapse."

    Not trying to get into a shouting match here, but I do check numbers people throw out.

    Back to the original subject, were public meetings held on this matter? Were non-NOAA associated personnel with a vested interest in the areas (commercial fisherman, dive operations, etc) invited, and are meeting minutes available?
     
  6. jkbonner

    jkbonner Angel Fish

    38
    4
    8
    Of course, our oceans are worthy of care. No one is arguing that point. The issue is, where is the evidence to support certain claims? In the case of the Drakes Bay Oyster Company, there is no scientific evidence to support its closure, only politics. It's evident the politics of the Drakes Bay Oyster Company closure is related to the expansion of this marine sanctuary. Full disclosure: I eat abalone, not oysters.
     
  7. Jared0425

    Jared0425 Public Safety Diver

    # of Dives: 500 - 999
    Location: Detroit, Michigan
    941
    613
    93
    NOAA expanded their marine sanctuary here in Lake Huron to protect "historically significant" shipwrecks. Most wrecks here in the lakes are working vessels hauling general cargo of no special interests which makes them quite unhistorical. Then all of a sudden fisherman had to acquire extra permits to fish areas that they have used for decades and the shipping companies had to lobby the state and federal govt to lessen restrictions on commercial shipping in the sanctuaries. We hunt shipwrecks using sidescan sonar and have 2500sq mile lead over them with a few great wrecks that we hide away from them. Now with the new expanded sanctuary they tried to get us to release the numbers to them, and that was not going to happen. Next thing we hear is that they want to issue permits for those searching for shipwrecks in the sanctuary and what we find we must report, that also counts for where we have been. So my view on NOAA is very low indeed. Enjoy your new sanctuary.
     

Share This Page