Discussion Board
Hmmmm, is this good or bad
 |
 06/13/2011 08:10 PM
|
|
 |
freddie
Joined: 04/19/2007
Posts: 3599
|
Hmmmm, is this good or bad
Could put a crimp in mariculture, but could also affect us! Usually ends up that way.
CALIFORNIA State Assembly votes to protect little fish to sustain wildlife: The California State Assembly has passed a bill that aims to protect small ocean fish by placing value in leaving them in the water to sustain the food chain.
The bill requires state wildlife regulators to consider and protect small fish such as sardines and herring because they sustain wildlife. The California Department of Fish and Game usually divides catch among recreational and commercial fishing groups. Now, they would need to consider “ecological services rendered” by small fish, more specifically, their role in feeding natural predators (salmon, rockfish, sea bass, and marine mammals).
If the bill is passed by the Senate and signed by the Governor, it would take effect in 2012. To read more, check out the 2 June issue of the Los Angeles Times in the article at: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/greenspace/2011/06/state-assembly-votes-to-protect-little-fish-to-feed-wildlife.html.
Fish the Tides - Freddie
This post edited by freddie 06/13/2011
|
 |
 |
|
|
 06/14/2011 04:51 AM
|
|
|
Brad_G
Joined: 02/14/2007
Posts: 7007
|
re: Hmmmm, is this good or bad
Well, the concept sounds good and scientifically sound, the question is how it might be put into practice. Sure would be a shame if forage fish could be harvested for industrial uses but recreational anglers are prevented from getting bait.
Are there fish farms along the Cal coast? Or can forage fish be removed from Cal waters and taken to the Mexican bluefin pens? Are forage fish taken for any other purposes (??canning, fertilizer, etc??)
Brad_G
Common Sense is not Common Enough
|
|
|
|
|
06/14/2011 05:29 AM
|
|
|
Wils
Joined: 03/21/2007
Posts: 16025
|
re: Hmmmm, is this good or bad
Here is the bill as introduced:
ftp://leginfo.public.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_1251-1300/ab_1299_bill_20110218_introduced.html
Heres a link to one summary of the bill:
http://www.cfsb.info/meetingmaterials/AB1299.pdf
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here is an article about it from February:
SACRAMENTO – New legislation (AB 1299) introduced by Assemblymember Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) will provide a much needed change in the way California manages its fisheries, one that will protect forage species – which form the foundation of the food web – which in turn benefits everything else that eats them.
California forage species include Pacific herring, market squid, Pacific sardine, northern anchovy, juvenile rockfish, and several others. “This forward-thinking legislation will strengthen the resilience of our ocean ecosystem and foster vibrant coastal communities,” said Assemblymember Huffman.
Currently, California lacks an official policy that recognizes the importance of forage species in state law. Building upon a west coast prohibition on the harvest of krill in 2009, AB 1299 will for the first time recognize the value of forage species left in the ocean, require that any new fishery regulations for forage species account for their value as prey, prevent new fisheries from developing on currently unexploited forage species, and prioritize human consumption of forage species over their use as animal feed or fertilizer.
“Abundant forage species are critical to the sustainability and recovery of key fisheries like Chinook salmon, yelloweye rockfish, and white seabass, as well as whales, dolphins, and seabirds that make California’s oceans magnificent,” said Oceana California Program Director Dr. Geoff Shester, sponsor of the bill.
Forage species face a multitude of potential threats including ocean acidification, pollution, overfishing, global climate change, and the aquaculture industry. Along with other factors, lack of oceanic prey has been linked to the severe declines in Sacramento River fall Chinook runs, major bird reproductive failures and population declines, and marine mammal mortality events in California waters over the last decade. AB 1299 has tremendous support from California’s ocean-based community members, including California recreational fishermen. “Without adequate forage to attract and sustain our target species, there would be no California saltwater recreational fishery,” said Darrell Ticehurst, Chairman of the Coastside Fishing Club. “And in the case of our rebuilding rockfish, taking their forage away from them would be like taking medicine away from a recovering patient.
Aside from the recreational benefit, our state economy simply cannot afford to put at risk the $1 billion we spend each year on saltwater angling.” “Forage fish such as sardines, anchovies, mackerel, squid and others are the keystone species that support the entire oceanic food web,” said Paul Johnson, founder of the Monterey Fish Market. “As such they need to be managed in a way which takes into account their impact on the entire marine ecosystem. Rather than use these vital species as low-priced fodder for pigs, chickens and aquaculture, as we do today, we need to encourage their judicious use as healthy, delicious food for people while leaving plenty in the ocean to support wild fish, marine mammals and birds.” AB 1299 will be heard in a policy committee later this spring. Assemblymember Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) represents the 6th Assembly District, which encompasses southern Sonoma County and all of Marin County. First elected in 2006, Huffman chairs the Assembly Water, Parks and Wildlife Committee and also serves as Co-Chair of the Legislative Environmental Caucus
http://asmdc.org/members/a06/news-room/press-releases/item/2963-huffman%E2%80%99s-new-legislation-protects-forage-species-of-california%E2%80%99s-fisheries
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This post edited by Wils 06/14/2011
|
|
|
|
|
06/14/2011 09:11 AM
|
|
|
Brad_G
Joined: 02/14/2007
Posts: 7007
|
re: Hmmmm, is this good or bad
Building upon a west coast prohibition on the harvest of krill in 2009, AB 1299 will for the first time recognize the value of forage species left in the ocean, require that any new fishery regulations for forage species account for their value as prey, prevent new fisheries from developing on currently unexploited forage species, and prioritize human consumption of forage species over their use as animal feed or fertilizer.
Generally good, but "prioritizing human consumption" sounds like it could be a big loophole for taking forage fish for aquaculture.
Brad_G
Common Sense is not Common Enough
|
|
|
|
|
06/14/2011 09:47 AM
|
|
|
mogandave
Joined: 04/19/2007
Posts: 2833
|
re: Hmmmm, is this good or bad
Brad_G wrote:
Building upon a west coast prohibition on the harvest of krill in 2009, AB 1299 will for the first time recognize the value of forage species left in the ocean, require that any new fishery regulations for forage species account for their value as prey, prevent new fisheries from developing on currently unexploited forage species, and prioritize human consumption of forage species over their use as animal feed or fertilizer.
Generally good, but "prioritizing human consumption" sounds like it could be a big loophole for taking forage fish for aquaculture.
Except that you could argue that feed is not really any different than fertilizer for livestock.
“Every crowd has a silver lining"
|
|
|
|
|
06/14/2011 10:50 AM
|
|
|
TAURUS
Joined: 02/14/2007
Posts: 2434
Location: port san luis
|
re: Hmmmm, is this good or bad
the federal and state fish and game agencies are not completely stupid...harvest levels are set with sustainability in mind...these laws and regulations have been in place for quite some time now..
this new bill is nothing more than 'feel good' law making and vote pandering.
this bill also establishes quotas that cannot be increased, only lowered, based on 2011 commercial landings...it does not take into consideration the economic meltdown and astronomical fuel prices that curbed harvest in these fisheries...
this bill is wrong....
This post edited by TAURUS 06/14/2011
|
|
|
|
|
06/14/2011 02:02 PM
|
|
|
Wils
Joined: 03/21/2007
Posts: 16025
|
re: Hmmmm, is this good or bad
[quote=TAURUS]
this bill also establishes quotas that cannot be increased, only lowered, based on 2011 commercial landings...it does not take into consideration the economic meltdown and astronomical fuel prices that curbed harvest in these fisheries...
[quote]
I also noted that. The big three - sardines, anchovies, and squid are also affected by climate, water temps, currents, pollution, etc. Some years their numbers are just "off". The bill has a clause for re-instating previous quotas but the process is not spelled out.
Freddie asked specifically about we recs:
I think that the commercial guys who are collecting "forage" strictly for rec bait purposes, should be exempt. They pretty much only take what they need for immediate usage. There are not too many rec boats out there looking for dead/frozen/mashed sardines and anchovies for bait.
There is also little-to-no need to expand the permits for new commercial "bait collectors" as the rec fishing fleet that is being serviced is not growing by any great numbers.
I do see this as plugging a hole to keep mariculture OUT until they can figure out how to feed their "cattle" without the use of native forage.
I am sure that there is more to this. But the above is what I am seeing and thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
