From: cloyd_j@apollo.hp.com (John Cloyd)
Subject: re: environment, etc.
Originator: cloyd_j@face_plant
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Apollo Division - Chelmsford, MA
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 15:50:47 GMT

Lots o' stuff, first in response to Andy...
>The saltwater statement:
>The commercial fishing catch is more than 4 times the recreational catch.
>Assuming half the fish in the ocean were caught (and I don't think they are)
>then only 10% of the fish are caught by recreationals.
    This logic only works for non-gamefish species. Gamefish cannot be taken
by the commercial fleet (although we all know that driftnets are an equal
opportunity killer.) I think for gamefish the numbers are much different.
Speaking of driftnetting I saw on TV that Japan is hedging on stopping drift-
netting, claiming it'll be too much of a blow to their economy. Given this
attitude, and the impact of driftnetting I know I'll be goddamned if I ever
buy any more fishing gear made there (eg; Shimano, Marryatt, Tiemco, Daiwa, etc.)
I'd urge you to do the same, and maybe drop the dealers a line telling them why.
Pat;
>I maintain we have only addressed 50% of the problem. Making stricter regulations
> will not help, either. HELL, even a total ban on fishing for a couple of 
>years probably wouldn't help (it could come to this -- see Florida's ban
>on snook, Louisiana's ban on redfish for part of the year).
    I was under the impression that Florida's ban on snook helped a great deal,
didn't it ? It's not completely banned now, just (I think) during such critical
times as spawning seasons. But I think, Pat that it's not just one thing that'll
take care of the problem. A fish population is trashed, let's say, by commercial
fishermen. The first logical step may well be a full fishing ban, not to punish
sport fishermen, but because what's left of the population has to be nurtured for
a while if it is to recover. During this time a couple of other things need to
happen. First, you need to make sure the habitat is in good shape (easier said than
done, especially with the Bush/Sununu attitude towards wetlands IMO). Then you
need to make sure the same thing doesn't happen again when the population recovers.
To do this you need to either designate the fish a gamefish, removing the market
from the commercial fleet, or you have to put very strict limits on the commercial
fleet and commit to enforcing them. Most of us would opt for the former I'm sure,
but it's not always realistic and not always fair. If you do these three things,
then you monitor the population closely, determine when some of the fisheries can
be reopened to sports fishermen, and what regs should apply. It's not a quick fix,
but these things never are. It's like trying to replant a forest after a clearcut.

>Let's try stopping fancy condo's from being built on the Gulf Coast unless
>they are VERY conservation minded. It's stupid to build condo's anyway on the 
>coast anyway because of hurricanes. There just has been a lack of hurricanes
>the last twenty years because of the drought in Africa. Once this drought
>ends, watch out for the hurricanes. LOTS of people will be in for a rude
>awakening! (I'm a meteorologist, can you tell? :-) )
    Although I certainly agree with you, I think I must be more cynical than you
as I consider "very conservation minded condos" something of an oxymoron. The
people who build condos don't give a sweet f&*^ about the impact on the environment.
Hell most of them are built by humongous development corporations from out of
state. The guy writing the checks may actually see the place once, maybe not.
It's a brutal battle right now, because the economic times have put the environ-
ment in the role of bad guy. I saw this guy in the Maine paper a couple of weeks ago
saying the DEP was picking on him and screwing up his business because they fined
him for illegaly diverting a stream. Oh, the poor guy. It was like his 10th 
violation of this type of law in 5 years. I think you do need a strong law at the
national level. I think it should say wetlands in estuary areas *will not be filled*
period. None of this 'well what if I build a new one somewhere else' crap. It should
mandate low impact septic systems for any structure within 200' of any shoreline.
It should say that when such property changes hands it must be upgraded to comply
with these new regulations. None of these 50 gallon drums buried in the backyard
but 'grandfathered' stuff. Think the bozos in Washington would be willing to do
something like this ? Nah me either. Donate what ya can to Nature Conservancy,
local land trusts, etc. and write lots of letters I guess.

                                                          jc


Newsgroups: alt.fishing