Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

Send in the worm

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

Well if people dont know about the importance of the fisheries (including clams and crab) in the rivers and bay, whose fault is that?

We are pretty good at preaching to the choir but it is obvious we are not doing a good job in getting the word out to the average citizen.

If some Big Corporate spill killed a few thousand fish and birds on the Jersey shore in July, it would be national headlines for a year.

However, we have millions of winter flounder exterminated for the last 10 years or so and there is not a single peep. Its the same for Sea Trout; fluke and crab are on their way out too.

Believe me, there are tree huggers that would care if they only knew - and lots of other people would care too including Rik. The problem is, we are only preaching to the choir.

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

Rik van Hemmen is very dangerous to us.

I hope it's okay to post up The Fisherman video but as Jim Hutchinson points out that being that we were vocal Rik has decided it is best for everyone that he cuts out public opinion and only holds discussions from now on "underground". This guy has major brass ones !!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yc8PUdr7Xaw

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

Is there any way someone with computer skills can make up a one page flyer that outlines the proposed NMS its negative impact ( maybe list what has happened in other NMS ) and who to contact to voice concerns .
We can all then print out a few hundred copies and distribute them to individuals and businesses that will be effected. It will only cost a few bucks each to get our concerns in the hands of people who don't visit forums or go to meetings . It amazes me how little the public knows about this . Thanks.

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

Consideration 7

There is community-based support for the nomination expressed by a broad range of interests, such as: individuals or locally-based groups (e.g., friends of group, chamber of commerce); local, tribal, state, or national elected officials; or topic-based stakeholder groups, at the local, regional or national level (e.g., a local chapter of an environmental organization, a regionally-based fishing group, a national-level recreation or tourism organization, academia or science-based group, or an industry association).

http://www.nominate.noaa.gov/guide.html#document

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

http://www.nj.com/shore/blogs/fishin...rt_river_index

Jersey Shore Fishing: Sandy Hook Bay Sanctuary sparks strong opposition
Print Email
Al Ristori By Al Ristori
on March 24, 2016 at 5:06 PM, updated March 24, 2016 at 7:17 PM

Anglers are up in arms about the proposal by the Navesink Maritime Heritage Association to seek a Sandy Hook Bay National Marine Sanctuary designation that would encompass not only that Bay but also the rivers flowing into it plus a portion of Raritan Bay.

There was overwhelming opposition to that proposal at last week's meeting in the Red Bank Library, which wasn't large enough to hold the crowd that arrived. Rik Van Hammen seemed to be sincere as he spoke about his vision, but never presented any problem that would justify turning over control of the area to the federal government.

On the other hand, anglers in Florida and California can testify why this is the last thing we would want to do. The April issue of Salt Water Sportsman states that proposals there would eliminate fishing in up to 30 percent of the reefs covered, and may be followed up by making the entire southeast Florida reef track a National Marine Sanctuary. The magazine notes that "While anglers have supported a number of spawning-season area closures throughout the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts, most consider MPAs a last resort only imperative for the survival or restoration of a fishery. The Coastal Conservation Association calls the proposed creation of a marine sanctuary an unnecessary delegation o a federal agency of a state's authority over its waters. Florida has an excellent record of managing its fisheries."

The same applies to New Jersey. Our fisheries are controlled by the state in cooperation with regulations developed for migratory species by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. No one at the meeting was complaining about the quality of the fisheries or management by the state -- and if they aren't satisfied there's plenty of opportunity to seek change on the state level.

It was only three years ago that President Obama closed the national parks in a battle with Congress over the national debt. That just didn't involve facilities, but also the public's right to use lands that required no facilities, as money was found to pay rangers to keep anglers from walking the beach at Sandy Hook. At least the waters weren't involved up here, but charter captains in the Florida Keys, along with the rest of the public, weren't allowed to fish their traditional waters in Everglades National Park. Giving up state control to the federal government for no apparent benefit makes no sense at all.

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

If you look at his list of presentations, all but one are "private" meetings. His "choice" to go "underground" was by design from the start. That he will no doubt no longer publicize his schedule, beyond adding "(not public)" to the one presentation still pending, is not a surprise.

http://www.navesinkmaritime.org/NMS-presentations

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

I agree this is all very well planed out . He is playing chess against our checkers.

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

People need to comment in the Two River Times article. Link of article provided.

http://tworivertimes.com/marine-sanc...rs-take-sides/

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

(Snip)

Reed Bohne, the Northeast and Great Lakes regions director of national sanctuaries for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

(Snip)

"A state’s governor could alter the designation, which would then again be reviewed by NOAA, or outrightly end the process, he said. "

http://tworivertimes.com/marine-sanc...rs-take-sides/

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

this "Rik" plan threw it out there and really doesn't care . about any of this, the feds will contract his co. to do the research and guess who pays the bill !can anyone say insider trading !

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

Here is an example of a successful fight against a bid to create National Monuments offshore:

PRESS RELEASE

PRESIDENT OBAMA WILL NOT DESIGNATE CASHES LEDGE AS A NATIONAL MONUMENT

For more information contact:
Jackie Odell Maggie Raymond
Northeast Seafood Coalition Associated Fisheries of Maine
978-836-7999 207-384-4854

MARCH 25, 2016 / Boston, MA, Representatives of the White House Council on Environmental Quality met with fishing industry leaders and other stakeholders yesterday to announce that President Obama will not designate the marine habitat within or surrounding Cashes Ledge as a National Monument. Located approximately 80 miles offshore in the Gulf of Maine, Cashes serves an important and historic area that has been fished commercially and recreationally for decades.

In response to the announcement, Terry Alexander, President, Associated Fisheries of Maine said, “Commercial fishermen in New England face continuous regulatory uncertainty, so it is a relief to know that there is one less restriction on fishing to worry about. We believe that the President was persuaded by a lack of scientific information to support such a designation, as well as the position expressed by stakeholders that decisions about closing areas to fishing should take place under the process outlined in the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA).”

Vito Giacalone, Chair of Governmental Affairs for the Northeast Seafood Coalition said, “We are relieved by the President’s decision to forego a National Monument designation on Cashes Ledge, As stakeholders who participated in a lengthy, thorough and transparent public process to identify and protect important marine habitats such as Cashes Ledge, we are grateful and pleased to hear that the MSA process we all followed has been acknowledged and respected by the Obama Administration. We are sincerely grateful that the President, after gathering all pertinent facts, saw that the use of Executive Order was unnecessary in light of the process that has already taken place through the New England Fisheries Management Council.

Consideration of National Monument designations in the offshore Canyon areas of Southern New England remains ongoing, and affected fishermen should remain vigilant in assuring that any concerns they may have are addressed.

The American Antiquities Act of 1906 provides authority for the President to declare by public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States to be national monuments.

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

So we are supposed to be happy that the commercial guys get to decimate the NE fish stocks worse than they are?

That is the problem for us. Winter flounder, weaks, fluke and even crabs are getting dragged into oblivion.

I'm ready to give up on the area - maybe take up walleye upstate where you can consistently bring home enough quality fillets for a family meal.

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

NJOA and JCAA both reached consensus this week, to oppose the SHNMS.

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

More info:

PROBLEMS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED

While we have made great improvements in issues such as water quality, wildlife and public access in the NMS waters, there continue to be issues that are detrimental to optimal man/nature interaction and general enjoyment of the waters included in the NMS.

Some issues are non-contentious and have almost universal support, but simply are not making meaningful headway, while other issues, on the face of it, may be contentious. Often, even the issues that may appear to be contentious still have a common goal, but there is disagreement about the methods.

Contentious debate is unpleasant and therefore the debate is often avoided, but this does not make the issue go away. Only debate and analysis in a proper forum provides the chance that optimal solutions will be developed.

At present no such forum exists. A structure like an NMS makes it more difficult for the issue of concern to be ignored, and by keeping it on the table over a long period of time, adjustments can be made. Very often the issue does not need to be regulated, but instead improved education resolves the issue.

This is a list of issues that have been raised by various stake holders. These issues have not been vetted as right or wrong, they are simply concerns that have been raised and that, if resolved, will result in improvements that benefit everybody.

Lack of general boater courtesy
Lack of awareness with regard to river and bay wildlife and river quality issues
Lack of awareness with regard to NMS recreational and commercial opportunities
Reductions in recreational boating interest
Storm runoff water quality issues
Lack of native oysters
Lack of spartina grasses
Lack of edible species awareness
Clamming restrictions (check out the neat graphic)
Dissolved oxygen deficiencies
Ineffective bulkheading
Ineffective river scaping
Poor land side trash management
Bridge replacements issues
Land side impervious surface issues
Lack of dredging
Limits in NMS access
Inadequate ecosystem man/nature sustainable education
Lack of protection of culturally significant NMS activities such as boat racing, hunting, fishing and port facilities
Overall poor and non-optimized fisheries yield
Local fish to table inadequacies
Poor feeder creek conditions
Fertilizer overloading
Poor insecticide practices
PCB's and other industrial residue
River and bay bottom degradation
Silting
Lack of existing regulation (law) enforcement

This is a long list and is sure to grow, but if a mechanism can be developed where, as a local community, we make slow headway on most of them, the future will be much brighter. The vast majority of these issues do not need a huge investment to achieve improvements, but they do require general awareness by all stake holders and constant attention.

An NMS will provide a forum. None of this can be solved through special interest pressure, it can only be solved if the bay and rivers are presented as a valid common stake holder.

DISCOVER ENGAGE SUSTAIN

http://www.navesinkmaritime.org/Prob...o-be-addressed

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

And more:

http://www.app.com/story/news/local/...uary/82610356/

Re: Continued Discussion of the NMS proposal
 

Zoning the Oceans: Using the National Marine Sanctuaries Act and the Antiquities Act to Establish Marine Protection Areas and Marine Reserves in America

(Snip)

The National Marine Sanctuaries Act appears to represent the best option for consolidating these management regimes and establishing a new, unified system of marine protected areas in the United States. The Act is clearly flawed-there are too many ways to derail proposed designations and far too little money and legal authority to properly police existing sanctuaries. As discussed above, however, the NMSA at least provides a structure for creating MPAs, a process for receiving and incorporating public comment, and a designation term- sanctuary-that invokes something more powerful, more dignified, and more important than "marine park" or "marine protected area." Executive Order 13158 and the federal government's renewed funding for the marine sanctuary program represent important first steps in the effort to better designate and manage MPAs. If the federal government continues to prioritize the sanctuary program, and amends the NMSA in the few key ways discussed above, it will be possible to create and effectively protect an enviable system of United States marine sanctuaries.

(Snip)

http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/...74&context=elq