Not TOO happy about this

[hammer4reel]

Guys need to look at the size of the area they want to fill.
Its not a tiny spot it is a sizable piece of real estate

[Gerry Zagorski]

Would like to hear more opinions on both sides. So what are your issues for and against and why??

[Capt Joe]

Simple, as long as there are no "restricted" areas during construction and completion, who cares do it. More bottom more options. Gives the plastic urinals more places to go out of our hair. :-)

[bulletbob]

https://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/...e92d6b918.html

The wind farm off Block Island is NOT off limits, fishermen are free to use the grounds, and the commercial guys are already out there as well..
[ Big surprise right?].. If the areas off NJ are restricted, its the politicians doing it.make your voices heard, and make certain the areas are not closed to recreational fishing... bob...

[duranautic al]

Originally Posted by dakota560

Devil is in the details. Lot more involved in this energy alternative than most of us realize. But one thing is guaranteed, a lot of money is changing hands on a project of this nature and there will be adverse impacts involved. Question is what kind and for how long. Dan asks an interesting question regarding access in this highly populated area. Species reaction depends on whether the species involved is considered mobile or not. If the farms are built in an area inhabited by shell fish, lobsters, scallops, clams etc, a lot of sediment could be moved around during testing and installation that will change the bottom structure. Almost the effect Sandy had on a lot of hard bottom area getting covered up by sand, mud and debris. Depending on how the array is set up will also impact commercial as well as residential fishing. Cables have to be protected so rock structures are deployed on top of those cables in whats called "mattressing". How many commercial nets will be lost to these and what long term impact will that have on aquatic life. One thing is for certain, this is not being done for the benefit of the angling community and if the area chosen is shut down due to location, we're all screwed. Typically these areas are leased long term and like I said the devil is in the details of these contracts. Big business isn't going to invest billions and worry about fisherman. Government, both State and Federal, are getting their pockets lined as well and you can bet fishing access and marine impacts are not at the top of their priorities list, profits and protecting their investment are. We should all be concerned about this development since the people calling the shots don't have our interests at heart or conceivably even in mind. That usually ends up not good for the recreational and commercial community. Lot more details need to be understood before sounding the general alarm but all our antennas should be up. I'm all for clean energy but like anything else we should understand at what cost, impacts and risks.

well said dacota560...every form of government will make a buck on this one,nevermind the money that the blackmailing environmentalist will be making, the Devil is in the details for certain!!!!...and the recreational fishing community will get porked again!!

[hammer4reel]

While if allowed to fish this area may seem like a possible goldmine structure wise.
What is the impact going to be to our current fisheries ?

The areas in question are our current migration routes for the great fisheries we already have.

Not so sure its worth losing what we have for a possibilty of a different fishery many years down the road . With also possibility of area closure.
Comparing what goes on in Nj to other states is laughable.
Just look at the current closure to bear hunting on state properties with one pen stroke.
Those lands bought with revenue from hunting and fishing licences and excise tax .
Now closed .

.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Dakota and Dan make some valid points and I share some of the same concerns. I do however need get more informed before forming my own opinion.

What I've "heard" so far that is concerning:
- The company behind this is a foreign company
- Other areas where the wind mills are located, power cost actually went up
- There are some that believe the power lines on the ocean floor will disrupt fishing
- These structures could obviously pose issues with navigation
- Could fishing be restricted around them? Not sure but a slippery slope if they decided to make them MPAs in the future.

Many of the political power brokers in the state like Murphy and Booker are already for it so don't look for any help from them, the NJDEP or any appointed people representing our state fisheries management. Point here is if you want to oppose this, the fight is likely going to take place in DC not in NJ.

As I learn more I will post here...

[Hookmanski]

i think building these will make lots of areas of structure for fish to hold up on. Could create some interesting fishing opportunities.

What we really need to worry about is this proposed seismic blasting - a huge seismic boom going off underwater every 30 seconds for an extended period of time? Its going to destroy the fishing.

[Capt. Debbie]

Since NJ only has control to 3 miles it limits things. Feds jurisdiction starts past 3 miles and will cost more to run the undersea cables. Soo WHY NOT..

Have someone from this board help guide the placement of the windfarm. There's more dry holes than honey holes. Help with the selection process?

There's no shovel in the sea bottom yet. So why not put the NJFishing.Com input into site placement?

Originally Posted by hammer4reel

http://www.njcleanenergy.com/nj-offs...ce=govdelivery

Betting we lose a lot of fishing areas to this we have fished for a lifetime

Originally Posted by Gerry Zagorski

Dakota and Dan make some valid points and I share some of the same concerns. I do however need get more informed before forming my own opinion.

What I've "heard" so far that is concerning:
- The company behind this is a foreign company
- Other areas where the wind mills are located, power cost actually went up
- There are some that believe the power lines on the ocean floor will disrupt fishing
- These structures could obviously pose issues with navigation
- Could fishing be restricted around them? Not sure but a slippery slope if they decided to make them MPAs in the future.

Many of the political power brokers in the state like Murphy and Booker are already for it so don't look for any help from them, the NJDEP or any appointed people representing our state fisheries management. Point here is if you want to oppose this, the fight is likely going to take place in DC not in NJ.

As I learn more I will post here...

In situations of this nature, when politicians are making the calls (especially at the Federal level) history will tell you it's usually not in our best interest. What government will want you to believe is what you'll hear, better structure for fishing. What you won't hear is all the adverse effects. Example, what happens if testing / blasting occurs in the Fall during summer flounder migration offshore and what if it takes place right where the masses migrate. What'll be the impact on egg reproduction or the biomass itself. Could kill every egg laid. What happens to the fishery, might never rebound. If scallop beds are killed, I understand young ling require scallops as part of their early life cycle process. What's the impact on those two vital fisheries. The ocean is one big food chain and if one part is thrown off the entire food chain will be impacted. When there's another terrorist attack, will the area be closed to the public permanently for security reasons or as Gerry mentioned made into a Marine Protected Area for conservation reasons. More information is needed including designated area being considered. Everything in life has pros and cons, like I said the devil is always in the details and business / government never disclose the cons for obvious reasons.

If the project is so strategic to the US, as Gerry mentioned why would we not own it ourselves as opposed to a foreign concern? Counter-intuitive to the direction our government has elected in trying to be less dependent on foreign countries for energy resources as opposed to more. That in itself begs the question of why. A foreign country would be even less concerned about the potential environmental impacts, why would they since it's not their resources at risk.

Unless proven otherwise, to me this is potentially another Magnuson Stevens Act waiting to happen because politicians legislated it to for their own personal agenda, not because it's the right thing to do.