Offshore wind, local shops, crabbing, and more

[Chrisper4694]

Originally Posted by bulletbob

I don't think they are great or particularly good or bad for the environment.. I only think the structures and adjacent bottom would create a lot of new habitat, and that fishing around them would be very good to spectacular in a few short years..


Offshore oil rigs are certainly not good for the environment, and are eyesores of the highest order... However, ask a few gulf fishermen if they would like them removed..

Ask the government if vessels will even be allowed to be next to the wind turbines to fish.... so yeah, once they are in and start pulling fish off our current structure (even if thats what happens) thatll mean less fish to target cause they wont even let you near them.

[bulletbob]

Originally Posted by Chrisper4694

Ask the government if vessels will even be allowed to be next to the wind turbines to fish.... so yeah, once they are in and start pulling fish off our current structure (even if thats what happens) thatll mean less fish to target cause they wont even let you near them.

If access is limited in ANY way then all bets are off.. There is great access at Block Island, and lots of fish. If NJ/NY restricts access, then I would be outraged if I were a NJ salt water fisherman.

Again, I don't buy the "it pulls fish from other places" theory.. If that were that big a problem, Every time a wreck was sunk, or an artificial reef expanded, fishing would be poor in other spots, because the local fish populations "moved out".. Might be a small concern for a season or two, but increased habitat will lead to better populations in the long run, and less pressure on areas that have traditionally been fished hard.
Access is everything.. I would be singing a different tune if access were denied , no question.... bob

[Chrisper4694]

Originally Posted by bulletbob

If access is limited in ANY way then all bets are off.. There is great access at Block Island, and lots of fish. If NJ/NY restricts access, then I would be outraged if I were a NJ salt water fisherman.

Again, I don't buy the "it pulls fish from other places" theory.. If that were that big a problem, Every time a wreck was sunk, or an artificial reef expanded, fishing would be poor in other spots, because the local fish populations "moved out".. Might be a small concern for a season or two, but increased habitat will lead to better populations in the long run, and less pressure on areas that have traditionally been fished hard.
Access is everything.. I would be singing a different tune if access were denied , no question.... bob

No question that after time it will lead to better fishing when structure is added but i think it might take more than a few years. I think i heard 5+ somewhere but cant remember. A straight standing structure with rubble at the base isnt gonna be as good of a fiah attracting structure as a wreck or reef though and like i said unleaa it was in writing that vessels would have full access, i wouldnt believe it.

[Duffman]

Originally Posted by Chrisper4694

No question that after time it will lead to better fishing when structure is added but i think it might take more than a few years. I think i heard 5+ somewhere but cant remember. A straight standing structure with rubble at the base isnt gonna be as good of a fiah attracting structure as a wreck or reef though and like i said unleaa it was in writing that vessels would have full access, i wouldnt believe it.

Not sure about 5 years. The recently built structure in Raritan Bay had life on it almost immediately.