How Marine Protected Areas can pay for their own Protection.

[OldBlackDog]

How Marine Protected Areas Can Pay for Their Own Protection | Hakai Magazine

The area right next to a marine protected area is a prime fishing spot—and researchers think fishermen will pay to access it.

hakaimagazine.com

 

[Bryan Allen]

How Marine Protected Areas Can Pay for Their Own Protection | Hakai Magazine

The area right next to a marine protected area is a prime fishing spot—and researchers think fishermen will pay to access it.

hakaimagazine.com

And one line from the story.... Another serious challenge that Jones envisions to the scheme’s implementation is its likely unpalatability to global fishing communities. Well all I can add is..."No Chit Sherlock !" One of the stupidest ideas yet.

 

[CRGreg]

one of the best things we have going is the ability to access our common property resource for a nominal licence fee....
This is Just A Bad Idea !!!!!

 

[wildmanyeah]

So the general background on MPAs is the UN used them as a solution to help third world countries reduce there fishing impact and create a sustainable production.

They were never meant for first world countries that already have full blow resource management and enforcement in place. Not to mention in Canada we have first nations who are going to have access to these MPAs. So tell me how much are they going to produce if we have full blow first nations commercial fishing in them???

MPS are a stupid solution here but that's not gonna stop JT from ramming them down our throats.

Instead of calling them MPAs they should just call them First Nation exclusive fishing areas

 

[searun]

Don't worry the enviros will have everything closed one way or another. If MPA's get blocked they will make up something really sexy like SRKW Sanctuaries as an easier way to close down the coast and bankrupt the Blue Economy. Someone needs to sit down and put together how we attach a $$ value to what we take away when we close fisheries - start by measuring not just the pure economic direct and indirect expenditures....get to the nub of why people go fishing and live in small coastal communities. They live there because of the intrinsic social and cultural values. We need to put a $$ figure on how much that loss is worth. No different that trying to put a value on how much to pay an accident victim for their "pain and suffering." I think ol JT there owes me about a $$billion in losses so far.

 

[agentaqua]

MPAs may have their uses - but are only but 1 tool of many in the tool box; and in contrast to other fisheries management tools - are largely a blunt & indiscriminate tool that is rarely examined & honed in the context of efficiency and success - and maybe even intent, IMHO. I really have grown to respect and admire Ray Hilborn & his critiques of MPAs (and other fisheries issues) over the years:

Ray Hilborn: MPAs aren’t the answer to ocean biodiversity, sustainability efforts

www.nationalfisherman.com

Dr. Hilborn: No-take MPAs “do nothing to mitigate” problems facing U.S. oceans - Saving Seafood

November 18, 2020 (Saving Seafood) — WASHINGTON — Yesterday, at a House Natural Resources Committee hearing on the Ocean-Based Climate Solutions Act, respected fisheries scientist Dr. Ray Hilborn criticized the marine protected area (MPA) provision of the bill, which he called “the wrong tool...

www.savingseafood.org

Are MPAs effective?

Before we can begin to consider this question, we must define what we mean by MPA and by effectiveness. According to Wikipedia “Marine protected areas (MPA

academic.oup.com

Introduction to marine managed areas - PubMed

No issue in marine conservation and management seems to have generated as much interest, and controversy as marine protected areas (MPAs). In the past 30 years, a substantial scientific literature on the subject has developed, international agreements have set targets for proportion of the sea...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

And then there is the political component within the development of MPAs that affects their effectiveness...

The current situation on the North and Central Coasts is largely a legacy of Harper's tenure:

Marine planning on the North Coast started out with the PNCIMA process shepherded initially by DFO. As soon as Harper got elected (while previously getting both personal and party $ from Enbridge) he sent the survey vessel out to survey the approaches to Kitimat while pulling all the feds out of the PNCIMA process because Enbridge was scared that they would be zoned out of the approaches - and the funders call the shots in our government. In addition - that joker gutted numerous Acts - such as the Fisheries Act, the CEAA Act, the Marine Act and others under his undemocratic omnibus bills that we are still un-burying ourselves from.

That action by Harper forced the FNs to look for alternatives, and the Foundations stepped-in with funding for deliverables and they reinvented PNCIMA into what today is called MaPP which was supposed to be a marine-planning exercise verses a MPA exercise. But since the feds were noticeably absent thanks to Stevie Blunder - also absent were the processes that affect activities on the water column and their regulators - such as fishing, etc. That left land-use zoning verses water-column management; so they then cribbed the methodology from the UN Marine Spatial Planning processes and hired a bunch of younger mostly urban researchers with little to zero experience in how fisheries & fishing communities work and with little to zero ties into current fishing management processes but educated in school and by certain ENGOs into how "great" MPAs are - to fulfill this process.

The end result was and is - unfortunately predictable. Quite the legacy, indeed.