TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Some No-Fish Zones Just Don't Make Any Sense

ADVERTISEMENT

By FRANK SARGEANT | The Tampa Tribune

Published: July 9, 2008

Citing statistics that nearly a third of seafood species have declined 90 percent worldwide, then blaming it on recreational fishermen in the United States is so preposterous that it's not even worth talking about. Well, it wouldn't be if the suggestion did not continue to rope in general news reporters, as evidenced by the Associated Press report published Saturday in The Tampa Tribune.

None of the species that have declined in the worldwide slump of fish populations - that is, not one - have done so as a result of recreational fishing in Florida waters. That is the simple fact. Yet Florida is where the no-fishing advocates want to put most of the no-fishing zones they say will alleviate the problem.

Recreational harvest is not even a small part of the issue for most species, yet the radical environmentalists want to lock out sport fishermen along with the commercial anglers who have caused the decimation of fish worldwide.

Look at the management of inshore fish in Florida, where the species that are being fished hardest recreationally - under regulations hammered out with the approval and often at the request of recreational anglers - continue to provide outstanding fish populations in a fishery that draws tourists from around the world.

Check out the angling catalog: snook, redfish, sea trout, Spanish mackerel, kingfish and tarpon - the most popular angling targets by far in Florida waters are all thriving thanks to more than 20 years of thoughtful management. By all accounts from expert anglers, there also are outstanding numbers of red snapper, gag grouper and red grouper. And this year marks a historic high in mangrove snapper numbers both at Charlotte Harbor and in Tampa Bay.

How can it be that these populations continue to thrive? Biologists here estimate fish populations and their trends year to year, then set regulations that allow a sustainable harvest so no more fish are taken out of the fishery than can be restored by natural reproduction and growth. Some "boutique" fisheries are managed so more large fish survive in the population - for example, snook, trout and reds all have slot limits, where fish above a certain size must be released. This assures reproduction from fully mature fish and also creates a catch-and-release trophy fishery that has proven highly appealing to thousands of anglers from around the world.

And most importantly, we have no commercial harvest of popular gamefish species such as snook and tarpon, and very little on redfish and trout. To be sure, too much harvest by sport fishermen with rods and reels can be just as devastating as commercial fishing; at one point some 30 years ago, snook were fished down to shadow populations almost entirely by recreational fishermen. But as regulations were tightened on the species, the population came back, and today Florida has snook fishing as good as it ever has been in most areas.

So how can it make sense to kick recreational anglers out of tens of thousands of acres of our coastal fisheries in an effort to save the fish there?

To be sure, it's reasonable to create some underwater parks, at diving depths, where those who prefer to look at fish underwater rather than attempt to catch them from above can enjoy the pastime. Florida's coral reefs, though degraded now in many areas because of global warming and water quality issues, are still a wonderland that deserves full protection and preservation.

And unfished waters unquestionably have more reef species than those that are fished; reef species tend to stay in one location for months at a time, and when the big ones are caught out, they are not replaced for years. So setting aside a portion of this habitat so people can appreciate it first-hand, unspoiled, makes complete sense.

But broad-brush stories like the AP story imply that American recreational anglers have something to do with the worldwide decline of ocean species. That is simply wrong. In fact, U.S. recreational anglers have taken much better care of the fish they pursue than have the citizens of nearly all other nations of the world. As a result, we continue to have outstanding populations of gamefish here.

The only species suffering in U.S. waters are those that are pursued by commercial fishermen. Long-line boats are almost entirely responsible for depletion of offshore populations of large grouper and snapper, as well as billfish - an unwanted bycatch.

If regulators want to solve the depletion of fisheries, here or anywhere else in the world, they have only to shut down commercial fishing and put in place reasonable sportfishing rules, like those in Florida. The fish will take care of the rest.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT