2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Ditto.... not sure why Mr Miller referred to "most of the posts (are) by commercial fishermen."

BTW, as fishermen shift effort from salmon to other species, there will be a "domino effect" such as:

1. More commercial effort on albacore, which will drive the ex-vessel price down, or even cause the market to be flooded (in which case they stop buying).

2. More sport / charter effort on nearshore rockfish, which increases the odds of the black rockfish quota being hit early in the year (such as the pre-Labor Day shut down a few years back).

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context

Of course, it is a necessary step to curtail much of the ocean fishing season with this kind of crisis in our face. However, just as ocean fishing has very little to do with the cause, stopping fishing will not be a long-term solution to the most important root cause.

Just as the Klamath die-off a few years ago was caused by poor in-river flows, the Sacramento / Central Valley salmon crisis is primarily related to mis-management of water in the river / delta. Much of that ecosystem is collapsing, because so much fresh water is being diverted south. And the Governor is at this very moment promising southern CA that they will have more water, via another canal / diversion project.

From a regulatory standpoint, the PFMC, and the (CA) state Dept of Fish & Game have little to no authority over water management. Therein lies the inter-agency problem. All the fishery management agencies can do is regulate fishing; they can not force more water for the Sac delta.

Have no fear though - get ready for the un-informed, mis-directed statements about how mankind has over-fished the oceans once again and caused this salmon collapse.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context

To: Sandra, Meryly, Megan, Philip J, and all other proponents:

What you seem to be missing is how FLAWED this whole process has been. Many stakeholders are in agreement that we should continue to improve the way the ocean resources are managed. Philip mentioned the usefulness of having areas set aside as controls. I understand and agree with this concept.

How many of you know that the original OPAC process, 6 or 7 years ago, was working on a very different proposal for marine reserves? It was to start out on a small scale, design one or two areas, stay open to changing the design / plan, and proceed carefully? That was a model with a high chance of stakeholder support.

Yet for some reason this wasn't good enough for the governor's office. Instead it turned into this huge push for many large-scale reserves. The backlash that you are seeing is a direct result of the way the process leap-frogged over all the normal, trust-building steps.

Think about your own job / career - how is it you get things done? Do you foster good relationships with the people you work with? Or do you just do whatever it takes to get the job done, even if it leaves a wake behind you of destruction & broken relationships?

Don't you get it?

This is what is happening before your eyes with the whole process. Like Onno said....you engage local stakeholders first.

Now here we are, with the local stakeholders so upset & mis-trusting of the people behind the process. And finally, they have Oregon SeaGrant facilitating the outreach process, but only after the relationships & trust have been ruined. I feel sorry for the SeaGrant folks. This outreach is happening way too late; it should have been one of the FIRST steps; not 11th hour.

The governor's "Legacy" on this topic will certainly not be around the leadership of bringing Oregonians together.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context

Hi Mike, I'm curious where you got the idea:

"....the people who are protesting the creation of coastal or ocean reserves are the very ones who have made the need for such reserves necessary."

Yes I am seeing lots of people giving critical feedback or "protesting" as you put it, but not from the ones who caused most of the past problems (groundfish stock reductions).

That particular user group would be the groundfish trawlers a.k.a. "draggers" who fish in deep water. Marine reserves in state waters (inside 3 miles) have little to no connection with the species that were over-harvested by the trawl industry.

From what I have seen, the trawl industry is a relatively small voice at the OPAC functions & related forums. Rather, it is the recreational fishers, and the businesses who rely on them (e.g. tourist related, sport stores, etc) who I see en masse speaking up.

So if I am missing a connection between the "causing group" and the current protesters, maybe you could enlighten me a little. Thanks!

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context

Hello Meryl, interesting history of Three Arch Rocks.

Question for you -

Do you think that Audubon might be able to help with some of the funding issues? As you probably know, there is a need for much baseline data such as mapping of bottom structure / kelp etc.; that work requires funding so I'd be curious if your oganization, and other similar organizations, are talking about how they might contribute.

BTW I used to run bird watching trips on the ocean with entire groups from Audubon.....those people are really fast with a camera! Thanks....

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context

The problem as I see it is the process by which marine reserves are being implemented. If there is a problem, then one should start out by identifying the problems, and developing objectives. Then you figure out what methods to use in order to reach those objectives.

If the objective is "understand and protect marine resources", then the methods used to get there might include (1) stock assessments, (2) bottom mapping, and yes maybe even (3) limited protected areas to act as controls. And don't forget...the resources necessary to do the work.

But the way this process has proceeded has been to say that the problem statement is "we don't have reserves", and the objective is "implement reserves." This is backwards logic, and it offers evidence to support those who claim this is agenda-driven.

Contrary to some perception, the fishing community in general are very smart about resource conservation. They learned from past mistakes. But now the process itself is in jeopardy because of a lack of trust. The governor's office has been steadily losing the trust of the very stakeholders needed for this to succeed. The very best thing the governor & staff could have done would have been....to go straight to the coastal stakeholders, the fishing community & those who depend on the ocean for their livelihoods. Establish a good relationship with those people, look them in the eye, shake hands, establish trust. And then equally important, keep your word when you make promises (e.g. "no more than 10 reserves", and "will not have any negative economic impacts"). If this had happened from the start, you would have seen a whole different result.

Even if this does move forward, the key issue of resources / funding is still there. As was stated on the OPB show a few minutes ago, it is up to the state to come up with funding via the legislative process.

posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context