2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election 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 international 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 television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

The show's guest from OSU forgot to mention one of the most important reasons for creating a marine reserve - to provide breeding, source populations that can re-seed surrounding populations of fish and invertebrates that have been reduced by fishing. She did mention biodiversity, but calling a reserve a "park in the sea" where no one can visit except scientists misses the most powerful argument for reserves that any Oregonian can support. Bigger fish produce more offspring than smaller fish. Protecting habitat for the largest female fish (this is especially important for bottom fish like rock fish) ensures lots of offspring. I worked as a researcher for years at the Oregon Institute of Marine Biology in Charleston, and I can say that many of my commercial fisherman friends understand the importance of protecting critical habitat, particularly from destructive fishing like bottom dragging.

posted 5 years, 3 months ago
view in context