No Take Ban

[konaplugcaster]

Morefish,
I am on your side with this, but will forever stand strong by my convictions that Catch and Release fishing promotes healthy fisheries.

And I am aslo not inbred by the way; no need for that. I have a BS in Fisheries Biology, have worked with Woods Hole Marine Biological Labs, i fish almost every day, have fished around the world, and observed the strategies of different States and countries to manage their waters. Most of all, i want more fish too!
Most forum members here probably disagree with alot that i have to say about this topic. There is no need to call our opinions here inbred. Many of us argue all the time about dumb crap

Do you feel that the KMLAC is unopen to the idea of establishing a C&R zone, and if so, why?

[morefish]

I will reiterate myself again, I SUPPORT THIS NO TAKE BAN. But i believe that maintaining it as a C&R has more tangible benefits than a full closure. Most of all, it would provide an excellent area to teach the younger generation about caring for their fishery, starting here and now.

For everyone reading this thread, I am currently looking into the proper avenues to petition the State/DLNR to have the KMLAC re-examine the project to include C&R fishing as an amendment to the No Take plan.
Basically what I'm trying to do is ask fishermen around the State for their support of the KMLAC's plan, but ask them to maintain the area as a C&R preserve during the 10yr period. The petition i am putting together will very clearly state that whomever signs it SUPPORTS THE NO TAKE BAN, as long as they have the right to catch and release sportfish in the area. I have been on the phone all day, calling every fisherman/woman i know to get involved with this. So far, everyone i've explained the situation to has been supportive of both the KMLAC and the idea to make it a C&R zone.

Now I see. This is not a suggestion you are making to the KMLAC, you are trying to derail it. First of all, C&R has a proven high mortality rate. There is no way that a C&R area would have the same efficacy as a no-take area. And if you think the benefit of doing this would be that the keiki can have fun messing with and injuring fish is a useful lesson to teach them, I think you're wrong. But if you insist on teaching them to injure things and possibly kill things so that they can enjoy themelves, there will still be 140+ miles of coastline to teach them such cruelty. C&R has nothing to do with feeding families or caring for the resource, it's just about showing your superiority over nature.

I'm afraid you have shown that you don't know anything about the nuts & bolts of fishery management and what is beneficial to the resource.

The frantic tone of your second message here implies that you want to stop this no matter what. People who live in Kauai should have nothing to say about it. You are saying that people from Kauai have as much say in how to run a small section of a traditional ahupua'a than the descendents themselves. What is wrong with you all?

[morefish]

Catch and release is a completely un-Hawaiian ethic. As they say, "we don't play with our food."

[morefish]

We have some crossing of posts happening here.

I would like to ask you a question: What do you mean by sportfish?

...clearly state that whomever signs it SUPPORTS THE NO TAKE BAN, as long as they have the right to catch and release sportfish in the area...

The fact is that trolling and sportfishing for marlin, etc. is already excluded from the KMLAC plan. Some bottomfish are excluded as well as Kona crab. If that is what you're talking about then there is no issue.

I continue to believe that C&R is better than sportfishing just to kill things. but no-take is infinitely better than C&R.

[morefish]

No, the KMLAC absolutely insisted that the no-take reserve status be lifted and then they would put in a comprehensive fisheries management plan.

Sorry I got a little hot under the collar. I had something going on around me that just drove me nuts. Again, sportfishing in deep water (over 120') is exempted from the no-take status.

[morefish]

A most public and heartfelt apology to Konaplugcaster. We had some cross-posting and one misunderstanding, and I got a little carried away. Now that I see that you are speaking of deep water sportfish, I realize my comments were completely over the top. I thought you were talking about reef fish. Mortality for reef fish in C&R is huge. And I have witnessed more than once someone fishing at the shore, hauling a little fish out and letting his kids play with it until they threw it back. or dug its eyes out and then threw it back. Made me sick.

I totally agree with you. C&R for sportfishing is far the better way to go than bringing the fish in. Although many still don't make it, it's got a better chance than being hauled up into the boat.

The KMLAC knew that putting a ban on anyone trolling through the district was problematic at best, impossible at worst and likely to be too much trouble. They decided to exempt the deep water trolling and certain bottomfish. I'm sorry I thought you had heard that at the meeting, so I thought you were talking about the near shore species, which are not nearly as hardy.

It would be great if you could get everyone to agree to voluntarily engage in catch and release when they troll in Ka'upulehu's waters.

Mahalo, and sorry.

[konaplugcaster]

Thank you Morefish, much appreciated, please accept that i am not trying to start a fight with you as i respect and understand your viewpoint as well as that of the KMLAC, regardless of our disagreements.
But now i'm sorry to say that i did in fact mean nearshore fishing. Sorry by sportfishing, i meant recreational C&R fishing, i sometimes forget that the term sportfishing refers to offshore big game fishing exclusively. The most intended species of my last posts are regarding omilu, ulua, and moi. All of which being species that i target at Kaupulehu for C&R fishing.

Please re-read my last posts, i am not trying to derail the project at all. I would just love to see Hawaii adapt C&R zones into its management scheme. By assembling a petition for the reasons I previously stated, it would simply make the suggestion to KMLAC stronger than just a few solitary voices. This project would serve as a perfect platform to engage some conservation minded regulations for the state.

You must believe me that I am not out to ruin the project, i am also not your enemy. In what way have i shown that i have no knowledge of the nuts and bolts of fishery management? All i have shown is a difference of opinion of how we view the same situation/fishery.

If it is the KMLAC's will that "we dont play with our food", then you are correct in the sense that i am an enemy of that viewpoint. I dont fish for subsistence, i fish for fun, and take about 5% of my catch from the shoreline home with me. When i do fish for food, i use my boat to target smaller bottomfish species, and never concentrate on one area too much.
What we have here is a core difference in the way we each view a fish. SInce i am clearly not Hawaiian, does that mean that my viewpoint does not count towards wanting a better fishery. I suppose a good argument could be made either way, and i will not dispute it if you say that my voice does not count in regards to traditional Hawaiian fishing values. Absolutely correct. But in the sense of what fishing means to Hawaii right now, i feel that my viewpoint is legitimate. C&R fishing is a growing practice here in the State among Hawaiians, locals, and us foreigners. I have Hawaiian friends that regularly practice C&R, are they also wrong to enjoy it as apparently i am?

In regards to C&R fishing being cruel practice, i have heard and agree with some of the arguments against it, but that will never stop me from doing it. A few years back now; Germany adopted policy that essentially stated that if you have no intention to eat the fish, then you should not be fishing. Within their law, it was stated that each fish caught must be killed efficiently as possible. So this kind of thing has been employed before.
If the fishing public, State, and DLNR officials tell me that C&R fishing has no place in Hawaii, then i will pursue the issue with KMLAC no further. Until then, i stand by it as a means to establishing healthy fisheries.

Morefish, keep in mind that even if i get nowhere with my suggestions and petition to the KMLAC, i will still support the project. My passion for recreational fishing is second to none, thus my standpoint on the issue. I am not the enemy, and would still crack a few cold ones with you.

[LetItFly]

Real talk right there ^^^^ KPC, you Hawaiian bro lol

Aloha

[morefish]

Thank you, konaplugcaster.

I do understand your stance on C&R. I don't actually agree with it for the reasons I stated above, but I do agree that there is a place for such regulations. However, when I meant the nuts and bolts, I meant the actual science of how to revive a fishery rules out such a method as being successful. The best C&R can do is slow the decline of a fishery. As I said, there is a high mortality associated with it. We tend to soothe our consciences by thinking the fish will live, but there is much evidence to the contrary. So, even if you don't take the fish home, if it dies, you've taken it anyway. To be sure, some do live, but when you go home from fishing, there are fewer fish than there were in the morning.

If you have a relatively healthy fishery, C&R can be quite useful in maintaining that state. However, in a depleted fishery, it only furthers the decline. I have a number of friends who are well-respected, world-renowned PhDs in marine biology, fisheries management and ichthyology. I have learned a great deal from them. They universally agree that no-take marine reserves are the ONLY long-term successful method to replenish fish stocks. Any marine shoreline should have 20% off limits to fishing of any kind; in the absence of other regulatory measures, the distance should be 30%. KMLAC is asking for less than 3%.

The KMLAC (and I am not a member of KMLAC but have long supported what they are doing) has looked at all the alternatives. They didn't want to have to shut the fishery down for any length of time, but the situation they were faced with truly required it. I do not think that it is appropriate for someone from outside to come in at this late date and try to tell them that they don't know what they are doing and that it should be done differently. They do feel it is their kuleana, and they want to initiate a management plan based on traditional Hawaiian values. C&R is not one of those values.

The Ka'upulehu proposal is not the platform for introducing C&R regulations, but it doesn't mean there can't be a different platform. I would suggest that you and your friends who were willing to sign on to your petition put your energies into finding a place, say several miles somewhere along the West Hawaii coastline (we have a lot of coastline and as I showed you before, very little of it is in any type of conservation status) and petition the DLNR to make it a C&R-only area. Get someone to do some initial fish surveys for the area to show what your baseline is, then as time goes on, further monitoring studies will reveal how effective C&R is as a conservation method for near shore species. I would suggest using one of the Fish Replenishment Areas, where aquarium fishing is already prohibited so you won't get any pushback from them. Also the state DAR already has baseline surveys for all the FRAs. If you don't quite know how to go about it and how to get it to the state, I have a friend who can help you.

So, please let KMLAC do it their way. Give it a try. And if you take on the C&R only project, I'll help you all I can.

[10ozgrabba]

I would suggest that you and your friends who were willing to sign on to your petition put your energies into finding a place, say several miles somewhere along the West Hawaii coastline (we have a lot of coastline and as I showed you before, very little of it is in any type of conservation status) and petition the DLNR to make it a C&R-only area.

why is it so important to to have a no take ban near the resorts? why cant they take the ban say several miles somewhere else along the coastline? the Puppet show is not working.Its pretty clear who is pulling the strings. I have hundreds of friends that will sign that petition. (power of social media baby)

[morefish]

why is it so important to to have a no take ban near the resorts? why cant they take the ban say several miles somewhere else along the coastline? the Puppet show is not working.Its pretty clear who is pulling the strings. I have hundreds of friends that will sign that petition. (power of social media baby)

Okay, this for the fourth time: This is not hotel driven. The reason why the KMLAC has to do it here is because this is where the court gave them the authority to do it.

Actually, 10ozgrabba, I do know who you are and I know that you know the truth. You are simply trying to destroy the project, as your very first post on this matter shows, by spewing out falsehoods. And the petition would only be an attempt to hijack the issue, not improve it.

Stand back and let this happen. You will be pleased with the results. Everyone will.

[morefish]

As for your other statement why were other areas mentioned earlier? Mainly hotel grounds also.

Never mentioned by me. Read all my posts. The one who mentioned other areas, like the hotel areas of Waikoloa and Mauna Lani was 10ozgrabba in his first inflammatory message. He seems determined to derail this.

Now for the fifth time: This is not driven by the resorts. NOT! NO! Unh-unh!

[morefish]

You certainly implied that you thought it was resort driven, when you said that other areas being talked about were also hotel areas. But never mind. I have never mentioned any area but the Ka'upulehu area and that's the only area being considered.

As to my making things up and twisting words, why on earth would I bother? As I said before to konaplugcaster, the makeup of the KMLAC was determined by the court, but that doesn't mean those are the only people who know about and support this project. And besides, if you think I'm making anything up, come to the informational meeting in Kona at the Old Kona Airport pavilion at 6:30 Pm on July 24th. You will hear the same things from KMLAC members as you have heard from me.

[morefish]

Dear twoqttsdad,

The truth is that there is no place that fishermen are going to agree to. There is always going to be someone to claim those grounds, whatever grounds they are. The court gave the KMLAC authority over this area because they had proved to the court that they had historic authority over this area and had the good of the area as their purpose when the resort did not. I haven't actually read the whole court decision, only parts of it, but that is the gist.

These people are attached to the place. If you truly think about it, they have much more of a say as to how it is used than those who come from some other place and just like it there. When it opens again in ten years, it will be open to all, but with management.

I know konaplugcaster says he's all for the proposal, except that he wants to change it so that he can continue to have fun there. And that will destroy the whole integrity of the proposal. That's frankly selfish. I think most fishermen are selfish because they don't see past their own enjoyment to what's important and what's necessary. Somebody, somewhere is going to have to sacrifice.

There is still an awful lot of shoreline out there.

[konaplugcaster]

The suggestion of C&R area of Kaupulehu has nothing to do with selfishness. It has more to do with how fishermen want to see their entire fishery managed for the future. This is really a microcosm of the general trend of what fishermen are leaning towards more and more; which is C&R of various species.
The State itself is pushing C&R with programs like the ulua/papio/o'io/moi tagging programs. I believe we are at the start of a statewide movement of a more conservation minded fishing public. C&R is going to have a big place in the future of our fisheries.

My suggested amendment to the proposal would serve as a starting point for the State to study the effectiveness of a C&R zone with the additional help of the KMLAC to manage the area. DLNR is underfunded as it is, so a partnership between C&R fishermen, DLNR, and the KMLAC, would make for the ideal setting to set up such an project. There is nothing selfish about this, just an opportune convergence of ideas.