Grays Reef Closure

[HeadHunter]

Rob-Les.....I was told yesterday that Grays Reef was being closed to spearfishing but not hook-line fishing? Is this true?? Whats being done??? Please inform me/us. If it is true, why hasn't it been posted on the board?? I talked to a half dozen guys and no one knows anything about it??? If it is true, is the FRA involved? If I got bad info, let me know. Dan

[Charlestondivin]

To summarize, All of the public input, hundreds of letters, etc. was just a formality. I think it is viewed as one step closer to what they really want, Total closure. One of the reasons for the ban is that they found empty casings (Powerheads are illegal in Grays reef) Although no one knows about this rule because it is not in the GA rules and regs. Basicly they are going to create another law to enforce a previous law no one knew about.

When they put this thing together the diving representative did not stand up for us. Neither did the fishing representative in creating the draft plan. After speaking to the fishing representative(CCA guy) he did support us as did the CCA.

IMO The only thing left is legal action. That is up to the FRA if they decide It is high enough of a priority to fight. We have never dove Grays reef and do not have plans to but this is a scary trend for our sport.

http://www.spearboard.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=7015&highlight=reef

http://www.spearboard.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5490&highlight=greys+reef

[Denny]

Legal action is a couple of steps away. The Gray's Reef folks know they did wrong. There will be some pressure on them from their bosses. Legal action will most certainly be effective.
SIX SHELL CASINGS does NOT constiutute a problem.
Given that the actions taken by certain Grays staff are seemingly illegal, perhaps personal lawsuits should be filed.
If anyone wishes, please email Judy Wright. She is YOUR diving representative on the Gray's reef council.
The fat lady aint sung yet.
Denny

[jbrady2852]

Please correct me if I am wrong since it has been a couple of years since I dove Gray's Reef out of St Simonns Island.

It was my understanding that spearfishing was not allowed in the park but just like the keys there we areas you could. They have various artificials that we great spearing.

I think a call to the folks that run to that area should produce the best info.

101 Marina Drive
St. Simons Island, GA 31522
E-Mail scubadive@thebest.net
Phone: (912) 638-6590FAX: (912) 638-4956
TOLL FREE: 1 (800) 940-3483 (DIVE)


http://www.graysreef.noaa.gov/sac/min33.html

[jbrady2852]

Now that I am caught up on the other threads that Rob posted it seems that the no spearing issue was not Georgia law but local dive shop policy.

Looks like the the local representive has a hidden agenda on the whole spearing ban. Let hope we can put a stop to this BS.

I enjoyed spearing out of St Simmons Island but maybe I should have made another choice of who I chartered with.

Cheers!

[Quetzal]

Please keep us updated.

[Slay Ride]

I don't think it's a done deal yet, but Rob said it right, lots of our concerns seemed to go on deaf ears. The worst part (IMO) is that a commercial hook and liner will still be able to sit on a spot and catch an UNLIMITED amount of fish but we can't go and spear a recreational limit. Tell me the logic in that? It's just wrong.

[RichT]

We need to get Bertram 25 bugging those people over at grays reef since he is so "concerned" about the sport of"spearfishing" and its perception.:D
Hes over here wasting time when he could be conversing with some important people.:rolleyes: :D

[Steel Shootin']

IMHO, a regulation that carves spearfishermen out of all other attended gear is the most nefarious precedent that could be set. One thing that we cannot stand for is being segregated as a method of harvesting fish.

Right now, in spite of some differences with rod/reel fishermen, there is plenty of reason that they would want to defend our rights, as an assault on spearfishing is an assault on fishing in general and could open the door to broader regulations. However, once the concept of regulating spearfishermen as an independant entity takes hold, then we could potentially lose the broader support of the fishing community, who might be willing to throw us under the bus as long as it does not effect them. It's the old strategy of divide and conquer.

[Spear One]

Rogers on that Scott......I couldn't agree more. IMO, any attempt by any group or individual, who attempts to separate spearfishing as a gear type from other methods of harvest, is doing so due to bias or ignorance. There is absolutely "ZERO" statistical or scientific evidence to support separating spearfishing as a gear type.

Less than 1/2 of 1% of all commercially harvested reef fish are taken with a spear. The recreational % probably isn't much higher. ANY attempts at separating spearfishing from other methods of harvest MUST be stopped. Once this precedent is set........it will become much more difficult to protect spearfishing rights in other areas of the country.

[Quetzal]

?

[toothy]

Hello

I was off the coast of Beaufort at either the Bft 45 or the eagles nest and saw some guys target practicing. I'm not talking at the bottom I'm talking on the surface, just plain old blasting away. Is anyone sure the shell casings came from a bang stick and not from a surface weapon. It was a little annoying to hear the projectiles do the skip whistle thing, I was sure hoping they were all going in the other direction. They put quite a few casings on the bottom that day.

wade

[biggsy]

Thats an interesting revelation.

[Charlestondivin]

You should report that to the people at Grays Reef.

graysreef@noaa.gov

[FredT]

KNEW this already. Any even roughly competent armorer can look at a .223 casing and give you a pretty good idea of what fired it.

Extractor and ejector markings as well as chamber dimensions are pretty distinctive model to model. A powerhead fired .223 will have NO extractor markings. WHICH H&K or AR fired it takes a specialist to determine, but anyone who has spent much time on a range can tell the difference at a glance for some rifles, others may take 3 or 4 seconds study to determine who made the rifle it was fired in. A powerhead round will have NO ejector or extractor markings, and a pretty distinctive bolt face & primer marking.

Any regulator NOT telling wheither a round was fired from a rifle or a powerhead simply means he willfully declined to look at the evidence.

[eyyeball]

They decided to close it before the meetings, it was nothing but a rubber stamp when they asked the public for input.

[Charlestondivin]

It doesn't matter if they were powerhead rounds. You couldn't know about the powerhead restriction unless you visit the Grays Reef website and read through the rules.

The restriction is not listed in the GA Rules and Regs... how would someone have known they were doing wrong?

I was told they had so many shell casings they decorated their tree with them. I think the actual number was 6 casings.

All this over 6 casings that MIGHT have been from someone who probably had no idea they were doing anything wrong.

[Upwelling Clay]

I'm mystified by all the words about "the most nefarious precedent that could be set", referring to discriminating against spearfishers where other fishing methods are allowed for the same species. The words in this thread could give a reader the mistaken impression that such precedents don't already exist.

At least as early as the 1970s (maybe even at park creation in 1960), spearfishing was illegal in the actively angled Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park in the Florida Keys. Spearfishing was federally banned in the Key Largo and Looe Key National Marine Sanctuaries (NMS): the 2 federal predecessors of the much larger Florida Keys NMS. The bans were rationalized in both cases by the ludicrous classification of spearfishing among "harmful fishing methods", which include "poisons, electric charges, explosives" [U.S. Title 15, Parts 929 and 937 (later numerically reorganized)]. Spearfishing was also separately banned in the Flower Garden Bank(s) NMS off the Texas coast, using a comparable rationale.

Although the trend of orthodox-environmental agitation favors nondiscriminatory no-fishing zones, there's no reason why the current round of NMS regulation-rewriting can't ban spearfishing while continuing to allow angling or commercial net fishing. California has a separate Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) pushed through the state legislature by the same orthodox-environmental forces that promote no-take 'marine protected areas', using campaigns pushing whatever rationale ("science", "common sense") seems most easily swallowed by their targeted audience, as bankrolled by wealthy private foundations who answer to no one.

California fishing regulations ban spearing salmon and steelhead, even when in the ocean part of their life-cycle. In Florida, there's an unexplained stature assigned by state fishing regulations to all fish species designated "gamefish"; it's illegal to spear them recreationally, or to take them commercially by any method. What's the objective basis for designating any particular species a 'gamefish'? None: The state's fishing regulations don't define 'gamefish' except by a list of the privileged species. It's really easy for a spearfishing observer to conclude that it's just a matter of the political muscle of recreational anglers and de-facto-commercial guides keeping as many of the popular species as possible for themselves alone. The Coastal Conservation Association (CCA) of Florida--Ted Forsgren presiding--is especially smug about preserving anglers' selfish privileges. They're not interested in what seems like a tidy solution: banning commercial spearfishing for 'gamefish'.

Florida fishing regulations provide a separate category for decorative tropical fish intended to be taken live for aquaria, although it's easy to understand why spearing would be a counterproductive method of capture. California allows something similar, albeit for far fewer species (maybe only garibaldi).

And the foregoing is limited to the cases I'm familiar with, drawn almost entirely from California & Florida. Hmmm. Maybe that foregoing is a bit much for a first post in this forum. But on a national scale, there's an awful lot happening, thus a lot to try to monitor and keep the facts straight on. My own presentation of these issues (more or less):

http://www.upwelling.org/sanct/index.html

doesn't even mention Gray's Reef NMS as I'm writing this posting.

[eyyeball]

Damn good point Clay

[PatMyGreen]

Welcome to the board. I particularly liked..... "but as one observer noted, MPAs are the "Gucci of fisheries conservation"-an alluring fad that promises easy solutions to complex problems."

[Charlestondivin]

Welcome to spearboard Clay

[Denny]

Clay- Welcome to the board. Impressive first post.
You have an outstanding presentation of information on your website.
I am looking forward to hearing your opinions on the various issues that confront us.
Denny

[Screen Name]

I would support a class action lawsuit against NOAA to make them give spearfishing equal treatment with hook and line fishing.

[Screen Name]

Attached is some correspondence with Judy Wright, the person who "represented" divers in the Gray's reef issue:

Dear Judy:

>

> I am sickened by your selfish support of banning spearfishing at Grey's

> Reef, while other types of fishing are allowed. I certainly hope that

> you do not profit one cent by trading equal treatment for divers to

> benefit yourself.

>

> Sincerely,

>

>

> John Schmidt

> President, Florida Skin Divers Association

> 727-403-6281

-----Original Message-----
From: Judy Wright [mailto:scubadive@thebest.net]
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 12:44 PM
To: John Schmidt
Cc: Becky Shortland
Subject: Re: Grey's Reef



your message has been received. you are certainly entitled to be sickened.

i don't understand your second sentence. if you are implying that i make

money off of taking divers to gray's reef, you haven't done your accounting

homework. all of our local dive charters are a service to our customers as

we don't make any money from running dive charters. our dive center is an

ecotourism dive center; we take divers who take photos and go sightseeing.

for safety reasons, we don't take divers spearfishing. as the president of

FSDA, you should learn to treat others with respect and how you would like

to be treated..judy

----- Original Message -----

From: "John Schmidt" <inluber@tampabay.rr.com>

To: <scubadive@thebest.net>

Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 11:28 PM




Dear Judy:



Respect? My comments to you could not be more respectful in light of the fact that you have sold millions of divers out for your own self-interest. As far as accounting homework, I am a business major and owner. Businesses do things for business reasons, otherwise they do not remain in business. Most people know that, and can see through your explanation.



Spearfishing has been clearly demonstrated to have the least bycatch and habitat consequence of any method of fish harvest. Not only is it the least wasteful, it is also the least efficient, and requires the highest degree of investment and training. Commercial catch records prove that spearfishing has nowhere near the capacity to catch fish as other methods. If fishing regulations were really based on scientific evidence, then spearfishing would be the last of all methods to be prohibited.



I understand that the basis for this was that "powerhead shells" were found at the reef. I personally have experience with powerheads, and I am not afraid to admit it. Not only is it legal in some areas, but it is the absolutely most humane method of fish harvest, rarely if ever touches the habitat, and has the least of any method of bycatch. While other methods are legal, this one was prohibited, and clearly not in the interest of science or the resource.......



But that is not my point. My point is that the fact that shells were found there hardly demonstrates that powerheads were being used. I would like to see those shells. I have experts that can tell how they were discharged. The chances of several shells being in the same local area is far greater from someone target shooting on the surface, which is much more common than powerhead usage.



Lets pretend that someone did break the law.......but it was a fisherman. Would they ban hook and line fishing? This has not happened once, and the reason is that I personally have never heard of a case where the person who represented the fishermen sold them out.



Where fishing is permitted, the most environmentally sound method, spearfishing, must be permitted. I'm not sure how you were appointed to your role, but you let millions of divers down and didn't support fairness.



If this is how fishing regulations are made, sooner or later every fisherman is in trouble, and the FSDA will not let that happen.



I hope that clarifies my last sentence.



Sincerely,



John Schmidt

President, Florida Skin Divers Association

727-403-6281

[eyyeball]

Hoorah! Let her have it John!

I think the appropriate thing to do at this point is to EDUCATE everyone who spears in the southeast that her business is NOT friendly to us and is not to be patronized.

[deepstops]

What's the name of her business??

This lady sounds like someone on a power trip that needs to be cut short.

[sharkbait]

John:
Another sleepless night? Your post at 1:24 am indicates you're not getting enough, keep in good health and thanks for all your work on this and the FSDA...
Regards,
Brian McGarry

[Charlestondivin]

The thing that really bugs me is that we had no representation from the start.

[Screen Name]

The thing that really bugs me is that we had no representation from the start.

That is the way the whole process is structured. It is a Government agency. The top person (Becky Shortland) picks her council. Guess what? She picked one that sees it her way. Government agencies make and enforce their own laws. Guess what? People that have never been spearfishermen take what we thought were our rights away.

I believe the law passed by Congress just says that the agency must protect and preserve the sanctuary. Guess what? It does not say it has to be fair. Now, fishing is allowed, and I believe some forms of commercial fishing are allowed, including tropical collection, but...........

Guess what? Spearfishing is not allowed in any Marine Sanctuary that I know of.

I am thinking we need some celebrities, like Tiger Woods or Ted Nugent to take up our cause and maybe provoke some legislation that says that fishing regulations must be made based on science, and be generally fair, not excluding any user group arbitrarily.

We have to do something, or we will be over with in ten years.

I think every speargun manufacturer should start attaching a brochure to their guns that explain the virtues of spearfishing.

[FredT]

Just a thought. In the closing hours of his Administration Slick Willie signed a bill prohibiting the use of "junk science" for regulatory purposes. I don't have the #s handy but remember the NRA mentioning it at the time as a possible hope for rolling back some of the insane regs the shooting sports have to deal with.

If that can be applied in this case, and it sounds like it could, perhaps the folks onthe "comission" can have thier feet held to the fire a bit. I'd vote to cook them at least to the knees. It's time for the lawyer types here to check that bit out.

FT

[Steel Shootin']

Government agencies make and enforce their own laws. Guess what? People that have never been spearfishermen take what we thought were our rights away. Government agencies are not quite that powerful, although at times it certainly seems they are. A governmental agency derives its power from an enabling statute. They then pass rules within the confines of the power that they have been given from the statute. Lawsuits arise when an agency either a) does not execute the mandate of the statute, or b) exceeds its power, or enacts rules outside the scope of its power. In many ways, an agency is more dangerous than a legislative body because they are appointed positions and not under the same political pressures. They also fly off the radar screen a lot easier, as the adminstrative code does not receive the checks and balances that passing legislation does.

[Screen Name]

Government agencies are not quite that powerful, although at times it certainly seems they are. A governmental agency derives its power from an enabling statute. They then pass rules within the confines of the power that they have been given from the statute. Lawsuits arise when an agency either a) does not execute the mandate of the statute, or b) exceeds its power, or enacts rules outside the scope of its power. In many ways, an agency is more dangerous than a legislative body because they are appointed positions and not under the same political pressures. They also fly off the radar screen a lot easier, as the adminstrative code does not receive the checks and balances that passing legislation does.

Scott, you are saying what I was trying to say.

By the way.........if you have a dispute with an agency, who handles the legal process? It couldn't be the agency..........could it? :)

If we were talking about stamping dies I could whoop ya any day though! :D

So.........how will we aproach this problem that has locked us out of the sanctuaries? How would the hunters do it if they were denied the use of national forest land, but the trappers still could harvest there?

[Steel Shootin']

Good questions, Screen, and I don't claim to be an expert in agency law. This is really testing my memory, but I know that there are two principals frequently at issue when talking about suing a governmental agency: standing and jurisdiction.

Standing is a legal concept of who has the right to sue. For example, if my 40 year old cousin buys a lemon off the car lot, I can not file a suit against the car lot for his damages. I don't have standing, because it's not my car. In the context of agency law, it comes into play because an agency can defend that they are being sued by someone who has no interest in their rules.

Jurisdiction just means where do you file the suit. What remedies are available? Is it something filed in state court, federal court, or arbitrated, etc.?? Webers actually knows more about agency law than me, and he can likely tell you with regard to the Gray's Reef issue where a suit can be filed, and on what basis.

If I were looking at this, and I wish I had the time to, I would start by reading the statute, and then the admin code. I would then read some case law, the rules enacted by the agency, etc. Once I had my bearings, I would form an opinion if the closing of Gray's Reef to spearfishermen is actionable (i.e., can we sue), and what remedies we could potentially seek to obtain from a lawsuit. That is a question I would defer to webers on at this time.

[mcjaret]

Better watch your timing, too, since most administrative actions have a limited time to bring a challenge.

While standing and jurisdiction are important, one must also be sure to have completed all administrative procedures prior to bringing suit. If you had an administrative remedy and did not try it prior to bringing suit, you may well have waived future rights.

For Florida cases, you need to look closely at Chapter 120 of Florida Statutes. That deals with administrative proceudre and challenges to agency action. In the late 90's, the legislature restricted agency action severely. They also limited those who can challenge to those who can show an actual impact from the action itself. They got tired of having challenges from large activist organizations with no connection to the actual action in question.

Agencies only judge their own actions to a point. Then administrative law judges who have no link to the agency have to hear the case and decide whether the agency had the authority to make the decision and whether they got it right. Unfortunately, the real problem isn't so much being willing to challenge; its whether you can afford to stand up to the agency. Litigationis EXPENSIVEMany agencies, right, wrong, or indifferent, are willing to use the money and power of government behind them to shut down the little guys just because the people can't afford to hang. That gives those who feel they have religious calling to "protect the resource" an unfair advantage because they are willing to push the envelope beyond the limits of the law since 99% of people won't or can't stand up to them.

If someone wants to discuss the details of this case for a real challenge, let me know.

[mcjaret]

Sorry, I hit the send button accidentally and screwed up my punctuation. Whiskey does that sometimes, yeah, it does!

[Steel Shootin']

Yes, it can definitely be different in terms of procedure and limitations, which is why it can be so time consuming for someone who does not do a lot of administrative law, and that you have to carefully read the law, and also why I would defer to webers.

What kind of whiskey? Scotch, Irish, Canadian, American?

[Screen Name]

I stole this from one of Rob's posts several months ago. It appears to be the draft plan. It is the ugliest, most error laden piece of official record I have ever seen.

117
Recreational and Commercial Spearfishing in GRNMS Spearfishing was considered for regulation during the original 1981 GRNMS designation. No regulations, however, were adopted at that time, except the prohibition of powerheads (explosives) for spearfishing. While the number of recreational divers spearfishing at GRNMS appears to be small, spearfishing targets the largest
individual fish among the reef-dependent snapper-group complex. These large fish are invaluable to the reproductive health of these species. As noted above, some of these populations are overfished or approaching Draft 11/03 118
Alternatives Analysis overfished status. Some researchers have commented on the lack of large snapper-grouper individuals at
GRNMS (Bohnsack pers. comm.). Research in the Florida Keys compared natural reefs that had been protected from spearfishing with a reef that was heavily spearfished (Bohnsack, 1982) and found significantly reduced populations of larger predatory fishes at the speared reef. As noted above, these larger predators are favored targets of spearfishermen. Reduction in the larger predatory fishes can have a “top-down” effect on biodiversity by allowing other lessvaluable but prolific fish populations to increase, altering the composition of the overall natural communities including invertebrates. Although the use of powerheads is prohibited at GRNMS, powerhead cartridges found on site indicates that this gear is still in use. Law enforcement officials have expressed concerns that some commercial spearfishing operations may be harvesting large numbers of undersized fish from the region. Alternative Actions Considered The following are the alternatives that have been considered in order to address resource concerns from fishing activities at GRNMS. The alternative actions were developed through public comment, issue-specific workshops, and discussions with the GRNMS Advisory Council, SAFMC, NOAA Fisheries Southeast Region, and GADNR. a. Revise Sanctuary regulations to allow fishing only with rod and reel and handline gear – (Preferred Alternative) The new regulations would restrict fishing at GRNMS to use of rod and reel and handline gear by prohibiting the injuring, catching, harvesting, or collecting of any marine organism or part thereof in the Sanctuary except by these gear types. All other forms of fishing gear would be prohibited, and if on board a vessel, would have to be stowed when the vessel is in the Sanctuary. The new proposed regulations would simplify the public’s understanding of allowable activities in GRNMS, while maintaining SAFMC/NOAA Fisheries’ restrictions
(e.g. bag limits, size limits, closed seasons, etc.). Before the proposed regulations are enacted, a public awareness campaign would be initiated to educate the public and users about the new rules. The Sanctuary would also enhance reef fish assessment, monitoring, and enforcement activities.
Activities
New regulations would be promulgated to allow fishing only with rod and reel and handline gear (as described above). All other fishing gear would be prohibited by these rules. The following draft regulatory language would be added to the GRNMS regulations (15 CFR Part 922, Subpart I): (5)
(i) Injuring, catching, harvesting, or collecting, or attempting to injure, catch, harvest, or collect,
any marine organism, or any part thereof, living or dead, within the Sanctuary by any means except by use of rod and reel and handline gear.
(ii) There shall be a rebuttable presumption that any marine organism or part thereof found in the possession of a person within the Sanctuary has been collected or removed from the Sanctuary.
(6) Except for fishing gear stowed and not available for use, possessing or using within the Sanctuary any fishing gear or means except rod and reel and handline gear.
Draft 11/03 119
Alternatives Analysis
In addition to those definitions found at §922.3, the following definitions apply to this subpart:
Handline means a single line with no more than three attached hook(s) that is tended directly by hand. Rod and reel means a rod and reel unit that is not attached to a vessel, or, if attached, is readily removable, and from which a single line having no more than three hooks attached is deployed. The line is payed out
from and retrieved on the reel manually, electrically, or hydraulically. Not more than eight hooks per line may be used to capture bait fish and the hooks must not exceed #8 size category of the “sabiki” style bait hooks.
Stowed and not available for immediate use means not readily accessible for immediate use, e.g., by being securely covered and lashed to a deck or bulkhead, tied down, unbaited, unloaded, partially disassembled (such as spear shafts being kept separate from spear guns), or stowed for transit. This language would replace the existing prohibitions that currently regulate fishing in GRNMS (15 CFR 922.91(4), (5), and (6)(C)):
• Using, placing, or possessing wire fish traps.
• Using a bottom trawl, specimen dredge, or similar vessel-towed bottom sampling device. GRNMS would also develop a comprehensive education and outreach program alerting users and the general public about the new rule. Enforcement activities likewise would be a priority for the site, as well as consistent
monitoring of the habitat, and diversity/populations of fishes, particularly reef fishes. Biological and Socioeconomic Impacts and Analysis
Biological Impacts
Currently, there is a variety of fishing gear that could damage habitat and negatively affect biodiversity in the Sanctuary. The types of gear include various nets, sea bass pots, and spearfishing gear. Some of these gear types currently allowed in the GRNMS are discussed in more detail as follows:
• Spearfishing: The impacts of spearfishing on tropical reef communities are demonstrated in the studies initiated on Looe Key in the Florida Keys (Clark et al., 1989). When Looe Key was first protected as a national marine sanctuary in 1981, spearfishing was cited as having a major impact on fish populations and was banned. Monitoring of fish over two years after the ban indicated that fish species that had been the target of spearfishermen had dramatically increased in abundance. Some species that had not been observed previously were now present. In other locations, such as Ft. Pierce, Florida, spearfishing has been a source of user conflict between
hook and line fishermen, spearfishermen, and non-extractive divers. Analysis of the issues at Ft. Pierce cited three main concerns: 1) safety for non-consumptive divers when spearfishing activities take place in the same vicinity; 2) fishes being frightened out of areas heavily spearfished; and 3) significantly reduced populations of larger predatory fish in speared areas (SAFMC, 2000). Another concern is the selective removal of large individual fish that are important to the reproductive health and fecundity of the species. A common example often cited is the fecundity of red snapper. It has been noted that one large red snapper female (approximately 8-10 years old) produces the same number of eggs as 212 small (approximately 3-4 year old) females (SAFMC, 1990).
Draft 11/03
Alternatives Analysis
In the original GRNMS designation document, spearfishing was identified as an activity that may be regulated to “ensure the protection and preservation of the Sanctuary’s marine features and the ecological, recreational, and aesthetic value of the area” (U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, GRNMS 1983). Although spearfishing was listed because of the potential for damage to marine resources, only the prohibition on powerheads explosives) was promulgated at that time. While surveys (Ehler and Leeworthy 2002) indicate that commercial dive operators are unlikely to participate in spearfishing at GRNMS, some private recreational boaters spearfish in GRNMS. Increasing use by recreational visitors at this time and the potential impacts of such use as seen in other locations, however, along with the lack of individual large fish observed by researchers, have prompted the GRNMS to propose prohibiting any spearfishing activity in order to help protect sanctuary resources.

This is bad news folks, and definetly full of misinformation. Powerheads affect the reef? :rolleyes: You dont shoot the reef with a freaking powerhead! You shoot the freaking fish! How far does the bullet travel......five feet? But its a law and a precedent. And Jerry Ault's predecessor determined that spearfishing scared the fish away and got all the big fish? Well...........not really.........they "Target" the big fish........"damage to marine resources... :rolleyes: These precedents, set unopposed maybe 30 years ago, are the basis for this ridiculous action. We can't stand by and let them keep using this junk.

[RichT]

The amount of junk science and outright falsehoods in that are incredible! :mad:
It just stuns me to read something like that and think that people will believe it! :eek: :mad:

[Screen Name]

I'm not saying that I want to go spear fish at Looe Key or other highly visited areas, anymore than you should be hunting in Downtown Key West, but these precedents are being used to eliminate us in areas where spearfishing is certainly as apropriate as any other kind of fishing.

How can we reverse this crazy stuff?

[Denny]

Gray's Reef brings to light a very important part of the fisheries management process. Accountability.
In reading the Sanctuary Advisory Panel's comments about the spearfishing gear ban at Gray's, one would wonder how such a ban could still be considered by the Sanctuary manager, one Mr. Reed Bohne. I'm guessing that Bohne (pronounced 'bony') is the one who will ultimately be responsible for any litigation brought against the sanctuary due to this action.
The government does not really like to be sued. And they hate to lose. When an agency gets sued, said agency heads look to the source and validity of the suit. Ready for the spotlight, Reed? Admiral Lautenbacher won't like this one.

Even the Sanctuary's Advisors warned of possible litigation. The Georgia CCA is against this. And we are all on record before December 31, 2003. http://www.graysreef.nos.noaa.gov/sac/min012804.html

Filing a lawsuit can be expensive, and defending a lawsuit can be embarrassing.

It seems as though the Gray's Reef sanctuary management group think of GR as an aquarium without glass. They let special friends in to partake of the resource, and otherwise get paid to keep Gray's "special" in the public eye.

[biggsy]

Time for some peer pressure ;)

[Denny]

Stay tuned.
A list of email addresses for Reed's bosses, all the way up to Admiral Lautenbacher, will be showing up here any time now.
Ignoring public input and Sanctuary Advisory Panel members is UNACCEPTABLE, and will not be tolerated.

Some old Charlie Daniels tune keeps running through my brain-

The Devil went down to Georgia, he was looking for some rights to steal.
He was in a bind and he was way behind so he thought himself up this deal.
When he came across some shooters sharpening steel for a better shot
The devil jumped up on his sanctuary stump and said 'Folks lemme tell ya what'
I bet you didn't know it, but I'm a scuba diver too. And if you care to take a dare, I'll backstab your user group.
You shooters are usin' them bullets, boy, we found a TON of your shells.
Gonna make up some tales, send out some pics; I bet I send your gear to hell.
The boy said "I'm a shooter" and it might be a sin, but I'll take your bet and I'll make you regret this battle you will not win.

[Screen Name]

If someone wants to discuss the details of this case for a real challenge, let me know.

Frank........Your comment here certainly did not go unnoticed. :D

[rmo8jlt69]

though I have never been out to Gray's Reef I do want to go there. I agree with everything everybody says about spearfishing, I am a marine science major studying icthyology and fisheries management, if you need real in-depth statistics about destruction of reef or overfishing of species out of coastal waters by commercial and recreational fishermen let me know. I will be more than happy to my brothers in supporting our wonderful ( enviromentaly friendly) sport of spearfishing. I would love to talk to the commitee myself.
Reed.Bohne@noaa.gov? I want to know when the next public meeting is?

[Screen Name]

rm08jlt69:

The agencies have all the control on these regulations and proposals. If they actually do ever use scientific data to support the regulations, guess what? The data comes from studies that the agency has commissioned with taxpayer dollars. And, guess what? The agency picks the issue to study, and who will study it.

It is an extremely biased system, paid for with our tax dollars. :mad:

Guess what? No agency has commissioned a study to demonstrate that spearfishing has all the environmental virtues that we know it does. Since they will never do that, we need to build our own case.

Any data that you can come up with will be helpful. Please send me a copy and I will see that it gets forwarded to Denny, Rich and others.

Thanks!

John

[rmo8jlt69]

Screen Name I will be more than happy to provide you and our fellow spearos with plenty of data that shows that commercial and recreational fisheries causes more damage to reef ecosystem than spearfishing does. I just need to look in some on-line libraries and scientific research documents to find all of these statistics, but will this evidence even help our cause? We all know that spearfishing is selective predation and produces no by-catch, and causes no damage towards reef invertibrates enless we lay on top of coral and shoot sea fans and sponges.
The thing I don't get is how they continue to let recreational fishermen fish there and let the collection of aquaria fishes take place but not let us spearfish, did anyone go to their meetings and speek on the behalf of all the spearfishing community? You have to give these simpleminded people some real evidence that they are doing the wrong thing. "Normal" people think we have guns underwater and shoot anything that swims and do not care about the impact it has on this fragile ecosystem. I can understand the common person who knows nothing about spearfishing can look down on our sport. We just have to make them understand.
You have to ask ourselfs; if we do convince these people that spearfishing is the humane thing to do; everyone will want to spearfish, therefore everyone will be taking up the sport of spearfishing. Do you really want the average joe purchasing a speargun and spearfishing in our hunting grounds, eliminating all our mature grouper and hogfish? HELL NO you dont. I am for our cause, but I am for keeping our love of spearfishing to a minimum amout of people.
Sorry I am an Empiricists in nature and only rely on scientific fact and experiences to have knowledge on a subject, not my beliefs. I do on the other hand have to be sceptic on our decision to push spearfishing regulations on Gray's Reef. I do want to spearfish there but I dont want every idiot and their brother spearfishing there too.
Sorry I rambled on for a while, I promise I will give the forum scientific evidence that spearfishing should be allowed on Gray's Reef for others to use against the EVIL Bohne Reed.

[RichT]

The thing I don't get is how they continue to let recreational fishermen fish there and let the collection of aquaria fishes take place but not let us spearfish, did anyone go to their meetings and speek on the behalf of all the spearfishing community? You have to give these simpleminded people some real evidence that they are doing the wrong thing. "Normal" people think we have guns underwater and shoot anything that swims and do not care about the impact it has on this fragile ecosystem. I can understand the common person who knows nothing about spearfishing can look down on our sport. We just have to make them understand.


rmo8jlt69,
I look forward to any more ammo you can provide against the mis-guided and ignorant assumptions being made by the keepers of Gray's reef.
Denny posted this in an earlier thread but perhap you may have missed it.

http://www.graysreef.nos.noaa.gov/sac/min012804.html

[rmo8jlt69]

Rich, I will have uncomming post containing secientific journals that have supportive evidence that shows spearfishing has no impact in reef destruction.

[Screen Name]

Rich, I will have uncomming post containing secientific journals that have supportive evidence that shows spearfishing has no impact in reef destruction.

Friendly reminder. :)

[WreckDiver]

http://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy.usf.edu/itw/infomark/873/591/89044104w3/purl=rc1_ITOF_0_A76523159&dyn=3!xrn_1_0_A76523159?sw_aep=tamp44898

[eyyeball]

I keep seeing this thread over and hearing our "threats" of lawsuits, well threats don't do crap cowboy. Let's quit with the threats and draw the legal six shooters here fellas, it's time to get this done. I spent alot of energy attending their BS public comment meetings and they just IGNORED US, I want my pound of flesh damnit.


Marcus A. Harold
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Spearfisherman

[Screen Name]

Not a whole lot as far as impacts but here is a link to a study in Florida comparing fishing methods.

http://infotrac.galegroup.com.proxy.usf.edu/itw/infomark/873/591/89044104w3/purl=rc1_ITOF_0_A76523159&dyn=3!xrn_1_0_A76523159?sw_aep=tamp44898

Can't get it to link for some reason but if you copy and paste it will take you there.

James, I cant access this link. Can you tell me the bottom line with it and whether or not it is useful in this situation?

Thanks- John

[Denny]

Check this link out. Want to know what fish are landed by what gear?
Click here: http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/recreational/queries/catch/snapshot.html

The FRA will be pursuing the Gray's Reef issue with some special help. The Gray's people will soon feel the pressure of making a wrong decision.
I am sure that they will be enlightened and see it our way.

[eyyeball]

I can't wait Denny, I'm pissed at the rotten back stabbing we got to say the least.

[Upwelling Clay]

On 01-30-2005, 10:22 PM,
FSDA president John Schmidt a.k.a. Bubblewrap the Spewer asserted:
>
>Spearfishing is not allowed in any Marine Sanctuary that I know of.

An excellent illustration of why national communication
is important in defending fishing access or rights for divers.

Spearfishing _is_ allowed in at least 3 of the 4
national marine sanctuaries (NMSes) in California:
* Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary (CINMS).
* Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuary (CBNMS).
* Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary (GFNMS).
* Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS).

The possible exception is CBNMS, a bank--i.e., a huge but
completely submerged pinnacle--that rises no shallower than
approximately 110 (116?) feet below the surface,
making spearfishing not really an issue there
(although the 'blue water' folks may disagree).

California has been diligent in insisting that
control of fishing in NMSes remain under the control of
the state's Department of Fish and Game
and its Fish and Game Commission.

However, the orthodox environmental organizations in the state,
with financial backing from like-minded affluent private foundations
(notably Pew of Sun Oil fame, and Packard of Hewlett-Packard)
were able to push the Marine Life Management Act (MLMA)
and Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) through the Legislature.
The MLPA required California to create a network--or networks--
of marine life reserves in the State's ocean waters.
Fishing, including recreational angling, is their primary target.
The way it's unfolding, the orthoenviros are using the MLPA
to create large area closed to fishing, and to facilitate enforcement
and "research", the no-fishing zones may be sited at important
diver & skiff-fishing accesses, instead of in hard-to-get-to places.

It's important to understand that unlike in Florida, physical
access to the ocean off central & northern California is scarce,
thanks to practical consequences of all that picturesque
rocky or downright mountainous coastal scenery there.
Peaks in California's Coast Range just a handful of miles inland
(e.g.: Ventana Double Cone in Monterey Co.) is taller than
the highest point (i.e.: Spruce Knob) of "The Mountain State":
West Virginia.

I've added Web-page anchors for states & sanctuaries
to allow visitors to go directly to my admittedly longish
discussion of California aspects of NMSes & MPAs:

<http://www.upwelling.org/sanct/index.html#US_CA>

My brief discussion of Gray's Reef NMS is on the same page:

<http://www.upwelling.org/sanct/index.html#US_GA>

[Screen Name]

Clay, thanks for the correction. There are some sanctuary areas on this coast that are open to spearfishing also. This includes a portion of the Florida Keys Sanctuary.

[Upwelling Clay]

On Friday, January 28, 2005 12:44 PM,
scubadive@thebest.net
("Sport Diving Representative" Judy Wright) replied
(with c.c. to the GRNMS Policy and Planning Coordinator):
>
> you should learn to treat others with respect
> and [to treat others] how you would like to be treated.

In an episode of apparent self-righteousness,
Wright failed to realize that she _herself_ failed to do
exactly what she lectured the FSDA president about.

Wright failed to treat diving spearfishers as one would think
she would want her customers and her business, which includes
angling charters and rentals of the widely unpopular
'personal watercraft' a.k.a. jet-skis, to be treated:
With objectivity and fairness.

After all, former GRNMS SAC "Living Marine Resources Research
Representative" (Dr.) George Sedberry, of the Marine Resources
Research Institute for the South Carolina Dept. of Natural Resources,
advised the SAC in December 2001 "that if the [GRNMS SAC]
goal is reducing fishing mortality, addressing spear fishing
and commercial fishing may not achieve the goal
since the majority of fishing mortality at Gray's Reef
is through recreational fishing", i.e.: sport angling
(note: quotation is from the official minutes, and thus
may not accurately record the actual words spoken by Sedberry).

Although the public should be able to expect that treatment of
anyone empowered to make or recommend public policy--as the SAC is--
an elected representative of an established diving organization
like FSDA should certainly be able to be expect that a diving activity
favored by his diving members would be treated objectively and
fairly--perhaps even defended on its merits?--by the GRNMS
"Sport Diving Representative". She is, after all, the SAC member
officially charged with "liaison to the" recreational-diving
"community regarding sanctuary issues and represent[ing]"
recreational-diving "community interests, concerns,
and management needs to the sanctuary and NOAA"
(quotations per <http://graysreef.noaa.gov/members.html>).

The "Sport Diving Representative" chair on the SAC should be treated
by its holder as an important opportunity--and responsibility--
to _serve_ & defend the often misunderstood diving community.
I am concerned about whether that accurately describes
Ms. Wright's attitude.

[Upwelling Clay]

Regarding National Marine Sanctuaries off Florida
and the remaining opportunities for spearfishing there,
I've created a new thread:

"Florida Keys Sanctuary Spearing"

Although the topic may be old hard-hat to long-time 'spearboard'
participants, I didn't see any thread under "Spearfishing Regulations"
that appeared to be relevant.

(If there is a different approach that the webmaster/moderator
prefers for branching/forking threads, please advise.)

[Slay Ride]

It's one thing to have a sanctuary near the coast where there could be a perceived saftey or pressure concerns, but 20-30 miles offshore in the middle of no where citing junk science involved????? That's just crap. I'm with eyeball. Their personal petting zoo has got to be stopped.

[Denny]

And it will be, Les. Just like it did not happen overnight, the solution will take time to be implemented.
We continue to chip away at the stone. The FRA has already exerted its influence to allow spearing of gulf Tuna And Sharks, AS WELL AS getting the Gulf Council to recommend that the Atlantic Councils do the same.

We should start to hammer Judy Wright again. I am hoping to make contact with some influential people at the national fisheries management meeting this week. The Gray's Advisory Panel told the Gray's staff not to disallow spearing in Gray's area. The staff, in ignoring its own Advisory Panel, has clearly violated Staff's manadate to manage the sanctuary.

Soon, you will be singing Warren Zevon's "Bring lawyers, guns and money" with a smile on your face.

[Slay Ride]

Let us know what we can do to help Denny. Give us a nail and we'll hammer. Whatever it takes. At the meetings it sounded as though it was a done deal before it hit the public. Just not right. Let me know what I can do.

Les

[eyyeball]

Ditto what Les said.

[Denny]

While in DC last week, I happened to meet the NMS attorney for Gray's Reef. We spearfishers involved in the Gray's issue were referred to as a "merry band". I guess that makes me Robin Hood.
The attorney was surprised to hear the facts. He was also surprised to hear that we were ready to sue if they went forward with their illegal actions.
We should be hearing something from Grays soon. ;)
Keep the faith, ye merry band. The wheels sometimes turn slow.

[Denny]

[Federal Register: January 13, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 9)]
[Notices]
[Page 2391-2392]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr13ja05-48]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration


Availability of Seats for the Gray's Reef National Marine
Sanctuary Advisory Council

AGENCY: National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP), National Ocean
Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Department of Commerce (DOC).

ACTION: Notice and request for applications.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary (GRNMS or Sanctuary)
is seeking applicants for the following newly-created and three vacant
seats on its Sanctuary Adivsory Council (Council): Charter/commercial
(for profit) Fishing (charter and commercial fishers), Sport Fishing
(recreational hook-and-line and spear fishers), Sport Diving (divers,
dive operators, dive clubs, and dive shops), and Regional Conservation.
Applicants are chosen based upon their particular expertise and
experience in relation to the seat for which they are applying;
community and professional affiliations; philosophy regarding the
protection and management of marine resources; and possibly the length
of residence in the area affected by the Sanctuary. Applicants who are
chosen as members should expect to serve 3-year terms, pursuant to the
Council's Charter.

[PatMyGreen]

So whose in?

[Screen Name]

Does anybody know these people? http://www.savannahscuba.net/home.html

[Charlestondivin]

Yes, that is Andrea, she is signed up here on spearboard as andrea31419 .

[TimTarver]

Hey guys. I have just begun my service on the Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council. I replaced Bing Phillips as the rep from the recreational fishing community. As I understand it I also represent the recreational spearfishing divers. The new rep of sport divers is Ralph Neely from Savannah. I will do my best to represent all of my constituents. I would like to enlist all of you as concerned users of the Sanctuary. The more numbers we can show, the more political clout we can show. There is talk of closing Gray's for research. I'm sure you all would like to be heard on this matter. Let's give it all we have!

[PatMyGreen]

Welcome to the board, and I wish you well on the council. I'm sure you will hear from Denny (our point man and Founder of the FRA) soon if you two haven't already met and talked at length.

[Charlestondivin]

Tim, Good to have you here!

Hey guys. I have just begun my service on the Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council. I replaced Bing Phillips as the rep from the recreational fishing community. As I understand it I also represent the recreational spearfishing divers. The new rep of sport divers is Ralph Neely from Savannah. I will do my best to represent all of my constituents. I would like to enlist all of you as concerned users of the Sanctuary. The more numbers we can show, the more political clout we can show. There is talk of closing Gray's for research. I'm sure you all would like to be heard on this matter. Let's give it all we have!

[biggsy]

Tim, welcome to the board! We appreciate your service and look to what the future will bring. Please keep us posted on any developments.

[Denny]

Welcome aboard, Tim. Nice to see you here.
Looks like Bing's fear of a Gray's reef private aquarium is well founded.
I wonder what makes Gray's so unique as to qualify it for a research area?
I'm sending you a PM with all of my contact information. Please feel free to contact me at any time.

[Slay Ride]

Good to have you Tim. Thank you for looking out for the spearfishermen out there. We appreciate your efforts. Please keep us in the loop and let us know what we can do to help. I've been to meetings and met a bunch of these people. Nice people, but I do not beleive they know the precedents that could be set by their actions of wanting a personal research aquarium. Thanks again.

Les Orr
Mt Pleasant, SC

[Screen Name]

Hey guys. I have just begun my service on the Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Council. I replaced Bing Phillips as the rep from the recreational fishing community. As I understand it I also represent the recreational spearfishing divers. The new rep of sport divers is Ralph Neely from Savannah. I will do my best to represent all of my constituents. I would like to enlist all of you as concerned users of the Sanctuary. The more numbers we can show, the more political clout we can show. There is talk of closing Gray's for research. I'm sure you all would like to be heard on this matter. Let's give it all we have!

That is great news Tim! As lond as divers are getting a fair shake, you can count on us all the way! :)

[Quetzal]

Tim Tarver, Thanks.
I'm trying to get a group up now to go to Grays Reef. And I don't get in the water unless I have a spear.

[Quetzal]

Lets show interest in spearing it and have a say in not having it shut down.
Buddy Networking -- Let's Go Hunting! Anywhere else!
http://www.spearboard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17614

_____http://www.graysreef.nos.noaa.gov/_______________

ALLEN
NEVERRR EVERRRRRR GIVE UP!!!

CAHENDRICK@YAHOO.COM

[Denny]

Join the FRA, Q! Tackle choice is one of the FRA's major issues.
Grays Reef is one of the areas that required the FRA's attention. We feel that the Gray's Reef management group has been enlightened regarding spearfishing gear. And enlightened to the resolve of the FRA to file a lawsuit to right a wrong.

[Quetzal]

Join the FRA, Q! Tackle choice is one of the FRA's major issues.
Grays Reef is one of the areas that required the FRA's attention. We feel that the Gray's Reef management group has been enlightened regarding spearfishing gear. And enlightened to the resolve of the FRA to file a lawsuit to right a wrong.
DONE!
JUST SENT THE CHECK!

[Denny]

Welcome, brother.