Lobster Fishery Management Plan Meeting tonight

[BigJoe]

We all have a vested interest in the future of the lobster fishery and this process is to create a management plan that makes sure that fishery is viable for years to come. The stock assessment at this time shows that the population is just fine, that is why this management plan is very timely in we are not in the mode of having to make serious immediate changes to curtail or restrict the fishery. These meetings are to let the public know what the FMP process is, what the FMP tries to do, and the first opportunity for the public to voice opinions/comments/questions about the future management of the fishery.

People who are out there harvesting lobster that have either seen changes, have concerns/questions, or even think everything is fine but want to find out why this is happening are people I expect to see at tonight's meeting.


I know this is a dive board but

I will be manning a station showing people what recreational hoop netting gear looks like and how I use it to harvest lobsters and I hope to see many of you there.

Carlsbad: Thursday, April 19, 2012
Open house begins at 6 p.m.
Public meeting will be held from6:30-9 p.m.
Grand Pacific Palisades Hotel
Grand Ballroom
5805 Armada Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
www.grandpacificpalisades.com/map-directions

[Myrran]

Down with Hoop Net's!! Boooo! Lol

[campbellc0321]

Boring. What I got out of it is the lobster fishery is in good shape, but that doesn't matter... The FMP has to happen per act. of 1998. So stand-by for changes in 2015. Some comments about slot limits.

[BigJoe]

Sorry for being so late here is my report on the meeting.

Approximately 40 - 50 people attended the meeting in Carlsbad with the largest group of people being commercial fishermen. There were also some divers, hoop netters and environmental representatives. They did not do a show of hands so each group could be identified. Some of the larger fishing clubs (Oceanside Anglers Club, San Diego Anglers, and San Diego Rod and Reel Club) had people there and some dive clubs (San Diego Fathomers, and one other I forget the name), and some people that identified some affiliation with environmental groups (San Diego Coastkeeper and Surfrider).

The purpose of the meeting was to inform the public that the FMP process is starting and that it was made possible by a grant from the OPC (Ocean Protection Council). They outlined the timeline of the process to be approximately 3 years and a Committee of 12 people and 5 alternates to represent different interests. The committee makeup is as follows:
Two marine science members and one alternate (biological and environmental);
Three recreational members and one alternate (hoop net anglers and divers);
Three commercial members and one alternate (harvesters and buyers);
Two non-consumptive recreational members and one alternate (cultural and wildlife);
One environmental organization representative member and one alternate (NGO); and
One Federal agency member.

They outlined that the FMP was a plan that outlined what future management of the resource should look like/be. The purpose of the meeting was to find out what issues/concerns people have with current management and get ideas about what needed to be changed/addressed for a viable sustainable fishery resource in the future. They gave examples of stuff they heard at Oxnard line Slot limits and commercial permit/effort reduction. They gave details on what the FMP was required by law to contain by chapter (too detailed for he to recite).

Then they asked the public to comment on what they thought should be addressed in an FMP for future management and what concerns people had over current management and what the process should look like. They asked people to raise their hand to speak and passed a mike around and addressed/answered what people said after each speaker. Some of the comments/(answers) were:
A scientist telling them they had data about lobster recruitment that they would make sure was available for the study (response: Thank you)

Concerns this process would be like the MLPA process with closed door meetings and already a perceived predetermined outcome/agenda (response: no closed door meetings, all meetings open to public, no BRTF, DFG is working as partners with the public through the advisory committee members)

Concerns during MPLA about feeling like your voice was listened to/acted on not just heard, concern about another acronym OPC giving money to fund where is the money from? (response: we want not only to hear you we want you to know we value your input and if you do not feel like talking there is time after people have said what they wanted feel free to talk to us individually, OPC money is public bond money voted on by voters for Prop 84, Clean Water Bill there are no private monies being used for this process)

Concerns about management of compaction due to MPA closures, very poor data available on recreational catch (only 14.5% of cards returned), possibility of using volunteers to gather data on population. (response: working on return of cards, MPA areas will have to be considered in management plan)

More concerns about how MLPA process just wore people down and doubts about why this process was needed so soon after when the population is healthy. (response: they were mandated by the MLMA to create FMP's for all species and funding recently became available)

Concerns about who picks the advisory committee and the makeup not enough commercial positions too few environmental positions and too little time to find good representation (response: timeline due to trying to work on this while lobster season is closed, if needed membership might be changed slightly but they are trying to stay lean and mean, DFG has final say on committee members)

We need to have an upper limit for lobsters commonly called a slot limit. (response thank you for that suggestion)

We need tighter restrictions for everyone because there are just too many people in the world. (response: thank you for your comment)

Why lobster that appears to already be sustainable and not another species that is in more need of immediate management changes? (response: department has had several meetings ranking the species and lobster rank in the top because its range is limited to southern CA, valuable fishery to commercial and recreational, closed season allowing more participation, very recent stock assessment)

A lot of discussion about how members of committee are chosen back and forth asking for ideas fear they would not be represented if department was picking, wanted to take vote of people in room to decide. (response: asked for suggestions explained applicants would be screened for citations and poachers need not apply, if 6 people applied and only 3 positions available get the people together and let them pick the 3 of them best suited to represent them)

How did people find out about the meeting? (response hold hand up for methods flyers handed out at docks/ramps: 0, internet message boards : 1-2, word of mouth; 3-4, clubs organizations: 7-8.

There was more discussion over how people are picked and why the rush to get this started. (response: if you have ideas on picking people come talk to us after the comments we want to hear your ideas, lobster season is now closed we are trying to kick this off before the season opens which is a short timeframe)

There may have been more but I did not take notes they said they would post something on the website: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/lobsterfmp/

They had four stations you could visit before/after the meeting and information at each one:
Recreational: sports fishing regulations, lobster pamphlets, I brought two hoop nets one flat and a conical and answered questions about them when people came by. Another person from the DFG helped me answer questions.

FMP process: had information about the timeline and applications to be on the committee two people answering questions.

Enforcement: 3 wardens were there with regulations and pamphlets.

Commercial: Code book with commercial regs (look at only) and a couple new commercial traps 2 fishermen to answered questions.

They had big tablets for people to write comments on but nobody did.


The department working with the committee to provide review of documents and ideas for future management measures will create the FMP. The department will present the FMP and any possible requested regulation changes needed to implement to the Commission early 2015. The Commission does have the right to suggest back to the department that changes be made to address issues they see with the FMP or to make changes during the adoption process as with any other regulation. The regulatory process is expected to take 6 - 12 months then the FMP will be adopted by the Commission.

There you go I hope that helps, no it was not an enviro-fest, the department said it was an acceptable answer that things are OK with some future management guidelines should conditions change.

[rhyne]

Thanks for the report Big Joe.

[marksman]

Well done Joe!

[halibutmike]

Thanks Joe!... Appreciate the report.