Larry B – You are absolutely right about misinformation/disinformation becoming the truth if spouted often enough. Again, There was not a single person on the Rockfish advisory group or any organization represented that wants to exclude sportfishermen or stop recreational fishing. Bear and Rob insist on making the statement and it is profoundly not true. I challenge both of these men to produce the documentation for this statement.

Smalma – Thank you for an open honest discussion and a respectful opinion. Many people assume high relief rocky habitat is all that needs protection to protect the rockfish. Unfortunately this is only part of the solution. Rockfish have four stages to the lifecycle. Each stage is in a different part of the Puget Sound ecosystem. Protection of the larval and juvenile stages is critical to restoration of Rockfish. Larval and juvenile stages use eelgrass beds, Kelp beds, and floating debris, as well as the open ocean waters. Consequently, it seems like a Marine reserve or rockfish conservation area is always much much larger than is ever really needed. Evolutionary biologists and geneticists now think that at least 5000 pairs, (males and females), are the minimum number of a species that are needed to keep a species going. This is not to suggest each Marine reserve needs 5000 rockfish. It does suggest that a network of marine reserves needs a minimum of 5000 fish. Each Marine reserve in a network must be large enough to support a population large enough to preserve the genetic diversity of the species and a complete age and size structure. More and more publications are coming out daily suggesting a 20% of the entire management area is appropriate for a network of marine reserves. Their borders provide a trophy fishery and the Marine reserve houses the ecosystem’s fish hatcheries.
You are absolutely right that recovery seems to have begun in some areas of Puget Sound. Cod, hake and some rock fish species are improving. I have talked to several divers who say they are seeing more and more larval rockfish and adult rockfish. I too have talked with a few fisheries biologist who say the Neah Bay stocks are more closely aligned with the oceanic stocks. Since there is less fishing for Rockfish outside 4B, there is probably considerable spillover into Neah Bay from the ocean stocks. I cannot agree with your final conclusion more. This whole discussion should be tabled until there is a scientific advisory group assembled for a marine reserve network.

Jaydee – The misinformation is all in my original posting.

Somethingsmellsf – I am not an expert or a know-it-all on this subject or a spreader of the gospel. Just an interested fisherman who coincidently has degrees in Zoology, Ecology, Evolutionary Biology and Entomology. I spent ten years in the Dept of Entomology, Fisheries and Wildlife and became interested in conservation issues and environmental issues while there. After retiring to WA, I became interested in the subject after a presentation to PSA about Aquatic Reserves. I thought the guys presenting the Aquatic Reserve info missed the chance to give a talk about restoration of ecosystems in Puget Sound. I started reading about marine reserves and aquatic reserves.
Frankly when I retired to Sequim, I expected a fishing paradise out here. Instead, I find two things which totally appalled me. Instead of a fishing paradise, I find the longest list of endangered species of any state in the US, and according to the American Fisheries Society, the most depressed fisheries in North America. Talk about historical mismanagement by WDFW! It clearly took many years of mismanagement and abuse by overfishing to get to this point. I really believe, WDFW is trying to restore our fisheries but they have inherited a really nasty mess. This message is also complicated by the tribes.

Slowleak – Thank you Bear for a little support. I am not trying to convince anyone of something I am not. I am a recreational fisherman and hunter. I am also a conservationist and a real pain-in-the-butt environmental activist. Environmentalists attack problems in the environment that need solutions. Our fisheries problems need solutions. WDFW has allowed observers to the PSRCP to make comments and contributions. As an observer, I submitted spoken testimony and written testimony, and I know for a fact it is part of the final package that will go to the Washington Fish and Game commission. Just so you know, Doug Myers did not tell me he was going to ask the advisory group for my presentation before that meeting. Maybe you recall, Doug had to leave early from that meeting and came directly to me and said “You you realize I was speaking about your presentation?”. I did catch on to what was happening, but I had no foreknowledge that it was about to happen. I am an active member Puget Sound Anglers and an active member in Coastal Conservation Association. Bear, I apologize for appearing to be militant. Simply put, I seem to have an ability to put together a really good talk on a specific issue, whether it is daylilies or marine reserves or any of a number of other topics. You are absolutely right that marine reserves are one tool in the toolbox necessary for effective fisheries management. Reserves are also necessary for defective restoration and ecosystem-based management. Reserves are based on the fact that we cannot protect vulnerable species without protecting some of their habitat. Fisheries biologist think 20% is about the right amount of habitat protection.