MACNA reports

[clarionreef]

Targeting cute and charasmatic babies for conservation while permitting the take of reproductivly mature adults year round already suggests the save the leopard shark drama wasn't serious or scientific.
What kind of conservation ethic is that?
Its a bloomin sport fishery precisely on account of its abundance!

Do we hear ;
Save the tiger cubs...but shooting the adults is OK? no.
Save the whale calves....but harpooning the adults is OK? no.
Save the salmon fry....but never mind the dam or the adults? no.
Save the leopard shark cubs...but catching their moms is OK?

If conservation is belittled by promoting it so selectively for show, it loses credibility with people who really want to practice it.
If it smacks of politics, tokenism and insincerity then how does it lead us into a genuine practice?

Falling for pop conservation by the masses doesn't lead to needed effort. It may well stop with small, painless, piecemeal effort!
Steve
Of course the aquarium fishery in live leopard cubs should be liscenced, regulated, limited entry etc. and could be if money was coughed up by the our little industry.
The live fish fishery in rockfish, cabezon and lingcod is. But their entry was paved in cash...by a bigger industry and approved by all relevant agencies of the government....not environmental reason.
Steve
OH well.
You know what they say;
"A bucket a day keeps the forest fire away...."
Disclaimer....no it doesn't. It just makes you feel you've done your "bit."

 

[Anonymous]

Targeting cute and charasmatic babies for conservation while permitting the take of reproductivly mature adults year round already suggests the save the leopard shark drama wasn't serious or scientific.
What kind of conservation ethic is that?
Its a bloomin sport fishery precisely on account of its abundance!

No one said it wasn't. You are making jumps and generalizations that just don't match up with the reality of the situation.

If conservation is belittled by promoting it so selectively for show, it loses credibility with people who really want to practice it.
If it smacks of politics, tokenism and insincerity then how does it lead us into a genuine practice?

Falling for pop conservation by the masses doesn't lead to needed effort. It may well stop with small, painless, piecemeal effort!

You are blowing this into something it isn't. Guys illegally harvesting shark pups for the trade got busted. Some of the fines levied as punishment went towards habitat restoration around the bay. The case is used to promote further efforts in the area and to spread education about the problem.

Since you seem to think the way things are currently being done is incorrect, perhaps you should get involved and make a real difference.

 

[Anonymous]

Targeting cute and charasmatic babies for conservation while permitting the take of reproductivly mature adults year round already suggests the save the leopard shark drama wasn't serious or scientific.
What kind of conservation ethic is that?
Its a bloomin sport fishery precisely on account of its abundance!

Do we hear ;
Save the tiger cubs...but shooting the adults is OK? no.
Save the whale calves....but harpooning the adults is OK? no.
Save the salmon fry....but never mind the dam or the adults? no.
Save the leopard shark cubs...but catching their moms is OK?

If conservation is belittled by promoting it so selectively for show, it loses credibility with people who really want to practice it.
If it smacks of politics, tokenism and insincerity then how does it lead us into a genuine practice?

Falling for pop conservation by the masses doesn't lead to needed effort. It may well stop with small, painless, piecemeal effort!
Steve
Of course the aquarium fishery in live leopard cubs should be liscenced, regulated, limited entry etc. and could be if money was coughed up by the our little industry.
The live fish fishery in rockfish, cabezon and lingcod is. But their entry was paved in cash...by a bigger industry and approved by all relevant agencies of the government....not environmental reason.
Steve
OH well.
You know what they say;
"A bucket a day keeps the forest fire away...."
Disclaimer....no it doesn't. It just makes you feel you've done your "bit."

NOAA is NOAA, CA FISh and Game is CA Fish and Game. NOAA can't tell CA F&G to stop all leopard shark taking unless there is a law in place for them to enforce (endangered animals, CA F&G law of no take of LS, etc), they can how ever enforce the law on the books of no taking of babies. Petition CA F&G to make the changes you seek. Wasn't it you that said a CA F&G agent asked you to help develope some MO rules on LS at the San Mateo fair grounds several years back? Just what can NOAA do when CA F&G says different? I'lls ave you the breath, nothing is the asnwer! NOAA along with several scientific bodies say they want zero shark fishing and have proof how what is does and is doing. They had a chance to make a SMALL dent in the poaching of said animals, like Thales said, what prey tell makes that a bad thing?

WIth your line of reasoning, net trainig programs could be coinsidered a joke, After all, it's not doing anything against the larger problems like pollution, etc. We should stop spending good money over bad, disband EASTI, get Dave V a new job and you can go back to selling Baja fish in two weeks (until the import of all MO puts you out of your job because the industry failled to live up to any standards the governement would like to see in place). Dude, you have to start some place!

 

[clarionreef]

Guys,
Keep on the subject and not my character flaws....my goodness.
The legal case is not a volunteer grassroots movement and the comparison to the net caught movement that spawned IMA and MAC is not right.
It was a very expensive bust that took 3 years for them to promulgate while allowing the slaughter to go on.
It took them 3 years to learn what many in the trade already knew was happening and it took on a life of its own way beyond any conservation cause.
You already know how simple it would've been to canvass retailers and websites to see leopard sharks offered freely for sale all over the East coast.
Both of you could've collected the critical evidence on a week long field trip and started puting links in the supply together right away saving the taxpayers a million or so!

I was maligned by my own Florida supplier at the time because he thought I was the one who squealed on him!. Turns out he was the initial link that "broke" the dcase and sent them back to California..
He asked me many times to supply him w/ leopard sharks because as a kid I caught hundreds [ catch and release] and know their pupping grounds very well. Its called the San Francisco Bay.
But he was already supplied anyway by the Mr Big who got off with the get out of jail freee card enabled by the cash donation to the cause of conservation.
I was pressured by others to catch for them as everyone had leopards back East and why not I ?...or so it went.
I refused to engage in this of course as it became illegal. Cal DFG found that to be simpler then managing it as a tropical fishery that thus far never had them any coin or lobbying effort.
The case has come and gone now as did the great Garibaldi bru-haha in Southern Calif. and the sensational clarion-gate scandal.
One of these days they're gonna have a case that matters with a species thats actually in trouble.
Then...I'll be happy to support it.
The great leopard shark raid...[shark...shark...did someone say shark !!]was a legal bust and not a movement for conservation....thats the gist of my original post and still is what happened.

Meanwhile...sharks are butchered and slaughtered every day for fun and unappetizing mercury laden meat.
If I thought of my self as a warrior for a save the common leopard shark movement, I would be much, more concerned with the routine killing of broodstock such as the big female below,

Steve

 

[Anonymous]

Steve,

No one said it was anything other than a legal bust. No one said it was a movement for conservation. You seem to be railing against something no one thinks.

 

[Anonymous]

I stand behind what I wrote Steve. It sure does compair. Both efforts mean very little when compaired to other thing the planet is up against. Both are token events on a minor scale, but, they are a place to start from. NOAA is NOAA, you know this. They can not tell CA state to stop allowing LS takes UNTIL the shark is either listed as endagerred, or a law in place to stop the take outright. The case was handled by NOAA as CA F & G dropped the ball.

Your right, it could have been done much cheaper. Doesn't really matter as we're not going to change 10K dollar toilet seats They spend what they spend. HOWEVER, they are now activelly seaking partners with in the trade to help them. They don't know our industry like us, just like you said. Can't fault them for that.

You have to start some place. They are activelly seeking to add leopards to the endangerred list. Once on that your pictures of lame people and their kill will cease to exist except in vaporspace.

 

[clarionreef]

Gresham
Did you just accuse them of misbehavior?
You said they are;

seeking to add leopards to the endangerred list

Wow...even though they are not endangered?

If they were actually endangered, by all means!.........But to seek it without proper cause?
That would make a mockery of the ESL.
Its not a popularity contest. Its a legal protection based on science is it not?
In a rank ordering of priority for protection...I'd have em somewhere near the bottom as they haven't nearly the case for protection that so many other fishes have in California.
Six gill cowsharks need protection...and sturgeons....cowcod, canaries and ling cod....halibut and bocaccio, salmon and opahs etc...

The leopard would benefit a good deal if the Calif. DFG rules for catching them were changed and a maximum size limit imposed. As it stands now, you can only kill mature ones, ie. 3 feet or more.
Sharks this size are 8-15 years old...environmentally expensive and far, far more vital to the species then fresh pups.
That could be the maximum size allowed to take instead of the minimum. Then the broodstock could survive to have their pups that everyone suddenly cared about after the case came to light.

Before it did...there was no popular cause or issue at all.
The aquarium trade pressure [ie. a smuggling ring of half a dozen knuckleheads] was the weakest pressure there was on leopard sharks...and the easiest to pick on.
Well...its is all gone now...
Steve

 

[Anonymous]

LS #'s have been declining for years in my area. mid 80's I used to see HUGE swarms of them yearly at a spot near my house. Since the late 90's we haven't really seen any, although a few dead ones washed up in recent years. And no, I'm not showing you the spot as there's halibut fising right by :lol: Not until I get a two bander and my boat!

IMO all sharks should be on the ESL list. Political move to save them, yes. Be able to have OTHER countries protect them as well by being on the ESL, yup and GREAT...have at it I say. No one needs to catch sharks. No one needs to eat them.

Yes, max size is something I subscribe to as well. You know this though :lol: I agree 100% no doubt about that. The hub cappers don't taste as good and they produce way more then your typical 9ner. Sure, monster ling is insane, but a 26" is just as evil at times :twisted: I fish for food, not trophies!!!