Sandy Hook Bay Shutdown to Fishing

[scooter1010]

http://www.navesinkmaritime.org/National-Marine-Sanctuary

Think it can't happen? Just let them go ahead with this plan and it will be the beginning of the end !!! It already happened in Florida !:mad:

[scooter1010]

Here's the proof
http://www.saltwatersportsman.com/biscayne-national-parks-plan-excludes-anglers-from-prime-fishing-habitat

[Arbutis]

Regarding Fishing and other recreational activities in SHB:

excerpt:
"NMS status will not directly affect any of those recreational activities. As such, there will be no new regulations beyond those that already exist, and activities that occurred before the NMS designation will continue to occur after the NMS designation."

http://www.navesinkmaritime.org/NMS-Recreational-Character

[scooter1010]

Go ahead and believe that. Your right the government NEVER changes it's mind or does 180's. Once you give the Fox the right to guard the Hen House all bets are off !

[bulletbob]

It can and most likely will happen.. The political far left has almost absolute power on much of both coasts these days, and these things will certainly be implemented if it continues as is... Think not?... Please take a look at California's
"no take" zones...https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Marine/MPAs/Network

[shrimpman steve]

I have to agree with scooter. Nothing good can come of this. In my opinion once set up, they will take more and more of our rights away.

[scooter1010]

I have to agree with scooter. Nothing good can come of this. In my opinion once set up, they will take more and more of our rights away.
Thanks Steve !
However, given that this post already has almost two hundred views and only five replies shows the absolute apathy and could never happen here attitude that fisherman are famous for.

It will be too little too late when everyone wakes up and the smoke clears.:eek:

[dakota560]

I'd love to know where the money comes from to fund initiatives like this....our tax dollars directly or indirectly. How about no trying to fix what's not broken and use those dollars to reduce the taxes we pay every day. Not sure where this is headed but again someone somewhere in politics will be looking to make a name for themselves and these waters regardless of what the public is being told today will be off limits to the general public for the good of our children off course. A gift to our children........where do these people come from!

[Chico]

I'd love to know where the money comes from to fund initiatives like this....our tax dollars directly or indirectly. How about no trying to fix what's not broken and use those dollars to reduce the taxes we pay every day. Not sure where this is headed but again someone somewhere in politics will be looking to make a name for themselves and these waters regardless of what the public is being told today will be off limits to the general public for the good of our children off course. A gift to our children........where do these people come from!

The "Pew Foundation" is behind a lot of these closures. Although it is officially an independent organization it was founded by family and money associated with Sun Oil. SUNOCO. Their power comes in their ability to divide us, as already stated in another post "the far left" is to blame. Divide and conquer by using the media to make some of us feel "smarter" than the others. Not wanting to get into a pissing match is why so many of us just read and move on. In Florida the "official hearings" by government officials where our "fish quotas, and limits" are decided have actually been funded by the Pew Foundation. They have reserved the room, paid for the meals, and transportation of the officials to attend!! Their goal is to stop ALL fishing and as much human activity in the Oceans as possible. They do not let any facts stand in their way. When they insisted the Gulf of Mexico red snapper were all juveniles with no adults capable of reproduction, we provided ear bones of recently caught snapper that were over 20 years old, when they said the younger fish were no where to be found, we provided evidence that the young fish were everywhere. They then said it was to their credit as they had kept the fishery shut down for so long and the shut down needs to continue.........and on and on and on. Red snapper are all over the gulf, and the extreme limits continue. Oh well, I've had my rant!!!

[Dupes]

Regarding Fishing and other recreational activities in SHB:

excerpt:
"NMS status will not directly affect any of those recreational activities. As such, there will be no new regulations beyond those that already exist, and activities that occurred before the NMS designation will continue to occur after the NMS designation."

http://www.navesinkmaritime.org/NMS-Recreational-Character

Dude, wake up.

[NoLimit]

So if they intend to maintain the same regulations, why the need to make another governing body?

And who are these people that they are oblivious to one of the biggest recreational activities on the river. The list of activities makes no mention of crabbing?!? It seems these people are landlubbers who want to restrict activities on a river they consider "theirs".

[shrimpman steve]

I just sent the following to the organization sponsering this joke, for what it's worth

I can't disagree with the establishment of a national marine sanctuary more! I fish the bay and the river and don't need the Feds to restrict my rights any more than they already do.

I and my fellow fishermen will do whatever legally possible to keep this from moving forward.

The river and bay belong to the public not special interest groups like yours.



Steven Hanstein

[scooter1010]

Way to go Steve.

Here is my email that I sent.

Rik van Hemmen,

There will be a tremendous fight on your hands with all of NJ’s fishermen. There is absolutely no place for a marine sanctuary in this state. The state and federal regulations are more than enough to deal with. We as fishermen have already seen first hand what happens when you let a fox guard the hen house. We will not allow NJ or any of it’s marine waters be designated like this. Biscayne Bay Florida was portrayed as a great idea that would preserve a valuable resource. Now there is a federal ban on all fishing activities.
http://www.saltwatersportsman.com/biscayne-national-parks-plan-excludes-anglers-from-prime-fishing-habitat


Prepare for the biggest legal fight of your life.


Scott Risko

[scooter1010]

Here are a list of places that hosted this special interest group.

December 9, 2015, Bahrs Restaurant, Highlands, NJ, hosted by NMHA

January 18, 2016, Monmouth Boat Club, Red Bank, NJ, hosted by Monmouth Boat Club.

February 23, 2016, 8 pm, Keyport Yacht Club, Keyport, NJ, hosted by SEAS

February 25, 2016, 4.30 pm, Shrewsbury Boro Hall, Two Rivers Council of Mayors (initial introduction)

March 2, 2016,7 pm, Fort Monmouth Recreation Center
2566 Guam Ln, Tinton Falls, NJ 07724 , hosted by Monmouth Conservation Foundation.

March 6, 2016, 1130 am, Ralph Hall, St. George's Episcopal Church, Rumson

March 7, 2016, 7 pm, Crawford House, Tinton Falls, hosted by Two Rivers Environmental Commission.

March 13, 2016, 2 pm, Keyport Yacht Club, Keyport NJ, hosted by Keyport Yacht Club.

March 16, 2016, 7 pm, Red Bank Library, Red Bank, NJ, hosted by Red Bank Library.

I can not believe some of these places allowed them to have meetings there. I will not be supporting any of these establishments anymore.

[joerosa1]

At this still early stage we are considering the following goals for the Sandy Hook Bay NMS:

1. Serve as a laboratory and thought leader for integrated man/nature interaction in a rich, complex, diverse, and culturally developed environmental setting


Sounds clear to me ...no threat here.....:rolleyes:

[Dino]

At this still early stage we are considering the following goals for the Sandy Hook Bay NMS:

1. Serve as a laboratory and thought leader for integrated man/nature interaction in a rich, complex, diverse, and culturally developed environmental setting


Sounds clear to me ...no threat here.....:rolleyes:

that's liberal-speak for, "we set up a big expensive government program staffed by a bunch of marine biology grads from Ohio who go on a boat twice a year, making them experts, and we pay for the whole thing with your tax dollars, then we tell you whats what about your own home waters".

[Reel Class]

Corruption, bureacracy, tree hugging bleeding heart liberals taking whose soul goal is to take more of our freedoms.... MAKES ME SICK

[bulletbob]

Corruption, bureacracy, tree hugging bleeding heart liberals taking whose soul goal is to take more of our freedoms.... MAKES ME SICK

agreed,,, Yet coastal states east and west continually elect leftist environazis into office despite the fact that much of those states leisure dollars are spent in and around coastal waters... NY and NJ both are guilty of this year after year... California coastal waters are inundated with no fishing/ no take areas, yet the radical environmentalists are elected every cycle.. I guess there are just more non fishing voters in all of these states...

[Bob T.]

Step 1 to fight back-Boycott Sunoco.
Step 2- Join RFA

[Capt. Debbie]

Allowed? How do you know they did not pay rent?

This tree huggers's blurb at the bottom is dedicated to the art of building wooden boats. Who do you picture doing that as his calling? Some crotchety 80 y-o geyser chasing people away.

LOL





Here are a list of places that hosted this special interest group.

December 9, 2015, Bahrs Restaurant, Highlands, NJ, hosted by NMHA

January 18, 2016, Monmouth Boat Club, Red Bank, NJ, hosted by Monmouth Boat Club.

February 23, 2016, 8 pm, Keyport Yacht Club, Keyport, NJ, hosted by SEAS

February 25, 2016, 4.30 pm, Shrewsbury Boro Hall, Two Rivers Council of Mayors (initial introduction)

March 2, 2016,7 pm, Fort Monmouth Recreation Center
2566 Guam Ln, Tinton Falls, NJ 07724 , hosted by Monmouth Conservation Foundation.

March 6, 2016, 1130 am, Ralph Hall, St. George's Episcopal Church, Rumson

March 7, 2016, 7 pm, Crawford House, Tinton Falls, hosted by Two Rivers Environmental Commission.

March 13, 2016, 2 pm, Keyport Yacht Club, Keyport NJ, hosted by Keyport Yacht Club.

March 16, 2016, 7 pm, Red Bank Library, Red Bank, NJ, hosted by Red Bank Library.

I can not believe some of these places allowed them to have meetings there. I will not be supporting any of these establishments anymore.

[scooter1010]

Captain Frank, one would hope they paid for meeting space but I'm guessing probably not. Either way it makes no difference. The fact that the above establishments allowed this group to use/rent their facilities should show that they are, at the very least, very uninformed of what happens when you sign up for the Trojan Horse. In my opinion establishments that are run by ill informed people are dangerous and should not be supported.

Where you come up with thinking I'm a tree hugger is beyond me. Maybe you can explain further? The only wood I admire swings between my legs.

[bunker dunker]

I am so sick and tired of this bs.these groups that found this kind of crap don't want us to use hooks to fish with as the fish may be hurt by them.i'll stick to fishing with Dex Russell and RUs Sharpener and take my chances.

[Arbutis]

You guys are all paranoid. Think of ALL the good that could come from this! :confused::D:confused:

[shrimpman steve]

Doug. I hope you are right. I just don't trust the government anymore. And that is a shame.

We are each entitled to our opinions and I never mean to be disrespectful of other opinions that don't match mine.

[CompTime Charters]

NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN. I won't even think twice about it. Lobby groups, etc along with charter/part boat captains and owners have way too much influence on what happens. The rfa will step in also. What kind of sanctuary has thousand of boats flying thru it on the way to and from the fishing ground. lmao. Too much money brought in by Dingell Johnson funds for fisherman who utilize that bay and patronize the tackle shops, gas stations, restaurants, etc.. They are just blowing smoke and have nothing better to do. FORGET ABOUT THE IDEA.

[scooter1010]

It always starts out this way. A group states that they are just looking into the possibility of doing something that will help a resource and be for the betterment of all concerned. People state oh they could never do this or it could never happen here. Trust me when I tell you that this is the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing. The fact that this group is highly funded and has already scheduled and has had public meetings/hearings on this should hit everyone over the head like a two by four. Am I being paranoid? Do I believe in conspiracy theory? Do I believe in ghosts? NO. I do however am a firm believer in history can always repeat itself. An that any form of a tertiary governing body has absolutely no place in this state. Laugh now and cry later.

[Flukemeister1]

Thanks Steve !
However, given that this post already has almost two hundred views and only five replies shows the absolute apathy and could never happen here attitude that fisherman are famous for.

It will be too little too late when everyone wakes up and the smoke clears.:eek:

OK so what is the answer? How do we stop implementation of NMS status?

[scooter1010]

My guess is that we should reach out to the RFA, The Fisherman Magazine, Al Ristori, maybe some of the party boat captains and find out what can be done. I have already written an email to the fisherman magazine, sent an email to the contact person that is heading this special interest group and sent a message to a PB captain. So far the only one that has also stepped up was Shrimpman Steve. Maybe someone can contact the RFA and someone else get Al Ristori involved.

[scooter1010]

I was in contact with the RFA and it seems as this will be a priority that they will address. Anyone friends with Al Ristori?

[dales529]

I was in contact with the RFA and it seems as this will be a priority that they will address. Anyone friends with Al Ristori?

Scooter I applaud your effort here to not only call attention to this but to follow up with it. As an RFA-NJ board member I reached out also and more to follow. To quote a board member I hold in high regard the goal of RFA is conservation and the goal of this could be preservation which are two distinct different goals. I will contact you soon with further information here and or via PM. The plus is Sandy Hook Bay is State regulated and it takes a Federal action to provide a NMS so there are options to take it on.

[dfish28]

Arrrrrrrgh!!! My knives are sharpened and I'm pissed... Feel free to come aboard!
http://www.lucylearns.com/images/pirate-clipart-pirate-graphics-pirate-gifs-free-pirate-clipart-Pirate-Flag-Calico-Jack.gif

[SaltLife1980]

:mad::mad::mad::mad:

[NoLimit]

I emailed Rik who is the contact person on the website and this might be a case of "Trust but Verify". He seems to be a dyed in the wool outdoorsman and has spent his whole life in the marine industry as an engineer.

Feel free to email him too. He got back right away and at first, it was pretty much what is on the website. "No, there wont be any new rules - yes we want to do research and public awareness - yes, we want to make fishing and clamming better". So it was all warm and fuzzy.

I then asked him what exactly did he have in terms of programs and this is what he came back with:
.....................................

The creation of an NMS will simply raise our awareness on things in the NMS, and provide a forum for adjustments, be they the recent closing of clamming in the Navesink, the difficult questions around the oceanic bridge replacement, the sudden removal of the oyster reef in the Navesink, bunker over fishing that affects the stripers, silting of the upstream waters that reduce striper breeding effectiveness, or the advantages of putting boats in lifts rather than painting boat bottoms with antifouling (although the latter is not a top concern in our rather well drained system)



I will readily admit that the NMS concept is complex and maybe even elusive at this stage, but we no longer have the luxury of making simple decisions in our crowded but very beautiful ecosystem. The days of settling, kicking out the Indians, cutting the trees and building a log cabin, and moving on once all the oysters are gone are over. We have what we have, and what we have is quite special, the trick is to manage it as one precious thing. The Sandy Hook NMS will let us look at the rivers and our portion of the bay as one thing, and hopefully this will provide clarity when difficult decisions have to be made. We are making difficult decisions today; the NMS will simply provide a clearer, more effective and more concise backdrop to make it against. We will be able to ask: How would the NMS feel about that?



Last night, during a presentation, we had a long discussion about the type of governance that this particular NMS should have and we are starting to get some ideas on that. The trick that everybody likes is to realize that those who live around the NMS probably know it better than others, and the governance system will weight towards that realization.



The most successful outcome will be an NMS where there is sustainable commerce, fishing and recreation (with the added benefit of more effective education and deeper cultural appreciation), and where, little by little, we can look back over a long time and say: You know what? Together, we made this thing better and more fun and we left it better for our kids to enjoy.



I own an 18 foot wooden Hankins diesel Sea Bright skiff (River Runner; wave to me when I go by your house in Highlands), a woodpussy sailboat, about five canoes and an iceboat. I also fish with friends on bigger boats, and provide engineering services to people around the river. I also like to bring in big boats on the river. If you search “Onrust” and “Navesink” you will see what I mean. I do not hunt and consider it a flaw in my upbringing, but I love it when I hear gunshots on cold winter days because it tells me all is well on the river. We are doing something that the first people who came here some 10,000 years ago were doing and we can still do it today. That is too cool for words. The NMS intent is that we continue to do that. But also that we do cast an eye on the NMS and say: Are we doing these things as well as we can? And if, over time, we can do better, let’s give it a shot.



Study the info that is on the website and in the pdf I sent. This thing is about “better for all”, within the reality that what we have is not unlimited. But if we are clever, we can all have more of it and have more fun doing it.



I will be presenting at the Red Bank Library on March 16. When I asked the library to present, the library director said: “But are you not mad at us? We put up a bulkhead and you suggested that we should have a soft shore line.” (this was about two years ago, and I did send a letter to the library when I heard about it)



I was never mad, I simply suggested that a soft shore line would be better for wild life and the library. At the time, I arrived at the discussion too late to make a difference, so a new hard bulkhead went up. If there had been an NMS, there is a chance that the town and library people would have been more aware of the benefits of a soft shore line and would have planned for one, and without me having to get involved. Regardless, I hope that if the library’s memory is sufficiently long (or if we have the educational benefit of an NMS), that in 50 or so years, when they need to replace the bulkhead again, they remember that soft shore lines are better and why.

.................................................. ......

So there it is and like I said, maybe this is a case of Trust but Verify. More knowledge is better than less and the fact that he is an engineer instead of some social science airhead might mean they want to deal with hard facts.

What does everyone think and will something like this help us - for instance can such an organization help us with the stupid laws that force us to take breeder fluke and let 17" males die of old age?

[scooter1010]

Scooter I applaud your effort here to not only call attention to this but to follow up with it. As an RFA-NJ board member I reached out also and more to follow. To quote a board member I hold in high regard the goal of RFA is conservation and the goal of this could be preservation which are two distinct different goals. I will contact you soon with further information here and or via PM. The plus is Sandy Hook Bay is State regulated and it takes a Federal action to provide a NMS so there are options to take it on.

dales529
Thank you very much.

Conservation/Preservation are still terms that are used by NMFS, NOAA, AMFC, Historical Societies that have historically proven that they put undue hardships on fishermen. Which ever one this special interest group falls under I still personally fear that once a moniker of NMS gets established the door opens to any and all restrictive measures that can be implemented at anytime. Even if they call it a river preservation society a designation once implemented can lead to unforeseen abuse. Once something gets established it is an extremely tough battle to recall it. It's a battle that I prefer to fight before establishment rather than after.

[scooter1010]

No Limit

I am really curious why you would post a reply from Rik? I applaud that you actually reached out and emailed him but less then thrilled to see you do his work. When he replied to me and asked me to post it up to this website and others I refused. I refused and told him that he should join these forums and others and post up what he wants. The fact that he doesn't do it himself does give me some trepidation. There is a lot written on his website that I feel is very loosely worded and open for a wide interpretation. Do you seriously think that when they were presenting the Biscayne Bay NMS the people showed up in anti-fishing billboards? I am sure they showed up in Huk, Aftco, Columbia etc clothing and talked about all the benefits that everyone will have if this is passed. Talk is cheap but legislation becomes almost permanent. At the very least Rik could do is his own work. This is not a personal attack on you or anyone else. Everyone is entitled to feel and do what they want. This is not my website but I am glad I have a place to go and state that most titles, monikers, NMS, and legislation ends up not benefiting most in the end.

[NoLimit]

"I am really curious why you would post a reply from Rik?"

Because it disclosed specific actions they wanted to do instead of just the generalities that are on the website. That information is useful in determining where they might be going on this. I thought it indicated that they do want to provide for better fishing, clamming, etc.

If this group is something that will be positive for us, we should support it. If we see it is heading the wrong way, then we move against it. Maybe a local group will reverse the trend we have with state and feds. The more arrows in the quiver, the better your chances.

Keep your friends close and your (potential) enemies closer. I am going to check it out further and will get back with any updates. I am sure you will do likewise.

"I refused and told him that he should join these forums and others and post up what he wants."

That is one approach but I took another. More information and engagement is better than less at this point.

[reason162]

More information and engagement is better than less at this point.

Appreciate the info, even if I have to wade through 4 pages of sheer hysteria to read it.

[njdiver]

Here are two sites that explain the process on how to create a NMS:

http://www.nominate.noaa.gov/

http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/management/designations.html

[Capt. Debbie]

You're not the tree hugger. That website lists his wooden boat building love at the site's bottom. Frankly I would rather use the boat, than fix the boat. But maybe I'm crazy?





Captain Frank, one would hope they paid for meeting space but I'm guessing probably not. Either way it makes no difference. The fact that the above establishments allowed this group to use/rent their facilities should show that they are, at the very least, very uninformed of what happens when you sign up for the Trojan Horse. In my opinion establishments that are run by ill informed people are dangerous and should not be supported.

Where you come up with thinking I'm a tree hugger is beyond me. Maybe you can explain further? The only wood I admire swings between my legs.

[Tuna Tales]

Another attempt to close down fishing areas...just take a look @ Florida.

My suggestion is if you can - attend the meeting in Red Bank on the 16th. Also join the JCAA, NJOA and the RFA as these organizations are fighting BS like this from happening in the first place - politically.

This would really wipe out the rentals boats, smaller boats, kayak fishing and surf fishing in the Sandy Hook area.


Joe T.

[NoLimit]

Here are two sites that explain the process on how to create a NMS:

http://www.nominate.noaa.gov/

http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/management/designations.html

Going to those links found this: http://stellwagen.noaa.gov/visit/fishingrec/fishingrec.html

It looks like the Stellwagon Banks are now a refuge and the big question is Will they chase out the draggers and help recreational fishing?

[NoLimit]

Another attempt to close down fishing areas...just take a look @ Florida.

My suggestion is if you can - attend the meeting in Red Bank on the 16th. Also join the JCAA, NJOA and the RFA as these organizations are fighting BS like this from happening in the first place - politically.

This would really wipe out the rentals boats, smaller boats, kayak fishing and surf fishing in the Sandy Hook area.


Joe T.
Are these groups doing anything to stop draggers? That is the only thing that is killing recreational fishing.

[Leif]

Going to those links found this: http://stellwagen.noaa.gov/visit/fishingrec/fishingrec.html

It looks like the Stellwagon Banks are now a refuge and the big question is Will they chase out the draggers and help recreational fishing?

It was supposed to be closed to the draggers but after the draggers bitched and moaned that they couldn't get their limit on Georges, fishing was opened to the draggers and they wiped the cod out again. Now that there is nothing left, its closed to draggers.

I believe this is correct but let me know if I'm wrong.

Leif

[NoLimit]

So the first question for this new group is

- What will you do about stopping the draggers that have decimated the population of winter and summer flounder that used to live in these rivers and bays.

- What will they do about preventing the destruction of fluke stocks in the rivers and bay by stopping the forced taking of breeders and allowing the harvesting of mature males

This is what we need done and I am not sure if anyone except Captain Ron and a few others are doing anything about it. I am not going to donate to any group that includes draggers.

[dales529]

RFA is monitoring the situation and will be present for the March 16 meeting in Red Bank to question this nomination for a NMS. All I can say right now as details are being evaluated is this is a major concern as to what the real agenda is. Will keep you posted

[scooter1010]

RFA is monitoring the situation and will be present for the March 16 meeting in Red Bank to question this nomination for a NMS. All I can say right now as details are being evaluated is this is a major concern as to what the real agenda is. Will keep you posted

Again dales529 thanks for you support. At least the RFA can see that there is some danger here. Unfortunately, it looks like a lot of people on this forum don't.

Gotta love the guy that was bothered by having to read through four pages of "hysteria". SMFH

[scooter1010]

From the RFA
http://myemail.constantcontact.com/CORRECTED-DATES--RFA-SAYS-NO-TO-RARITAN-BAY-MARINE-SANTUARY.html?soid=1102181706823&aid=YhNkMe0XyAM

[scooter1010]

Just in case anybody can't click on a link.

RFA SAYS NO TO PROPOSED RARITAN BAY NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY


New Gretna, NJ - An effort is underway by the Navesink Marine Heritage Association to have Sandy Hook Bay, Raritan Bay, the Shrewsbury and Navesink rivers and their tributaries declared a "National Marine Sanctuary." According to the proponents, if it is enacted by federal authorities it would add more than 12,500 acres of public-use parkland to eastern Monmouth County, while extending the federal National Park philosophy "in perpetuity" to these local waters.

The idea might sound good, but past experience with Marine Sanctuaries in California, Florida and other coastal areas has ultimately resulted in loss of access for recreational fishermen and having one in such a highly populated area that is also home to some of the best inshore fishing on the coast would lead to just such overzealous regulatory actions.

"This action is a solution looking for a problem," says Jim Donofrio, executive director of the Recreational Fishing Alliance. "The proponents of the NMS claim they want the areas protected and preserved, but New Jersey already has some of the most progressive environmental and development laws of any state so little is to be gained by a listing. What an NMS designation does is open the Pandora's Box of denying public access and recreational fishing is usually the first to lose."

"RFA has dealt with the broken promises of no further restrictions touted by the promoters of marine protected areas for two decades," Donofrio continued. "California, the Dry Tortugas, Biscayne Bay and Stellwagen Bank off Massachusetts just to name a few. The real goal behind the high minded idealism always ends up being reduced access. That's why we are asking fishermen to attend the hearings next week to voice their concerns and to just say no!"

Public hearings on the proposed National Marine Sanctuary initiative in Sandy Hook Bay, the Navesink and the Shrewsbury will be held at 2 p.m. on Sunday, March 13 at the Keyport Yacht Club in Keyport, and at 7 p.m. on Wednesday, March 16 at the Red Bank Library, 84 West Front Street in Red Bank. Click on the facebook link below to let us know if will be attending the hearings.

[njdiver]

The presentation at the Keyport Yacht Club is not open to the public. Per Mr. Van Hemmen.

[scooter1010]

The presentation at the Keyport Yacht Club is not open to the public. Per Mr. Van Hemmen.

I wouldn't take this Rik V Hemmens word for anything. He posts up on his website here are PUBLIC dates and now he tells you Private. :confused:

[Kup]

The Government controls 30% of the land in the country now and we want them to control more. I think there is a problem with that. It's in NJ and should be controlled by NJ not the Fed.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Yep - first step is National Marine Sanctuary, next is Marine Protected Area. And this is all in state of NJ waters so why does the Federal Government need to be involved. What ever happened to the sovereignty of the states?

It's a slippery slope here and it needs to be stopped in its tracks now or we risk going the way of way of California where there are all sorts of areas closed to fishing.

[scooter1010]

I got our chant LOL.
I Stand with the RFA Don't Take Away Our Bay !!!! ;)

[njdiver]

I wouldn't take this Rik V Hemmens word for anything. He posts up on his website here are PUBLIC dates and now he tells you Private. :confused:
MARCH 13TH SANDY HOOK BAY NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY NOT OPEN TO PUBLIC

New Gretna, NJ - The Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA) has been contacted by the Navesink Marine Heritage Association, the organization pursuing to have Sandy Hook Bay, Raritan Bay, the Shrewsbury and Navesink rivers and their tributaries designated as a National Marine Sanctuary, and informed that the Sunday, March 13th meeting to be held at the Key Point Yacht Club is not open to the pubic since the meeting location is a private facility. Those wishing to attend Sunday's meeting need to request permission to attend from Rik van Hemmen, vice president of the Navesink Maritime Heritage Association at 732 224-1133.

The general public will still have an opportunity to weigh in on this proposal. The Wednesday, March 16 meeting at the Red Bank Library, 84 West Front Street in Red Bank is being held at a public facility and no one can be turned away. Click on the facebook link below to let us know if will be attending the hearing.

[scooter1010]

MARCH 13TH SANDY HOOK BAY NATIONAL MARINE SANCTUARY NOT OPEN TO PUBLIC

New Gretna, NJ - The Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA) has been contacted by the Navesink Marine Heritage Association, the organization pursuing to have Sandy Hook Bay, Raritan Bay, the Shrewsbury and Navesink rivers and their tributaries designated as a National Marine Sanctuary, and informed that the Sunday, March 13th meeting to be held at the Key Point Yacht Club is not open to the pubic since the meeting location is a private facility. Those wishing to attend Sunday's meeting need to request permission to attend from Rik van Hemmen, vice president of the Navesink Maritime Heritage Association at 732 224-1133.

The general public will still have an opportunity to weigh in on this proposal. The Wednesday, March 16 meeting at the Red Bank Library, 84 West Front Street in Red Bank is being held at a public facility and no one can be turned away. Click on the facebook link below to let us know if will be attending the hearing.

njdiver

I am not seeing any Facebook link.

[njdiver]

njdiver

I am not seeing any Facebook link.

https://m.facebook.com/RecreationalFishingAlliance

[Relentless Charters]

Go after them and do notback down. When the Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary was established, fisherman were very skeptical and not on board. They were told the establishment was to prevent oil exploration and mining and would NEVER affect fisherman. Nothing was in writing in the House Bill which created the 842 square mile National Marine Sanctuary. Here we are now 20 years later having to watch the Sanctuary Manager, his staff, the National Sanctuary Foundation, everyone they are in bed with, PEW, WWF, academia and others who want fisherman off the water and have their own little marine playground. Don't believe the hype, they hate fisherman and fishing. Look at all of the MPAs created in CA and FL.

Last year the Stellwagen Bank Charter Boat Assoc worked their asses off when the sanctuary proposed closing 55 Square NM on Stellwagen Bank to recreational bottom fishing. It was a grass roots campaign filling two meetings to where people were in the hallway with the message being NO. May folks on here like CaptBob, Gerry and others sent letters of support. Look what is going on now with the push to make Cashes Ledge and much of the Canyons and Seamounts area a National Monument.

Go and fight this and if you need a letter supporting the fishermen's cause, please let us know and our association will send one in support. We all need to stick together no matter where we do or not fish.

Respectfully,

Dave

[bulletbob]

Thanks capt Dave.. Sadly some on this very fine site seem to fall into the age old trap.. "Oh that can't happen here"... Uh, yeah, it can... NJ like my state of NY, is FULL of liberal elites that feel they know best whats good for society and the natural world around them, and feel that the masses are just destroying everything, and that they need to step in and "fix" things..

You know, keep us from destroying the world and ourselves while we're at it... Our "guardians"...
They can and will keep us from fishing/hunting/owning guns if they can, and if we let them ..
Each person that reads this need to do a search on this term.Agenda 21..
Its real, and its coming.. the US IS a signatory... We WILL have our hunting/fishing/ownership rights taken by the government unless we are proactive... bob

[Gerry Zagorski]

As mentioned above, there are people who are probably thinking this could never happen in NJ.

Lets face it, there are more an more environmental groups out there who would prefer that we aren't allowed to fish at all. You might say to yourself that this is not the case here in NJ like it is in CA but look at what happened to Stellwagen. If our area becomes a National Marine Sanctuary it becomes a federal matter and the national groups who are very well organized and funded will be all over it.

Give them and inch and they will take a mile.

Once again, we need to stop this in it's tracts and take a stand now.

[scooter1010]

Thanks Capt Dave

The absolute ironic thing is that of all the party boat captains and charter boat captains that are on here I've seen very little support on this thread. I went on Sunday and can tell you first hand that this is no joke and that if this is not stopped it will get through. I hope everybody goes on Wednesday because if you don't god forgive your complacency.

[dales529]

These questions for Rik remain:
1) WHY does he feel a change as large as an NMS is necessary as well as another layer of governing that comes with it to accomplish his goal? It appears there are enough avenues to use for improvement (if even required)with the existing state agencies laws that run the area.
2)What specific issues and what areas are really in such desperate need for improvement to warrant a NMS?

The lack to date of these answers are my concern for doubt as to the legitimacy of the NMS Nomination and in my opinion the risk is not worth the reward.


RFA-NJ attended the presentation at Keypoint Yacht club. RFA NJ and RFA National will be in attendance on Wed. Will keep you posted on the complete position and what's next.

[BarbGailIV]

How about an NJ Fishing online petition. I'm in for whatever it takes.

[stevelikes2fish]

RFA is monitoring the situation and will be present for the March 16 meeting in Red Bank to question this nomination for a NMS. All I can say right now as details are being evaluated is this is a major concern as to what the real agenda is. Will keep you posted

Thank you for your support. I will be there supporting you and NJFishing. Hopefully, we get better than the usual zero point five (0.5)percent that normally shows up.

[shrimpman steve]

I'm trying to work it out so I can come down. It's not easy for me to trek down there on a Wednesday night but I'm gonna try

[june181901]

Mr Zagorski: Re "sovereignty of the states".

Perhaps you recall years ago when the MADD group got Congress and the DOT to institute a .08 DWI limit. Those states that said no were told simply "there would be no future highway funds if your state was non-compliant". All 50 states and all territories acquiesced soon thereafter.

POWER OF THE PURSE! Or as we used to say in Bayonne 'money talks and bs walks'.

[Gerry Zagorski]

Same thing with Common Core Education and Obama Care. If you want the feds money as a state you must comply.

[bulletbob]

Mr Zagorski: Re "sovereignty of the states".

Perhaps you recall years ago when the MADD group got Congress and the DOT to institute a .08 DWI limit. Those states that said no were told simply "there would be no future highway funds if your state was non-compliant". All 50 states and all territories acquiesced soon thereafter.

POWER OF THE PURSE! Or as we used to say in Bayonne 'money talks and bs walks'.

Thats exactly what we can expect from the federal government IF they get involved.. Strong arm tactics/......

[Gerry Zagorski]

My first question is what is the benefit of making the area a National Marine Sanctuary? If the benefits are compelling enough, can we have some sort of Iron Clad protection from ever making the area an Marine Protected Area.

Another interesting bit of information would be to find out who the people are behind advocating the National Marine Sanctuary and what their underlying motivations are.

See you all at the meeting.

[Joey Dah Fish]

I'm trying to work it out so I can come down. It's not easy for me to trek down there on a Wednesday night but I'm gonna try

Typical Shrimpman response :confused:

[Joey Dah Fish]

I propose a class action suit against this organization and or the federal government by as many NJ residence as we can get to sign on. Nothing speaks louder than a law suit.

[njdiver]

This just announced via email:

https://m.facebook.com/sandyhooknationalmarinesanctuary/

[Canyonfish]

It's the "rest assured" part that makes me nervous. I hate to be a doubting Thomas.. but last time I heard a politician say "Rest Assured" .... there was something about being able to keep your Plan and your Doctor in it. Sorry about even putting something as pure as our recreational fishing access and politics in the same post... but getting the Federal Gov involved in NJ Rec fishing access in any way invites this kind of skepticism. :confused:

[baetis]

The Director told me that new rules for National Marine Sanctuary nomination have been published and that now the public would take on the most significant role in making nominations for National Marine Sanctuary status.

So I asked him: “Can you still fish in National Marine Sanctuaries?”

He said: “Yes, but according to a fishery management plan.”


- That's really all you need to know about the future of fishing in the bay if this is ever approved.

[Charlie B]

All I can say is I have no idea what the true goals are by those who support the NMS. But if the RFA is against it that's good enough for me until I'm shown otherwise. We have too many bad regulations as it is, And this would just open the door for more regulations. Support the RFA...Charlie

[Gerry Zagorski]

It's the "rest assured" part that makes me nervous. I hate to be a doubting Thomas.. but last time I heard a politician say "Rest Assured" .... there was something about being able to keep your Plan and your Doctor in it. Sorry about even putting something as pure as our recreational fishing access and politics in the same post... but getting the Federal Gov involved in NJ Rec fishing access in any way invites this kind of skepticism. :confused:

Right you are Canyon.... First step is National Marine Sanctuary, yes you can still fish but now the feds are involved and as we all know how they cow tow to environmental special interests groups. So the the next step could be Marine Protected Area. No fishing allowed there.

A slippery slope in my opinion...

[scooter1010]

Let’s Create the Sandy Hook Bay National Marine Sanctuary
December 22, 2015

trtwebcommentaryby Rik Van Hemmen

I have traveled far and wide as a marine consultant and often try to capture a bit of local maritime culture and beauty in my business travels. There are countless interesting maritime areas and cultures in the world, but I always come back to our Two Rivers estuary with a slight feeling of awe. I simply have not been able to find a small area like it in the world. For many peculiar reasons, this little corner of New Jersey is subject to forces that provide endless change completely out of proportion to its size. It is not just the boats, it is also related to our excellent county park system, to the interaction of sea, shore, beach, land, hills, farms and wooded areas, to the feel of real seasons, to the Atlantic Flyway, to the interaction of blue and white collar occupations, and to both a feeling of local history and a cosmopolitan and international outlook.

Our local waters are a cultural laboratory; an experimental station; a Zen garden. In 400 years these waters have gone from a pre modern native culture, to an idyllic farm community, to a light industrial society, to a somewhat worn out estuary in the 1970’s and then to something else that includes much improved water quality, further development, higher levels of environmental appreciation and a more varied use of the river.

Today, it consists of three layers; the estuary itself with everything natural in it, the river uses and then the surrounding human community. All three change, not necessarily in concert, but they change and they change remarkably quickly.

During a business trip I met the director of the National Marine Sanctuaries Foundation. National Marine Sanctuaries are the equivalent of National Parks, but exist on (and in) water instead of land. National Marine Sanctuaries range in size from a single submerged shipwreck in the Atlantic, to the size of several states in the Pacific Ocean. Just like National Parks they can fulfill a multitude of purposes ranging from nature preservation, to historical preservation, to education and recreation. Our own Sandy Hook National Park is an example where all these missions and goals come together in one park.

The Director told me that new rules for National Marine Sanctuary nomination have been published and that now the public would take on the most significant role in making nominations for National Marine Sanctuary status.

So I asked him: “Can you still fish in National Marine Sanctuaries?”

He said: “Yes, but according to a fishery management plan.” “Does it restrict construction around the sanctuary?” He said: “Not specifically, but a well designed sanctuary tries to establish goals that allow the land and the water to work together.”

In 2014 the sanctuary nomination rules were published and they indicate that the following criteria would support nomination and the establishment of a National Marine Sanctuary:

Does the place have natural resources or habitat with special ecological significance?

Does the place have maritime heritage resources with special historical, cultural, archeological significance?

Does the place have important economic uses like tourism, fishing, diving and other recreational activities?

Do all of these things depend on conservation and management of resources?

Then the reviewers look for:

Opportunities for marine research, education or partner ships;

Potential threats & impacts for the place’s marine resources;

Existing management/regulation that could help with conservation efforts; and Importantly, broad community based support.

This is for nomination only, and the actual designation is a national public process and nobody expects a nomination and designation to take place in a few months or even years. Still, can anybody think of a place that fits this list of requirements as well as our Two Rivers? Each question can be reasonable answered with a strong “yes.”

Quite reasonably all of the Raritan Bay and its estuaries would be able to fit within the description, but that is a huge area with possibly too many competing interests. But what if we nominate Sandy Hook Bay, extending from the tip of the Earle Weapon Center to the tip of Sandy Hook and all the estuaries within it? It would be bounded on one side by a federal military installation on the other side by a national park, and upstream it would contain the waterfronts of Middletown, Atlantic Highlands, Highlands, Rumson, Fair Haven, Sea Bright, Red Bank, Shrewsbury, Little Silver, Tinton Falls, Oceanport, Eatontown, Long Branch, West Long Branch, and Monmouth Beach, together with various abutting county parks.

It is a remarkably varied collection of communities, but each is becoming more and more interested in the sustainable and balanced use of the Two Rivers and Sandy Hook Bay. The Sandy Hook Bay Marine Sanctuary would be a suburban marine sanctuary y that can serve as an example of carefully designed and executed sustainable use and could serve as an example for the world. Possibly, this first experiment will allow gradual expansion of the sanctuary, maybe to include all of the Raritan Bay and all its estuaries. Maybe, in the not too distant future, New York City will be positioned within a National Marine Sanctuary.

The thought of it alone boggles the mind. It will not mean that industry and commerce will leave the area. Instead commerce and industry will be supported for its historical and economic significance, but it will mean that each and every one of us can look at the water and say: “That water is part of me just like our magnificent national parks are part of me and together they pro vide a deeper meaning to our existence on earth.”

Can it be done? Maybe, maybe not, but change is this area’s middle name, and if the experiment is worth starting, it certainly is best started here. Let’s use our community’s ability to create change and create something that will make us all proud for centuries to come.

In the coming year I plan to start working on putting the pieces for the application together. Join me if you are interested in creating something that those who follow us will be thankful for.

Rik van Hemmen is a naval architect and marine engineer and the President of Martin & Ottaway, a 135 year old marine consulting company based in Red Bank that deals with issues ranging from marine sustainability to ship design and construction. He also is the Vice President of Navesink Maritime Heritage Association. He just published the second edition of “A Chronology of Boating on The Navesink.” He can be reached at rhemmen@martinottaway.com.

[scooter1010]

The above quite clearly states that you WILL have more regulations and Construction restrictions !!!

[bulletbob]

Are you kidding me??.. That guys word usage reads like a a leftist radicals wet dream...
"Zen Garden".. are you serious?.. THIS is the type of people we are dealing with.. Tree huggers that want you to NOT fish in Sandy Hook bay or anywhere.. Bernie must love this bullshit,,He talks the same way..

Look ,call me a right wing fascist if you must, but this leftist utopia crap must end.. Can't catch a few fish at Sandy hook pretty soon??? Not to mention the Shrewsbury and Navesink!!... Its coming if this granola loving kook has anything to do with it... NJ sportsmen, please consider carefully who gets your vote.. From an outsiders viewpoint, that WAS an insider for many decades, I can say that as NJ became more and more liberal politically, the fishing and gun ownership rights have become more restrictive... bob

[Joey Dah Fish]

These waters are with state waters boundaries. We need the fed out of our state and out of our life period. It will be another Wacco

[dales529]

This just announced via email:

https://m.facebook.com/sandyhooknationalmarinesanctuary/

The issues / reasons specified in the Facebook link can all be remedied under the current State regulation and Laws. While maybe not perfect and there is always room for improvement you do NOT need a NMS to maintain this environment.

"NMS Presentation by this group believes that a "National" sanctuary would result in more local control. His proposal assumes a 25 member advisory council including the 18 municipalities in the watershed, as well as representatives from special interest groups including commercial and recreational fishing, hunters and marina operators."

This would ONLY be a local "ADVISORY" council with "ONE" recreational fishery member to advise guess who. NOAA! We all know how much they listen to our opinions!

Enough said.

[Relentless Charters]

The Sanctuary Advisory Committees are a sham. The Stellwagen Bank NMS has a recreational rep who happens to be a member of the Stellwagen Bank Charter Boat Assoc and on the board of directors along with the MA RFA rep. It does not matter what he says, heavily outnumbered by the tree huggers on th SAC. They only have him there along with the commercial rep is to say, hey we are working with you and your part of our team.

DO NOT BE FOOLED THAT THIS IS GOOD, reach out now to your federal and state representatives, organize a meeting of hundreds of fisherman and get them there to see the unity and how many anglers are against this. This is a great forum to kill the beast.

[dales529]

You all know from my posts my stance on this but lets quit the Lefty / Righty crap. This just promotes the on going obstruction rather than a solution. Liberals and Right wingers Fish and Hunt. Neither party has helped our fishing rights. In the "Old Days" Reagan and Clinton knew how to navigate the middle ground. Both parties sanctioned NMS for probably good intentions, now its just a shit show because we the people pit each other against each other by party and they follow suit to get re-elected. So we all stagnate. In the regulations game you have to lobby and cater to both sides, granted its slides back and forth decade to decade but if you honestly believe one point of view helps you more than the other you are sadly part of the problem and why the current state of affairs perpetuates, Solid facts that neither side can refute is the only way out and name calling doesn't work. I have no reason to disrespect Rik, nor do I know his political views and don't care I just don't agree he needs a NMS but his beliefs are his own and his right as an American. Lets stop losing sight of that

[NoLimit]

This is the response received from the Sanctuary group. It is in response to the question if a primary goal of the Sanctuary will be to increase productivity of the waters for fisherman, clammers, and crabbers.
.................................................. .....................

I have no specific answers, but better water quality cannot hurt and will benefit all.

If there are other suggestions, the NMS would be the forum to get all stakeholders to think about it.

The way you pose the question, there may be catch restrictions, but the NMS would not be creating those. The cause of the catch restrictions lays with catching and habitat. We can make habitat improvement, catch restrictions is related to the catchers. The NMS as a whole may think catch restrictions would be of benefit, and some people may think they are not. But the only difference between an NMS and no NMS is that the debate will be clearer more inclusive and focused on the welfare of the NMS. If there is a catch restriction, it focuses on sustainability to allow fishing again in the future. If the whole world lines up two feet outside of the NMS boundary to catch what the NMS produces, the overall yield may have improved but now the world, not the NMS, has turned the NMS in a breeding ground. That would stink, and might prevent us from lifting restrictions, but it would not be related to NMS management, it is related to opportunism outside the NMS. In that case if I were the NMS, I would really put some pressure in the state and feds and say: Hey folks we know what is going on, time to reduce catch outside the NMS.



I don’t know about crabs, but clams (and hopefully some day oysters) don’t move that much so while migratory species may be a problem, less mobile species will still be harvested in the NMS and hopefully more when we improve conditions.

Fuzzy, yes. But it is better than endless debate. We will know what the NMS is doing and can provide guidance to the rest of the world. Today we do not have that level of knowledge and experience.

Those who know more about fish may be able to comment on the effect of species yield within the NMS to allow catch within the NMS. Maybe there are species that will do really well with the NMS design, probably others need more. Still it does not invalidate (rather it validates) the NMS concept. But it is important to note that the NMS goal for fishermen is increased fish yield, maybe within the NMS, maybe two feet outside of it. The goal for all is improved water quality, and sustained enjoyment.

[scooter1010]

No Limit
Do you even read any posts before you comment? Have you not read and understood what Relentless Charters Capt. Dave is telling you from FIRST HAND experience? Do you realize the role of the EPA has been for clean water? Do you realize that NJ has more Superfund Cleanup Sites that leech into the water everyday? Does everyone want clean water....YES. Does everyone want more harvest.....YES. Is a NMS anyway to go about this....NO. Not if you want to fish or clam and find restrictions in place at a moments notice that close areas down or restrict harvest. That's the power a NMS has. Every NMS has had a goal of being better for fishing. Do you actually think they would come out and say it will be more restrictive? No one would want it. I'm getting tired of saying that every NMS that was started now has MORE RESTRICTIONS and LESS ACCESS if not CLOSED ACCESS than before it was made a NMS. Name anything the Federal Government Does Well.
SMH:mad:

[NoLimit]

No Limit
Do you even read any posts before you comment? Have you not read and understood what Relentless Charters Capt. Dave is telling you from FIRST HAND experience? Do you realize the role of the EPA has been for clean water? Do you realize that NJ has more Superfund Cleanup Sites that leech into the water everyday? Does everyone want clean water....YES. Does everyone want more harvest.....YES. Is a NMS anyway to go about this....NO. Not if you want to fish or clam and find restrictions in place at a moments notice that close areas down or restrict harvest. That's the power a NMS has. Every NMS has had a goal of being better for fishing. Do you actually think they would come out and say it will be more restrictive? No one would want it. I'm getting tired of saying that every NMS that was started now has MORE RESTRICTIONS and LESS ACCESS if not CLOSED ACCESS than before it was made a NMS. Name anything the Federal Government Does Well.
SMH:mad:

Scooter,

I did not make any comment.

I just copied and pasted the response to the question if they intended to make it a priority to increase production of fish, clams, etc for clammers and fishers.

[Parker Joe]

Any time you let government control your activity you are going to lose access to that activity. Look no farther than your fishing limits. Sea Bass, Blackfish. Season is open for a few weeks then closed. One fish, two fish no fish. Everyone cant wait for blackfish to have a real season in mid November? Are you kidding me.We sit with our hands tied while NY season opens weeks ahead.
Oh yes and you know that cast net full of bunkers you get in the morning for bass, forget that. Planning on potting or seining for bait forget that too!Dont give this group one inch! The rivers and bays were fine before this and will be fine long after we are all gone.

[scooter1010]

Tonight is the last night to make your voice be heard. There should be almost no reason good enough not to show up and make your opposition well known. It's 7:00 pm at the Red Bank library. Newspapers should be attending.

[NoLimit]

Tonight is the last night to make your voice be heard. There should be almost no reason good enough not to show up and make your opposition well known. It's 7:00 pm at the Red Bank library. Newspapers should be attending.

What should be demanded tonight is that the area be returned to its normal state of a highly productive fishery for weakfish, winter flounder, fluke, crabs, crabs, etc. That's the way it was for thousands of years and that is the way it should be again. If that means cut backs for the draggers offshore, so be it.

That entire habitat depended on huge amounts of winter flounder, clams, crabs, etc and they are gone. They were a critical link in the food chain and now they are gone.

[scooter1010]

Does anyone remember the social networking commercial?

THIS IS NOT HOW THIS WORKS. THIS ISN'T HOW ANY OF THIS WORKS.

LOL. :eek:

[njdiver]

National Marine Sanctuary Act

(Snip)

The NMSA provides several tools for protecting designated national marine sanctuaries. For example:

The NMSA provides the program with the authority to issue regulations for each sanctuary and the system as a whole. These regulations can, among other things, specify the types of activities that can and cannot occur within the sanctuary. [See section 308 of the NMSA.]

The NMSA requires the program to prepare and periodically update management plans that guide day-to-day activities at each sanctuary. [See sections 304(a) and 304(e) of the NMSA.]

The NMSA authorizes NOAA and the program to assess civil penalties (up to $130,000 per day per violation) for violations of the NMSA or its implementing regulations and damages against people that injure sanctuary resources. [See sections 306, 307 and 312 of the NMSA.]

The NMSA requires federal agencies whose actions are “likely to destroy, cause the loss of, or injure a sanctuary resource,” to consult with the program before taking the action. The program is, in these cases, required to recommend reasonable and prudent alternatives to protect sanctuary resources. [See section 304(d) of the NMSA.]

(Snip)

http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/about/legislation/



The Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) regulations are codified at 15 CFR Part 922.

Regulations have the effect and enforceability of law and are written in a specific manner. ONMS regulations prohibit specific kinds of activities, describe and define the boundaries of the designated national marine sanctuaries and set up a system of permits to allow the conduct of certain types of activities (that would otherwise not be allowed).

(Snip)

While each danctuary has its own unique set of regulations, there are some regulatory prohibitions that are typical for many sanctuaries:

Discharging material or other matter into the sanctuary;

Disturbance of, construction on or alteration of the seabed;

Disturbance of cultural resources; and

Exploring for, developing or producing oil, gas or minerals (with a grandfather clause for preexisting operations).

In addition, some sanctuaries prohibit other activities, such as the disturbance of marine mammals, seabirds and sea turtles, operation of aircraft in certain zones, use of personal watercraft, mineral mining and anchoring of vessels.

(Snip)

http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/protect/regulations/



NOAA: Final Notice Of Fee Calculations For Special Use Permits
POSTED ON NOVEMBER 19, 2015

In accordance with a requirement of Public Law 106-513 (16 U.S.C. 1441(b)), NOAA hereby gives public notice of the methods, formulas and rationale for the calculations it will use in order to assess fees associated with special use permits (SUPs).

(From the Federal Register) — Congress first granted NOAA the authority to issue SUPs for conducting specific activities in national marine sanctuaries in the 1988 Amendments to the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (“NMSA”) (16 U.S.C. 1431 et seq.) (Pub. L. 100-627). The NMSA allows NOAA to establish categories of activities that may be subject to an SUP. The list of applicable categories of activities was last updated in 2013 (78 FR 25957). SUPs may be issued for the placement and recovery of objects on the seabed related to public or private events, or commercial filming; the continued presence of commercial submarine cables; the disposal of cremated human remains; recreational diving near the USS Monitor; the deployment of fireworks displays; or the operation of aircraft below the minimum altitude in restricted zones of national marine sanctuaries. Congress also gave NOAA the discretion to assess an SUP fee and laid out the basic components of an SUP fee (16 U.S.C. 1441 (d)).

Read the full article here:

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2015/11/19/2015-29524/final-notice-of-fee-calculations-for-special-use-permits


http://policy.oceanleadership.org/noaa-final-notal-use-permits/


(Snip)= Irrelevant material deleted.

[boatail]

a little news on where this may be headed . not sure if posting links is allowed .
http://wwlp.com/2016/03/10/june-hearing-set-in-everett-casino-environmental-permit-case/
lou

[joerosa1]

a little news on where this may be headed . not sure if posting links is allowed .
http://wwlp.com/2016/03/10/june-hearing-set-in-everett-casino-environmental-permit-case/
lou
Article to "June hearing set in Everett casino environmental permit case"?

[shrimpman steve]

Take note of the witnesses against the project. Rik van hemmen.

I can not make the meeting due to a prior commitment, but I would be curious as to why he is siding the city to stop the project

[Gerry Zagorski]

Did a little more digging and found this on the Marine Sanctuary currently in certain parts of the Florida Keys. It clearly states some parts of the keys are closed to recreational fishing.

Here is the reference link https://mcbi.marine-conservation.org/what/what_pdfs/Florida_Keys.pdf

[njdiver]

Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary

Q: What is South Atlantic Fisheries Management Council (SAFMS) in relation to National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and GRNMS?

Is GRNMS part of National Marine Fisheries Service?

What is the difference between the two organizations?

A: A National Marine Sanctuary is not part of the Fishery Management Council system. Fishery Management Councils, such as the SAFMC, are established under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and are charged with reducing overfishing and maintaining fish stocks. The SAFMC advises NMFS (NOAA Fisheries Service) in management of marine fish stocks in federal waters for sustainable fisheries. Sanctuaries are not charged with managing fisheries.

Marine Sanctuaries are designated by the Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) under the National Marine Sanctuaries Act. ONMS is responsible for identifying, designating, and managing ocean and Great Lake areas of special national significance as national marine sanctuaries. Sanctuaries are managed to protect and conserve their resources and to allow uses that are compatible with resource protection. Like NOAA Fisheries, Sanctuaries depend on citizen input through the Sanctuary Advisory Councils to advise NOAA on how to protect Sanctuary resources while allowing compatible use.

(Snip)

http://graysreef.noaa.gov/about/faqs/welcome.html

[Gerry Zagorski]

Well I think Rik was not prepared for the reception he got tonight in Red Bank. He was greeting by a bit skeptical and sometimes angry group of around 2 to 300 fisherman. It was quite a turn out so much so they exceeded the capacity of the room where the meeting was being held and people were only allowed in when someone came out.

I almost felt sorry for Rik as he was definitely on the back of his heels all night with people coming at him form every corner of the room voicing opposition and questioning his motives. At the end of the day, I think his heart is in the right place and is very sincere about wanting to improve the quality and the envioroment of the area as we all do. However, as it was pointed out by several people, we don't need the Feds to accomplish that and everyone is very skeptical as to what could happen if they get control of the area and started to limit access to fishing, boating, clamming, crabbing etc.

I had the opportunity to meet and speak with Jim Donofrio the from the RFA there. He's seen this sort of thing time and time again... Marine Sanctuaries typically lead to restricted access to fishing and we need to stop this things in its tracks.

It's my understanding that this meeting was to get some public feedback before submitting the application for the Marine Sanctuary since local support is nessecary for consideration. I don't think Rik got the support he was looking for at this meeting. I think he heard the message loud and clear that he would have some major opposition on his hands if he and anyone else continued to persue the Sanctuary designation.

More to follow I'm sure and great to see everyone out there in force today.

[shrimpman steve]

Sounds like people came together for a change. Sorry I couldn't make it and thank you all for representing.

[NoLimit]

Rik's heart might be in the right place but what we need is political pressure put on the draggers to stop the extermination of the fishery that should be in these rivers and bays.

There should be stacks of winter flounder spawning but there are none thanks to draggers.

There should be crabs in the river but they were gone from the Neversink thanks to draggers.

Weakfish, fluke should be there in the spring and they are gone thanks to the draggers and idiotic laws that force the taking of breeders.

That is the ecology that has been destroyed but its underwater and people cant see it. That is the message that needs to be sent and then acted upon

[Reelron]

"It's my understanding that this meeting was to get some public feedback before submitting the application for the Marine Sanctuary since local support is nessecary for consideration. I don't think Rik got the support he was looking for at this meeting. I think he heard the message loud and clear that he would have some major opposition on his hands if he and anyone else continued to persue the Sanctuary designation. "

I think the key would be to continue to keep an eye on this to see if any other meetings take place indicating that he continues to press on despite the strong opposition. It would appear to be a one man show as I really didn't see anyone there to support his efforts? But he was never very clear on who or what was behind him.

I also have to wonder how a Marine Engineer could not foresee any problems with involving the Federal Govt. in the process of keeping the bay &rivers clear of trash? He tried to keep stating that once this Marine Sanctuary takes place the whole thing would be overseen by a "Local Board" of representatives for the towns affected. Wow, Don Quixote for real!

I was very impressed with most of the people that stood up to speak against this plan. I hope that that is the last we will hear from Mr. van Hemmen except maybe an announcement to assemble in Fair Haven for a river clean up!

[River Rat]

Thanks to all who showed up to protect out waters.

GREAT JOB

[Relentless Charters]

Great Job Guys,

Would have gone but the five hour drive was not happening, I will throw my support from this end, just like members here are doing for the haddock our way. Remember we need to work together to defeat these people from taking away our rights to fish.

Speaking of no fishing, take a look at this MAP (http://floridakeys.noaa.gov/fknms_map/welcome.html) of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary and click on the push pins and see how many of these areas are no fishing. Once they start shutting down an area, it will continue to expand. Get your legislators on board, use the media, use the RFA and this site. Stay ahead of them because they will use social media with hired public affairs professionals to tell the world to Petition The President (https://secure2.convio.net/clf/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&page=UserAction&id=435&AddInterest=1079) to protect these areas which will be closed to fishing , if not now in future. This is what we are up against and once again, stick together and fight like hell. Thank you to everyone who attended the meeting and for those who could not for being engaged.

Dave