|
Sustainable
eNews |
August 2004 |
|

|
IWMC
World Conservation Trust |
|
Editorial: A tragedy in
California
by Nils (Stolpe)
Garden State Seafood Association/FishNet USA
|
Last
Sunday we lost a colleague. Randall Fry, a lobbyist for the California branch of
the Recreational Fishing Alliance, was killed by what was estimated by an
eyewitness to be a 16 to 18 foot great white shark while diving for abalone
north of Fort Bragg, California. While we in the commercial fishing industry
have had more than a few disagreements with the Recreational Fishing Alliance,
Mr. Fry's primary interest, like ours, was maintaining his constituent's access
to productive fisheries in a healthy ocean environment. We are saddened by his
death and extend to his family and friends our deepest sympathy.
As
much as we are saddened by his death, however, we are outraged by the reaction
of the California Department of Fish and Game to it. In a press release dated
August 18 titled "Shark Attack Serves as Reminder of How to Minimize the
Risk," the Department's "shark expert," Dr. Robert Lea, said
"It may be a case of mistaken identity or it may be investigatory or
territorial behavior, the shark's primary prey are marine mammals, and if you
happen to look like one, from a shark's perspective, and you are near the
surface, you're at risk." Later in the release in "White shark
facts" the Department explains that "white sharks play a crucial role
in the marine ecosystem by helping to suppress pinniped (seals and sea lions)
populations." And in their "tips on how to avoid a shark
encounter" swimmers are warned to avoid areas in or near those
"frequented by sea lions, harbor seals, and elephant seals, near their
rookeries, or near the mouths of rivers where the animals concentrate looking
for fish."
This from a government that has forced bathers
from beaches, boaters from marinas, and fishermen from fisheries so that their
activities wouldn't interfere with those of the ever-expanding and completely
protected (from human interference) seal and sea lion populations.
What about the human population? Year by year
more of us are migrating to the coastline. Every year there are more people
spending more time swimming and diving in and boating on the ocean. And every
year there are more protected seals and sea lions occupying more and more of
that same ocean, and more and more white sharks feeding on the increasing number
of seals and sea lions. If these conditions are allowed to continue, human
tragedies such as the one that befell Mr. Fry are bound to increase. And how
does the California Department of Fish and Game handle this? By suggesting that
when in the ocean we stay away from seals. And, of course, we're supposed to
stay away from the surface, hug the bottom, and not do anything that will make a
white shark mistake us for a seal. These are difficult to do if you are a member
of an air-breathing species that bears a superficial resemblance to a seal or a
sea lion (Of course, we probably don't have to emphasize here that sharks aren't
anywhere near being the brightest creatures in the ocean and, as seemingly
countless television shows have demonstrated, are likely to mistake just about
anything they bump into for food.)
What are our coastal waters for? Are they
protected playgrounds for sharks and seals, where humans can only trespass at
their own risk and on the terms of the sharks and seals, or are they areas being
managed to allow people the most and the safest access possible to natural
resources that belong to all of us? We know what the will of the California
Department of Fish and Game is. What we don't know is what the will of the
people is. Is an ever-increasing number of swimmers, boaters and fishermen going
to be exposed to an ever-increasing risk of shark attack in an ever-decreasing
area of the ocean because our government's priority is to maximize the
population of seals, sea lions and sharks everywhere? Are we going to continue
to be forced by governmental edict to give up access to resources that centuries
of law guarantee belong to all of us because a small handful of well funded
animal rights activists have decided that some creatures have more rights than
we do, or are we going to move back to a public policy that lets us use our
coastal waters free from the fear that we might be looking or acting like some
primordial beast's dinner? 
Visit the New Jersey Fishing
website at www.fishingnj.org
|