Preserving Our Access
In the boating and fishing world, access has become the top hot button, polarizing issue and it’s on a lot of agendas. Environmental groups constantly lobby for no fishing zones (the international concept of “sanctuary”) as the way to solve overfishing, and most conservation groups adamantly oppose them, but several regulatory agencies are contemplating creating new zones or expanding existing ones at this time. You would think that environmental and conservation groups would have many common interests and be able to work together, but this issue has driven a wedge deep between the two camps.
Cover story: Bay boats with towers are increasingly common sights. See page 56 to learn more.
I have long maintained that small, targeted zones have merit for protecting endangered deep-water species of snapper and grouper, but almost no one shares that opinion. The strident pro-sanctuary folks want to take vast areas of the ocean away from us, with no trolling or catchand- release allowed (neither of which would affect the endangered species), and the anti-sanctuary folks argue that sanctuaries aren’t necessary (sometimes conveniently ignoring alarming stock abundance statistics) and don’t work anyway.
Then there’s the other kind of exclusion, in which human activity is greatly curtailed in the hopes of maintaining a more “pristine” environment, as defined by the environmental crowd. The National Park Service has jumped into that fray with both feet by releasing its preliminary alternatives for amending Everglades National Park’s General Management Plan.
Three of the four options (Alternative “A” is to maintain the status quo) would eliminate motorized boat traffic in substantial parts of the park that now allow such traffic. The most notable example is Hell’s Bay, a vast maze of brackish water and mangroves that’s a Mecca to backcountry fishermen the world over.
Hell’s Bay would be designated a “Backcountry” area, which the park defines as “Areas for exploration and self-reliance; non-mechanized recreation only.” No outboard engines, in other words. Hell’s Bay is so large that exploring it via paddling would be a multi-day adventure that few would ever undertake.
The most Draconian option, Alternative “D,” would eliminate combustible engines from all of the waters in Florida Bay shallower than three feet, and in case you haven’t spent much time there, that’s about 90 percent of the bay. A great many guides make their livings fishing those waters, and people travel from far and wide to fish with them.That would end under option “D” as only canoes and kayaks would be allowed.
The Park Service has scheduled hearings through the summer on the plan, and let’s hope they listen to reason. Many of us will be there to offer suggestions, but unfortunately, the pro-sanctuary environmental folks don’t wait for meetings— they lobby their case constantly, and it can be a persuasive message. They argue that national parks, and the ocean in general, belong to all of us, and that people from the Midwest who may never, ever visit the Everglades or go saltwater fishing, still derive pleasure from envisioning these places as pristine, preserved wilderness.
I would argue that those of us who utilize the areas in question have a much greater stake in protecting these places than someone who just likes to know it’s there, and that excluding those of us who care about the area in question the most is bad public policy.