California Halibut Carcasses Wanted!!!

Just so everyone is aware, this person may be the same Cheryl Barnes who is directly responsible for helping to get your fishing areas closed via the MLPA:

http://spearboard.com/showthread.php?t=147083

Thanks Dutra for posting that here!

I have no doubt we'll react to this with more class and courteousness than was shown on spearboard.   

-Allen

Yow! They really stuck it to her on that board!

True

I have no doubt we'll react to this with more class and courteousness than was shown on spearboard.   

-Allen

She has an anti-fishing agenda. She actually arranged to bus protectionists to MLPA meetings. Then she has the audacity to post on multiple fishing boards asking for assistance to further her undisclosed agenda, taking advantage of the open, trusting and good natured spirit of the greater sport fishing community.

I think the spearos showed considerable restraint given the situation.

I have no doubt we'll react to this with more class and courteousness than was shown on spearboard.   

-Allen

How do you politely tell someone to go pound sand?


I'm already suspect of BJ's science friends, I did a half assed search for her name but couldn't link it to anything directly related to the ncc mlpa.  I will research mlpa public comment further, Id be willing to bet we find similar public testimony here (as if the socal involvement wasn't enough though). 

Cheryl, do you not think it's hypocritical and deceitful to ask us for help after taking sides against us and asking for closures? 



Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

I can't speak to whether or not Cheryl has an agenda.  She has told me she does not.  I think her stated mission, to better understand these fish, is admirable.  My concern is how her findings will be used and I've told her this.  She has indicated she has no control over how her research findings will be used.  I'm guessing her data likely won't result in a loosening or status qoe halibut fishery, rather, more restrictive in some form. 

I'm very conflicted about participating though I have donated one carcass (yesterday-I'll have to live with it).  On the one hand, we should know more about this great fish and on the other..., the powers-that-be (w/ an agenda), backed by an uniformed and gulible citizenry, will seize anything available to further restrict sport and commercial fishing.

I have been personally impacted by the commercial fishery restrictions as have friends and family.  I left the industry when the bay was declared a "sanctuary."  I'm not sure I'll be participating in Cheryl's program from this point forward, still trying to work this out.  For those that do, God bless.  This study will apparently occur so let's hope it helps the fish and not the agenda.         

It's easy to be conflicted on the subject, we have both a need and demand for better science but, after consistently get burned by "scientists", it's difficult to know who we can trust.

Track records do speak for themselves though.  She can say she has no agenda but her opinion is on public record in the socal mlpa process and she's asking for unneeded closures .  In addition she organized folks to speak against us.  There's a line in the sand....she's clearly not on our side.

Whether or not her current work is going to be used against us....I can't possibly forsee it benefitting us.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

The last time I helped in a "survey" or "progam/ Project"  I lost my half of my fishing grounds.  (The good half.)
Tell her to "Fish it up buttercup."  Zip your lips.   

I have no doubt we'll react to this with more class and courteousness than was shown on spearboard.   

-Allen

+1

 

Whatever you think of Cheryl's motives/opinions/beliefs I do not believe that is any reason to personally attack or insult her.

Yes, I am biased because I consider her a friend. I have plenty of friends whose opinions I don't agree with, many of whom are members here...

Her CA Halibut project seems unrelated to me to the MLPA process in SoCal, and I still think it is research that may be valuable to helping sustain our fishing and the resource...

I know many on here will disagree and slam me for this and that's fine...everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I would like to think that we have the opportunity to discuss these issues with Cheryl and let her know why we feel the way we do about our passion for fishing...Insulting and slamming her will not help "us" at all in my opinion.

My 2 cents.

Sincerely,

Jim

Dear NCKA,

This message is in response to the personal attacks that I have received on spearboard.com.  It is important for me to address you as a group because you (NCKA) are the people that I wish to work closely with and who have been so helpful and gracious to me in the past.  I value your continued support and collaboration…and hope that you will give me the benefit of the doubt when reading this. 

First, everything that I have said with reference to this project is complete truth.  I am simply a graduate student looking to complete a study that is of importance to members of the fishing community and resource management.  My family and many of my friends are fishermen.  I do not wish harm to them nor anyone else with my research.  I simply hope to gather missing information, which may or may not better equip fishery managers (though additional data can only help us understand where we stand).  I am not looking to skew results or twist conclusions to fit any predetermined idea.  I understand that that is not only not useful, but actually detrimental to the scientific process and to my study.

Secondly, I understand (I admit, only to some degree) how the MLPA process has affected fishers throughout California.  To clear one thing up, I never organized groups to shuttle to MLPA meetings.  In fact, I was only able to attend one or two myself…as I was focused on helping restore white seabass populations, teaching kids about marine biology and assisting the community in preventing storm water contaminants and sewage outfall.  With reference to the written comments made at one of the meetings: I was simply stating that since MPAs were being instituted with the goal of serving as tools for conservation, that they should be placed in areas with suitable habitat and/or adjacent to existing reserves (I actually don’t know where the part about surfers came in).  A comment not relayed to the group was that I also believed MPAs should benefit both non-consumptive users and fishermen (through spill over, etc). 

I want you to know that I truly aim to conduct a scientifically rigorous study and produce unbiased results.  This is the point of my graduate education.  I am not looking to prove any one potential outcome and can assure you that the data will speak for themselves. I am simply seeking the truth and attempting to characterize what is taking place in our region.  I do not wish to participate in advocacy or decision-making.  I instead want to make sure that those who are responsible for making fishery regulations are well-informed.  Above all, I am truly interested in working with fishermen rather than against them to collect data on socially, economically and/or ecologically important species.

Lastly, I hope that those of you who know (or have met) me realize that I am not a malicious or manipulative person.  To the rest of you, I understand your hesitation.  Because you do not know me, I encourage you to ask questions rather than point fingers or call names.  Regardless, some of you may think that this is just another push of some predetermined agenda.  All I can say is that I am not trying to tell you what you want to hear.  I am simply looking to increase our understanding about the reproductive capabilities of local California Halibut.

Sincerely,
Cheryl

Maybe you can answer the questions for us you failed to answer for them.  Be honest 100% an u might convince some to help you, I doubt it but whats the worse that can happen.

What is your stance on:
1. Ocean Access
2. The MLPA process
3. Existing MPAs/SMCAs
4. Sustainable Take
5. Ocean Stock Assessment

Maybe you can answer the questions for us you failed to answer for them.  Be honest 100% an u might convince some to help you, I doubt it but whats the worse that can happen.

What is your stance on:
1. Ocean Access
2. The MLPA process
3. Existing MPAs/SMCAs
4. Sustainable Take
5. Ocean Stock Assessment

Derrick, you are our new attache.  Questioning scientist?  Questioning media?  Never been done before! 
For every question asked, I want one of yours answered too.

Love it. 

She denied the most egregious allegations. Unless and until someone proves her wrong that will be good enough for me.

The  person who made those allegations on the other site should provide evidence or apologize.

To be fair you have to remember all the times this State has been burned bad by "protect-it -to -death" whackos masquerading as "scientists".   Remember all the "facts" about spotted owls that turned out to be political theater? Spotted owls are down to their lowest numbers ever recorded since timber management was stopped. Except of course on private industrial timber land where their numbers are up. Where did the guru of owl science end up? In jail for fraud and embezzlement of funds for owl studies.
I am NOT saying this is that just trying to address some of the reasons for the reactions on here.

California is a mess and common sense here is sadly absent. No wonder people are suspect.