Are seals really that big a problem? Yeah, No.

Seals aren't a problem for Genie, the 2000# Great White cruising off Nantucket.  Track her here.

http://sharks-ocearch.verite.com/

They are breakfast, lunch and dinner.

Which got me wondering.  If seals are following charter fishing boats for easy pickin's, wouldn't Great Whites eventually do the same to pick off these distracted seals? And if both are no longer scared of man, who merely drives funny loud boats with prey trailing behind, aren't we humans just luring them both closer and closer to populated areas like beaches and the harbor?

Matt   

talk about smoke screen, no one can answer that...."China also plays a pivotal role in the global seafood industry. In fact, China is now the world’s leading exporter of marine fish products, outranking Peru, Norway, the Russian Federation, the USA, Thailand and Chile in 2006. Despite these statistics, details of the fish re-processing industry (i.e. from imported materials) are not well understood owing to a lack of publicly available data. Better understanding of how fisheries resources are used by China, and the extent to which these processes are controlled by national and international regulations, is an essential component of effective global fisheries management. By illuminating the role China plays in fish reprocessing, the extent to which China must be involved in solutions to the problems of overfishing and illegal, unreported and unregulated catches (IUU) is highlighted. " www.thefishsite.com/articles/753/understandin-chinas-fish-trade-and-traceability-system.com

here is the flip side according to the FDA

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Testimony/ucm115243.htm

and since the FDA thinks it is just fine to feed trusting americans pink slime here is something else from the whistleblowers

http://www.wnd.com/2007/06/41907/

yum..

Also, and this is more of a matter of opinion than a point of fact, my beleif is that people have a right to eat. But they no longer have a right to fish to eat when they can easily drive into the mid island and go talk to David Glidden and get a really nice piece of fish that is of high quality and affordable for them. No more than I have a right to raise cattle or pigs on my land becuase I want a steak or BBQ ribs. 

Me raising livestock on my land would put an undue stress on my neighbors and the common wealth. Just as people overfishing our waters for fun are putting an undue stress on the common wealth. 

One thing is clear. No one on this island, save the very poor, are fishing becuase they have to to survive. So the claim that they have a right to fish to eat, in a time of depeleted fish stocks, is suspect. 

Two things.

I think I need to see some refernce link or citation to back up your assertion that wealthy Chinese people eat all our good fish. I'm not calling you a liar, but I have never heard such a claim and am wondering if you are confused on this point. 

Conservation groups are not calling anyone "seal haters." I did. I am not a member of any conservation group. I'm just an agitator. 

I would say "human overfishing" is too broad a statement. ..I'd break this group down to 1. individuals out exercising their basic human right to catch food. 2. traditional sized fishing vessels (already regulated nearly out of existence) 3.recreational/tour fishing(are there enough of those to bother) 4. foreign owned off shore ship harvester/ processing plants

personally I think an individuals right to procure food from the ocean supersedes any commercial activity. next I think small scale fishing boats have a right to harvest fish from our public waters and sell it with in the states. I think it is obscene the amount of our highest quality fish that is shipped to feed the very wealthiest Chinese and in return they send us unknown tainted fish from their polluted waters for cheep. Nantucket's own history of whaling illustrates how over demand and human nature can wipe out a species..Times have changed our understanding of the environment has grown. Unfortunately conservation groups have little authority over the Chinese floating factories or the free market financial incentive to over fish for export purposes...so they focus on the individual or small privately owned fishing vessels... and the bans and limits it imposes is increasingly a one way street. For example the ban on Herring... initiated in 2005 for 5 years.. when the term was up it was extended for 3 years. The herring have not increased substantially .. If human overfishing was really the problem at this point, a 7 year ban on all herring should show improvement. Seals love herring. a bigger issue on the mainland and conservation efforts have made a big impact in getting barriers to fish breeding grounds removed or engineering them so that fish can still get through. of course us islanders learned from the local native Americans the importance of keeping these inland waterways clear and have always had sizable pipes under madaket road under the bridges for that reason...so yes I think Islanders would and have done a better job of protecting our resourses that the regulatory board with no expertese in our ocean environments

so to answer your question I think conservation groups calling fishermen "seal haters" is a red herring and I think I as just a mere human on the food chain I do not want to see the masses stripped of there basic right to fish or hunt or grow a garden on their front lawn or just take a walk on the beach in the name of conservation.

What does one say to the claim made by several conservation groups that all of this seal hatred is nothing more than an attempt to create a smoke screen that can obscure the fact that human overfishing is a real problem that needs to be addressed?

G. 

Hey.  #5, the road builder, should join the Planning Board.  Ooops.  Never mind.  He has a PhD and probably pollutes his mind with that fancy readin' stuff.  ;) 

Matt

Yes Please "lets ask a scientists".. so I was curious and hopped over to the mass wildlife board of directors page. These are the experts who make the regulations and set policy

board member #1- expert on the Berkshires and local ecology

board member #2-Lawyer

board member #3 teacher with advanced degrees in administration

board member #4 expert on quabbin rez in western mass,

board member #5 a PhD in endangered species who was formerly the chairman of dept of forestry (the largest road building company in the country

board member #Forest biologist

board member #7 agriculture

so bottom line.. despite being another Island dullard, capital letter abusing, potential baby seal clubber, I probably have completed more college course work in oceanography, habitats, species evolution and environmental succession than some of your policy making experts. no I don't really consider myself an expert but I am educated on on my own environment and community ..so don't write us all off as disgruntled recreational fishermen please

I'd like to hear from scientist who have no skin in the game and no particular connection to the Island

Seal noses. I bet there are some human noses that might make you 5$ richer per.  Please don't start with mine.

I have found that it is easy to judge the strength of an opinion solely by the number of capital letters, explamation points and type size changes used to espouse it. 

If you don't beleive me, ask a scientist. Go to the UMass Field Station and ask around. Call the Mass Deprtment of Fisheries and Wildlife and see what they say.

But to change an important piece of legislation in order to assuage a handful of frustrated recreational fishermen, to me, is backwards. 

I asked Libby Gibson last weekend if she would pay $5 a nose again for a bounty on seals. She asked that I not bring any noses to her office.  

G. 

What's ironic about the sarcasm over the recent lobbying to relieve the seals from their title as a protected species is very glaring.

Here's the thing. You say, man ought not interfere with nature, because when we do, ultimately it doesn't end well? That's pretty much the bulk of your argument. Fine. In fact, couldn't agree more. So back in the 70s when man interfered with nature and made seals a protected species. Guess man really screwed himself. Here we are in 2012 the stench from the seals is enough to knock you out; the Muskeget vole - how much habitat is left for it; the FISHERMEN who make their living catching fish that are pretty much convenient appetizers once their on the hook; and last but certainly not least, the great whites that are quite happy hunting closer and closer to our shores as the seals come in to get a good look at our beaches... at our dogs, at our families....

Tourists want to feed them, name them, slap a collar on them and teach them to roll over... which only brings them closer to where you're sitting on the beach.

The Marine Mamal Protection Act was all well and good back in 72 when the seals were losing their steam in the waters. Hunted by us, sharks and wales... it wasn't looking good.

Now however, that we're a good 40 years onward, have learned a few things in that 40 years, it's pure adaptation at its bests. Adapt or die. The fishery is suffering needlessly. It's easy when your livelihood depends on readers not to be overly concerned about a whole different market, however, I wonder if other Yackers livelihoods were equally threatened they would be singing a different tune. I'm not trying to be either a protagonist or an antagonist. I'm merely trying to talk sense. Grant, this is what you preach. Sense talking.

Am I really on the dark side here, or just speaking the truth?

-Collette Christiano

Go get 'em Lobbyists! In order to keep nature in balance, if a species is "protected" to the point of causing a threat to the local fishermen, to the local species, clearly WE ARE OUT OF BALANCE. Time to step in and FIX what we broke.

I had the pleasure yesterday of meeting the wife of the man behind all of the lobbying on our behalf. I couldn't have been happier to hear about all of his efforts. There's a guy in Washington happy to lobby on our behalf for a buck a year, that's right for $1.00 a year because he knows just how bad this thing is getting.

GreenACKer, you are out of order with your numbers. It should be 3,1,2. And 2 should not be on the list at all. Personal obvservation is all.

What do you do? Nothing. History has clearly shown that Man's actions, no matter how well intentioned, are far more damaging than their inaction. The wild does much better when we step away from it. 

Yes I agree, Grant, it is supposition. So let's suppose that ... with all the beach closings that we have had this summer due to toxicity and algae levels in the water... well, we found out that the main culprits are 1. diapers, 2. dog waste, and 3. fertilizer run-off.

While it's still hard for me to wrap my head around putting dog poop in a plastic bag and taking it to the landfill is actually better for the environment than letting it decompose naturally ... I am learning just how costly so much "dog waste" can be to the waters we swim in.

I digress. Suppose with thousands of seals breading on an island with an approximate acreage of 292, wouldn't you say that the water for the vole on such an island might be contaminated? Wouldn't you suppose that the vole's own breeding grounds were being moved in on? I mean, how could one suppose otherwise?

I'm not arguing for arguing-sake. I'm just trying to show a different side of the coin. I do not have an answer or even a clue as to how to bring the seal number down... but I do think it ought to go down. I do not like to mess with mother nature more than the next guy, however, when local fisherman are having fish taken right off of their hooks by the seals... when the seals are luring in sharks into shallow waters... and when unique and local species may or may NOT be negatively impacted by the sheer number of seals...

well, what do you do?

All those seals and another year has passed without myself and my dog taking a drive to Great Point, Costkata or Coatue.  The Trustees would get my money if my best guy could go for a ride so we could both experience the beauty that is off-limits to passengers with 4 paws and a tail.  I understand him not being allowed to snack on tasty Plovers.  Yeah, yeah off-topic. 

Jo

Them looks like lots of seals!

Matt

I think we need to charge everyone who wants to go over to Muskeget $140 for a permit. Then when their money is collected, close the beach and put up fences and signs telling everyone they can't be there because of a mouse or a seal. You know, like they do at a certain other beach here on ACK all summer. Then we need to study the mice and seals.

Chookie Holdgate is rolling in his grave listening to all this. 

It's supposition on Mr. Snow's part. There is no proof that the vole is in any danger. 

The article in the Inky mentioned how they're now affecting the population of the Muskeget Vole.

In the words of AB ... Grant, "discuss."

When one species is causing the depletion of another... what do you do then? Let nature takes its course, even if it means another species lost and gone forever. (Yes, I may sound a wee bit dramatic, but I'm playing devil's advocate, worst-case-scenario here.)

What do you guys think?

Google maps, Great Point - no idea when this was taken.

There is a webcam on the top of Great Point Lighthouse. The unwashed general public can log onto it and see just how many seals are on the tip of Great Point. 

As an avid fisherman, I have had many run ins with the seals. I have no opinion on the seals, but I think most have no idea of how many are here. Go to Google earth and zoom in as close as possible on Monomoy on the Cape. Especially along the east side of the point. Thousands and thousands......

It looks as though YACK's resident seal expert left a long time ago along with Tobey (with an e). Those two crusty old salts are a wealth of information on this topic. I'm no expert on anything. Believe me. But I have a thought on the seal problem here on ACK. Nothing lasts forever. The only reason seals are here is fish. If their food source dries up, the seals will move on. Give this some more time. The seals will eventutually leave.

Discuss.

I think it's interesting that we refer to an ecosystem as "artificially protected" when we leave it alone. Artificially protected from what? From Man's excesses, sounds like. Now we have to jump in again and restore some kind of (artificial) equilibrium by messing with the seal population. Am I the only person seeing the illogic here?

Let's face the harsh reality that man has not traditionally been a good steward of the wild. The cost of destroying the wild is far greater than the loss of value to the recreational fishing industry due to Ol' Mossback. 

G. 

The trouble with tribles is too much of a cute thing can become a problem. The Marine Mammal protection act was a success..it changed the attitude and culture for most of us. Now we need to address the lack of balance in an artificially protected ecosystem..for all the reasons Noah pointed out. whether wolves or other success stories of protection. People in Maine are struggling with this now that bears are having a comeback and heading south... bears are cute too. Shark protectors passed legislation last year to try to outlaw finning..right up there with clubbing baby seals..who could be against that ? except that it is preaching to the choir, America has a healthy shark population because we do not eat shark fin soup...our ecosystems would be better protected if we limited exports. but it is a step, next on the agenda is to "protect" sharks from fishing entirely. Then our hands will be tied. We do need tweak Legislation to give humans reasonable even equal rights in coexisting with predatory animals. With the oceans warming and sharks moving north and artic sea mammals moving south ..we need to be flexible to deal with coming challenges

When the seals invade the harbor and start eating nubs, I will have a problem with them and have to cut their noses off.

Nobody here remembers when we used to cut their noses off and receive $5 for them.

Beatings will be accepted now.

I'm happy to disagree. In part.

When I left the Midwest, the debate was very similar, but it was over the population increases in the grey wolf. Once extirpated, reintroduction efforts and conservation measures increased the population to the point where the grey wolf population came smack against public safety concerns and deer predation issues.

While the issue is ongoing, the USFWS delisted the grey wolf, and future pushes will likely (IMO) result in a limited, lottery based, hunting season on the grey wolf.

What are the parallels? In Michigan the drive was led by public safety concerns, and depredation on local deer populations. The situation here is directly relatable: seals reduce fish stock, and while not alpha predators, attract sharks, which install the same fear responses and wolves do in the Midwest.

While wolves In Michigan pose no threat of actually decimating the deer herd (in fact, most studies show that the result will be a smaller, stronger, more ecologically sustainable herd), deer hunting is such a strong economic driver and traditional pastime that any threat is indeed a political issue. I would have to look up the exact stats again, but it's something along the lines of one million deer hunters take to the woods every november, and spend several hundreds of millions of dollars in license fees, motels, food and drink. It's enough that Michigan delegates in the state and congress certainly took notice to enforce a change in the law.

What can Nantucket learn from this? Depends on how proactive or shrill the various factions would like to be. I have not yet seen any scientific study that specifies what a balanced population (aka "carrying capacity") would be for the area, if we are short of it, near it, or over it. It is worth having a very frank discussion now.

If the deer hunting industry in Michigan can approach one billion dollars, what is the value of the Nantucket recreational and charter business? How does this intertwine with the overall economy? Off the top of my head I can think of a dozen charter boats and 4 tackle shops. I also know how psyched my guests and incidental tourists are to see a grey seal at the beach and take some photos.

Both of these activities need to exist in concert. I don't know where the balance should be. This past Saturday, i had to skip a bluefish in to keep DeCosta's old mossback from getting him. Three fish later a different seal got my blue and my Hopkins. I only fish great point a few times a summer, but with seal interference on 20% of my hookups, it is reasonable to think that another person might reconsider their purchase of a great point sticker, tackle, bait,rental car, and even the trip to Nantucket. For now, hooking a 400# grey seal is a good story, but for the future? Who knows.

I happen to love the fact that I've seen grey wolves,and heard them howling, and had the pleasure of knowing that I was not the only only alpha predator in the deep woods of northern Michigan. I've also known for years that when surfing the south shore of Nantucket that there was a deeper more powerful presence, whether it was the eternal pull of then ocean or the creatures that dwell within it.

But I also value my evolutionary supremacy: doing otherwise would be a slap in the face of mother nature herself. Deer and fish and beautiful left handers are there, should be there for the taking by men and women who will it.

For now, we owe ourselves the right to ask our federal scientists to find out what the ecological balance is between fish stocks, seals, sharks, and tourism. It is the classic three-headed social/environmental/economic problem. As an island population we are fortunate that people are bringing this problem to the forefront before we face a reactive agenda, pulling the issue one way or another too far.

Take for example, the state of Idaho. They are balanced in an absolute clusterfuck, with the statehouse trying to completely extirpate the grey wolf, and conservation groups trying to make any sort of lethal control (include a rancher protecting his stock from a direct attack), illegal.

We can do better. I am sure that if we try, we can find a reasonable balance Between conservation, and well, conservation. The Michigan DNR held a number of workshops before moving towards a reasonable management strategy, and perhaps Nantucket should do the same. We are at the beginning of a nascent problem, and any unifying steps the community can take now will go a long way to preventing further acrimony.

But then again, the summer season is almost over, and acrimony seems to be the favored Nantucket sport.

Great idea. Seals can be trained.

(Perhaps we could get 'em all to stack their barky-little-selfs up on 'Sconset Beach?)

QC