It’s Saipan that needs protecting

One of the base ideas that protected areas across the planet are created upon is that human activity causes a negative change in the numbers, diversity and behaviors of animal and other natural life. Restricting human’s actions was and is still one of the first steps if natural life is threatened. The process of identifying the offending activity and stopping it is called regulation and enforcement. One of, if not the greatest, hurdle to the efforts of reversing biomass decline is the actual enforcement of well thought out regulations. Some people think the rules don’t apply to them, or they don’t like the rules, so they are ignored. Others know it is wrong, but do their best to not get caught. On top of this we are sneaky creatures, and if there is a loophole someone will find it. This means regulations can be less effective than intended, and usually are. More study and regulations are then needed, as well as more enforcement.

The islands north of Saipan have little human activity compared the main islands, and have different regulation and enforcement needs. Anatahan and islands north are also young in terms of geological age compared to those south. It doesn’t help most fish or coral in the short or medium run to have volcanic ash being dumped in the water either. The islands north do not have any encircling reefs or lagoons. They tend to drop off very quickly and have little in terms of protective shallows. This is important to understand because lagoons and shallows provide critical habitat for many non-pelagic juvenile fish. The resulting adult reef fish are then able to move to other islands.

Saipan should be a marine biomass bank for the rest of the NMI. Human activity and non-traditional fishing practices have caused a great decline in the fish biomass on and around the island. When I first arrived on Saipan there were no traffic signal lights. The next decade saw those and a substantial rise in human population and consequent fishing efforts. The practices with lesser negative effects are and were traditional fishing practices, non-scuba spearfishing, and trolling. Heinz Hofschnieder led the successful efforts for the MPA status of Managaha, Bird Island and other parts of Saipan we see today. It’s not enough, however. The lagoon and near shore waters are still overfished by the sheer number of people fishing. Look at the beach during an e-e run. See as I did so often multiple boats pulling in huge gillnets after an all-night set (but don’t ask me about the incident I had with some of those doing this). I’ve climbed down hundreds of fishing places on Saipan in search of big Giant Trevalle caught with lures. Nearly every place had the trash left from bait cliff fishing: empty bait boxes; hook packages, cigarette butts, etc. It was disgusting to look at and smell. The weights and line that accumulate on the bottom kill fish long after they are initially used—as a diving guide on Saipan I saw this, and any current guide will tell you the same thing. Traditional leaders in the past made rules as to when, how, and who would fish. This, combined with the gear used, resulted in stable high biomass numbers. It is non-traditional fishing practices and efforts that have caused biomass to greatly decline. Just look at Guam’s reefs to see this.

Fishing is not a right, it’s a privilege. If you want the biomass to heal itself you must remove the fishing pressure. More MPAs are needed and an exponential reduction in fishing pressure by all but a few of the least harmful methods must be enacted. The political resistance will be large, but requiring a fishing license and fee for all non-traditional fishing must be considered.

The greatest negative effect of human activity on near shore marine biomass in the whole CNMI has taken place on Saipan. If you really wish to help the local environment, your attentions and efforts should be focused here, not where there is little human interaction and threat.