The Looe Key 0ns ite Survey indicated there were other zones 

 where wire fish traps are used by Looe Key fishermen. It is not definite 

 that the loss of fishing grounds in the five sq nm alternative could 

 not eventually be either partially or completely offset by setting 

 more traps in adjacent areas or moving to other localities to fish. 

 However, learning new areas takes time and there would be at least a 

 temporary reduction in fish catch and an accompanying economic loss 

 while fishermen located and became familiar with new fishing grounds. 



Use of wire fish traps is prohibited within the Key Largo 

 Marine Sanctuary because they indiscriminately catch and kill large 

 numbers of tropical fish species (personal communication, Gillen, 1979). 

 Reducing the population of tropical fish by the use of wire fish traps 

 can diminish its delicate balance, creating unnecessary additional 

 stress to this fragile ecosystem (Stevenson, 1978). 



Most visitors to the marine sanctuary depend on boundary 

 market buoys and other landmarks to determine their position within 

 the sanctuary. They do not visually carry sophisticated depth sounding 

 equipment aboard their small pleasure boats and would have difficulty 

 tracking several differing boundary restrictions. Therefore, for 

 regulations to be realistic and understandable to the general public, 

 they must be consistent throughout the sanctuary area and unchanging 

 with respect to depth. Therefore, this alternative would extend the 

 prohibition on wire trap use throughout the proposal area to the 140 

 foot depth and thus beyond the 100 foot depth proposed in the Snapper- 

 Grouper FMP. 



109 



