Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print
Marine parks next wave of water wars (Read 7172 times)
Jasignature
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3925
Scam Syd-i-knee
Gender: male
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #15 - Dec 30th, 2010 at 11:53am
 
You're missing the point on the Great Barrier Reef, besides it not being for the purpose of Fishing. Its more for Tourism and a lot of other things pertaining to the higher realm of human existence upon this planet.

When I associate it with NSW - it is in regards to something done upon such a scale. I'm sorry if I didn't clarify properly. Victoria seems steadfast upon dumping more and more Ex-naval and other Vessels into the sea along its coast as an 'artificial reef' by-product of the immediate design to be a recreational 'dive Mecca' to rival Truk Lagoon.
NSW is trying with Avoca and Ex-HMAS Adelaide, but it seems cursed from the start ...so culturally, I don't think that is NSW's path to take.

I can see the NO TAKE ZONE doing for Fishing in NSW what the GBR does for Tourism in QLD.
All the Fishermen concerned in New Zealand regarding the Poor Knights Islands becoming a No Take Zone put up a real stink in regards to their selfish needs. Now they think it is a blessing.

My idea was to turn the Five Islands off Wollongong/Port Kembla into a No-Take-Zone ...as an experiment that would be better than anything a scientist could cough up with genetically engineered 'plastic' fish for the gullible. Science is not the answer to everything, especially when science seems unable to think for itself a lot of the times.
Thankfully the Spearos put the population of Grey Nurse Sharks into a more accurate account because the Scientists just had no idea. Who knows what we would have put up with - genetically engineered baby GN sharks  Roll Eyes to compensate.

I'm pretty sure the Five Islands would improve, besides offering the people of the local area a growth in Diver Tourism, local Recreational Fishermen the benefit from whatever spillover there is from an area set out aside for the fish to enjoy the equivalent of a 'Motel Room' with the "Do not Disturb" sign in full effect.

If you wonder why Conservationists expect an 80% increase in Sanctuary Zones ...its probably because the Aquatic Life has taken an 80% pounding from Fishing/Trawling/etc.

All this 'mass' Fishing and for what? To feed dangerously over-populated nations. Thats right, keep feeding the obese kid in the high chair, especially when there is a buck to be made like some bad influence 'Co-Dependent'.

Back to top
 

U.nited&&F.ederation of&&O.ceania&&...for all Austr-Aliens
 
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1330
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #16 - Dec 30th, 2010 at 12:15pm
 
How on Earth is the GBRMP and it's supposed effect on tourism of any relevance to propsed NSW marine parks and their effects on fishing?

PS:There is no evidence the GBRMP has benefited tourism either! Only a proportion of tourist actually dive on the reef and only a handful of reefs are regularly visited by tourist. If you must have NTZ's so that tourists have a lot of fish to look at you would only need a few, not 30% of the reef.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 30th, 2010 at 4:26pm by pjb05 »  
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 25220
I like fish
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #17 - Dec 30th, 2010 at 7:51pm
 
Quote:
Ironically, it is the Australian Commercial Fishing Industry that seems to be the major player behind this Conservational manouver.
The gist is that with the ACFI making a strict NO TAKE ZONE from 1km to 20 km out to sea (usually off the shelf) - they are achieving two things: knocking out their chief competitor - the Recreational Fishing Industry and providing a sanctuary for the fish to recouperate and proliferate to become 'spillover' beyond the 20km zone. This is due that most Recreational Fishermen can't afford to go beyond 20kms and they can't really ban Father's and their kids fishing from shore so thats where the 1km comes into play (might be reduced in future to 200metres?).
This goes with the fact that many Restaurants are buying fish from Recreational Fishermen 'under the table' and not from Commercial Fishermen.


Sounds a bit far fetched to me Jas. The commercial sector will always loose. They are the weaker one, politically and economically, so it would be unwise for them to start that fight. Plus the idea itself is silly as it would increase their fuel costs.

Quote:
I think the level of 'enforcement' along the NSW coast has to be looked into a lot more - go to Stockton Beach and you see one guy working x20 rods off the beach ...and there are a lot of these guys doing such.
If I had a dollar for every guy I've heard brag how they don't pay for licences (they just run or high-tail it) and take whatever they want without any trouble.
So I think its easy to make Sanctuaries - but its another thing to make 'effective enforcement'. Recreational Fisherman DILLIGAF the whole situation, so I kinda see the Commercial point of view as the more responsible, besides protecting their own future.


If you put no-take zones adjacent to popular tourist and land based fishing spots, enforcement will be a lot easier.

Quote:
The spillover benefit you talk of is theoretical


Don't be silly PJ. We have been over this enough times for you to know this is not true.

Quote:
There are more fish in NSW waters than there have been for years


LOL PJ, and you have the gall to accuse others of making stuff up.
Back to top
 

Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger - Franklin P. Jones
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1330
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #18 - Dec 30th, 2010 at 8:08pm
 
[] Quote:
[quote]The spillover benefit you talk of is theoretical


Don't be silly PJ. We have been over this enough times for you to know this is not true.

Who is being silly? I have put up numerous papers from very experienced and highly credentialed fisheries scientists who have said the same.NB I said benefit, not effect.

Quote:
There are more fish in NSW waters than there have been for years


LOL PJ, and you have the gall to accuse others of making stuff up]

Anecdotaly there is plenty of evidence of improvements in numbers of fish like salmon, spotted mackeral and kingfish for instance since the mid 1990's. Yo cannot deny that much of the commercial effort was removed in the 1990's and this corresponded with the catch rate being halved. At the same time the CPU of the remaining fishermen increased, pointing to a greater abundance. Your smug, lazy one line rebutals don't prove anything.    
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 30th, 2010 at 10:13pm by pjb05 »  
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 25220
I like fish
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #19 - Dec 30th, 2010 at 10:18pm
 
Quote:
Anecdotaly there is plenty of evidence of improvements in numbers of fish like salmon, spotted mackeral and kingfish for instance since the mid 1990's. Yo cannot deny that much of the commercial effort was removed in the 1990's and this corresponded with the catch rate being halved. At the same time the CPU of the remaining fishermen increased, pointing to a greater abundance. Your smug, lazy one line rebutals don't prove anything.


Grin

You make it too easy for me PJ. Now you are claiming that the dismal failure of traditional fisheries management tools in the case of kingfish is actually evidence that fish numbers are increasing. Perhaps you think that because kingfish didn't go extint and eventually recovered it proves how well you can do without marine parks?
Back to top
 

Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger - Franklin P. Jones
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Jasignature
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3925
Scam Syd-i-knee
Gender: male
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #20 - Dec 30th, 2010 at 11:18pm
 
Quote:
Sounds a bit far fetched to me Jas. The commercial sector will always loose. They are the weaker one, politically and economically, so it would be unwise for them to start that fight. Plus the idea itself is silly as it would increase their fuel costs.

Well I always thought that the Australian Commercial Fishing Industry, especially in South Australia, was one of our most productive and powerful industries ...a lot of millionaires at Port Lincoln, etc. But I might be wrong.
The Fuel Factor was always on my mind in consideration of this 19km wide and very very long NO TAKE ZONE ...especially with Fuel prices set to rise, if not rocket. Maybe they didn't take this into consideration?
Maybe they take 'alternative' power methods into consideration ...although I doubt it?

Quote:
Who is being silly? I have put up numerous papers from very experienced and highly credentialed fisheries scientists who have said the same.NB I said benefit, not effect.

Sorry PJ, but I don't always bat to the balls bowled by Scientists and Researchers, as many times they are completely 'wrong' ...pending the price paid. Like I said - Scientists forever plugged only x50 Grey Nurse Sharks for over a decade based upon 'Research' and this became common knowledge to the general public until a lot of Spearos came forth upon a Current Affairs program and proved 'visually' that there were way more GNSharks out there. So I tend to believe the people 'actually in the thick of it' rather than just scientific papers.

Quote:
Anecdotaly there is plenty of evidence of improvements in numbers of fish like salmon, spotted mackeral and kingfish for instance since the mid 1990's. Yo cannot deny that much of the commercial effort was removed in the 1990's and this corresponded with the catch rate being halved. At the same time the CPU of the remaining fishermen increased, pointing to a greater abundance. Your smug, lazy one line rebutals don't prove anything.



You make it too easy for me PJ. Now you are claiming that the dismal failure of traditional fisheries management tools in the case of kingfish is actually evidence that fish numbers are increasing. Perhaps you think that because kingfish didn't go extint and eventually recovered it proves how well you can do without marine parks?


Whatever it takes I guess: Marine Parks for Aquatic rejuvenation and Dive tourism or a restructure of Fishing practices and quotas.
Either way, something has to be done.
...I'm pretty sure the immense Hawaiin Islands Sanctuary Zone is making a difference. Probably the one admirable thing George Bush did.

I'm not against Fishing, in fact I wish Australian Fishing was much better. But I don't need to be a Conservationist to realise that things aren't as they should be. I'm just as tough with Conservationists - they should be implementing more into the Aquatic World besides just saying "No" to Fishing.
At the moment, Sanctuaries, Parks and No Take Zones are an immediate and effective 'Respite', let alone saving grace for some really special underwater environments.
But I expect Conservationists, even Scientists who think they know everything except the ability to think for themselves, to start designing and making effective Artificial Reefs that stimulate Aquatic growth x3 as fast as what a natural Bommie can do. We need to have these Artificial Reefs, not just small ones, in place so as to provide adequate Fishing Stocks for the future of this country. Fishing 'jobs' are not an issue considering many 'conservationists' volunteer their efforts much like many other people in this country - so the Fishermen should just HTFU ! Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

U.nited&&F.ederation of&&O.ceania&&...for all Austr-Aliens
 
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1330
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #21 - Dec 31st, 2010 at 10:31am
 
[] Quote:
Anecdotaly there is plenty of evidence of improvements in numbers of fish like salmon, spotted mackeral and kingfish for instance since the mid 1990's. Yo cannot deny that much of the commercial effort was removed in the 1990's and this corresponded with the catch rate being halved. At the same time the CPU of the remaining fishermen increased, pointing to a greater abundance. Your smug, lazy one line rebutals don't prove anything.


Grin

You make it too easy for me PJ. Now you are claiming that the dismal failure of traditional fisheries management tools in the case of kingfish is actually evidence that fish numbers are increasing. Perhaps you think that because kingfish didn't go extint and eventually recovered it proves how well you can do without marine parks? [/quote]


I didn't just mention kingfish FD. In any case traditional techniques aslo got us out of the overfishing problem regarding kingfish. And given their remarkable recovery, maybe they weren't all that overfished to begin with. Another observation would be that kingfish and other inshore fish have a lot of natural resilience with regard to fishing pressure.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 31st, 2010 at 11:03am by pjb05 »  
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 25220
I like fish
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #22 - Dec 31st, 2010 at 3:58pm
 
Quote:
In any case traditional techniques aslo got us out of the overfishing problem regarding kingfish. And given their remarkable recovery, maybe they weren't all that overfished to begin with.


So I was right about you setting the bar that low? So long as they don't go extinct then the fisheries management have done their job?
Back to top
 

Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger - Franklin P. Jones
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1330
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #23 - Dec 31st, 2010 at 4:26pm
 
freediver wrote on Dec 31st, 2010 at 3:58pm:
Quote:
In any case traditional techniques aslo got us out of the overfishing problem regarding kingfish. And given their remarkable recovery, maybe they weren't all that overfished to begin with.


So I was right about you setting the bar that low? So long as they don't go extinct then the fisheries management have done their job?


Actually no fish species has ever become extinct as the result of fishing.

Furthermore, do you deny kingfish stocks are now relatively healthy? How is that fact less relevant than something that happened 15 years ago? And what about all the other points I have made - why does everything suddenly rest on kingfish?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 25220
I like fish
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #24 - Dec 31st, 2010 at 4:54pm
 
Quote:
Actually no fish species has ever become extinct as the result of fishing.


And that is about the extent of the effectiveness of traditional fisheries management tools. So I was right, you really are setting the bar that low?

Quote:
And what about all the other points I have made - why does everything suddenly rest on kingfish?


There are plenty of other species that have experienced or are currently experiencing a collapse that can be attributed to the shortcomings of tradtional fisheries management tools. I just thought it was ironic that you used one of them as an example to show how great those management techniques are. You brought it up PJ, so don't blame me for pointing out the irony.
Back to top
 

Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger - Franklin P. Jones
WWW  
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1330
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #25 - Dec 31st, 2010 at 5:03pm
 
[]Actually no fish species has ever become extinct as the result of fishing. [/quote]

And that is about the extent of the effectiveness of traditional fisheries management tools. So I was right, you really are setting the bar that low?

The countries that have done the best in making their fisheries sustainable didn't use marine parks as the main management tool. Also there is no reason you can't set the bar high with traditional management tools.

Quote:
And what about all the other points I have made - why does everything suddenly rest on kingfish?


There are plenty of other species that have experienced or are currently experiencing a collapse that can be attributed to the shortcomings of tradtional fisheries management tools. I just thought it was ironic that you used one of them as an example to show how great those management techniques are. You brought it up PJ, so don't blame me for pointing out the irony. [/quote]

Isaid a lot of our species are in healthy numbers and are on the way up - how could I leave kingfish out? Nothing ironic about that. Are you saying the past errors are more relevant than the present situation? Are you saying that marine parks are needed purely as a precaution against already learned mistakes?
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 31st, 2010 at 5:51pm by pjb05 »  
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 25220
I like fish
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #26 - Dec 31st, 2010 at 8:06pm
 
Quote:
The countries that have done the best in making their fisheries sustainable didn't use marine parks as the main management tool.


Duh. No countries did, until very recently. Hence your ability to comprehend the term 'traditional fisheries management tools.'

Quote:
Also there is no reason you can't set the bar high with traditional management tools.


http://www.ozpolitic.com/fish/marine-parks-fisheries-management-tool.html#failur...

Quote:
Isaid a lot of our species are in healthy numbers and are on the way up


Can you tell me why they were down?

Quote:
Are you saying the past errors are more relevant than the present situation?


No, but we won't know what errors we are currently making until they become apparent. Obviously if we knew about all of them at the time we wouldn't make them.

Quote:
Are you saying that marine parks are needed purely as a precaution against already learned mistakes?


http://www.ozpolitic.com/fish/marine-parks-fisheries-management-tool.html#failur...
Back to top
 

Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger - Franklin P. Jones
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Jasignature
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3925
Scam Syd-i-knee
Gender: male
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #27 - Dec 31st, 2010 at 10:11pm
 
An entire Seminar at the last Oztek show was dedicated to the Orange Roughy nearly being fished out in Aust/NZ waters and how a  lot of (so far discovered) rare deep sea 'Coral Reefs and Sponge Gardens' south of Tasmania were practically obliterated by trawlers. From a 'temperate' deep sea Coral Garden to ...sand.

I believe the Australian Fishing Industry is making sincere efforts to change for the better these days.
Back to top
 

U.nited&&F.ederation of&&O.ceania&&...for all Austr-Aliens
 
IP Logged
 
pjb05
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 1330
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #28 - Jan 1st, 2011 at 6:25am
 
Quote:
The countries that have done the best in making their fisheries sustainable didn't use marine parks as the main management tool.


Duh. No countries did, until very recently. Hence your ability to comprehend the term 'traditional fisheries management tools.'

So you don't deny my point?

Quote:
Also there is no reason you can't set the bar high with traditional management tools.


http://www.ozpolitic.com/fish/marine-parks-fisheries-management-tool.html#failur...

Can you give at least a short reply instead of making me look up links.

Quote:
Isaid a lot of our species are in healthy numbers and are on the way up


Can you tell me why they were down?

Duh, any significant fishing effort will mean there are less fish around than if there is no fishing effort. In other words the only way they had to go was down. It is not neccessarliy a sign of failure that a fishery will expand in the early stages and then consolidate at a lower level. It sounds like you are confused about what you want ie sustainable fishing or the preservationist anti-use philosophy.  

Quote:
Are you saying the past errors are more relevant than the present situation?


No, but we won't know what errors we are currently making until they become apparent. Obviously if we knew about all of them at the time we wouldn't make them.

Now you invoking the Precautionary Principle. You could just as logically apply that to marine parks because we don't know what effects they might have on an unprecedented scale.

Quote:
Are you saying that marine parks are needed purely as a precaution against already learned mistakes?


http://www.ozpolitic.com/fish/marine-parks-fisheries-management-tool.html#failur... [/quote]

Why all the links?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 25220
I like fish
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #29 - Jan 1st, 2011 at 8:46am
 
Quote:
So you don't deny my point?


I think you are making a logical fallacy.

Quote:
Can you give at least a short reply instead of making me look up links.


Traditional fisheries management techniques fail fishermen in two ways. They fail by allowing fisheries to collapse despite the best efforts of fisheries managers. They also fail in that they force fisheries managers to set extremely conservative restrictions on both recreational and commercial fishermen in order to overcome the flaws inherent to the techniques that are currently used. Marine parks can help to overcome both of these problems, allowing for an increase in catch rates and a more sustainable fishery. If implemented with the active cooperation of fishermen, they can also make enforcement simpler, reduce the cost to fishermen of catching a fish and make fishing more convenient.

Quote:
Duh, any significant fishing effort will mean there are less fish around than if there is no fishing effort. In other words the only way they had to go was down. It is not neccessarliy a sign of failure that a fishery will expand in the early stages and then consolidate at a lower level.


But that is not what happened, is it? What I asked was whether you could give an explanation of why they were previously lower than now.

Quote:
It sounds like you are confused about what you want ie sustainable fishing or the preservationist anti-use philosophy.
 

It sounds like you have a reading comprehension problem.

Quote:
Now you invoking the Precautionary Principle. You could just as logically apply that to marine parks because we don't know what effects they might have on an unprecedented scale.


There is both real world evidence and a lot of common sense supporting the view that marine parks make fisheries more resilient.
Back to top
 

Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an acquaintance, or a stranger - Franklin P. Jones
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print