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 !