I'm sure I didn't come out all guns blazing on this subject - I think I would have been pulverised by the pair of you.
Quote:Come off it - your promoting marine parks as the ideal fisheries management tool. It's a question of scale. I'm against 20-30% of our waters being sanctuary zones. If you want a few areas for divers to look at fish or a few of unique consevation merit as green zones then that's OK by me. But that is not what your advocating is it?
Why do you keep thinking that anything less than 50% for areas set out for the wellbeing (recouperation/rejuvenation and
survival) of Aquatic Life is ideal?
Is the Australian Fisheries so inept that they can't make a profit from just 45% (let alone your 20-30%) of NSW 'Shelf' waters?
...as far as I know - Santuaries, Parks and Zones is as good as we have got it (especially when they symbolise what was once successful
'naturally' before the exploitation by the Fishing/Trawling Fleets that plagued the seas like rabbits to a good crop) ...so far.
Properly designed 'Artificial Reefs' (and I will be getting more involved), not the dumped Ex-Naval Ships for Diver Recreation (which I was
banned off DiveOz Forum for my stance against such beyond 'real' Artificial Reefs for Fish - not Divers) - should eventually come into place and action ...especially when more Scientists use their heads in partnership with Artists and Researchers.
My mate has excess tonnes of quality stone slabs ready for use as make-shift Artificial Reefs done in the style used by Scientists upon a David Attenborough doco. (will try to find the peice - it was aired 2 months ago.). We just don't have the means of getting it all into the appropriate areas - when chosen.
Its all about '
progression' - better Sanctuaries, Parks, Zones, Artificial Reefs, and other stuff ...along with better Fishing techniques, attitudes and conservatism. All for the long term ...haul.