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 7302 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 26149
I like fish
Marine parks next wave of water wars
Dec 25th, 2010 at 1:41pm
 
From the front page of yesterdays's Australian. It is interesting to read about the WA lobster fishery reducing by more than a half, with further declines predicted, even though it is held up of an example of what can be done with highly intensive management using traditional fisheries management ools.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/
marine-parks-next-wave-of-water-wars/story-fn59niix-1225975659238

BEYOND the crystal ocean surrounding the Abrolhos Islands off the West Australian coast, a storm is brewing for the federal government.

The controversy could rival the water wars over the Murray-Darling Basin.

Environment Minister Tony Burke has missed Labor's self-imposed deadline of the end of the year to announce the boundaries of a network of marine sanctuaries in commonwealth waters stretching from Kangaroo Island off the coast of South Australia to the Abrolhos north of Perth.

For several weeks, Mr Burke has been holding roundtable discussions with commercial and recreational fishing representatives and environmental groups, as well as shipping and tourism operators, in a bid to finalise the draft South West Plan, which green groups hope will become the template for marine reserves around the nation.

West Australian tourism operator Rod Wilson, of Sea Lion Charters, says marine health has improved enormously since the creation of a state sanctuary at Green Head, a fishing village about three hours drive north of Perth where he has run charters for more than a decade.

Mr Wilson, who collects data on the sea lion population as part of his licence to take snorkellers to the area, says their numbers have almost doubled since cray fishing was restricted.

The groups claim experience from existing sanctuaries shows exclusion zones lead to more fish in the surrounding waters.

This means some of the best fishing spots of the future are likely to be on the edge of the marine sanctuaries.

Tony Abbott campaigned against marine parks before the August federal election.

Abrolhos Island fishing charter operator Jay Cox said he had witnessed a massive decline in fish stocks over the past 35 years, and things were getting worse.

"I think it will be good for fishing if there are more sanctuaries," Mr Cox said.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/
marine-parks-spark-sea-wars/story-e6frg8y6-1225975517144

AFTER a 14-hour overnight shift pulling up lobster pots in rough seas about 40km off the West Australian coast, the crew of the trawler Night Stalker has had a welcome reminder of the good times that once made the rock lobster business the millionaire factory of the sea

For an industry that used to be Australia's biggest fishery but has shrunk by half, there are bigger uncertainties at play.

After the southwest, the commonwealth is due to announce the proposed zones for the north of WA, northern Australia and the northeast, taking in Cape York and meeting up with the southeast zone established by the Howard government. Environmental groups have made no secret of the fact they will want to revisit the southeast reserve, claiming it does not reduce fishing and provides little protection.

If there is unity, it is that all three groups, the government, the fishers and the environmentalists, recognise fish stocks are declining and agree that anything that increases the number of fish in the ocean is a worthwhile aim.

The push to create sanctuaries in which healthy fish stocks can breed up and spill over into surrounding areas has broad agreement.

Kane Moyle, spokesman for state-funded recreational fishing organisation Recfishwest, says there has been little consultation with recreational fishermen.

Moyle claims fishing is already managed through the states and a lot of what is being proposed is simply another tool for fisheries management.

Whatever the facts, the commercial sector knows it will carry the burden of any new regulations.

"But if they came out and said they are going to do something about the recreational sector it wouldn't get past the first base politically. It's a big deal what we are facing and I think they are targeting the wrong people."

But after a decade of turmoil in the crayfish business, Night Stalker skipper Bruce Cockman is resigned to more change.

The WA rock lobster industry used to be Australia's biggest fishery, which at its height was worth more than $400 million a year.

Today, the annual rock lobster catch is worth less than half that amount and all indications from the puerulus count -- the monitoring of juveniles, which gives a three-year leading indicator of what to expect -- are there are several lean years ahead.

Perth businessman and former Perth stock exchange chairman John Poynton says the science is compelling that if you set aside parks for fish stocks to breed up things will improve.

But after witnessing a "massive decline" in fish stocks in the past 35 years, Cox says he would be happy to see something like the Great Barrier Reef marine parks system that provides sanctuaries for fish to breed up and migrate out.

Biologist and conservationist Wendy Payne says the global view is that Australia is trying to act while we still have a fishery to protect. "The fishing industry is changing due to the environment and it is important that industry does change before we have a repeat of the [Atlantic] cod disaster, where fish stock collapsed.
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
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 26149
I like fish
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #1 - Dec 25th, 2010 at 1:42pm
 
For Tim Nicol, marine co-ordinator with the Conservation Council of WA, the state's peak environment group, the marine sanctuary system is necessary both to protect fish stocks and lift the profile of the region.

"Sanctuary zones are important in WA because of the types of fish, such as dhufish and groper, which are long-lived and need sanctuary zones for proper management," Nicol says.

He says many recreational fishermen are supportive because with the bag limit for some fish now as low as one fish they recognise the need for something to be done to make sure there are stocks for the future.

"There is some vocal opposition, largely on ideological grounds," Nicol says.

He says it is ironic the recreational fishermen who do object say on the one hand that reserves won't be effective and on the other that they will have a honeypot effect and attract poachers.

"We have to look at the Great Barrier Reef for a sense of what would happen with poaching," he says. "Most people obey the rules and you are still seeing two to three times the number of big fish in the sanctuaries."

The Conservation Council says the minimum size for a sanctuary to be effective is 20km by 20km.
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 #2 - Dec 27th, 2010 at 1:06am
 
Interesting FD.

Upon the east coast, its still unofficial - but there is talk of making the entire NSW (starting with the south) Coast a Sanctuary.
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.

Having scuba dived the Poor Knights Islands which are strict NO TAKE ZONE, the size and proliferation, let alone the vibrancy of aquatic life is astounding ...and once the Fishermen got used to the idea of reaping more and bigger fish from 'spillover' from the zones - they were very happy.
Having dived all along the southern NSW coast - nothing much to see in the way of 'big' fish, let alone 'mass schools' of fish ...all gone.

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.


Palau has a big international Sanctuary ...but the country can't afford to 'enforce' it, beyond one donated boat from Australia. Hence why x40 Phillipino and other country boats continue to fish in its 'sanctuary' waters.


Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 27th, 2010 at 1:12am by Jasignature »  

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 #3 - Dec 27th, 2010 at 2:01pm
 
Interesting FD.

Upon the east coast, its still unofficial - but there is talk of making the entire NSW (starting with the south) Coast a Sanctuary.
Ironically, it is the Australian Commercial Fishing Industry that seems to be the major player behind this Conservational manouver.

Did you just dream up this rubbish? The areas under assessment for Commonwealth Marine Parks look nothing like that!

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?).

The spillover benefit you talk of is theoretical, and on the balance of evidence it is unlikely that fishermen will benefit from such an effect when the fishery is already well regulated. Another flaw is that we aren't even talking about the same species that are common close to shore being prevalent 20kms out! Do you really think that mulloway, snapper, tailor etc will obey you spillover theory to replenish areas outside their normal range?

This goes with the fact that many Restaurants are buying fish from Recreational Fishermen 'under the table' and not from Commercial Fishermen.

They have to provide valid receipts for their fish purchases - not hard to enforce.

Having scuba dived the Poor Knights Islands which are strict NO TAKE ZONE, the size and proliferation, let alone the vibrancy of aquatic life is astounding ...and once the Fishermen got used to the idea of reaping more and bigger fish from 'spillover' from the zones - they were very happy.

Do you have evidence of what the size and abundance was before the marine park was established? For that matter do you have any before and after evidence for any marine park in Australia?

Having dived all along the southern NSW coast - nothing much to see in the way of 'big' fish, let alone 'mass schools' of fish ...all gone.

There are more fish in NSW waters than there have been for years, due to the reductions in commercial fishing licences in the 1990's and other regulations. NSW now imports 91% of it's seafood.  

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.

Are you for real, who can manage to carry, set up and use effectively 20 rods?

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.


Do you think that unpopular sanctuaries will get 100% compliance? Does any law get 100% compliance? If you say high enforcement will get compliance then why don't you just apply it to existing rules instead of policing marine parks?

Palau has a big international Sanctuary ...but the country can't afford to 'enforce' it, beyond one donated boat from Australia. Hence why x40 Phillipino and other country boats continue to fish in its 'sanctuary' waters.


Back to top
 
 
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 #4 - Dec 28th, 2010 at 12:29am
 
Well I guess I know a lot of things you don't know Pj. - sorry to say.

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 #5 - Dec 28th, 2010 at 6:48am
 
Jasignature wrote on Dec 28th, 2010 at 12:29am:
Well I guess I know a lot of things you don't know Pj. - sorry to say.




You call that an argument? So you have somehow reach the state of enlightenment of 'just knowing everything'. Looks like it took as much thought and research as your preceding post!
Back to top
 
 
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 #6 - Dec 28th, 2010 at 9:25am
 
Its 'collective knowledge' that I'm good at.
Although I didn't go to University to become a Dux like my older sister,
I wagged school a lot and researched in libraries around Sydney from an age (from Primary) well before most go to Uni to learn how to research and I used to jigg school a lot to follow-thru with my favourite subject "School Excursions" - because lets face it, its the only time everyone at school seemed to be happy ...especially when school was in the midst of that hole known as Mt Druitt.

So my opinions are based upon facts that I've come to know and I for one am not afraid to be wrong as I find on these Forums from time to time. I ain't no Billy Goat Gruff who can't "cross a bridge and get over it".

My opinion is just an opinion, point of view, etc. I'm not here to argue pedantic points - I'm just here to have my say and to read what many others have to say.
If I say that I've been threatened with violence by Recreational Fisherman down the Sapphire Coast after emerging from a Scuba Dive because of so-called "Sanctuary" rumors and such, knowing full well it comes from the Commercial quater ...and if this is from the Commercial quater in an 'unofficial' way - then it is due mostly I guess from the 'desire' of the Commercial Fishermen themselves and nothing is in 'official' documentation because lets face it - such documentation is usually many months behind the times. Having spoken to Commercial Fishermen down the Sapphire and even in the Gong, they "quietly" admit that there is "talk" about such and they say so with some willing acceptance of the end results.
I kinda thought this has been known for years now - as I have known?
Huh
Kinda makes sense though - such a Sanctuary and I can see the Commercial tactic.
I suggest YOU look into Goat Island and the Poor Knights Islands NO TAKE ZONES yourself for the endless facts about the beneficial effects.

...I would have thought this would be common sense in an era upon this planet where Fishing results are just 4% take with superior technology over the Fishermen of 100 years ago having a tonnage take of 96% more with less technologically advanced gear.
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 #7 - Dec 28th, 2010 at 12:00pm
 
You can't just claim that you have the 'facts' when you can't counter any of the pertinent (not pedantic) criticisms I have made. You then try to weasil out of this by saying it's all you just your opinion so you don't need to justify it. Is that the way to conduct resource policy? On half baked opinions?

PS: If you want to talk about schemes and alliances what about the unholy alliance between scuba divers (a lot of them commercial dive charter operators) and greens in pushing for marine sanctuaries? The former being keen on what will amount to private dive sites.
Back to top
 
 
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 #8 - Dec 28th, 2010 at 5:13pm
 
Don't get me wrong PJ.
I ain't like 'that' at all ...except for the long hair Wink
I firmly believe in Australian 'fishing'.
Sure there are a lot of Scuba Divers in an unholy alliance with the Greens, but as you've notice last election - there are a lot of other people too.
I don't believe in dumping ex-naval ships for falsified 'artificial reefs' when really they are just recreational dive sites ...I've been banned from DiveOz numerously for this stance.
I do believe in NO TAKE ZONES that compliment 'Fishing Zones' - for a No Take Zone provides a "motel" if you like for the fish to get it on in the name of proliferation ...something which is sadly missing around the Australian coast. To break it down a level, why fish a Bommie where the Fish find safety to breed, when you can fish a bit further away and collect the 'spillover'. If the 'spillover' is just x50% of what can be taken if the Bommie was fished also - then so be it, at least the law of nature is running the show and not financial greed and short-term stupidity to exhaust very long-term resources.
Like I said - I believe in Fishing, but if areas need to be cordened off for periods of 25 years plus for the greater good (because, specifically, the last 100 years) - then so be it for the long term profit.
I believe the Australian Fishing Industry is one of this nations best attributes unlike any other region of the world.

As for my 'opinion', well I'm not getting paid to write what I write here, so an opinion suffices quite adequately until such time.
a 'FACT' can be from word of mouth, wether you believe not or otherwise. I put forth whatever can be of value here upon the Forum.
Well written documentation would be better, but I go with what I've got.
I could be mean and say "At least I'm out there" amongst the forefront of whats coming up ahead for the country. Wink ...to be put in writing a year after its decided.

I can see the sense of the Australian Commercial Fishery and its tactic 'if' it is indeed the 'official' case. Such a -1 to 20km NO TAKE ZONE would create a 'Barrier' (like a Great Barrier Reef? Huh) along the NSW Coast that would give AQUATIC LIFE, let alone FISH STOCKS a "respite" to recouperate. I mean, who wants the costly "aquafarmed" and bland tasting grain fed fish compared to the vibrant wild stuff? Roll Eyes
Dare I say, via my opinion, that this will be the future of Nipponese Fisheries.  Lips Sealed

I see some major changes for Australian Fishing, especially when the rest of the world is looking in this direction for leadership Wink
...but i'm sure you knew that.
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 #9 - Dec 29th, 2010 at 6:53pm
 
You don't seem to understand, or ignore, the fact that our fisheries aren't open slather. They are run by input reductions such as gear restrictions, limited number of licences, closed seasons, trip limits and in some cases quotas. These methods are working quite well so your case doesn't get past your first premise.
Back to top
 
 
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 #10 - Dec 30th, 2010 at 1:57am
 
Stagnant waters.
Comfort zones.
"If it ain't broke don't fix it" says the drunk patriotic Aussie until he asks you for some 'change' because he's discovered he's 'broke'.  Roll Eyes
...from pissing it up against the UK Prison wall because he didn't know what to do with the 'Freedom' the USA gave him. Roll Eyes

I'm not dishing the current methods at all, I'm quite pleased with the way things are going.
But I will never stop the 'advance' of Australia's fair by denying a better future.

What has the Australian Fishing Industry done about "Artificial Reefs" to benefit the Aquatic Life recently? Or do you think a bunch of Dive Shops and VARS Divers dumping ex-naval ships under the insincere words of "artificial reef" for the real reason of Recreational Dive Site is doing the job effectively? Huh
Maybe everyone should throw in some stolen cars, shopping trolleys and those giant barges of rubbish from the USA and Nippon? Roll Eyes afterall, VARS's motto is "Trash for Treasure" ...rubbish for cash, rather than the wellbeing of our Aquatic population and quality.

Not only is Aquatic Life being exploited beyond the magic 50% mark of recouperation back towards its original level before the advent of mass fishing, there are no efforts made to actually help proliferate both in size and number, Aquatic Life.
Maybe you think blande tasting, grain-fed Aquaculture pens is the 'technologically advanced' superior method by 'civilised' people who are so 'un-natural' in their thinking.

Don't you think that Fish find 'survival' underwater tough as it is ...now they are being decimated by more efficient means although their numbers aren't even close to what they were 200 years ago.

I think a NO TAKE ZONE along the NSW Coast is a great 'Safety Zone' where Aquatic Life can find some 'RESPITE' if not some 'rumpy-pumpy' in peace.

...whats the matter with such a NO TAKE ZONE as proposed from some sectors of the Commercial Fishing fraternity? Can't Fishermen, let alone the Fishing Industry cope with such a challenge? Grin
Would life be too tough to make such 'long term' changes?

I don't mean to be too testy, but Artificial Reefs are a pretty close subject to me.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 30th, 2010 at 2:05am by Jasignature »  

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 #11 - Dec 30th, 2010 at 7:16am
 
[]Stagnant waters.
Comfort zones.
"If it ain't broke don't fix it" says the drunk patriotic Aussie until he asks you for some 'change' because he's discovered he's 'broke'.  Roll Eyes
...from pissing it up against the UK Prison wall because he didn't know what to do with the 'Freedom' the USA gave him. Roll Eyes

I'm not dishing the current methods at all, I'm quite pleased with the way things are going.
But I will never stop the 'advance' of Australia's fair by denying a better future.

There has to a good chance the change will give some benefit and more to the point outweigh the costs. Unless of course you are merely advocating change for the sake of change.

What has the Australian Fishing Industry done about "Artificial Reefs" to benefit the Aquatic Life recently? Or do you think a bunch of Dive Shops and VARS Divers dumping ex-naval ships under the insincere words of "artificial reef" for the real reason of Recreational Dive Site is doing the job effectively? Huh
Maybe everyone should throw in some stolen cars, shopping trolleys and those giant barges of rubbish from the USA and Nippon? Roll Eyes afterall, VARS's motto is "Trash for Treasure" ...rubbish for cash, rather than the wellbeing of our Aquatic population and quality.

Actually the rec fishing licence funds measures such as the establishment of artifical reefs.

Not only is Aquatic Life being exploited beyond the magic 50% mark of recouperation back towards its original level before the advent of mass fishing, there are no efforts made to actually help proliferate both in size and number, Aquatic Life.

I have already outlined some of the substantial reductions in fishing effort in Australian waters, why do you chose to ignore them? PS there will always be less fish around compared to if there was no fishing effort at all. Maximum sustainable yield is usually regarded as when 40% of the spawning population is left.

Maybe you think blande tasting, grain-fed Aquaculture pens is the 'technologically advanced' superior method by 'civilised' people who are so 'un-natural' in their thinking.

What have you got against aquaculture? On one hand you say we should give wild stocks a respite then trash the best option of doing this. It is a good thing if they are grain fed as less fish has to be caught as feedstock. Scientist are working on a 100% grain feedstock using genetic engineering.

Don't you think that Fish find 'survival' underwater tough as it is ...now they are being decimated by more efficient means although their numbers aren't even close to what they were 200 years ago.

I think a NO TAKE ZONE along the NSW Coast is a great 'Safety Zone' where Aquatic Life can find some 'RESPITE' if not some 'rumpy-pumpy' in peace.

i]As I have pointed out much of the fishing effort has been removed. As to your value laden statement - life in the ocean is not peaceful. Predation is extremely high as is the ability of fish to reproduce. Fishermen are just another snout in the trough. [/i]


...whats the matter with such a NO TAKE ZONE as proposed from some sectors of the Commercial Fishing fraternity? Can't Fishermen, let alone the Fishing Industry cope with such a challenge? Grin
Would life be too tough to make such 'long term' changes?

A no take zone up to 20km out to sea will decimate recreational fishing as well as commercial fishing. The commercial infrastructure (co-ops etc will collapse). The deepwater fish are by and large different species so how can you possible get any spillover? Also they are slower growing and more vulnerable to overfishing. What's the point of closing down a healthy inshore fishery just to deplete deepwater species?

I don't mean to be too testy, but Artificial Reefs are a pretty close subject to me. [/quote]
Back to top
 
 
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 #12 - Dec 30th, 2010 at 10:51am
 
Quote:
There has to a good chance the change will give some benefit and more to the point outweigh the costs. Unless of course you are merely advocating change for the sake of change.

So $$$ before Aquatic Life ...nice Roll Eyes
Save the Fishermans 'job'. Well I say stuff them. If its a 'job' they are worried about - then they can go work in Conservation, just like the National Parks got the USA outta trouble in the Great Depression.
Thats like putting Prisoners' "well-being" by Human Rights before the well-being of the innocent population at risk. Bring back Capital Punishment before these killers are released again because of 'Human Rights'.  Roll Eyes
Change for the sake of change? More like doing a NSW version of the Great Barrier Reef for the sake of the Aquatic Life ...I mean, you do have their "well-being" as a priority don't you Huh Or are we suffering a Fishing Industry like Land Farmers who pump litres of insecticides and other chemical sprays upon their lands until it becomes 'sterile' and they then need a 'relief package' as a $$ bail-out. Tell me the Fishing Industry isn't that pathetic?

Quote:
Actually the rec fishing licence funds measures such as the establishment of artifical reefs.

This is good. I didn't know this. Will follow more into this.
Smiley

Quote:
Maximum sustainable yield is usually regarded as when 40% of the spawning population is left.

I may have done "Maths in Space" and still count on my fingers occassionally, but I'm pretty sure thats still an ever-decreasing 'sustainability' excuse. Kinda sounds backwards.
I would have thought 51% would be a more 'common-sense' percentage ...at least you know your crop is still growing. Huh
That extra 1% past the half-way mark can make a big difference.

Quote:
What have you got against aquaculture? On one hand you say we should give wild stocks a respite then trash the best option of doing this. It is a good thing if they are grain fed as less fish has to be caught as feedstock. Scientist are working on a 100% grain feedstock using genetic engineering.

Its a Cop-out for the failings that preceded its introduction. The Aqua-culture 'Pens' don't give 'respite' to the NSW Coast. They merely make more money for more people in the Fishing Indsutry who can't afford to compete for what little is left out there. They are cashing in on whatever they can get by selling inferior quality food that only makes it to the shelves of Woolworths and Coles rather than top Restaurants ...well, we can only hope so. Huh Well I hope you enjoy your 'genetic-engineered' seedless Watermelon. Besides the taste being somewhat 'zilch', taking the seeds away takes the fun away too.

Quote:
]As I have pointed out much of the fishing effort has been removed. As to your value laden statement - life in the ocean is not peaceful. Predation is extremely high as is the ability of fish to reproduce. Fishermen are just another snout in the trough. [/i]

Its one thing to  'conquer' the Animal kingdom as we rise up from our past in the 'survival of the fitest' rule ...but its another thing to annihilate, obliterate and destroy due to our inability to control our fears and show some restraint with all this new found Freedom of ruling the world. Where is the 'discipline'?

Quote:
A no take zone up to 20km out to sea will decimate recreational fishing as well as commercial fishing. The commercial infrastructure (co-ops etc will collapse). The deepwater fish are by and large different species so how can you possible get any spillover? Also they are slower growing and more vulnerable to overfishing. What's the point of closing down a healthy inshore fishery just to deplete deepwater species?

So the Fishing Industry is man/tough enough to harvest the crop unrestrained and with (short term) ignorance for 100 years ...but can't cope  Cry with the idea of going without for a minimum of 50 years for any long term gain of allowing the crop to regenerate. It must be frustrating for Farmers to sow seed when Harvesting Machines are going mad all over the property digging whatever they can up before the seeds get a chance to bloom.
I'm pretty sure the NSW Fishery will survive, if not streamline and perfect its ways under such 'constructive' adversity (most due to their own doing). I don't think the Commercial Fisherman care about their chief competitor - Recreational Fishing, goes without more than they do. The 1km Fishing Zone is ample room for Recreational ...and I'm sure Commercial Fishing can cope with anything beyond 20kms ...or at least "Shelf Life". Survival of the Fitess - Fishing style you could say. Grin

Something needs to be continually done and this NO TAKE ZONE along the NSW Coast (much like the Barrier Reef) is the best I've heard in ages. If you have anything better that can proliferate Aquatic Life (in size as well) ?


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 #13 - Dec 30th, 2010 at 11:11am
 
If you think the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is a good example, think again. It has been a socio economic disaster (except for it's government funded employees) and hasn't benefited fisheries one bit. It hasn't even likely to have given a net benefit to the environment either.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Dnarever
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16210
Here
Gender: male
Re:  Marine parks next wave of water wars
Reply #14 - Dec 30th, 2010 at 11:23am
 
I think the concept of marine parks is a good thing which can work and should be supported.

The unfair and dishonest manner in which they were implimented in NSW was a disgrace.
Back to top
 

"Operation secret boarders" Some good old red neck Totalitarian policy.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Send Topic Print