[]
Quote:The pre park situation was that you could basically go and fish where you like.
If they are implimented properly, this situation will not change for the majority of fishermen.
So the majority does not include people who own a boat or fish out of someone elses? Also is the inference then that our marine parks have not been implemented properly?However, to claim that this is the extent of the complexity of fisheries regulations is absurd.
That's not what was suggested. Quote:All the previous rules on fish size and numbers still exist - nothing was made easier at all.
Hence my suggestion that they be approached from a fisheries management perspective.
Your original post says they were implemented by our fisheries management authorities. Quote:I can't really answer because you don't say where the actual NTZ's will be.
Would it make a difference to whether you would support keeping the land based spots open? Or are you just making stuff up?
I'd keep all spots open to recreational fishing. Is that clear enough? Quote:No it isn't it started off as marine parks will make for simpler rules for fishermen and will benefit them in other ways as well. You got into trouble justifying this statement and resorted to rhetorical devices.
One of the ways to ensure that marine parks mean simpler rules for fishermen is to leave open the easily accessible shore based fishing spots. Do you support this principle? Do you see in the opening post where this is the first principle I put forward? Why are you so afraid to give your opinion on it? Why do you think I ought to argue with you about these principles when you appear to support them but won't admit it? [/quote]
They are already open to fishing - at least where marine parks don't exist.