Over-fished Or Over-regulated

[Grantm]

Although i can see your point mate ... If your asking me to vote liberal .. NOT WITH A BLOW TORCH TO MY FEET AND MY HEAD IN A VICE

No im not asking you to vote for anyone, just bare in mind who is making the decsions on these issues as we speak...

My post was about the reality of the situation thats all.

[Guest danielinbyron]

No im not asking you to vote for anyone, just bare in mind who is making the decsions on these issues as we speak...

My post was about the reality of the situation thats all.

I'd just like to say i appreciate all of the posts in this topic and would like to thank you all as i am really struggling to remain open minded and get some real understanding about this.And not just form the most convenient attitude to support my lifestyle .. I have seen this reflected in many of the posts. thanks guys

[pjbink]

I posted Dr Starks comments because it puts in to perspective the gloom and doom claims of the greens of a terminal decline in this states fisheries. They want to paint this picture so that the public will be lead by the nose into accepting marine parks with large scale sanctuary zones.

Mondo, I was not arguing for increased commercial fishing. Anyway DPI has been reducing commercial effort over the past few years based on the precautionay priciple. Commercial trawling has been banned in deep waters and over rocky reef. All commercial fishing banned in 30 estuaries. Salmon catch by commercials drastically reduced. Kingfish traps banned. Ring netting of spotted mackeral banned in SE Qld. 600 Commonwealth licensed to be bought out. There are plenty of signs that stocks are recovering due to these efforts.

Some people seem to be saying that I am denying that fish stocks have fallen. I don't say that this is not the case compared to 30 or 40 years ago. But I don't see anything wrong with this. Our fish stocks were virtually untouched back then and a certain degree of 'fishing down' of stocks is acceptable if you agree that we should use a valuable food source on our door step. What matters is that fish are still reasonably plentiful and that there is enough breeding stock left to replenish the population. There is no evidence that this is not the case.

[veck]

Grantm

Well put, a great sumary with an action plan

If your analysis is correct - and from what I can see it certainly seems like a valid summary - then we need to accept the marine parks are going to happen.

OK, fair call.

As such, and as you have pointed out, the real bone of contention should therefore become the zoning within those marine parks. My understanding is that the zones are roughly divided as follows:

• Sanctuary Zones: No fishing at all
  
• Habitat Protection zones: recreational fishing (with limited commercial activity); a
  
• General Use zones: no fishing restrictions
  

So shouldn't we, as recreational fishermen, simply be lobbying for a reduction in the size of sanctuary zones in favor of Habitat Protection zones? This would keep the more damaging activities of the pros out of these areas but allow us back in. We could also lobby to restrict the pro activities allowed within Habitat Protection zones even further than the current rules propose, thus creating an incentive to expand the Habitat Protection zones at the expense of Sanctuary zones.

To be honest I think that siding the pros on this might actually limit our ability to effectively negotiate a better outcome for recreational fishermen, particularly since expanded Habitat Protection zones would be a good outcome for us but less so for them.

[Mondo Rock]

No worries Billfisher and Grant

So, I know this is a stupid question, but what can we do?

Is it simply a case of making personal submissions to the MPA? What about this 'Frost proposal' - that sounds like something I could really get behind, so how do I get on board?

I am extremely time poor these days and am wondering what I can do to get heard on this issue without having to travel to protest rallies or take time off work (although I would consider this if I thought it would be useful).

What is the most effective thing I can do to voice my objection to the sanctuary zones?

[Grantm]

Hey Mondo,

Start with this maybe

fill out public submissions on the parks in question

Write to local members portraying your views on the park zoning

Write to anyone else who your think is relavent local papers etc

Keep having your say on threads like these - its ALWAYS the same people

face the reality of the situation so your not 'spinning your wheels' ie : the reality is one of two parties will be elected next year, LABOUR or LIBERAL. Who ever you vote for check the preferences and understand that although there is no guarantee the LIBS will do any better, we know for sure Labour loves marines parks.

Maybe support groups like $%^&* who are the most active in the SZ opposal.

Also here is the link to the Frost proposal

Frost Proposal

Im sure some of the others will have some proactive ideas too !

Good going

[Guest johblow]

Some people seem to be saying that I am denying that fish stocks have fallen. I don't say that this is not the case compared to 30 or 40 years ago. But I don't see anything wrong with this. Our fish stocks were virtually untouched back then and a certain degree of 'fishing down' of stocks is acceptable if you agree that we should use a valuable food source on our door step. What matters is that fish are still reasonably plentiful and that there is enough breeding stock left to replenish the population. There is no evidence that this is not the case.

That is very true and a good point - there was only one place to go from where they were, presumeably saturated stocks.

[pjbink]

Here are some suggestions as to what to do:

Parks_Advert.docHere are some suggestions as to what to do:

[squizzytaylor]

Make no bones about it, a vote for labour is a vote for a marine park and the fact still remains that there is no scientific evidence behind them. As a life long labour voter this really cuts me to the bone but it is the truth. There is also an alternative plan on the MPA site at the moment for Port Stephens which I would encourage you all to look at and ask questions to relevant parties as I personally believe this may be workable.

As far as the commercial guys go, they are a different kettle of fish all together and should probably be addressed seperately to the MPA issue and again as much as I hate many of thier practices, anyone who has ever purchased packaged bait has directly supported them. At the end of the day most of them are just hard working aussies who enjoy thier footy and a cold beer at the end of the day. Blame the laws that they operate under not them.

The fishing party has the right idea in wanting to get into the senate and run interferance (like the Likes of Barnaby Joyce) as more and more recently many of these decisions are made with a 1 vote majority. I emailed Bob Smith about 3 months ago questioning his values, alliances etc and his answer were very plain and simple......They will support any party totally oppose to the mpa's and currently have NO alliances.

Thier policies are even more simple NO MPA's and no more encroachment on the Aussie lifestyle.

I have no association with them but once again have a look at thier website and make your own decisions.

Im relatively new to this site but it is a credit to the members that these issues can be raised in an intelligent and civil manner without the agro at other sites. good on ya guys and girls!

cheers

Geoff Taylor

[el pescador]

Although i can see your point mate ... If your asking me to vote liberal .. NOT WITH A BLOW TORCH TO MY FEET AND MY HEAD IN A VICE>..

Everything going to plan you won't have to mate. The fishing Party is planning on running in the senate. You can vote for whoever you like in the house of reps. If TFP can get a similar percentage of votes nationally to what they did in the seats that TFP independants stood in the recent Qld election then they would get at least 1 senator in parliament. This would give us the voice & clout that we need. The major parties will be beating a path to TFP's door.

Les

[Yoda]

Some people seem to be saying that I am denying that fish stocks have fallen. I don't say that this is not the case compared to 30 or 40 years ago. But I don't see anything wrong with this. Our fish stocks were virtually untouched back then and a certain degree of 'fishing down' of stocks is acceptable if you agree that we should use a valuable food source on our door step. What matters is that fish are still reasonably plentiful and that there is enough breeding stock left to replenish the population. There is no evidence that this is not the case.

excellent point Billfisher, when you go over the science behind all forms of renewable primary resource harvesting, and in particular to this issue, fisheries, it is a fact that it will never be at 100% saturation, the only way to achieve 100% saturation is to stop all extraction altogether,(which is what the greenies want), what we need to be realised by the general public is that fishing, whether it be recreational or commercial is that is has definitely got to be sustainable, and has historically been monitored and managed by DPI Fisheries, now I must admit that Fisheries may have made some mistakes in the past, and they will in the future, but that is the nature of fisheries because the government will not spend the money to do the necessary research, but there have been no species of fish which populate the inshore areas where the Marine Parks are proposed which has collapsed due to fishing. Yes, Kingfish was a drama, but, they are coming back due to Fisheries intervention, You have to remember that fish populations are very biodynamic, which is to say that you really do not know from year to year which species will have major recruitment and which species will have poor recruitment, eg; leatherjacket in this year with huge populations taking over all the inshore reefs, it is a fact of life on the reefs that some species will flourish more than others in different years, some years it will be snapper and other years it will be leatherjacket, no human intervention will make a difference to this ever. Fish are a valuable and finite resource and in my opinion fisheries do a pretty good job of ensuring that the resource remains sustainable, to hand the management of the resource over to a bunch of new green and politically manipulated managers is a very dangerous thing to do, (there is a push to have Marine Parks come under the portfolio of the Department of Environment and Heritage). Look at what the NPWS have done with some of the terrestrial National Parks due to mismanagement. Things could get a whole lot worse than we ever imagined if we let the greenies assume control of the Marine Parks.

Edited September 22, 2006 by Yoda

[pjbink]

High Yoda,

The greens seem to be getting everything their own way so far and the scary thing is that it could get worse. One thing apparent about them is that their demands are inordinate and never ending. When their demands for sanctuary zones are met they immediately respond with more demands. Like other extremists before them they are only interested in unconditional surrender.

Australia now has, by area 30% of the worlds marine parks!

[Mondo Rock]

Just a thought - but if you are like me and wish to register your protest at Labor's apparent capitulation to the Greens on this issue, yet can't bring yourself to vote Liberal, then the other option is to vote The Fishing Party in the House of Reps and not number your preferences.

That way, even if TFP doesn't get up a candidate in the HOR, they will at least be able to use your vote as a bargaining chip during preference deals. The reason this helps us is it allows TFP to negotiate with the larger parties by offering their preferences in return for particular policy positions, such as the removal or limiting of sanctuary zones within the marine parks. Yes your vote might ultimately end up with the Liberals, but only if the Liberals have agreed to a deal with TFP. My understanding is that politicians are far more likely to honor deals done for preferences than they are to honor general promises to voters prior to an election.

If you number your preferences after TFP then TFP will not be able to bargain with your vote as it will automatically go to the next candidate numbered on your list.

[Guest danielinbyron]

The idea that scientific studies can only be conducted if fishing areas aren't fished seems a litlle implausible to me ...I followed up Yoda and Dans suggestions on investigating the science behind mullet fishing or beach hauling and found that not much besides the figures for catches from pros has been collected as data.

Then I spoke to a marine park official{ information office Byron Bay} and told them i was having a hard time trying to understand why they would impose some of the restrictions that they had done . And that from a lay persons point of view the only part of the process that has been exposed is the political agenda, that there is a complete lack of availability of any of the scientific data or logic in plain language behind the changes...

They said that some of the restrictions that they had placed seemed a little ridiculous after the initial plans had been compromised and they had conceded some areas..They also said that limiting fishing was in aid of conducting study that would give them some measure of the sustainability.. As this until now hasn't happened, no real study could be conducted.. I have questioned some of my misgivings about the park .. And i ask myself what i would be willing to sacrafice in order to protect the marine environement..

So what was it we've been paying for with fishing liscences????? I wonder if the DPI isn't getting figures from pros, and we aren't allowed to fish there .. How and what is it they will learn. And heres a thought .What if rec anglers and charter operators and fishing clubs reported there catches once pros were bought out..

I still count the pro boats off the lighthouse when i walk up at night and i still don't think that stopping me from fishing here or there is going to help change much at all... But if I'm to be honest what it is that really disturbs me... Is those signs and lines and restrictions in a place i once found solace from such things all my life ..The government has taken that wilderness at my doorstep that has been there all my life away..I now have to travel away from it to find it elsewhere..

[BOB_SMITH]

Just a clear idea on voting in NSW State elections.

Preferences are optional. That means you personally have to number your preferences. TFP can indicate on their How to vote cards our preferred way that TFP supporters should vote but it is entirely your choice after giving TFP the 1 vote. TFP does not pass on preferences. This process only occurs at Federal elections

If you do not give anymore preference numbers your vote will extinguish if and when TFP is excluded from further counts. If you are a protesting previous Labor voter then you will be denying Labor that vote (as we would like you to do). We believe that the only way to halt no-take zones is a change of government, so that means for us that we at this stage, would be recommending a 2 preference to the Coalition. Things would have to change pretty dramatically for that not to happen. If you cannot force yourself to not vote Labor then give your 2 to them. It will still give them a fright if we get numbers.

We are only trying to have candidates in Labor held electorates where we can be the most threat.

The Central Coast has Terrigal, The Entrance, Wyong, Lake Macquarie among the 55 Labor held seats.

We are seeking candidates in them as well as polling booth helpers. Anybody interested please check our website for details > www.thefishingparty.info. There is a fishraider link there as well. (Candidates have shown interest locally in Swansea, Wallsend, Maitland and Port Stephens.)

Whatever happens another greens representative is disaster for fishing or recreation and any chance of stopping the Labor/Green marriage is slipping away.

Bob Smith

TFP

[squizzytaylor]

Bob, can I suggest you get some how to votes on to various websites closer to the time?

Also can you post some TFP contact details for volunteers who wish to help on election day?

Cheers

Geoff Taylor

Edited September 27, 2006 by squizzytaylor

[BOB_SMITH]

Will do Geoff, including where the polling booths might be.

There might even be a few pubs who will have areas to vote in, in certain electorates.

Bob Smith

[BOB_SMITH]

A list of our Labor target electorates/ polling booths and contact us is now available on TFP website > www.thefishingparty.info.

New electoral boundaries will alter some of the polling booths but the ones listed will still be linked to a nearby electorate, seats of Sydney and Terrigal will be listed later.

All interest is confidential unless otherwise directed, please spread the word.

Bob Smith