Should Recreational Fishers Involve Themselves in the Politics of Fishing?

[CEO]

  ..... and not many of those "food miles," associated with harvesting locally, Spiney! Real ECOfishers stuff - leaving less of a carbon footprint! True conservation, as opposed to greeny "preservation." Well done again mate. When the weather is bad we can always avail ourselves of the fresh local product at your local Fishermen's Co-op. The "silver bait," is the usual method.

[Monty]

If the Greens get their way the only way we will be able to enjoy our oceans and seas  in the future is looking from the distance. Fish stocks all over the world have crashed because of uncontroled comertial exploitation with no limits to numbers caught or method used. We have controls here and as far as I can tell fish numbers were increasing before marine parks were locked up.

In your first post you also mentioned harvesting of fish. I dont like this term either. Fish I catch are either humanely killed to be eaten or quickly released. Political corect language needs to be stopped as this makes other think we have something to hide. You also used the term murder which is a legal term and there is no such offence as murdering fish.

I am glad you have entred into this discussion, as fishemen and hunters are happy to share their ideas and educate. I have unfortunatly found the opposite with green/animal libber groups who get very upset when we try and talk to them. This is also a bit strange as we dont try and change their lifestyle as they do ours. Maby we are just more accepting of others ideas and are not closed minded. Please encourage others to visit other fishing/hunting forums so we can discuss the facts.

[opal]

we are providing the worlds best protection for NSW. the biggest marine sanctuary plan ever launched was on 4/12/08 by our NPA. this will help gain the worlds best protection for NSW oceans. we will be making BLUE THE NEW GREEN.

[CEO]

         Not if ECOfishers has anything to do with it opal. The greenys already have 34% of our beaches, estuaries, and coastal waters locked up in government marine parks and they aren't meeting their stated objectives. In fact they are conservatively described as environmental duds! Please do explain to our vast audience how green/government marine parks address and remediate the real impacts on our fisheries resources, marine biodiversity and associated ecosystems? Real impacts that the government's Marine Park Authority list as !) Coastal development, 2) pollution, 3) agricultural practices, and 4) introduced pest species. Or if that is too challenging, just pick one topic, say "pollution," and describe and outline for every one of the one million recreational fishing families in NSW, how marine parks address and remediate, the pollution problem in our estuaries and seas!  To make it even easier for you, you might like to choose/start with stormwater intrusion and osmotic shock, if thats simpler for you.You will get a fair and considered hearing because we all want to know.Your only restriction is you can't just "BAN" it - because you just can't BAN everything as a solution!

[CEO]

                                     
                                                      THE  FUTURE  IS  HERE!
                                                        Right here. Right now!
                       Join ECOfishers now. Become part of the solution, not part of the problem!
                       ECOfishers - Conservation thru' sustainable use. Making people part of the solution
                                                     Details here, on our site.

[opal]

clever trick. i am not taking that bait. i choose fishing. the marine park authority and our scientists identified fishing as a fifth key threatening process to our marine biodiversity. you failed to mention or even list it. more fisher misinformation. frightened of the truth? fish stocks the world over are crashing because of overfishing and the world knows fishermen do the overfishing. we will prevent that happening here so future generations can see what is left of our fish stocks in there natural environment, not in zoos and aquariums, to be enjoyed by all. so if that means providing sanctuary zones so fishers cant get at our fish, then thats the way we will go.

[CEO]

         Indeed. I did not list fishing as a major impact on our marine resources or ecosystems because it is not! The fishing referred to in the Marine Park Authority's "thinly veiled advocacy, masquerading as science," document, refers spefically to demersal offshore fish trawling. Had you or your friends bothered to read that shonky document closely, you would have known. Recreational fishers aren't involved in that at all. Never have been. Never will be.
  For your further information, demersal offshore fish trawling, is not permitted north of Barrenjoey Point in NSW. And none of those impacts are defined as "key threatening processes." That terminology is used in reference to threatened and endangered species and forms part of a recovery plan. Now how will locking-up vast areas of prime fishing country protect it from the real threats, threats such as pollution? Drawing a line on a map, colouring it pink and calling it a sanctuary zone, doesn't stop the pollution getting into that area. That's kindergarten stuff! And the same can and is said, for agricultural practices, introduced pests and coastal development! By locking areas up in so called sanctuary zones doesn't protect it from anything! And it only excludes recreational fishing families who aren't a threat or pose an impact to anything! Who is going to pick up the plastic bags that wash, blow, drift into these so called sanctuary zones if family fishers aren't allowed into your pink zones? Certainly not you greenies! Poor turtles and dolphins and whales now. So opal I believe you and your friends really have another sneaky agenda. I suspect you and your friends want to ban family recreational fishing forever and this is your gutless way of doing it! What say you?

[CEO]

         ECOfishers is receiving lots of suggestions for future wekly debates. Lots of them include and involve activities by commercial fishers. So in an effort to expose some of the myths held by recreational fishers, concerning commercial fishers and their jobs, we will start with a lively topic next week where you can all have your say. There are a lot of myths out there about the activities of commercial fishers. This may be an opportunity for you to post your concerns and for you to have those issues explained and even exploded.

[Open Oyster]

  CEO,
        Would it be possible to start each new topic for debate on a new page? Weekly debate but topic separation for easy access. Also would allow for late postings on each topic.

[billfisher]

clever trick. i am not taking that bait. i choose fishing. the marine park authority and our scientists identified fishing as a fifth key threatening process to our marine biodiversity. you failed to mention or even list it. more fisher misinformation. frightened of the truth? fish stocks the world over are crashing because of overfishing and the world knows fishermen do the overfishing. we will prevent that happening here so future generations can see what is left of our fish stocks in there natural environment, not in zoos and aquariums, to be enjoyed by all. so if that means providing sanctuary zones so fishers cant get at our fish, then thats the way we will go.

Fish stocks the world over aren't crashing, indeed there are plenty that have been rebuilt. In any case Australia has the least fished waters in the World by a big margin. Prof Ray Hilborn, peer review scientist with the University of Washington, said that countries that have done the best with protecting their fish stocks have done so without relying on marine parks but through the sensible use of methods such as quotas, closed seasons, gear limits, trip limits and a reduction in the no of commercial licenses. Our various MPA's have been caught out fraudently misquoting the science on this suject, no doubt to justify their own existance. The NPA with its 'Torn Blue Fringe' paper went to the trouble of putting what amounts to a legal disclaimer that it is not a scientific paper but an advocacy piece by an environmental group!

[CEO]

    Fisheries minister, "Guillotine" Macdonald, is sitting on so many reports his feet haven't touched the ground for a couple of years now. (So he is not in touch with the real world.) Kingpro, recreational fishers licence fees were used to buy out commercial fishers from the states Recreational Fishing Havens, through a loan to the Labor government. A loan which they are still paying off! ECOfishers is aware of the Stevens Report, which we understand was handed down to "Guillotine" last year. It contains some radical suggestions/recommendations we are told, but that is about all we have been told. Any re-structure of the commercial industry is a core government responsibility. Therefore it ought be funded by the taxpayer and not recreational fishers exclusively. Since the government is broke, as you correctly point out, they can't afford anything at the moment (except half a million dollar office refurbishment for the anti-privatisation minister.) So it appears the obvious tactic now is, and has been for some years, death by a thousand cuts, for the commercial industry. Red tape, rules, regulations, restrictions etc, that simply make the commercial inustry uneconomical. We already import 90% of our seafood. It is only a matter of time before it is 99% and bugger the consumer wanting fresh local product! It is easier to put Asian Basa into supermarkets at $9 a kilo and the community can whistle! So commercial buy-outs, if necessary under a government induced restructure, is distinctly a core government responsibility. This is the view of ECOfishers and not necessarily that of the minister's appointees! "Guillotine's" tactic may be to reduce the value of our commercial fleet and industry by more cuts and therefore secure a buy-out at bargin basement prices. The old "Guillotine" is a slick commercial operator. He managed to stampede some of his appointees into "buying" the Gaden Trout Hatchery, from the government  recently. Watch him, he is slick and slippery!

[CEO]

         All, NSW commercial fishers are managed by a series of input and output controls, among other restrictions.

[CEO]

         ECOfishers current policy on commercial buy-outs is that they should be on a voluntary basis only. That is, those pro's wanting to go, are able to surrender their licences and endorsements, on a voluntary basis and be paid market value. The issue of "latent effort," though is a different kettle of fish. We are leaning towards a "use it, or lose it," policy. That means if you havent weighed in anything for up to 12 months, you should be called upon to show reasons why, your licence and endorsements, should'nt be revoked. It is difficult to ascertain the level of "latent effort," out there but it is a real bug bear to the industry. An example would be, those commercial operators who only work when the prawns are running or when the mullet season is on. Other times of the year they hold down other jobs, not even related to commercial fishing. They just cash in on the bountiful times and avoid the poorer times by having other employment. Part time pro's, we call them.