A Chronological order of "Letters to the Editor" Chapter 4

This letter, 22/02/2006, elicited a response from Debus the following week saying how the Port Stephens Committee was, in fact, made up of chummy Rec/Commercial and Spearfishing people.? I was so pleased.
When you have a response from someone concerned with the letter you have written, you can then go "hell for leather". (so to speak !!)

Greens takeover the Port Stephens Marine Park Advisory Committee

It was with utter dismay that those of us who want a balanced debate on the zonings within the proposed Batemans Marine Park observe that 5 members of the 20 person Port Stephens Committee are members of the Green Conservation movement.? 3 members of the Committee are representatives of Recreational Fishermen.? What numbers can we expect for the Batemans Marine Park Advisory Committee when it is announced shortly??

We were under the mistaken impression that democracy ruled in Australia until we noted the makeup of this committee.? When Batemans Bay and Narooma can get a total of 900 people at meetings opposing the Marine Park, and the Nature Coast Marine Group, at a public meeting, to state their case get about a dozen attendees, and Coastwatchers get 15 or so at their meetings, what is the rationale for choosing nearly twice the numbers of greens to Recreational Fishermen??

What balanced contribution can we expect when the National Parks Association distort manipulate and misquote something as simple as a Visitor survey about the Solitary Marine Park?? They turn it from a document that simply analysed the surveys done over a 3 year period into a report that they claim shows a substantial economic benefits to areas with a Marine Park.

They are truly delusional to believe their own propaganda.? They also have the gall to say that a letter sent to the NPA by Coffs Harbour Council claims that the SIMP is "beneficial to the community through additional recreational marine pursuits".? However I have asked, politely, to view the full letter, rather than the selective quote they have made.? They of course have not obliged.? The "additional marine pursuits" available within a Marine Park compared to what are available now are unexplained.

What the survey actually shows is the demographics of those who visited, and the various activities undertaken at the Solitary Islands Marine Park, end of story.? The surveys showed that NO extra benefit was achieved after the Park's declaration.?

Debus replied as I said above.? The following was my response

More Marine Park news

I would like to thank Mr. Debus (Narooma News March 1) for clarifying my letter to the editor of February 22 and my assertion that the Port Steven Advisory Committee was made up of too many marine conservationists.? Of course, apart from the Conservationists, I forgot to add in the scuba diver, Marine Science delegate and the representatives of the National Parks and Wildlife service and NSW Fisheries who would be expected to be "pro-park".

Notwithstanding that misunderstanding, the makeup of the Batemans Marine Park Committee seems much more equitable.? However the appointment of a Marine Conservation person from Merimbula seems rather strange, when we had repeated assurances from members of your own Department (NPWS) that the committee would be "made up of local people".

Mr Debus a number of letters and radio interviews seem to be appearing now that bring into question, both the haste of the final zoning of the Batemans Marine Park, and the efficiency of the running of this amalgam of 3 separate Government departments that appear to makeup the "Marine Parks Authority".

Ms Muldoon CEO of the Marine Parks Authority (from Premiers Department) stated in a letter of 12th August 2005 in relation to Marine Parks,? " .. In the past it has been a minimum of 2 years before draft zoning plan has been developed for a newly declared Marine Park .."? Perhaps you could explain why the draft zoning of marine parks, especially one as large as Batemans Marine Park, now appears to be able to be done in 4 months?

Mr. McDonald, as Minister for Fisheries, stated in a letter as late as 9th November 2005, that? ".. Marine Parks in NSW are not declared as a fish management tool, nor for the purpose of protecting or enhancing specific fisheries..."?

And yet you stated in an ABC radio interview on March 1st. that "If we don't look at new ways to protect fish stocks our grandchildren aren't going to have anything to fish at all, commercial or recreational."? So now you have become the Fisheries Minister, as well as the Environment Minister?? Unfortunately it shows once again that your department, or minders, know nothing about fish or fish stocks.?

Perhaps I could suggest that Mr. McDonald, Minister for Primary Industries, and Mr Buffier, the Director General of Primary Industries will be crossing you off their Christmas card list this year.

What is happening here is a classic example of non-existent communication between the three Government Departments that make up the "organizing body" for Marine Parks.? Unfortunately for those of us on the Far South Coast who are forced to live with this mish-mash, we will be the ones who suffer.