Guess who picks which headlands will be protected.

[Rod Burston]

How much work did NSW government marine scientists do on rock platforms for the various biodiversity assessments that are the basis of our marine parks and sanctuary zones.

Virtually none.

They simply accepted the position presented by the Total Environment Centre, an extreme green group.

In the Manning, they recommended 15 of the 33 headlands for protection. The other report the government relied on only wanted one protected (Griffith, 1982). This shows how greedy the greenies have got over the last 23 years.

Check out this extract from the Manning Shelf region assessment:


"4.3.4 Coastal rock platforms (Total Environment Centre)

Data source
Short J.M. (1995) Protection of coastal rock platforms in New South Wales. National Estate
Grant Project NEP 94?288. Total Environment Centre, Sydney.

Data description
This database of ?significant rock platforms? identifies 198 separate rock platforms in New South
Wales, 33 of which lie in the Manning Shelf Bioregion.

Assessment measures
The database includes attributes relating to: location, access, platform dimensions, physical
characteristics, geology, biology, impacts, existing management, other data and
recommendations.

Assessment
Based on the assessment of the characteristics described above, Short (1995) recommended 15 of
the 33 headlands investigated in the Manning Shelf Bioregion for protection. These are mapped
in Fig. 16."

[Bluecod]

Rod,

was advised today that due to international treaty obligations the Feds are paying the NSW govt [grants etc] to establish Marine Parks - if this is true, and the way the State is going at it to get hold of those funds could justify that assertion, it could mean that a completely different approach is required.

ATM there's a lot of anger going to go at a State level whereas maybe it should also be directed at the Feds. Perhaps also the State pollies are suckering the Greens and wouldn't they be mad as hell when they realise they've taken the bait as well [ a play-off could be in order??]

What do you know about it?

[Rod Burston]

Bluecod,

Ecofishers and others are aware that we have problems with both sides of politics.
The declaration of marine parks is based on Federal legislation but the details are sorted out by the State.

And the devil is certainly in the detail.

It is the State that excludes fishers and gatherers from their territory by way of zoning plans.
On the other hand, Federally declared parks seem to have people friendly conditions.
(Note: The grand plan is to extend State marine parks out to sea into Federal territory so these people friendly conditions and this will become very important in deed.)

It is the control that the extreme greens have over State politics that has caused caused the real hurt.

If it wasn't for the hurt, almost all fishers would back the declaration of marine parks.

This is because the declaration of marine parks prevents the reclamation of mangroves for blocks of units, so to speak. In other words the declarations help to conserve the natural world.

The greenies must be really dumb not to recognise how much they really have in common with fishers.
We are very disappointed in the performance of these people.

Rod Burston