Marine Park for Sydney!

[billfisher]

Fishers angry over marine park proposal PRINT FRIENDLY EMAIL STORY
PM - Wednesday, 19 December , 2007  18:29:00
Reporter: Simon Santow
BRENDAN TREMBATH: For many people, throwing a line in the water in the hope of catching a fish is one of life's simple pleasures. But over the years, increasing regulation has taken a toll on both recreational and commercial anglers.

Now they're up in arms in New South Wales over a proposal to triple the area where fishing is either restricted or banned altogether.

The idea has come from the National Parks Association which says overfishing and the threat of global warming requires drastic action be taken as soon as possible.

Simon Santow has our report.

SIMON SANTOW: Ask fishing groups about what's important to them and they'll tell you sustainability. Conservationists say much the same thing.

But there's no agreement on how to go about safeguarding fish stocks and how to go about protecting the marine environment.

Paul Winn is with the National Parks Association in New South Wales. He's written a report which shows the waters off that State are at greatest risk from the effects of imminent global warming.

PAUL WINN: Our fisheries are in real trouble. We have been overfishing it for far too long but also it is a consequence of the current regime. The east Australian current brings warm water down from the tropics and it meets with southern waters that come up from the Tasman Sea so south-east marine biodiversity is pretty well endemic to south-east Australia.

Between 65 and 95 per cent of the species in the south-east of Australia are endemic, living nowhere else in the world, and those warmer tropical species are going to basically invade those colder water species as temperatures increase.

SIMON SANTOW: Bob Smith is a fishing enthusiast and President of the Fishing Clubs Association.

BOB SMITH: There is nothing wrong with the fishing in New South Wales or even on the New South Wales' coast. Fisheries will tell you that. It is very sustainable. There might be a couple of species that have been overfished by commercial fishing but as far as the recreational fishing industry goes, there is no species on the east coast of New South Wales that is under threat of extinction or past the level of sustainability.

You only just have to look at all the reports that come in each week from fishing shows, fishing magazines that continue and catch, you know, even by commercial fishes has been at a sustainable level now that the commercial industry has been reduced dramatically.

SIMON SANTOW: Paul Winn's report says global warming could lead to the overall commercial catch dropping by a third.

And he warns storm surges and wave activity is going to play havoc with seabeds and other marine species already damaged by overfishing in New South Wales.

PAUL WINN: What National Parks Association is saying is that these are the impacts. There is an emerging consensus around the world that marine or all eco-systems that are degraded are likely to be significantly more affected by climate change than those that are intact.

We are have a significantly degraded marine environment in New South Wales and unless we start building resistance into that, resilience into that eco-system we are going to see far greater impact on our biodiversity than we are elsewhere.

SIMON SANTOW: His solution is to triple the area protected by marine sanctuaries to cover at least 20 per cent of the State's waters.

With that would come severe restrictions on fishing, and for the first time the bans would take in heavily populated Sydney.

PAUL WINN: We would like to see a marine park off the city of Sydney which includes the major estuaries from the Hawkesbury down to Botany Bay, including the Royal National Park.

We, obviously within that marine park there would be a lot of scope for fishing, both commercial and recreation. What we could do then is define an area we could look more closely at, identify the areas that need to be protected and make them sanctuary zones where fishing is excluded.

SIMON SANTOW: But of the areas that are currently available for both commercial and recreational fishing, what percentage would fishing be banned in?

PAUL WINN: Well, we are advocating that 33 per cent of all our marine parks be no-take marine sanctuaries.

SIMON SANTOW: Recreational fishers say the proposal is over the top.

BOB SMITH: Could you just imagine the economic damage that it would do the tourism, to the fishing industry, you know, to the tackle industry, to the holiday units, to all facets of whatever revolves around access to the resource and to the water?

And the best example I can give you is in Queensland where they locked up 30 per cent of the Barrier Reef, the initial response was that they were going to allow about $2.5 million to $4 million for compensation to offset, you know, for locking up the areas.

That bill now is in the vicinity of $222 million. Somebody made a huge mistake when they thought that locking up a few areas was just going to stop a few fishermen from going fishing.

SIMON SANTOW: And Bob Smith has this warning.

BOB SMITH: We've put up with all these little changes over the years you know. I mean, the New South Wales Government has been good at this. They just do a little bit at a time. I could nearly guarantee you that if fishing was stopped off Sydney there would be a huge massive protest and this would probably be the straw that broke the camel's back and unite all the fishing community together, whether they are commercial, recreational or just fish eaters. I believe that they would all be united.

BRENDAN TREMBATH: Bob Smith, President of the Fishing Clubs Association of New South Wales ending Simon Santow's report.

[CEO]

Is this a good idea??? Why should regional recreational fishers be the only ones to suffer the imposition of Labor / Green marine parks? Or are there too many Labor held seats in Sydney? Metropolitan areas of Newcastle, Sydney and Wollongong have the greatest fishing pressure just by sheer weight of population numbers. So doesn't the "biodiversity" there, need protecting too? Or is it only in the bush?

[Nete-Quette]

Northern Star 21.12.07

[CEO]

 The NPA's first priority is the establishment of a marine park off Sydney. They have already been resoundingly discredited by every marine scientist and fisheries biologist in the state for last years media release, "Empty Nets - Empty Oceans." Seems they've learnt nothing from that! Clearly, this is an exercise in softening-up the community, for a massive new marine park, in the Hawkesbury Shelf Bioregion. (Newcastle to Bass Point) And the Laborites will accede, claiming the community want it.

[CEO]

Read this in conjunction with, "Marine Parks on Labor's Caucus Agenda,"  (7/12/07) and the plot absolutely thickens! The extreme Greens do the government's dirty work!  CEO

[BOB SMITH]

Fishers angry over marine park proposal PRINT FRIENDLY EMAIL STORY
PM - Wednesday, 19 December , 2007  18:29:00
Reporter: Simon Santow
BRENDAN TREMBATH: For many people, throwing a line in the water in the hope of catching a fish is one of life's simple pleasures. But over the years, increasing regulation has taken a toll on both recreational and commercial anglers.

Now they're up in arms in New South Wales over a proposal to triple the area where fishing is either restricted or banned altogether.

The idea has come from the National Parks Association which says overfishing and the threat of global warming requires drastic action be taken as soon as possible.

Simon Santow has our report.

SIMON SANTOW: Ask fishing groups about what's important to them and they'll tell you sustainability. Conservationists say much the same thing.

But there's no agreement on how to go about safeguarding fish stocks and how to go about protecting the marine environment.

Paul Winn is with the National Parks Association in New South Wales. He's written a report which shows the waters off that State are at greatest risk from the effects of imminent global warming.

PAUL WINN: Our fisheries are in real trouble. We have been overfishing it for far too long but also it is a consequence of the current regime. The east Australian current brings warm water down from the tropics and it meets with southern waters that come up from the Tasman Sea so south-east marine biodiversity is pretty well endemic to south-east Australia.

Between 65 and 95 per cent of the species in the south-east of Australia are endemic, living nowhere else in the world, and those warmer tropical species are going to basically invade those colder water species as temperatures increase.

SIMON SANTOW: Bob Smith is a fishing enthusiast and President of the Fishing Clubs Association.

BOB SMITH: There is nothing wrong with the fishing in New South Wales or even on the New South Wales' coast. Fisheries will tell you that. It is very sustainable. There might be a couple of species that have been overfished by commercial fishing but as far as the recreational fishing industry goes, there is no species on the east coast of New South Wales that is under threat of extinction or past the level of sustainability.

You only just have to look at all the reports that come in each week from fishing shows, fishing magazines that continue and catch, you know, even by commercial fishes has been at a sustainable level now that the commercial industry has been reduced dramatically.

SIMON SANTOW: Paul Winn's report says global warming could lead to the overall commercial catch dropping by a third.

And he warns storm surges and wave activity is going to play havoc with seabeds and other marine species already damaged by overfishing in New South Wales.

PAUL WINN: What National Parks Association is saying is that these are the impacts. There is an emerging consensus around the world that marine or all eco-systems that are degraded are likely to be significantly more affected by climate change than those that are intact.

We are have a significantly degraded marine environment in New South Wales and unless we start building resistance into that, resilience into that eco-system we are going to see far greater impact on our biodiversity than we are elsewhere.

SIMON SANTOW: His solution is to triple the area protected by marine sanctuaries to cover at least 20 per cent of the State's waters.

With that would come severe restrictions on fishing, and for the first time the bans would take in heavily populated Sydney.

PAUL WINN: We would like to see a marine park off the city of Sydney which includes the major estuaries from the Hawkesbury down to Botany Bay, including the Royal National Park.

We, obviously within that marine park there would be a lot of scope for fishing, both commercial and recreation. What we could do then is define an area we could look more closely at, identify the areas that need to be protected and make them sanctuary zones where fishing is excluded.

SIMON SANTOW: But of the areas that are currently available for both commercial and recreational fishing, what percentage would fishing be banned in?

PAUL WINN: Well, we are advocating that 33 per cent of all our marine parks be no-take marine sanctuaries.

SIMON SANTOW: Recreational fishers say the proposal is over the top.

BOB SMITH: Could you just imagine the economic damage that it would do the tourism, to the fishing industry, you know, to the tackle industry, to the holiday units, to all facets of whatever revolves around access to the resource and to the water?

And the best example I can give you is in Queensland where they locked up 30 per cent of the Barrier Reef, the initial response was that they were going to allow about $2.5 million to $4 million for compensation to offset, you know, for locking up the areas.

That bill now is in the vicinity of $222 million. Somebody made a huge mistake when they thought that locking up a few areas was just going to stop a few fishermen from going fishing.

SIMON SANTOW: And Bob Smith has this warning.

BOB SMITH: We've put up with all these little changes over the years you know. I mean, the New South Wales Government has been good at this. They just do a little bit at a time. I could nearly guarantee you that if fishing was stopped off Sydney there would be a huge massive protest and this would probably be the straw that broke the camel's back and unite all the fishing community together, whether they are commercial, recreational or just fish eaters. I believe that they would all be united.

BRENDAN TREMBATH: Bob Smith, President of the Fishing Clubs Association of New South Wales ending Simon Santow's report.

PLEASE TAKE NOTE: I did a 15 minute interview with Simon Santo as a one on one interview. I did not have any interaction with Paul Winn at any stage (they would not have allowed my words on air anyway) and I was not told his name at any stage of comment.
My words and spiel in the  interview were about Global Warming, NPA claims of fish depletion so massive mp's needed was just bullshit and emotional crap, massive fish kills due to environment that go unmentioned by these clowns, marine resource adapts to climate change throughout history as in coral reefs etc move to appropriate depths, shorelines have receeded/changed and deserts have been formed since the big bang and NOTHING you and I can do will stop climate change or Global Warming. A serve was given about the water quality of estuaries and waterways and silted up rivers.  At least 15 minutes so the few paragraphs seen here is a manipulated story. The ABC will be contacted for the real interview (or else)


Bob Smith

[CEO]

  ALL.    LABOR / GREEN MARINE PARKS MERELY LOCK THE REAL PROBLEMS IN AND LOCK THE COMMUNITY OUT !  Read Emeritus Professor Bob Kearney's paper, on NSW marine parks. Then you will get a true understanding of their worth in "protecting the biodiversity." As Professor Kearney reports, " they are a sham. Thinly veiled advocacy, masquerading as science,  to hoodwink the unsuspecting public." Problem for them is, ECOfishers was never hoodwinked!

[billfisher]

This certainly could be the last straw. Winn even mentioned Botany Bay as part of the park. Surely he knows about it being a rec fishing haven paid with our licenses. There are other commercial bans already in place too, such as in Sydney Harbour and Port Hacking.

Were not talking about some little coastal town either. The damage to businesses such as the boating and tackle industry would be enormous with 33% closures. I would suggest a boycott on the payment and collection by tackle stores of the fishing license as a first step.

[sandfly]

      It appears Winn hasn't done much homework on the effect closures would have in Sydney and the opposition it is likely to create. Then again does he ever do much homework? No political party could afford to support these closures.

[Nete-Quette]

NATIONAL  PARKS  ASSOCIATION  CRIES  WOLF ? AGAIN.

ECOfishers, the state?s peak conservation fishing organization, scoffs at the latest claims, by the NPA, for more massive marine parks. (?Push for expanded marine parks.? NS 21/12/07)

NSW Fisheries Chief Scientist, recently announced, ?No NSW recreationally targeted fish are under threat or in imminent danger of collapse. All stocks are being harvested sustainably and are constantly monitored by the fisheries managers.?

Incredibly, a terrestrial ecologist, from the extreme green National Parks Association, now claims, ?nine (9) NSW species are seriously overfished! And 50% of our offshore reefs have been denuded of all life.? Radical claims indeed and without any supportive scientific evidence whatsoever.

Fishers are aware that four (4) species of NSW fish were growth overfished. This is an economic issue, not a biological one. That situation was simply rectified, by increasing the legal length and lowering the bag limit on those species.

Nor has the NPA been able to explain, the population explosion in Leatherjackets and Australian Salmon numbers. These species have been in plague proportions for years. So much so that billions of juvenile Leatherjackets perish every year, simply because there isn?t sufficient food, to sustain their mass.

With another radical claim, the NPA is demanding more massive marine parks, in NSW. They are relying upon the 1998 suggestion from overseas scientists, that up to 20% of the marine environment be protected from over exploitation. Clearly, NSW stocks are not overexploited!

Even the United Nations Charter on Biological Diversity, has not adopted specific targets for marine protected areas. And the Commonwealth Department of Environment policy says, ?since the objective of setting up marine protected areas, is to protect a representative sample of biodiversity, there may be no need to prohibit extractive activities that are well managed and do not affect that biodiversity.?

NSW recreational fisheries are well managed and no stocks are under threat or in imminent danger of collapse. Hence, the outrageous claims by the NPA cannot be justified.

The NPA continue to use recreational fishers, ?Catch Per Unit Effort,? as an indicator of fish stock abundance. It is not! It is merely an indicator of localised and relative fish stock abundance ? not of the entire biomass!

Unfortunately, NSW marine parks ignore the real threats to the marine environment. They are, pollution, siltation, coastal development and loss of wetlands etc. NSW marine parks simply lock these problems in and lock the community out!   


World renown marine scientist and fisheries biologist, Australia?s Emeritus Professor Bob Kearney PhD, DSc, AM, has already condemned NSW marine parks, describing them as, ?a sham.? And  the documentation relating to them, ?as very poorly disguised advocacy, marketed to the unsuspecting public as science.? ?This,? says Emeritus Professor Kearney, ?calls into question, the credibility of the NSW Marine Park Authority and the justification of all existing

and proposed marine parks in NSW.  This has always been the view of informed NSW recreational fishers!

The Marine Park Authority has been unable to clearly identify just what it is they seek to protect and exactly what it is being protected from. Recreational fishing has minimal impact on the marine biodiversity.

Despite this overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary, the NPA continue to demand more and larger government marine parks. They also cite the predicted impacts of climate change as a reason. So they simplistically propose to ban recreational fishing!

Closing huge areas to fishing simply forces fishers and other uses of the marine environment, to travel significantly further. This uses more fossil fuels, producing more green-house gasses, that contribute to climate change. So there is no science or logic or sense, in their solution at all. It is laughable.  Realistically, their claims are not credible.

   It is just another case of the NPA, ?crying wolf,? ? again!

The NPA plan to release yet another statement, early next year. ECOfishers considers 1st April 2008, would be a most appropriate date.
 
Ken Thurlow
CEO  ECOfishers  NSW.

[billfisher]

50% of all reefs denuded of life - thats a good one. Maybe Winn should come fishing with me. A few hours of drifting the close in reefs and gravel grounds off metropolitan Sydney using a simple patternoster rig usually sees us boat around 10kg of prime eating fish such as snapper, mowies, nannagai, pigfish, flathead and others. I have caught mulloway to 14 kg fishing like that as well as many kingies. I have ran out of bait more than once too! 

[petnic]

I think we have a real worry about peoples attitudes to this crisis...I noticed on your posting at fishraider they have 5000 members and 8 have responded, what does that tell you ?
cheers
Pete

[row]

Is the SMH priming readers for announcement of some more marine parks?

This is the same extreme green journalist who last year labelled recreational fisherman environmental vandals.

Waters of wonderment

December 31, 2007

The Barrier Reef gets the world fame but NSW has six great marine parks of its own, writes James Woodford.

Fishermen, as with any good hunter gatherers, don't like being told what they can and can't do, and where they can and can't do it.

Until recently, with the exception of a few bag limits, protected species and size restrictions, anglers could turn up at a favourite spot, hook up a yabby or a prawn and catch almost any old fish they wanted, any time they pleased.

There was no need to make an appointment for a spot, no forms to fill in, no hourly fee and no tax collectors sneaking around the rock platforms to collect GST.

The only forces higher up the food chain than an angler were the tide, weather and an impatient spouse.

But a southerly buster was tearing up the coast. First came recreational fishing licences and then along came four words - marine park zoning plan.

If you listen to recreational fishermen you would think "marine park" was code for a mass lockout of people. It is true that, in a few small areas of the coast, signs have sprouted up like mushrooms alerting anglers to marine park boundaries - but the sky has not fallen.

So what is all the fuss about?

New South Wales has one of the most spectacular coastlines on earth - 1586 kilometres, nearly 45 per cent in terrestrial reserves and a third in marine protected areas. There are wild offshore islands like Cabbage Tree, off Port Stephens, and Montague, off Narooma. There are also coral reefs, kelp forests, whale migration routes, cuttlefish spawning grounds, coastal lakes that are still in near-pristine condition, networks of underwater caves and hundreds of ship and plane wrecks.

And, last but not least, there are, according to Andy Short, University of Sydney researcher and author of Beaches Of The NSW Coast, 721 beaches in the state.

So far NSW has given birth to a neat half-dozen marine parks - Solitary Islands, Port Stephens, Lord Howe Island, Batemans, Jervis Bay and Cape Byron. All of them have caused immense political headaches - breach babies that needed emergency caesareans.

Each of the six has been created in a different bio-region and aims to protect a representation of the different habitats in each of the areas.

All the parks are multiple-use reserves, which means certain areas are zoned for particular activities. They are all within state waters and extend from high tide mark to depths of at least 180 metres. It is only in sanctuary zones that recreational fishing is prohibited altogether. These zones are still open to all other recreational pursuits - snorkelling, scuba, boating and ecotourism - and make up on average about a fifth of the total park area.

The main reason for the controversial policy is that there is clear evidence marine habitats are undergoing dramatic changes and entire underwater ecosystems are shrinking, if not disappearing altogether. As coastal human populations increase there will be more and more pressure on all areas and rising risk of degradation unless a few small areas are closed to harvesting.

Alan Jordan, a senior environmental scientist with the NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change, cites one startling piece of research when he makes a case for marine parks.

When an area is fished heavily and often it is the large adults that are removed by anglers. Many of these big fish are predators of sea urchins. When sea urchin numbers explode they strip reefs of the larger seaweeds. These areas are known as "urchin barrens".

"It has been estimated that around 50 per cent of all the coastal reefs south of Port Stephens are in urchin barrens," Jordan says. "Those barrens are the marine equivalent of a clear-felled forest. And you can't drive around an urchin barren like you can just go and see a clear-felled forest."

Large-scale scientific surveys are under way throughout marine parks to try to determine definitively whether biodiversity is benefiting from fishing closures. Within depths that can be reached by scuba divers there are 100 monitoring sites around the state. There are also 300 baited underwater video sites where population changes are being monitored remotely.

The science is still preliminary but it already seems there is an increase in some reef fish species such as the red morwong.

"There's also a pretty distinct effect with mud crabs in the Solitary Islands Marine Park," Jordan says.

By halting fishing in selected areas, scientists believe the numbers of adult fish will increase while sea urchins decline and reefs recover.

Each marine park has its signature attraction. In Batemans it is Montague Island, with its seals and penguins, reached by boat from Narooma. Jervis Bay is famous for its white beaches, calm waters and immense biodiversity. Its proximity to Sydney, however, also has meant it has been a playground for the city and its resources were, until the park was created, being over-exploited.

Port Stephens is regarded as one of the best places in Australia to see dolphins. Lord Howe Island, being 700 kilometres off the mainland, is the hardest of the marine parks to reach but arguably one of the most exquisite marine and island ecosystems on earth. Lord Howe has the world's southernmost coral reefs and its warm waters are home to turtles and spectacular schools of large fish. They are totally unafraid of humans and at some beaches come as close as knee-deep.

Cape Byron is famous for its beaches and the Solitary Islands have some of the state's best diving.

"Researchers have identified over 550 species of reef fish, 90 species of hard coral and 600 species of molluscs in the [Solitary Islands] marine park," says the authority. "[It] also supports a range of threatened and protected species such as the grey nurse shark, black cod, turtles, whales, shore birds and rare marine algae."

Jordan emphasises that the creation of marine parks is not for fish management, although benefits will flow to anglers when fish spill over from sanctuary zones into areas where they can be legally caught. Marine parks are about protecting and conserving biodiversity.

Consider these new findings by Royal Botanic Gardens expert Alan Millar and colleagues from the Australian Museum. "[In the Batemans area] we documented in excess of 250 macroalgal species (two new species and one new genus) and 340 invertebrates, of which 85 were new to science. On one single seaweed the team found 85 species of invertebrates."

The biggest losers from the creation of marine parks have been commercial fishermen. For example, in Batemans trawling was banned across the entire park. Numerous fishing families have left the industry by putting up their hands for licence buy-outs that aim to minimise the transfer of fishing from protected zones to other waters.

But, on average, about 80 per cent of all the parks remain open to recreational fishermen and, wherever possible, the most popular fishing spots are kept outside sanctuary zones. These spots tend to be the ones used by visitors. This has meant the less frequented sites are politically easier to put into sanctuary zones, where all fishing is banned.

The other big losers are locals who have a favourite fishing spot on a wild headland somewhere off the beaten track. They really feel the impact of the creation of a sanctuary zone.

David Booth, professor of marine ecology at the University of Technology, Sydney, wonders how long it will take before people realise they don't have to go Queensland to see spectacular underwater landscapes. He is one of the biggest defenders of the state's little understood and appreciated network of marine national parks.

"You don't have to go to the Great Barrier Reef to see magnificent scenery," he says. "New South Wales has such a diversity of tropical and temperate species.

"There's kelp forests, underwater cave fauna, estuaries, coastal lakes. We are right in the middle of this transition between tropical and cold. The whole species richness of the place is incredible."

[billfisher]

Typical mushy green platitudes. The article talks about great species richness and diversity of NSW waters. Isn't this a sign that fisheries managment is successful in maintaining this diversity? Another clue may be that our fishing pressure is orders of magnitude below just about any other country.
As to urchin barrens there is no reason to believe that these are anything other than a natural phenomenon.

[row]

SMH Letters 01012008

Fishermen's lament
Despite widespread opposition to marine park fishing bans, anglers are a respectful lot ("Waters of wonderment", December 31).

While many are sceptical of the exaggerated claims of environmentalists, most have made the effort to memorise thousands of rules in order to conform. For instance, we have learnt yellow is habitat protection, pink is sanctuaries and blue is general use. We are always careful to check the colour, and we only fish where the water is blue.

Rod Burston NSW Fishing Clubs Association, Kiama Downs

James Woodford is right to say fishers are modern day hunter-gatherers. After all, everybody has a fundamental right to fish for food. And yes, we are deeply offended by marine park lockouts, especially down here. Can you see Kalahari Bushmen happily calling off the hunt because they cross an imaginary line drawn on a map?

David Morgan Batemans Bay