Sunfish Bill tell ABC clossures are ok

[RayDeR]

G'day!

Sunfish Representative (President?) Bill Turner was on ABC 612 talking to Peter Gooch.

Bill told Peter that Sunfish represents the recreational fisherman and that basically the 15% closure is not a problem.

He said there is a lot of second hand and false information around. He encouraged everyone to go the EPA websuite and have a look at the closures for themselves.

Bill said you will see it is only a small area and so no problems for the rec fisher.

You can email Peter Gooch at the ABC on : gooch.peter@abc.net.au

RayDeR

[Chris Ryan]

This doesn't surprise me mate. Sunfish are out for the rec fisho only - by supporting the closures they are taking out the commercial operators. This is where/why I hear from the EPA regularly that 'many rec fisho's are supportive of the Green Zones'.

Unfortunately is doesn't help the MBAA in a lot of ways but each group has the right to respond in their own way so whether you support the MBAA or Sunfish or any other plan that may be out there, get ya backside into gear and get behind them.

ALSO make sure you complete the DPI&F Fin Fish Review response survey while you are at it.

Chris

[webby]

Sunfish are only interested in one thing themselves, if they object or dont support the govt they get told to toe the line or lose there funding.
Great representative of the recreational fisho be blowed
regards

[PinHead]

Sunfish..read Govt puppet. As a recreational fishermen I will gladly tell anyone that Sunfish does not represent me in any way shape or form.

[Chris Ryan]

Well, can't argue with either of you there boys.

[PADDLES]

yeah, it's sort of like a government department saying that they support a government policy. trouble is that the public would not be any the wiser. you could probably make up a ficticious organisation name and go on the abc claiming that you represent the recreational anglers of queensland and the public would believe you, sad really.

[billfisher]

We have similar characters in NSW. Aptly named 'Stinker' Clarke is a fishing journalist and a members of Labor's fun parlour the ACORF, which is supposed to represent NSW recreational fishers. He is a firm advocate of marine parks. He writes articles saying it has never been a better time to visit Port Stevens now that it hosts a marine park. He says fish are reuturning now that professional fishermen have been bought out (no studies mind you and the park has only been in effect for a few months). No mention of the fact that anglers lost access to half the inshore reefs. He also fails to mention that the park rangers have been running around intimidating anglers, boarding boats at sea and demanding licences, seaching boats (pulling up floors etc), and issuing fines.

[Jeremy]

that is very disappointing if it is true. I am making some enquiries to find out whether this is true and to clarify Sunfish's position on the proposed rezoning of Moreton Bay. I will post their response when I hear back from them.

Jeremy

[Chris Ryan]

Jeremy,

Its not the first time they have made this statement though mate. After the first rally, the Northern Times in Caboolture had a follow-up article which ended up being more about Sunfish than the rally. Here's the article.

Chris

[Horse]

Perhaps its time to look into how much of our money is going to Sunfish. If most of us recreational fishers do not support them then perhaps the $ should go straight into stocking and the development of artificial reefs etc.

[RayDeR]

G'day!

I see there are two possible reactions.

1. To knock Sunfish

2. To know what we are up against and strengthen our voice to state clearly, calmly and courteously our position. Thats why I gave Peter Gooch's address.

Our next Rally is about a month away. We need to saturate the media before that and when they see the strength of our Rally. The messages they have heard will be strengthened.

RayDeR

[Mike Delisser]

Info on Sunfish

http://www.sunfishqld.com.au/html/about.html

[Jeremy]

I have contacted Sunfish. Their position is that they DO NOT support the closures at all. That is why they would not sign off on the MBAA proposal. Perhaps Bill Turner is a loosa cannon voicing his own opinion rather than that of Sunfish? I am awaiting clarification on this from Bill Turner himself.

Lets hold off on the trail and execution until this picture is a bit clearer.

Jeremy

[Chris Ryan]

I agree Jeremy, but if he is a loose cannon, he is doing Dave Bateman and Co no favours at all and Dave is a top honest guy.

[regy]

I have spoken to Bill Turner about his position on the EPA plan, and he said that he loves yellow zones, dark blue zones, and does not like either the EPA or the MBAA green zones.

[Lovey80]

Can some one please explain the difference between a yellow and a dark blue zone?

Does anyone here sincerly believe that the EPA is not going to get near 100% of what they want/asked for? Does the MBAA stand a chance? Lets say at the next rally 30,000 cars flooded the city............... She/Bligh might get goose bumps but IMHO it's a done deal. A deal done by her predecessor but one she supports none the same.

Cheers Chris

[Daryl McPhee]

In answer to Chris,

The dark blue zones are habitat protection zones that do not impact recreational fishing but prevent commercial otter trawling.

The yellow (or conservation) zones I believe are of significant consequence to many recreational anglers and I have been contacted by numerous average recreational angler who are concerned. In a yellow zone you are only allowed to use one hook/line if you are not trolling. While this is suitable for some anglers it is not for many others and in any case it is simply not justified as it is a fishing effort control - the province of QDPI&F and not EPA.

It get's more complicated though, in a yellow zone you can troll for pelagics with up to three lines. Taking the proposed yellow zone off South Passage as an example, you can troll there with three lines, but only bottom fish for snapper with one line with one hook.

It gets worse when you consider the top of Bribie Passage where the yellow zone runs on the Bribie side but not the mainland side. You would be able to fish on one side of the Passage with only one hook/line but up to three on the other. Very difficult to enforce!! Likewise, some charter vessel operators who work around Flinders are extremely concerned because their clients typically use two droppers which is fine until the boat drifts into the proposed yellow zone.

The answer to the problem I believe is to have a similar solution as implemented in the Great Sandy Straits in the Great Sandy Marine Park where the Straits are a "designated area" where all lawful fishing as defined under the Fisheries Act and Regulations can continue.

Hope this helps Chris and I encourage all viewers of Ausfish to have a good hard think about what the yellow zones mean to your fishing activities. If you are fine with them well and good, if not voice your opinion.

Daryl

[Jeremy]

well said Darryl, I agree completely

Jeremy

[regy]

I beleive that Daryl is only telling half the story, in yellow zones there in no comercial net fishing allowed except for bait net fishing so recreational fishermen do not have to compete with gill nets in these areas, and in dark blue zones there is no trawling allowed of any description so the beam trawlers will be excluded from the Pine and Cabulture rivers.

[Daryl McPhee]

Yes no beam trawling or otter trawling in dark blue zones.

Many of the yellow zones such as Pumicestone Passage itself, Flinders Reef and many of the proposed offshore areas have no commercial mesh net fishery anyway.

The issue is that resource allocation is the province of QDPI&F for which they have a specific policy on which was developed with significant stakeholder support. It should not in my opinion be the role of the EPA. This is an issue I have discussed at length in addition to a critical analysis of the RAP, in my forthcoming book Fisheries Management in Australia which will be released at the end of this month.

Many of the the anglers that have rung me at home or contacted me directly by email are more concerned with the one hook/one line issue than the presence or absence of commercial fishing. I am not saying this is universal (nothing in fishing ever is) and everyone is entitled to their own opinion on this topic. I personally would like to have the freedom to recreational fish with more than one hook/line if I desire to.

Daryl

[regy]

I would also like to say why is the MBAA supporting green zones and not the yellow and dark blue zones, is it because commercial netters can only catch bait in yellow zones and can not trawl in dark blue zones, are the commercial netters in the MBAA trying to use recreational anglers to fight for their cause.

[Daryl McPhee]

The review of the yellow and dark blue is part of the next stage of the MBAA project, together with further analysis of the green zones themselves.

The project was always planned to be in two stages, the first leading up to the release of the draft zoning plan with a focus on green zones and the second focussing on all relevant zones. It was a matter of prioritising time and resources.

Much to my family's annoyance I spend most evenings on the MBMP issue - it is not my day job. There is only so much I can do.

Daryl

[regy]

what is trolling, is it when you are not at anchor and moving a bait across the bottom or on the surface, is drifting a form of bottom trolling?

[Daryl McPhee]

The key definition in the one in the Marine Park Regulation 2006 where trolling is for a set list of pelagic species and is from a boat under power only - not on the drift.

Trolling for flathead using more than one line in a yellow zone would not be permitted.

Daryl

[regy]

the DPI&F have been dragging the chain in the area of zones for Recreational use ever since the Burn's Report in the early1990's, even though the Recreational Use Fee/ PPV Levey, is or was for this purpose, DPI&F has netted the over $20,000,000.00 and they have flatly refused to spend this money on the purpose for which it was intended, and they don't look like changing their ways any time soon. So I thik we should be happy that EPA is doing some of the job that DPI&F should have done years ago

[regy]

is it true the FRDC gave the MBAA $200,000.00 to help fund this fight and the MBAA hasn't got a final plan out yet ! and they are asking anglers to sign a petition in support of their plan, when are they going to have a final plan so we can compare the EPA and the MBAA plans side by side.

[Daryl McPhee]

Check out the link at www.marineqld.com.au (http://www.marineqld.com.au) which contains a detailed report including maps that runs to about 173 pages. There are a number of other posts on the site from Grant Bennett that provide an overview of the project.

If you have any specific comments on the report ring me on 0410 335867.

Daryl

[regy]

I beleive you are wrong about trolling only is for pelagic species. more missinformation ?

[Chris Ryan]

ah regy is back. Regy, you disappeared during the election when you were hanging stuff on KC......you never did get back to him on his questions he posed to you.

Welcome back. How are things on your planet?

[Daryl McPhee]

I was waiting for you to call last night Regy.

I am hope I am wrong about trolling for no pelagic's but my years of dealing with legislative issues suggest vigiliance. A very early discussion with an EPA staff member was that trolling provisions in the "olive" zone contained in the Marine Regs (search www.austlii.edu.au (http://www.austlii.edu.au) for all relevant Acts and Regs) would be mirrored in the conservation zones.

As it currently stands under the Marine Park Regs, trolling is tied to a list of pelagic species:

(a) a species in any of the following families--

(i) Carangidae;

(ii) Coryphaenidae;

(iii) Sphyraenidae;

(iv) Istiophoridae;

(v) Scombridae; or
(b) a species in either of the following genera--

(i) Aphareus;

(ii) Aprion; or
(c) Rachycentron canadum; or
(d) Xiphias gladius. If EPA have seen commonsense and deviated from the advice additionally provided then that is great news. Getting back to the original question the definition of trolling is: "a vessel is taken to be under way only if it is being propelled through the water in a forward direction, whether by engine, sail or human power, and is not adrift".

On another issue, bait jigs would also not be permissible in a yellow zone, Again this would not affect all anglers in all proposed yellow zones but it is likely to impact some.

Daryl

[Lovey80]

Thanks Daryl for some great information there.

Regy where is the hostility coming from I don't see anywhere in Daryl's posts that warants it. As far as the MBAA is concerned any organisation that is fighting the EPA has got to be better than nothing.

Cheers Chris

[Derek Bullock]

Link here to the EPA Proposed Zoning for the different areas. Darryl is spot on.

http://www.aussiecampovenforum.com/Photo/MBAA/zones.JPG

[Moonlighter]

Like Daryl, I am also very disturbed about anyone from the recreational sector openly supporting the extensive yellow zones as currently defined by EPA in their draft plan for 2 main reasons:

1. Allocation Commercial/Rec is a Fisheries Management issue.
As Daryl has correctly pointed out, the issue of sharing the catch between the rec and commercial sectors is purely a fisheries management one and Ausfish is full of posts from dozens of people who quite rightly point out that fisheries management is the job of DPI&F, not EPA, and furthermore that EPA cannot try to justify its proposals on the basis of alleged or claimed benefit to fisheries.

It is therefore, IMO, unbelievable hypocracy for any rec angler or recreational fishing organisation to be willing to accept EPA's yellow zones based on the rationale that they effectively create rec-only fishing areas. Either you're OK with EPA interfering in fisheries management matters, or you're not. You can't be OK with them interfering in fisheries management when it suits your personal preferences and then object in circumstances where it doesn't suit you!

2. Yellow today, green tomorrow?
There is a very real risk that today's yellow zones will be tomorrow's green zones. It is just as important that we try to minimise them and where we can't prevent them, to make sure they are placed in areas where the impact on fishing will be less, and that we think about the long term when we do that. As yet we don't know whether what EPA puts in place later this year will be reviewed in 5 years or 10 years time.

MBAA is not and has never advocated for green, yellow or dark blue zones. But as anyone can see by now with the EPA draft and statements by the Government, like these zones or not, EPA will impose them on us.

So MBAA is working as hard as we can to try to make sure that all green and yellow zones in particular are minimised as much as possible and where they are imposed, they are placed in locations where their impact will be as small as possible on fishing.

Grant

[regy]

To Chris Ryan I don't know you or KC but you sound like a pro fisher to me, any one who thinks that Bill turner is in the pocket of Goverment or anyone else is mistaken Bill is very passionate about his fishing and if he thinks that the EPA plan is better than the MBAA plan that is good enough for me. After all I thought that this Site was a venue for Recreatinnal Anglers not Pro Fishermen it would appear that you Daryl Mc Phee, Horse, and lovey80 should start up a web site of your own and call it fishing for the future with nets

[Derek Bullock]

To Chris Ryan I don't know you or KC but you sound like a pro fisher to me, any one who thinks that Bill turner is in the pocket of Goverment or anyone else is mistaken Bill is very passionate about his fishing and if he thinks that the EPA plan is better than the MBAA plan that is good enough for me. After all I thought that this Site was a venue for Recreatinnal Anglers not Pro Fishermen it would appear that you Daryl Mc Phee, Horse, and lovey80 should start up a web site of your own and call it fishing for the future with nets

......................... http://forum.camping.com.au/images/smiles/laughing.gifhttp://forum.camping.com.au/images/smiles/laughing.gifhttp://forum.camping.com.au/images/smiles/laughing.gifhttp://forum.camping.com.au/images/smiles/laughing.gifhttp://forum.camping.com.au/images/smiles/laughing.gifhttp://forum.camping.com.au/images/smiles/laughing.gif

[regy]

The MBAA was instigated by the commercial fishermen and sucked in a lot of recreational anglers with the scare tactic of 50% green zones then it was 20%-25%, what EPA draft came up with was 15%, which is what the MBAA has in its draft. I think that recreational fishermen are being used by the MBAA like pawns in a chess game.

[regy]

Sunfish is the peak advisoiy body to the goverment on recreational matters if you are a true recreational angler get behond sunfish, I can see why Sunfish didn't join the MBAA, its controlled by Connercial Intrests with little regard for Recreational Intrests. Please note Sunfish does not have Commercial Fishermen as members of their orginaziation, so they only have Recreational Intrests at heart, unlike the MBAA

[PinHead]

Sunfish is the peak advisoiy body to the goverment on recreational matters if you are a true recreational angler get behond sunfish, I can see why Sunfish didn't join the MBAA, its controlled by Connercial Intrests with little regard for Recreational Intrests. Please note Sunfish does not have Commercial Fishermen as members of their orginaziation, so they only have Recreational Intrests at heart, unlike the MBAA

I do not know Bill Turner and I guess he must be employed by Sunfish..Please tell me Regy...why has Sunfish not asked rec fishos for their ideas on these zoning proposals...I have not seen any requests from them for submissions from rec fishos or do they just make decisions and say they represent all of us..I can assure you they do not represent me in any way shape or firm. If you support the proposed EPA closures, go and join the AMCS website..you can chat away merrily to people with your own mindset.
As for the MBAA, I originally supported them until I realised they also approved of green zones..I respect the work Daryl and grant have done on this but as i do not agree then that is my opinion..I am not guided by what someone else may think..I make my own decisions.

I am not in favour of any form of closures..but sustainability due to size and bag as determined by the DPI&F not the EPA..the EPA should be concenred about water quality not bloody fish numbers..nothing to do with them.

If Bill Turner IS in favour of these EPA Green Zones as an individual that is fine but if he speaks in favour of these as a representative of Sunfish then I believe he should resign his position immediately as he is not representing his Members as he should be.

Any thinking rec fisho would be very much against the proposed EPA closures..they are ridisulous.

[Moonlighter]

Quote:
"As for the MBAA, I originally supported them until I realised they also approved of green zones..I respect the work Daryl and grant have done on this but as i do not agree then that is my opinion..I am not guided by what someone else may think..I make my own decisions."

Pinhead: you've got it wrong and as a result you may be unintentionally misrepresenting our position. MBAA does not "support green zones" as you say we do.

As I said in my last post on this thread, MBAA has not and has never advocated for green, yellow or dark blue zones. A number of us keen rec fishers as well as tackle indusrty types and many others took the time and expense to attend a Recfish Australia seminar in late 2006 to learn about what was happening with marine parks across Australia and listen to what the experts had to say. It was called something like "Marine Parks - stocking the tackle box for rec fishing"

We listened to the advice from Recfish Australia that marine parks and more green, yellow and blue zones were going to be a fact of life however much we didn't like that and howver poor the science is in relation to them in Australia's unique context.

Recfish experts, and experience with other cases, confirmed that that the best way for fishing interests was to work together to try to minimise their impacts, because outright oposition was doomed to failure. This is Recfish Australia's advice, and they are the peak rec fishing group nationally.

And that's the course we've been taking. You've misunderstood our counter-proposals for green zones to mean that we support them, and hopefully the above context shows that this is not the case.

Regards

Grant

[PinHead]

sorry grant..however..I am one of those GOM..I would not compromise regardless of what any "experts" from recfish have stated..I would be fighting against any green zones ...stuff em as far as I am concerned and the same for the EPA.

I might have been raised in the old school tradition..if you don't like something ..say so..and do not bend on your principles..seemed to have worked okay for me so far...sometimes for the better sometimes not, but I can sleep at night knowing I have not bent over for anyone to be willingly shafted.

[Moonlighter]

Hi Pinhead

I can understand your rationale and I respect your position, but as you'd also expect I wouldn't agree with you!

MBAA believed that outright confrontation would be met with outright obstinance. In this matter, the Govt has always been ultimately in the position to do and take whatever they want. They just legislate, and its done.

We felt that means you have to negotiate, and a "minimise the damage" approach was the only viable choice if we were to make any difference in their final decision. In other words, if you offer no alternatives that will even go close to satisfying them, then you'll get no consideration in their decision.

Its a pity that Sunfish chose to leave the MBAA in the early days because it always helps to be a 100% united force rather than having several groups doing their own thing.

Some Sunfish people actually participated in our research project and contributed their extensive knowledge which was great, but because Sunfish's declared policy position (at that time) was to the effect that "no more green zones, full stop", they couldn't sign off on the alternatives we developed.

After the EPA draft came out proposing 15% compared to the 10% MBAA came up with, it seems that Sunfish may have conceded the fight is already over, which is a big pity because we don't think it is. I hope that thay haven't thrown the towel and conceded 15% and that they come out and say so....soon!

Even at this late stage, it would be great to get Sunfish back on board with MBAA because it would send a very strong message to the Govt that all major fishing groups are united. Wouldn't that be a great negotiating chip!

Grant

[Fafnir]

Sunfish is the peak advisoiy body to the goverment on recreational matters if you are a true recreational angler get behond sunfish, I can see why Sunfish didn't join the MBAA, its controlled by Connercial Intrests with little regard for Recreational Intrests. Please note Sunfish does not have Commercial Fishermen as members of their orginaziation, so they only have Recreational Intrests at heart, unlike the MBAA


I am with Pinhead on this. Sunfish DO NOT represent me as a recreational angler. I have never been asked my opinion by any representative from Sunfish, have not seen even so much as a survey from them where I might be able to express my views. I don't know of anyone who has. As far as I am concerned Sunfish are simply looking after themselves and are making decisions that are designed to look after Sunfish, not rec anglers.

I also agree with Pinhead that Bill Turner needs to stand down immediately, if the comments he has supposedly said are in fact true. If he did indeed make those comments then you cannot seriously say that he is looking after anyone but himself. I think all recreational fishermen should come out and voice their opposition to Sunfish in the strongest possible way, as clearly they are doing more harm than good.

[Luc]

To all,
For information, this is part of an email from SUNFISH Qld.

Following receipt of the attached emails I contacted Mr Turner re the ABC interview.
He denied the statements were made & at my request obtained a copy of the Radio interview which I have at present & have listened to.
I find he was correct & made no such statements re SUNFISH accepting the green areas or the plan in it's current form.
Personally I am disappointed that this has taken much of my valuable time & surprised at how willing anglers are to "shaft" SUNFISH & persons within the organisation.
I have advised Bill that if this happens again he should consider legal action.
I hope this puts the matter to bed.
David Bateman

Bill Turner is no longer the chairman of SUNFISH QLD.
He is however the chairman of the SUNFISH NORTH MORETON BRANCH. Despite the local papers having been made aware of this, they still regularly refer to him as the chairman of SUNFISH QLD.

If you want to know Sunfish's position on Moreton Bay, the FinFish review and other things, bother yourselves to get off your posteriors and access the SUNFISH website.

SUNFISH QLD tries very hard to be apolitical so that it can work with the government of the day no matter who's in power. Now if you thing that because it gets government funding SUNFISH QLD is simply a rubber stamp, you should get involved. More helping hands are always welcome.

The wingeing at large for someone or somebody to do something is as usual deafening. Well, I got news for you, you're the someone or somebody. If more fishers are not prepared to step up, we'll keep getting the rough end of the pinerapple.

Green zone are a POLITICAL fact and simply taking your marbles and going home to mummy wingeing about the big bad whoever only give free reign to insert the pineapple even further.

So get involved by voluntering you time or your donation otherwise go home, hide in the cupboard and suck your thumb.

Now if I've upset anyone, someone or somebody GOOD get off your duff and get involved.::)

Luc

[regy]

To Pinhead & Fafnir, Bill Turner has never ever said that he persomally or otherwise supported the green zones but does support yellow and dark blue zones, he is not a employee of Sunfish, he is a voulteneer who has worked lireless for the rights of recreational anglers for many years, he is also a quadaplegic pensioner with no use of his legs and only less than 20%use of his arms and hands, and he is not a loosa as gested previously, he will always stick up for recreational anglers weather they are members of Sunfish or not. Its a pity that the knockers of Sunfish and Bill would take the time to find out more about Sunfish and join,that is if you are a true recreational angler and not a pro pretending to be one, because Sunfish will not have a bar of Commercial fishers in their ranks. Sunfish is made up of voulenteers donating their time and in many cases their money, why sit on your arse and wait for Sunfish to come to you, get on the official Sunfish Website and check out for your self, there are only two paid positions in Sunfish and Bill has never been in any one of them.

[Mike Delisser]

Reality check please

"Horse"- Is it fair to call for a cut in the Gov funding of an organization that spends most of it's money on kids fishing programs, just because you don't agree with them on this issue?

"Fafnir"- Shouldn't it be up to the Sunfish members to demand Bill Turner resigns from THEIR organization (if warranted)?

No organization would have the support of every angler but are there any other Rec fishing bodies in Qld that have in direct or affiliated means 45,000 members?

Not knocking the "fishing party" but how many members do they have?

[Jeremy]

So I thik we should be happy that EPA is doing some of the job that DPI&F should have done years ago

Dunno where you are getting your information from. I think the DPI&F have been doing a good job managing the fishery. There is no evidence of any commercial or rec species which are overfished or threatened. The DPI&F has just produced a RIS on the East Coast Fin Fishery which proposed much tighter bag limits on higher size limits on a whole range of fish. A proactive measure. There is no scientific evidence that MP NTAs (no take areas or green zones) will have any positive effect on fish stocks.

Jeremy

[Jeremy]

G'day!

Sunfish Representative (President?) Bill Turner was on ABC 612 talking to Peter Gooch.

Bill told Peter that Sunfish represents the recreational fisherman and that basically the 15% closure is not a problem.

He said there is a lot of second hand and false information around. He encouraged everyone to go the EPA websuite and have a look at the closures for themselves.

Bill said you will see it is only a small area and so no problems for the rec fisher.

You can email Peter Gooch at the ABC on : gooch.peter@abc.net.au

RayDeR

well Ray, now you have been called a liar. Are you? Do you have something against Sunfish? Made me look like a d-head for contacting Sunfish and making them follow up on this. What is going on Ray?

Jeremy

[Fafnir]

"Fafnir"- Shouldn't it be up to the Sunfish members to demand Bill Turner resigns from THEIR organization (if warranted)?

To start with, I did say 'IF' the alleged comments were true, that he should stand down. If he did not make those comments, nothing I said in relation to Bill and his position have any relevance.

But as for should it be up to the members, yes ultimately it would be, but as far as I am concerned, if Sunfish are seen to be representative of recreational anglers, and I am a recreational angler, then I have ever right to be outraged at any comments they make, as they are seen to be commenting on my behalf. If a minister says/does the wrong thing, it is the OPPOSITION, and/or general public that demand that they stand down, not typically their own party members. So I stand by my comments.

As for getting off my backside and checking out Sunfish for myself, or worse still needing to become a member or join them, surely that is a joke. As far as I am concerned they either a) make it crystal clear that they only represent their membership, and not all recreational anglers or b) they go to the effort to find out the views of ALL recreational anglers through surveys, feedback forms etc. Option c) of course would be that they keep their comments/opinions out of the press.

I personally do not like yellow zones (and NO I AM NOT, NOR HAVE I EVER BEEN A PRO-FISHERMAN). So someone from an organisation that apparent represents me stating that they don't have a problem with yellow zones gives me every right to be furious. As I said, speaking on behalf of their members is fine, but speaking on behalf of recreational anglers as a whole is not acceptable. Comments like that simply make it harder for those people who are trying to fight the current draft zoning plan.

As I stated Sunfish DO NOT REPRESENT ME and I am a recreational angler.

[kitty_cat]

regy
this is what sunfish are good for telling you what you want to here
i have not yet seen much good come out off sun fish for us reco guys i think webbys got it right

[regy]

To Jeremy for a decade scientists and reseachers have told us that tailor are a threatned spicies, it has taken fisheries that long to put the legal size up to 35 cm to put a bag limit , and close Fraser Is. to Tailor netting. This is just an exmple of what goes on behind the closed doors of Fisheries. Politics rules your fishing not science, even now the scientific recomendations for Tailor size limit is 40cm. current graphs and infofmation show rapid decline in many spicies, if you want an examnple ,what ever happned to the Brisbane Perch. Be warned Geremy just brcause you are told something isn't wrong ,does't mean it isn't, Goverment feeds on votes not sustainability, whish is why we have the MBAA

[seatime]

I was listening to that ABC program when comments were made by Bill Turner.
At the time I thought "what the! why is he saying this?". On first impression it did come across as him not opposed to the EPA plans, and I don't think I'm the only one who heard it that way.
Obviously this wasn't what he said and without the benefit of a recording of the 'interview' questions asked, reponses given, and used in the correct context, I'll take Dave Bateman's explanation that he didn't say it.

cheers, and keep up the good work Sunfish.

[Mike Delisser]

Fafnir, Of course Sunfish doesn't represent you, it represents it's members & affiliats, 45,000 in total, 100% of whom are recreational anglers.
The 45,000 make it the peak rec angling body in Qld.
It's quite simple realy.
If you start up a organization and get 45,001 members then your mob would get a seat at the table and the media would be calling you.

BTW Local paper advises EPA staff will be at the Sandgete Community Centre
153 Rainbow St between 6p & 8p on Jan 24 to answer questions on MB Draft Plan.

[regy]

It seems the MBAA doesn't support Green Zones, Yellow Zones, or Dark Blue Zones so what is left, light blue zones, and I think commercial fishing has little or no restrictions in them, wouldn't that be good for recreational anglers.

[regy]

By the way anybody who would like to have a face to face discussion with Bill Turner about Sunfish or that he thinks of the EPA's Draft plan I can arrange that just post your Name & Ph. No and I will ring you.

[Luc]

So Sunfish does'nt represent you because you were not asked for your opinion!!

Sunfish operates throught its local branches and receives plenty of feedback from them. The branches are well aware of the local issues from both their members and Rec fishers who don't wait to be asked.

When the Finfish and Moreton Bay proposals came out, did you read, digest, analyse and then drafted a response?

Do you also keep an eye for other initiatives that may affect Rec fishers?

Sunfish and it's branches did and does.

Also, the Qld government views SUNFISH Qld as the peak body representing rec fishers.
If you don't like the way Sunfish is run or operates, don't just winge, do something about it.
Get other who think like you to join your local branch, get elected to your local branch executive or even the state executive.

You won't change anything unless you participate or is participating too much bother!!

Luc

[PinHead]

So Sunfish does'nt represent you because you were not asked for your opinion!!

Sunfish operates throught its local branches and receives plenty of feedback from them. The branches are well aware of the local issues from both their members and Rec fishers who don't wait to be asked.

When the Finfish and Moreton Bay proposals came out, did you read, digest, analyse and then drafted a response?

Do you also keep an eye for other initiatives that may affect Rec fishers?

Sunfish and it's branches did and does.

Also, the Qld government views SUNFISH Qld as the peak body representing rec fishers.
If you don't like the way Sunfish is run or operates, don't just winge, do something about it.
Get other who think like you to join your local branch, get elected to your local branch executive or even the state executive.

You won't change anything unless you participate or is participating too much bother!!

Luc

A question Luc..who funds Sunfish????

[Moonlighter]

It seems the MBAA doesn't support Green Zones, Yellow Zones, or Dark Blue Zones so what is left, light blue zones, and I think commercial fishing has little or no restrictions in them, wouldn't that be good for recreational anglers.

Perhaps Regy, you simply don't understand MBAA's position, which I have already stated quite clearly on this post, or alternatively you are going very close to intentionally misrepresenting our work - I'm not sure how that sort of behaviour would be viewed by the Mods if it carries on.

It really is becoming quite offensive for you to bandy about these rediculous and totally unfounded accusations of a commercial conspiracy/takeover/agenda of MBAA or whatever you want to call it, when nothing could be further from the truth. If you want to discuss the real facts with me, PM me and I'm happy to talk. Happy to meet you at my recreational Club, the Redlands Boat Club, where I am a former fishing captain and have been a member of the boating and fishing events committee over many years. Hope that establishes my rec sector credentials enough to satisfy you. Both MBAA's Chairman, Bruce Alvey (AFTA and also, as it happens, on Sunfish board) and Deputy Chairman (me) are from the rec side of things. Enough said.

Regardless, it is time you realised that all groups are doing things in their own ways and for the good cause we all support.

Unless of course under your alias, you are really one of AMCS's operatives deliberately trying to create a rift in the fishing ranks, which is exactly what the anti-fishing lobby would love to see. If you're not, then you can prove it simply by stopping these divisive posts.

I will say again to everyone that I think it would be better if all of the major groups were 100% together on this matter. MBAA does talk to Sunfish people regularly, but in my opinion if they came on board with us even at this late stage it would send a powerful message of solidarity to the Govt, surely!

You might not know that an Ausfish poll in 2007 showed that around 70% of us agreed that rec and commercial need to stand together to present a united front to EPA on this rezoning. And that, on a site dedicated to the rec fishing sector, says a lot to me about how most rec people are easily clever enough to see the big picture.

Grant

[PinHead]

Fafnir, Of course Sunfish doesn't represent you, it represents it's members & affiliats, 45,000 in total, 100% of whom are recreational anglers.
The 45,000 make it the peak rec angling body in Qld.
It's quite simple realy.
If you start up a organization and get 45,001 members then your mob would get a seat at the table and the media would be calling you.

BTW Local paper advises EPA staff will be at the Sandgete Community Centre
153 Rainbow St between 6p & 8p on Jan 24 to answer questions on MB Draft Plan.

Oh but according to Sunfish they do represent all of us..so they say.
I would love to see where they get 45000 members from.
From the Sunfish website:

"Representing all recreational anglers as well as members, SUNFISH QLD is the state’s peak recreational fishing group and consults all the major Statewide fishing organizations such as:"

see..they say all rec anglers..therefore shouldn't they be consulting us if they claim to represent us..if not then I suggest they do not make these claims.

[craftycarp]

quite frankly who gives a toss about the pros they aren't on ourside and like someone said if your a pro go find your own website.

If you think the pros are on our side you really need to read this thread.
http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/showthread.php?t=121030

If the pros had half a chance they would lock us out of their areas faster than any greeny!

[Luc]

Hi Pinhead,

Sunfish Qld gets grants from the State and Federal government, donations and affilliation fees from its members and branches.

The bulk of the $$ from the Qld govt and all the Feb govt grants get used on community projects (Take A Kid Fishing Days and similar, Angler education, Instructor training, etc...).

Part of the Qld grant money is used to cover runing expenses.

Sunfish Qld is also trying to get funding from corporate sources.

Now, I'm certain many will say Aha, Qld govt money so they're in the government's pocket and won't to anything to risk loosing that funding.

As I've said before, Sunfish Qld tries to remain politically neutral so it can work with the government of the day whether Labour, Liberal, Coalition etc..

Getting in bed with a political party would serve no purpose other than damage Sunfish Qld's reputation as a provider of advice/information based on science and members' feedback.

Naturally, the ideal situation would be enough corporate $$ and especially membership fees/donations so that none of the running expenses are met from government $$.

Qld has around 750,000 rec fishers. It would be great if 50,000 would be prepared to give $10/year to Sunfish. With that sort of $$ to meet expenses, Sunfish could employ scientists to work on project to help rec fishers.

Unfortunately, I can't see that happening to either Sunfish or any other similar organisation. In Australia, the average fisher is simply not prepared to fund an organisation to represent them. They're happy to whine, winge and then curse.

Luc

For more info on SUNFISH http://www.sunfishqld.com.au/

[regy]

If it sounds like a duck, acts like a duck, it probably is a duck

[PinHead]

Hi Pinhead,

Sunfish Qld gets grants from the State and Federal government, donations and affilliation fees from its members and branches.

The bulk of the $$ from the Qld govt and all the Feb govt grants get used on community projects (Take A Kid Fishing Days and similar, Angler education, Instructor training, etc...).

Part of the Qld grant money is used to cover runing expenses.

Sunfish Qld is also trying to get funding from corporate sources.

Now, I'm certain many will say Aha, Qld govt money so they're in the government's pocket and won't to anything to risk loosing that funding.

As I've said before, Sunfish Qld tries to remain politically neutral so it can work with the government of the day whether Labour, Liberal, Coalition etc..

Getting in bed with a political party would serve no purpose other than damage Sunfish Qld's reputation as a provider of advice/information based on science and members' feedback.

Naturally, the ideal situation would be enough corporate $$ and especially membership fees/donations so that none of the running expenses are met from government $$.

Qld has around 750,000 rec fishers. It would be great if 50,000 would be prepared to give $10/year to Sunfish. With that sort of $$ to meet expenses, Sunfish could employ scientists to work on project to help rec fishers.

Unfortunately, I can't see that happening to either Sunfish or any other similar organisation. In Australia, the average fisher is simply not prepared to fund an organisation to represent them. They're happy to whine, winge and then curse.

Luc

For more info on SUNFISH http://www.sunfishqld.com.au/

you've got it Luc..not many but most...nearly all believe that Sunfish are Govt flunkies...seems quite true from where most of us sit.
With your attitude towards rec fishos stating they just whinge whinge and curse..no wonder most do not want ot join..they cop flack even before they do..certainly not a good way to gain members.

a true apolitical body would not accept Govt funding...would source it elsewhere..that is the job of the organisation to fund raise for that.

[billfisher]

Yes its quite offensive to say we are a bunch of wingers and cursers. If Luc and others look through some of these threads they will find some well reasoned and scienced based arguments against green zones. Also to say that we MUST accept green zones and play the game otherwise we will get even worse outcomes is akin to blackmail. It's similar to the sort of remarks we hear from marine park bureaucrats and activists. Here in NSW the gov. appointed ACORF accepted marine parks without a wimper. I wonder how long members would last if they rocked the boat?

[Jeremy]

To Jeremy for a decade scientists and reseachers have told us that tailor are a threatned spicies, it has taken fisheries that long to put the legal size up to 35 cm to put a bag limit , and close Fraser Is. to Tailor netting. This is just an exmple of what goes on behind the closed doors of Fisheries. Politics rules your fishing not science, even now the scientific recomendations for Tailor size limit is 40cm. current graphs and infofmation show rapid decline in many spicies, if you want an examnple ,what ever happned to the Brisbane Perch. Be warned Geremy just brcause you are told something isn't wrong ,does't mean it isn't, Goverment feeds on votes not sustainability, whish is why we have the MBAA

OK Regy, lets see these reports you are talking about. I am going off the DPI&F annual stock reports in which there is NO EVIDENCE that any species are overfished or threatened. That does not mean that they are in the same numbers that they were 100 years ago. No species ever will be ever again due to pollution and overdevelopment.

For your information, size limits are generally set so that the fish have the chance to breed at least once. Not sure what this size is for tailor.

Jeremy

[craftycarp]

In the end boys you can babble here on ausfish all you want but it wont change a thing. Accept what is happening and get on with your lives. The GBR got hit and most of us SEQ fishos whined and whinged but did little more than that. Now its out turn you will eventually get used to the shutouts like the GBR fishos and you will get on with your lives. I agree with Luc we fishos get all upset when its in our backyard whine, whinge but if its happening outside of our fishing spot we dont gove a toss. Jeremy at least you got 1 thing write apathy is the enemy and guess what he has already won.

[regy]

If you want to get upset about anything ask DPI&F why don't spend the $12.50 since 1993 and $15.00 since 2006 that every boat owner pays on their boat rego called Recreational Use Fee otherwise known as the PPV Levey ( Personal Pleasure Vessel ) which is a self imposed Levey ( voted on at Burn's Inquiry Consulation meetings all around Queensland by Rec Anglers) on the promise of implementing tne Burn's Inquirys recomendations to set up Recreational Only Fishing Areas in specific areas in Qld htat money was to be spent on the buy-back of commercial effort in those areas. None of thet money has ever been used for that purpose, up to date, over $20,000,000.00, on enquiring I have been told that they prefer to spend that money on other things like Edducation , Enforcement, that in my opion amounts to lies and agorance and rec anglers being duped by DPI&F and that makes me angry, I don't know about the rest of Qld. Rec Anglers and boat owners, aparently they dont seem to mind that DPI&F is taking their money under false pretence.

[Fafnir]

If you start up a organization and get 45,001 members then your mob would get a seat at the table and the media would be calling you.


That would just be another 45,000 people with no media training that could potentially talk to the media, only to be misrepresented, or have their comment taken out of context.

From what I have read on here many people thought that Bill was saying something he apparently didn't. So if anglers with an understanding of what is happening have mistakenly thought that Bill was supporting the Draft Plan, then what would Joe Average non-angler think? Probably that the states peak recreational anglers body supports the zones. How does that make the rest of us look in the eyes of the public? The ones who are fighting against the draft plan?

NO COMMENT is better than one that ends up being taken the wrong way.


So Sunfish does'nt represent you because you were not asked for your opinion!!

Yes. In the same way that Sunfish cannot claim to represent all recreational anglers if they do not give non-members a say. Not saying they need to phone me. Simply conducting a survey through tackle stores or online etc would suffice. If this is too hard to do then the simple solution is to make it clear that they represent their membership only, and that they do not speak for the majority of rec anglers.

My preference would be the latter.


When the Finfish and Moreton Bay proposals came out, did you read, digest, analyse and then drafted a response?


No and Yes.


Do you also keep an eye for other initiatives that may affect Rec fishers?

Such as?


If you don't like the way Sunfish is run or operates, don't just winge, do something about it.
Get other who think like you to join your local branch, get elected to your local branch executive or even the state executive.


I have no time for Sunfish and you suggest that I join them? WTF????

[webby]

Why wouldnt Sunfish get involved in the past car rallies, the reason, they didnt want to get out of line with the state govt ???????
Along with Dave Batesman and Myself we were the two rec fishos on the Inshore Finfish Advisory Committee.
So if you require some answeres on why the new regs and changes came about let me no, and before you fire away 23cm bream has the capabilities of breeding, we tried to up the size, but it all came down to the Commerical Industry, and we are only two votes trying to make changes.
regards

[Mike Delisser]

Gees Fafnir, at least Pin reads the posts he comments on and his replies make sense.

Before this post digressed into a Sunfish bash it started with the false or mistaken report about comments made by Bill Turner, but Ray certainly got one line right, "He said there is a lot of second hand and false information around."

[Fafnir]

Gees Fafnir, at least Pin reads the posts he comments on and his replies make sense

Yes, yes I read the posts. And I responded in the Queens English. Have you been drinking today?

[billfisher]

In the end boys you can babble here on ausfish all you want but it wont change a thing. Accept what is happening and get on with your lives. The GBR got hit and most of us SEQ fishos whined and whinged but did little more than that. Now its out turn you will eventually get used to the shutouts like the GBR fishos and you will get on with your lives. I agree with Luc we fishos get all upset when its in our backyard whine, whinge but if its happening outside of our fishing spot we dont gove a toss. Jeremy at least you got 1 thing write apathy is the enemy and guess what he has already won.

What are you trying to say craftycarp? On one hand you say we should accept the lockouts and on the other you rail against apathy.

Regarding the GBR 320 anglers have to 'get used to' criminal convictions for the rest of their lives. Many others have given up fishing. People with businesses connected with fishing have lost them. At least the lobying of the Fishing Party got compensation for such cases. I don't think the state government is offering compensation.

[Luc]

"you've got it Luc..not many but most...nearly all believe that Sunfish are Govt flunkies...seems quite true from where most of us sit."

From some comments on this tread, it appears that fishers don't even want to bother accessing the Sunfish website to read up on it and won't 'play' unless they get a personal invite.
It seems much easier to listen to opinions, hearsay etc... God forbit getting of their ar-e and having a look from the inside and trying to change things to how they think it should be run.


"With your attitude towards rec fishos stating they just whinge whinge and curse..no wonder most do not want ot join..they cop flack even before they do..certainly not a good way to gain members."

Merely stating a fact about MOST NOT ALL rec fishos. If a 1/4 of rec fishos in Qld voiced their opinion that would be very hard to ignore.

For the love of fishing, a minority get involved, give up fishing and private time and eventually many get burned out because they are so few, there's too much to do and worse of all in some instances have to endure having their motives questioned.


"a true apolitical body would not accept Govt funding...would source it elsewhere..that is the job of the organisation to fund raise for that."

Sunfish is trying to move in that direction. It's open to any suggestion and help to become financially independent. Who's going to help!!!

Until rec fishos get organised and willingly support (money, time, etc..) an organisation to represent them, we'll keep getting a raw deal.
This means having full time, paid, qualifed and committed people working for us. It includes funding scientific work to support our position, sport, pastime, hobby, relaxation, way of life....

This simply cannot be done on a volunteer basis.

That's it for me, I've said my piece.:P

I'm getting off my soap box, putting my canoe on the ute and off to play with the local bass population.

Luc

[Chris Ryan]

only to commercial license holders, which is a lot more than they did in the GBR

[PinHead]

Luc..if you have 45000 members as stated by others..at a mere $20 per head per annum ( a small memebership fee for those that. you say, cares) that gives at least 900k in the coffers each year...if you cannot make a huge noise with 900k in your kick then perhaps you better let me loose with it.

Some of us do voice our opinions...we write letters etc...I could not see anywhere on the Sunfish website that says..NO GREEN ZONES...in big blaring letters that jump out at anyone that visits the site..why would that be ???

[RayDeR]

[quote=Luc;748138]To all,
For information, this is part of an email from SUNFISH Qld.

Following receipt of the attached emails I contacted Mr Turner re the ABC interview.
He denied the statements were made & at my request obtained a copy of the Radio interview which I have at present & have listened to.
I find he was correct & made no such statements re SUNFISH accepting the green areas or the plan in it's current form.
Personally I am disappointed that this has taken much of my valuable time & surprised at how willing anglers are to "shaft" SUNFISH & persons within the organisation.
I have advised Bill that if this happens again he should consider legal action.
I hope this puts the matter to bed.
David Bateman


G'day!

I am disappointed that Dave Bateman obviously thinks that correcting false impressions I and other rec fishers have is not a worthy use of his valuable time.

I wonder why SUNFISH is "shafted" by so many of the people it represents? (I did not know it was until Dave mentioned it).

Surely there is a message in that.

Ray De R

[Jeremy]

If you want to get upset about anything ask DPI&F why don't spend the $12.50 since 1993 and $15.00 since 2006 that every boat owner pays on their boat rego called Recreational Use Fee otherwise known as the PPV Levey ( Personal Pleasure Vessel ) which is a self imposed Levey ( voted on at Burn's Inquiry Consulation meetings all around Queensland by Rec Anglers) on the promise of implementing tne Burn's Inquirys recomendations to set up Recreational Only Fishing Areas in specific areas in Qld htat money was to be spent on the buy-back of commercial effort in those areas. None of thet money has ever been used for that purpose, up to date, over $20,000,000.00, on enquiring I have been told that they prefer to spend that money on other things like Edducation , Enforcement, that in my opion amounts to lies and agorance and rec anglers being duped by DPI&F and that makes me angry, I don't know about the rest of Qld. Rec Anglers and boat owners, aparently they dont seem to mind that DPI&F is taking their money under false pretence.

exactly what I thought. You have no evidence that any fish species is threatened or overfished. You have nothing except uneducated opinions and half baked thoughts.

As for the PPV, it is collected by the Dept Transport on behalf of the State Gov't. The DPI&F never see that money, so how can they spend it? Not their fault that they don't get the funding they deserve, it is the Labour State Governmments.

Jeremy

[regy]

To Jeremy DPI& F do receive this money and they have mever denied it, I have even written to tne Premier and the Minister regarding this matter and they just keep saying thet prefer to spend this money for other things.

[billfisher]

To all,
For information, this is part of an email from SUNFISH Qld.

Following receipt of the attached emails I contacted Mr Turner re the ABC interview.
He denied the statements were made & at my request obtained a copy of the Radio interview which I have at present & have listened to.
I find he was correct & made no such statements re SUNFISH accepting the green areas or the plan in it's current form.
Personally I am disappointed that this has taken much of my valuable time & surprised at how willing anglers are to "shaft" SUNFISH & persons within the organisation.
I have advised Bill that if this happens again he should consider legal action.
I hope this puts the matter to bed.
David Bateman

Bill Turner is no longer the chairman of SUNFISH QLD.
He is however the chairman of the SUNFISH NORTH MORETON BRANCH. Despite the local papers having been made aware of this, they still regularly refer to him as the chairman of SUNFISH QLD.

If you want to know Sunfish's position on Moreton Bay, the FinFish review and other things, bother yourselves to get off your posteriors and access the SUNFISH website.

SUNFISH QLD tries very hard to be apolitical so that it can work with the government of the day no matter who's in power. Now if you thing that because it gets government funding SUNFISH QLD is simply a rubber stamp, you should get involved. More helping hands are always welcome.

The wingeing at large for someone or somebody to do something is as usual deafening. Well, I got news for you, you're the someone or somebody. If more fishers are not prepared to step up, we'll keep getting the rough end of the pinerapple.

Green zone are a POLITICAL fact and simply taking your marbles and going home to mummy wingeing about the big bad whoever only give free reign to insert the pineapple even further.

So get involved by voluntering you time or your donation otherwise go home, hide in the cupboard and suck your thumb.

Now if I've upset anyone, someone or somebody GOOD get off your duff and get involved.::)

Luc

Do you Sunfish guys take a course in arrogance Luc? The waste 'of valuable time' and threats of legal action remarks certainly sound like a totally out of touch organisation. A transcript of the interview might have been more helpful.

Also you have made remarks if not supportive of green zones at least aquiecent of them. You even said that if we don't go along with them and support the process then we will lose even more areas. This is a disgusting attitude and is akin to blackmail.

[mod5]

Folks, think before you type.

The Conservationists will be loving all this division amongst rec fishers.

[craftycarp]

This thread typifies the fishos of Australia all have their own axe to grind all have their own opinion, all only listen to themselves or their mates. As I have said many times before we fishos have lost before we even started. Unity is one thing that is not achievable by the current generation of fishos. It is part of our make up. We learn from an early age to protect our local spots, chase away any strangers that might want to have a bash in them. I hope this trust no one attitude is overcome in the next geenration. They might be able to win back some of the closures we old farts have lost. Bill Fisher re-read the line Apathy is the enemy, at it has already won.

[billfisher]

Yes the Greens and conservationists promoting marine parks as the greatest gift ever to civilisation have more unity. So did the Communists and Nazis. I think I'd trust a diversity of opinions with it being up to each to justify them with reason and evidence. Ideologies which explain all the world's problems and offer simple solutions have been a shortcut to misery.

[PinHead]

crafty..this is a democracy where people can voice their opinions..now if you want unity then I suggest everyone follow along with how I think..then there will be unity..cos I can guarantee you i will not follow anyone else if i do not agree with them..and I have no respect for anyone that does.

Personally I think attacking the AMCS with various different groups is better than being united..keeps them wondering what is going to happen next and from where.

[billfisher]

Yes we don't live in Cuba or North Korea. To say that green zones are a political reality and we must not object as a few have said, is not an attitude that I would associate with living in a democracy.

[Chris Ryan]

Last I looked if you had all your weapons and men in one line advancing on an enemy, it takes only a handful to come at you from the side and you have lost. Flanking, attacking from various angles and methods is the proven winner in battle.

Even if the Green Zones come in as a predetermined done deal, then I will still flank, fight and attack from every angle I can get to. I'm not waving a white flag and I can't believe people already are. Until the Hansard reports say it is law, then it is all still able to be influenced.

[RayDeR]

G'day!

If there are rec fishermen who seem not to be standing up for the rights of rec fishermen, then I am sorry if there was division.

I started this thread because

(1) We need to know what others are saying

(2) I could not believe how one person was using the ABC given radio time to rec fishing to attack those rec fishermen who in his opinion we spreading falsehoods about the proposed zoning.

I noticed there was not one mention of this in the same fishing segment on Saturday. I imagine some counselling has taken place.

Ray De R

[Luc]

Do you Sunfish guys take a course in arrogance Luc? The waste 'of valuable time' and threats of legal action remarks certainly sound like a totally out of touch organisation. A transcript of the interview might have been more helpful.

Also you have made remarks if not supportive of green zones at least aquiecent of them. You even said that if we don't go along with them and support the process then we will lose even more areas. This is a disgusting attitude and is akin to blackmail.

1. If you keep on getting misquoted and/or misrepresented, I have no problems with threats of legal action.

2. I said nothing about supporting green zones my words were:
"Green zone are a POLITICAL fact and simply taking your marbles and going home to mummy wingeing about the big bad whoever only give free reign to insert the pineapple even further." Getting involved is about getting the best result we can.

Do you really think that if all fishing organisations had said "we're not in favour of green zones and will have no part of them" that EPA would not have continued with their plans!!

Now if our state pollies had got swamped with 1000's of letters and emails things may/might be different.

Like Jeremy says, "Apathy is the enemy" and IN MY OPINION as a whole, rec fishers are an apathetic bunch.

Luc

[billfisher]

Well Luc, RayDeR stands by what he heard. Would it be too much 'waste of valuable time' for someone to provide a transcript of the interview?

PS: nothing is a 'POLITICAL fact' in a free society. If Sunfish doesn't want to oppose whats going on I don't think they should criticise those who do. The danger in going along with the marine park process is that the 'greens' are very good at the 'peel the onion' strategy (ie taking a bit away at a time).

[PinHead]

1. If you keep on getting misquoted and/or misrepresented, I have no problems with threats of legal action.

2. I said nothing about supporting green zones my words were:
"Green zone are a POLITICAL fact and simply taking your marbles and going home to mummy wingeing about the big bad whoever only give free reign to insert the pineapple even further." Getting involved is about getting the best result we can.

Do you really think that if all fishing organisations had said "we're not in favour of green zones and will have no part of them" that EPA would not have continued with their plans!!

Now if our state pollies had got swamped with 1000's of letters and emails things may/might be different.

Like Jeremy says, "Apathy is the enemy" and IN MY OPINION as a whole, rec fishers are an apathetic bunch.

Luc

good grief Luc..legal action for misquoting ..I would love to see that...idle threats and not very lucid threats either.

If green zones are a political fact then just sitting back and accepting them if you do not want them is rather gutless..whimps way out. Better to stand up and speak than just sit there and take the pineapple.

As for an apethetic bunch..the bunch that supposedly represents leads the way in this...but you cannot risk losing your funding can you??

I am sick and tired of people who keep saying they are fact and have to live with it..that may be true but i sure as hell am going to let a lot of people know I do not agree with it.

[bondy99]

It would be nice to see if Sunfish made a public statement to say that the views and or comments made by Bill Turner is not supported or the views held by Sunfish. Unless there is some political bias or behind the scenes happening to which the doors are closed to the public. That's just my opinion only. Peter

[PADDLES]

i agree bondy, it'd be interesting to have sunfish make public their actual position on this issue because i read a letter in one of our local papers last week from Mr Turner in which he identified himself as the chairman of the sunfish north moreton branch and then in the letter showed full support for the EPA's current proposals and wondered why all the fishos were kicking up a stink over it. The general public would be none the wiser as to his position in sunfish and would pretty much take his opinion as the opinion of sunfish. Is his opinion the opinion of sunfish? Can anyone from sunfish comment on this?

[RayDeR]

i agree bondy, it'd be interesting to have sunfish make public their actual position on this issue because i read a letter in one of our local papers last week from Mr Turner in which he identified himself as the chairman of the sunfish north moreton branch and then in the letter showed full support for the EPA's current proposals and wondered why all the fishos were kicking up a stink over it. The general public would be none the wiser as to his position in sunfish and would pretty much take his opinion as the opinion of sunfish. Is his opinion the opinion of sunfish? Can anyone from sunfish comment on this?


G'day!

I wonder if Mr Dave Bateman could waste some more of his time by communication with us, "his members", and tell us if Bill Turner has spoken as an individual, or as Chairman of the north Moreton Branch and how many members were at the meeting of the North Moreton Branch which gave these views to Mr Turner to present ?

As Mr Bateman wasted his precious time listening to the tapes of the ABC talk by Mr Turner, I am sure none of Mr Turner's views expressed in the letter would be new to him, so he should be able to give us these answers.

Thanks to members who wil pass this note to Mr Bateman, just in case he does not read this forum. I am sure he is too busy to read the views of us rec fishermen expressed here.

Ray De R