Mullet netters

[akman1]

A section about these blokes and marine parks is on the ABC "landline " at the moment 12:10pm

[aussiefool]

Here is the link if you want to watch it.

http://www.abc.net.au/landline/content/2010/s2925799.htm

[Feral]

Not a bad story, and pretty much agrees with my sentiment, its all about the green vote, nothing to do with fish sustainability.

When I'm sitting around the artificial carbonless fire with my grandkids in 20 years time, they will be shocked to hear that people were actually allowed to catch their own fish once.....

[bondy99]

I very much agree with you Feral and I can relate to what you say.

And a g'day to you too Andrew. How's the fishing been. Mate, I'm itching to get some tailor next week.

Going down to Chinderah Factory, old fella wants 20kg fresh sea mullet. I can get them at a good price, smoked sea mullet next Friday.

Might be able to meet up with you when I'm down there.

Peter

[4x4frog]

Actually an impressive story for a change by ABC standards(from what I have seen over the years). They actually gave a very good go to both sides.
That Ben Birt(?) fellow from the conservation mob was a real fool. He never addresses the pollution issue at all in regard to declining stocks and his only answer to our growing need for seafood was import more. Yeah right, what happens when your stupid green movement locks up 35% of the whole ocean, are you going to do a JC and turn one fish into thousands everyday so we all eat?
Prof Bob Kearney sounds like a guy with his head on the right way though. His arguments were grounded in fact and he stressed faults with the statements issued already, which is something that is needed. Problem is, the green voters wouldn't bother to listen and just shrug him off like all of Al Gores sheep do when anyone questions the global warming facts.

[bondy99]

Actually an impressive story for a change by ABC standards(from what I have seen over the years). They actually gave a very good go to both sides.
That Ben Birt(?) fellow from the conservation mob was a real fool. He never addresses the pollution issue at all in regard to declining stocks and his only answer to our growing need for seafood was import more. Yeah right, what happens when your stupid green movement locks up 35% of the whole ocean, are you going to do a JC and turn one fish into thousands everyday so we all eat?
Prof Bob Kearney sounds like a guy with his head on the right way though. His arguments were grounded in fact and he stressed faults with the statements issued already, which is something that is needed. Problem is, the green voters wouldn't bother to listen and just shrug him off like all of Al Gores sheep do when anyone questions the global warming facts.

Prof Bob Kearney use to sit on the committee so he does know what he is talking about, The problem is with this and every other Government irrespective of their political standing is that they act on findings and recommendations made by a few academics and most of it is based on models and computer generated predictions.

The problem lies with the land runoff not with the fisherman (this includes woman).

[4x4frog]

Yeah, heard them refer to Prof Kearney as a former member of that board/committee. Makes you listen when someone who set up a certain authority goes solo and reveals their dis-content or otherwise with the organisation.

There is never enough noise made by the green groups about run-off or pollution when making reference to fish stocks. The Brisbane airport reconstruction is a prime point...the dept of Environment have made little noise about just how much of the bay is being lost to the 3rd runway but are quick to jump up and down and then lock up as much of the rest of the bay as they can, to make a point.

[murf]

just watched the abc program thanks to Ken Thurlow from ecofishers for the email


Attention ECOfishers: Prof Bob Kearney on the ABC’s TV “Landline,” 12 noon Sunday 13th June 2010. Prof Kearney on about NSW government marine parks and goes head to head with the green extremists. Should be worth watching. Hoo roo, Ken Thurlow CEO ECOfishers NSW.

Australians swindled by 'fraudulent' marine park science
Posted Fri Jun 11, 2010 6:21pm AEST
The Australian public is being deceived on the effectiveness of marine parks and other fishing sanctuary zones, according to one of the nation's leading scientists.
Bob Kearney is emeritus professor of Fisheries at Canberra University and a former head of fisheries research with the New South Wales Government.
He recently told a NSW parliamentary inquiry into recreational fishing that the basis on which marine parks have been sold to the public is fraudulent.
"What I said was the science we've used to justify the creation of the parks was fraudulent and I stand by that absolutely adamantly," he told ABC TV's Landline program.
"The science that was used and put out at the time of the Bateman's Marine Park, called the science paper, contained blatant abuse of scientific practises.
"It claimed that authors said things in their papers which they did not say. That is worse than plagiarism - it's as bad as it gets in the scientific community."
Professor Kearney, who now also works as an industry consultant, says marine parks do not address the real threats to the marine environment such as pollution, agricultural run-off, coastal development and introduced species.
"Marine parks in New South Wales have already cost more than $30 million in the last three years alone and probably tens of millions more than that, and they can't demonstrate any benefit," he said.
"In fact, the latest report by the Department of Industry and Investment, formerly New South Wales fisheries, actually concludes that the sanctuary zones cause a decline in biodiversity."
'Proof in the pudding'
Industry and Investment's fisheries conservation head, Bill Talbot, argues that report was not relevant to NSW parks, but the weight of scientific evidence supports an increase in biodiversity in sanctuary zones.
"Well I guess the proof is in the pudding, you look at these sanctuary zones and there generally are more fish and bigger fish than in areas immediately adjacent or in other areas unaffected by the park," he said.
The NSW Government's submission to the recreational fishing inquiry cites a global study of marine protected areas in 29 countries including Australia, which shows a 446 per cent mean increase in biomass or living things across 124 different marine reserves.
Australia currently has more than 200 marine protected areas and by 2012 more than 240,000 square kilometres are expected to have some form of protection.
Conservation groups such as the National Parks Association (NPA) have used the NSW inquiry to lobby for an increase of no-take sanctuary zones, where all fishing is banned.
The current average of these total protection areas in NSW Parks is 6 per cent.
"Twenty per cent is the minimal figure recommended by the International Union for Conservation of Nature that needs to be conserved worldwide if we are to have sustainable fish stocks into the future," NPA spokesman Gary Schoer said.
"There are predictions that the whole fisheries could collapse by about 2048 if current trends around much of the world continue."
Politics over science
Professional fishers such as Ross Fidden, who heads the Commercial Co-operative on the central and mid-north coasts of NSW, claim marine parks are more about politics than science.
"It was a deliberate ploy just to get the green vote in Sydney. It was the Sydney green vote they wanted," he said.
The Sydney Fish Market, which is the principal source of fresh seafood for a quarter of Australia's population, agrees.
"Addressing the real risks is a lot harder because if you want to address the risk posed by agricultural run-off for example, as a government, that's a pretty hard ask," market managing director Grahame Turk said.
"Drawing a dotted line around the ocean and saying to people 'we're going to protect that area' and everyone applauds it, is a lot easier, so yes to some extent it is political."
Since marine parks and recreational fishing havens were first established in NSW in 2003, about 400 fishing businesses have been bought out of the industry.
Some who remain, like Alfie Patane, a third generation fisher from Port Stephens, think the current restrictions have gone far enough.
"Instead of being 20 fishermen over a 100-mile area there's 20 fishermen now in a 10-mile area," he said.
"They've locked us into a little tiny zone, hence we've gone from making money to wages."
The effect of fewer fishermen on less fishing ground is having a market impact and Australia's current 75 per cent reliance on imported seafood is likely to escalate as the population grows.
Conservation Council of NSW spokesman on marine issues, Ben Birt, says marine parks should not be seen as a scapegoat for a dwindling global supply of seafood.
"People are going to ultimately have to be prepared to pay more for fish," he said.
"It's a finite resource and I think its not quite right and it's a little bit misleading to point the finger at marine parks and say that's why we're not catching as much fish."
Professor Kearney is worried that conservationists will now target the Coral Sea, which is part of the South Pacific tuna fishery, the world's largest.
"The catch is in now several million tonnes a year. Australia's total fish catch is 200,000 tonnes a year, we're effectively shutting ourselves off from the world's biggest fishery where we have a legitimate right as a coastal state," Professor Kearney said.
Sean Murphy's full report will screen on ABC TV's Landline program on Sunday from noon.