Great Sandy Marine Park - Lookout More Closures

[Derek_Bullock]

Hey guys and girls, I hope you are watching things up there.

Found the following press release today. Take not of the date ias t was just recent. These people are really pushing for 30% fishing closures.

Their full report is at http://www.npaq.org.au/Great_Sandy/GGSReport.pdf

Cheers


Derek


For immediate release

CONTACT: Martin Taylor 04 2867 0878 mtaylor@npaq.org.au

Broad coalition calls on Premier to Save Great Sandy

6 Dec 2005, BRISBANE:
In a letter sent today to all of the Queensland Government Cabinet Ministers, a broad coalition of conservation groups, local whale-watch operators and Butchulla Traditional Owners have issued a unified call to the Premier and the Cabinet to save the Great Sandy.

The groups are campaigning for the Great Sandy marine park zoning plan to be based on a scientific process following the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park model, where no-take, National Park areas increased from below 5% to 33% last year.

Conservationists, local residents and whale watch operators heard talks by visiting scientists from James Cook Uni, University of Queensland and the Australian Museum at a workshop in Hervey Bay on 7th Nov.

The visiting scientists identified important areas that had been left unprotected by the Plan, and stressed the need for a scientific basis for the Plan, with well-defined targets for protecting the marine environment. Participants discussed recent research showing the importance of no-take reserves for stabilizing fisheries and protecting biodiversity.

Scientists and conservationists agreed that little extra effort and time would be needed to put the Plan on a scientific footing since all the data needed were already available. To that end they have developed a 10 point plan

All that's needed is the political will by the Government to commit to a science-driven process said Dr Martin Taylor with the National Parks Association of Queensland.

[dasher]

Thanks for posting that Derek, I've just made about a dozen phone calls and none of them were aware of the meeting. :-?

"Conservationists, local residents and whale watch operators heard talks by visiting scientists from James Cook Uni, University of Queensland and the Australian Museum at a workshop in Hervey Bay on 7th Nov. "
I'm guessing the local residents
were hand picked by one of the following groups that did attend.

§ Butchulla elder, Marie Wilkinson, 4125 3566.
§ Hervey Bay Whalewatch operators, Peter Lynch, 4124 9600
§ Australian Conservation Foundation, Lucy Farmer 03 9345 1108
§ Australian Marine Conservation Society (AMCS), Craig Bohm 3393 5811
§ Australian Whale Conservation Society (AWCS), Paul Hodda 3824 8778
§ Burnett Mary Resource Group (BMRG), Deborah Scott
§ Cooloola Coastcare,Greg Wood 5486 3563
§ Fraser Is Defenders Organisation (FIDO) John Sinclair 3256 8616
§ Friends of Burrum River , Tim Thornton 41290609
§ Friends of Tinana Ck, Roger Currie 41233361
§ Great Sandy Region Conservation Council, Michael Gloster, 5447 4211
§ National Parks Association of Queensland (NPAQ), Martin Taylor, 3367 0878
§ Noosa Parks Association, Michael Gloster 5447 4211
§ The Oceania Project, Wally and Trish Franklin 4125 1333
§ Queensland Conservation, Toby Hutcheon 3221 0188
§ Sunshine Coast Environment Council (SCEC), Scott Alderson 5441 5747
§ The Wilderness Society, Kerryn O'Conor 4041 6666
§ Wide Bay Burnett Conservation Council (WBBCC), Roger Currie 41233361
§ Wildlife Preservation Society of Queensland, Fraser Coast Branch (WPSQ) Joan Coutts and Carolyn
Bussey 4125 7718

Maybe they're counting Auntie Marie as the local residents ::)

An interesting read. :o

[clutter]

Were there any fishing groups represented (did they get an invite) at this meeting or are we being railroaded again?

Clutter

[dasher]

Were there any fishing groups represented (did they get an invite) at this meeting or are we being railroaded again?

Clutter

Clutter as far as I know most people in Hervey Bay were unaware of the meeting. Obviously those in the various Conservation groups were privy to the info. Seems like these groups are heading in the same direction as the Government when it comes to public consultation. :o >:(

[mackmauler]

Why do they want to protect sand is there a shortage ;D

[David_P]

Hi Derek,

Thanks for posting this. I don't live in the Great Sandy region, but visit a good few times or so each year. I take the boat up from Brissie, and tend to fish the northern parts from Wathumba north. I am therefore particularly concerned with the proposal in the linked doc that wishes to extend the existing green zone to the high water mark on the entire northern shore of Fraser Island.

A couple of other points concerned me too. One is their proposal to potentially use funds from boat registration revenues to fund any buyouts. I assume this relates to the buy back of commercial fishing licences? Why should my boat rego revenue be used for this, particularly if I'm to be excluded from fishing in the same areas? The next point of concern was this statement on page 12, "it was agreed that fishing pressure including the large and poorly known recreational catch, was likely to be unsustainable". This should be of concern to all rec fishers, as on one hand these people are acknowleding they have little information on the regions rec fishing impact, yet they state it is large and "likely unsustainable"? Perhaps I'm missing something here? If so, please someone point it out to me. It would appear though that these people are not opposed to rec fishing, as per point 10 on page four, "and guarantee that the recreational fishing community has a continued resource available".

I don't know what I can do as an individual to voice my concerns on these matters, other than to join an organisation like TFPQ. I am not opposed to all the topics discussed in this document, nor am I opposed to some commercial fishing. After all, I buy bait. All I want is an unbiased, scientific approach to the management of OUR fishing resources. Is this possible?

Regards,
Dave.

[TonyM]

Bl**dy typical - claiming to have a representation of the local community and it's done on the hush, I wish I could say this was surpising! >:(

I live in Hervey Bay and like several other member here try to actively participate in fishing related issues, including the very shady Great Sandy Straights marine park deal that appears to have been put together to protect the interest of several minority groups as opposed to looking at the needs of the total community - Bl**dy typical!

Had I been aware of this meeting I most certainly would have attended, although this is the first I've heard of it....

[Fishbone]

Did you also notice that Wathumba and Eli creek have been added to the list of "Wild Rivers", I saw a notice in the Courier Mail on Friday 9th. There was originally 17 rivers - all up North then at the last minute they have slipped in Wathumba and Eli.

I wonder how long before they try and stop people from camping inside Wathumba creek on the western side??

regards

Fishbone

[Derek_Bullock]

Hi

In regard to consultation with fishing, groups this is a quote from the National Parks Association Website who are behind this. http://www.npaq.org.au/index.html


Conservation groups join with Traditional Owners and whale-watch operators in Hervey Bay to demand Save the Great Sandy! The groups have developed a 10 point plan based around their central demand for a science-based process, instead of the fisheries-driven process that resulted in a pitiful 3.8% of the area in no-take zones. They are demanding a planning process on the model of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park where no-take National Park zones went from 5% to 33% last year.

They arent really interested in fisheries as far as I can see as long as they get their 33% closure we can happily fish in whats left.


Derek

[kc]

Thanks for posting this Derek,

I was following up with Nick Heath from minister Boyles office only last week re when the draft plan was going to be available...answer was it won't and has gone straight from EPA to cabinet....now it looks like this "group" is in lobbying...and maybe getting listened to well after the close of public submissions.

To then hold up the GBR debacle as a science based process would be laughable if it was not so seriuos.

Personally, I just can not believe how quickly the anti-fishing agenda within the green movement has got its way.........

All I can do it enter into some communication with Mr Taylor and see what influence we can have...alternatively...there is always the ballot box because until the government fears the fishing vote more than the green vote...we cop it in the neck.

Regards

KC

[Derek_Bullock]

I was following up with Nick Heath from minister Boyles office only last week re when the draft plan was going to be available...answer was it won't and has gone straight from EPA to cabinet....now it looks like this "group" is in lobbying...and maybe getting listened to well after the close of public submissions.

Something stinks here. I have a feeling this is going belly up for rec fishers.


Derek

[dasher]

I was following up with Nick Heath from minister Boyles office only last week re when the draft plan was going to be available...answer was it won't and has gone straight from EPA to cabinet....now it looks like this "group" is in lobbying...and maybe getting listened to well after the close of public submissions.

Something stinks here. #I have a feeling this is going belly up for rec fishers.


Derek

You're so right Derek, the green lobby have a 20+ year head start on us as a unified group. We don't have that long and must band together quickly to at least have an equal say in the management of our fisheries.
Our children and grandchildren are relying on us to ensure they and there children can fish as we and our parents did. Time for a bit of soul searching and deciding whether you really care. :-?

I know most of the members on Ausfish are passionate fishos and care deeply for our environment, but they seem less than enthusiastic when it comes to the crunch.

I know you are all good people, but you really do have to put your name down for the future of fishing.

Ooops sorry getting a bit pushy, what the hell, let's do it, nothing more to lose eh. :-? :-?

[Derek_Bullock]

So right Daryl

This is a quote from the EPA Website in relation to the Great Sandy Marine Park


In keeping with the Queensland Government's commitment to establish marine parks from the Gold Coast to the Gulf of Carpentaria, a number of new marine parks are proposed.

People are still walking around with the old "she'll be right mate" or "head in the sand" attitude.

Well it wont be right . . . . . after this one there will be Moreton Bay and the Gold Coast.

Not only that we are still waiting for an announcement on the Gulf which it is understood has only slowed down because of the showing by the Fishing Party in the last election up in that area. But as sure as eggs are eggs it will come to.

Dont want to sound all doom and gloom either but these are facts and I am starting to dispair a bit.


Derek

[ssbayguide]

Hi Everyone

This is of concern. I grew up in Maryborough and still fish the Burrum River with my father. I spent many years fishing the straits and do disagree with large scale closures to recreational fishing without equal closure to commercial fishing and tourism operators. I say if you want closures, close the lot to everything, from whale watching to the Tin Can Bay Army area.

I can assure you that the friends of the Burrum River groups does include concerned recreational fishers but they are, of course, only one voice amongst many groups.

Perhaps a polite call to each of these groups might find out whether they do try to include, or would be willing to include the views of recreational fishers.


Peter

[ssbayguide]

Hi Everyone

This is of concern. I grew up in Maryborough and still fish the Burrum River with my father. I spent many years fishing the straits and do disagree with large scale closures to recreational fishing without equal closure to commercial fishing and tourism operators. I say if you want closures, close the lot to everything, from whale watching to the Tin Can Bay Army area.

I can assure you that the friends of the Burrum River groups does include concerned recreational fishers but they are, of course, only one voice amongst many groups.

Perhaps a polite call to each of these groups might find out whether they do try to include, or would be willing to include the views of recreational fishers.


Peter

[Hairymick]

Hi Guys,
I am a new member to this forum and found out about it through another fishing forum. I have just read the posts and am as mad as hell. I live in Hervey Bay and regularly fish the northern section of the Great Sandy Straight. I DO THIS AS OF RIGHT, not at the whim of some simpering bloody greenie.

They have said they don't know what the recreational catch is but they include it anyway! what is this, Keystone kops or maybe Disneyland. They talk in lofty terms about a scientifically based decision. There is no science in this, just a bunch of petty empire builders and other grubs pursueing their own agendas.

It seems clear to me why rec fishers were excluded from this meeting. Unless we start to get organised and LOUD in our opposition to this, these parasites will get their way - again. Have any of them stated exactly what is it they are trying to save the Great Sandy Straight from.

Regards,

Mick

[thumps]

look at the list of those "in the know"


greenies, tourism and the local traditional land owners.


gee if their not the groups to keep happy!!

balanced land rights, extreme (political)enviromentalists and the local money making enterprises.

seems the same all over to me....the only "heavy weights" NOT represented are the rec fishers...because we arent "heavy weights"

i hate to disagree with you HairyMick...but their not parasites...their well organised Political Parties and money making projects for the Government

[Hairymick]

Hi thumps,

Hmmm, "Well organized political parties and money making projects for the government"

sounds like parasites to me. :)

regards,

Mick