Green Zones today

[Hutcho]

I saw the front page of todays Courier Mail, and then the special report on the front page of one of the other sections of the paper about the "launch" of the different zoning for the GBR starting today.

Apparently the Government is going to 'compensate' those people who are directly affected by the zoning with an "open chequebook". Personally, I've never heard the Government react like that before. Either they've suddenly got the guilts, or have realised too little too late, just what kind of impact this is going to have on many people. How are they really going to properly compensate people for future losses?!

I look forward to hearing how they're going to police the zones, and will be watching the news tonight to see how the protest in Cairns went today.

Apparently these zones are here forever. I know I may be stating the bleeding obvious, but a lot of commercial business will suffer from this. From the boat sellers, to the tackle shops, to the bait man. It certainly seems as though offshore fishing in NQ has just become a lot more difficult and restricted for all. Tough times ahead for a lot of people...

Cheers,
Hutcho

[SNELLY]

Hutcho,

Certainly more difficult and that seems like what they want - so joe average just says too had and picks up the golf clubs


On the policing issue - I attended a meeting last night at Yorkeys Knob Boating club and GBRMPA said that they have an additional $2.9m in funding for policing and will be utilising resources of DPI fisheries, Customs, AQIS,QNPWS, Federal Police and Water Police.

Snelly

[kc]

Just so you know someone is trying to take care of all those effected business which support and supply the rec fishing industry but have been to date ignored in the compensation issue.

Regards

KC



Press Release 1st July 1, 2004

The announcement by the federal government on June 29th of the broad based and uncapped compensation package aimed at those people affected by the GBRMPA rezoning closures was generally welcomed by the commercial fishing industry. It was this sector that was heavily impacted on by the closures and clearly these businesses and individuals needed help to restructure or in turn leave the industry.
What was not and has not been considered by Government is the serious impact on the industries which directly support Queenslands $320M a year recreational fishing sector.

The Fishing Party (Qld) a recently formed but highly active organisation, which plans to stand candidates for federal senate seats at the upcoming election, has highlighted the effects of the closures, particularly on boating and tackle industries, and has put the government on notice that it is prepared to co-ordinate and fund a compensation claim on behalf of businesses directly effected by the closures.
Party chairman in Qld Kevin Collins said, “It is all well and good for the government to say recreational fishers are not adversely effected but the truth of the matter is that anglers are totally disenfranchised by the marine park zoning plan. They are in many cases, particularly the occasional family fisherman, leaving the sport and in many other cases putting off buying decisions while they reconsider making any further investment in a sport which is clearly on the outer as the government tries to shore up it green voter appeal at the expense of those who live in NQ”.

Mr. Collins said The Fishing Party (Qld) would attempt to quantify the claims of any business affected by the closures and have a legal firm oversee the lodgment of a broadbased compensation claim on behalf of business affected by the closures. “We are not about making frivolous or unsubstantiated claims but if a business or individual, involved in the sport of recreational fishing, can provide sufficient evidence to us that their livelihood is effected by the closures then we are prepared to make this an issue, both with the QRAA, who is handling the claims process and with the media who are starting to realize that the science behind and closures is being clouded by political expediency”.

Any business affected by these closures should contact The Fishing Party (Qld) for further information. TheFishingParty@hotmail.com

Media enquiries 0414 785 462

[Hutcho]

Good work Kevin. Thanks for that clipping.
It is a sad day for anyone involved in fishing full stop. Perhaps this will mean that all areas around these green zones and in other parts of the state are going to suffer more because they will be fished more heavily now? I'm really not sure, but it could happen I suppose. gotta rush home to see the news now.

Hutcho

[Jim_Tait]

I dont think it is a sad day for anyone involved in fishing. Quite the contrary it actuall might put the off shore fishery on a sustainable footing in terms of protecting beeding stocks of targeted species which will provide recruits to open areas. Anyone that has fished the reef long term knows that stocks of key targeted species were declining and zone closures provide one tool (shouldn't be the only one) for insuring a sustainavble future.

Every body is winging aboiut the closures - what about the yellow zones? Closed to commecial fishing but opn to recs some of these areas are going to provide increased recreational fisheries (at least for barra in a couple of coastal regions I'm familiar with).

I think a lot of the anti reef green zone arguments smack of ignorance not to mention vested interests looking for pay outs - this is the 21st centuary, times and values have changed not to mention population and fishing pressure and zonal closures are a necessary part of a sustainable fishery - get with it!!

Regards - Jim

[nonibbles]

Jim I agree with you, yes a lot of us are winging and yes the yellow zones should make us happy but alot of the support for the closures is also based on ignorance.

Ignorance of the fact that most of the support comes from areas such as yours that are not directly effected (ie it's not my back yard) thus the pros and cons are only looked at from an outsiders perspective and the general concensus would naturally be a "good on em, at least they're doing something" that looks worthwhile on the surface. But if its not in your own backyard most humans won't scratch beneath the surface.
Ignorance also of the fact that open water green zones with no reef or structure are designed purely for the purpose of banning fishing activity within large areas of mainly featureless waterway and beyond (ie out of range of recreational vessels that would need to pass through them to fish in non restricted fishable areas). #The only 'science' they have to base the decision to close these areas was that we told them that these areas contained some of our local fishing spots in the RAP survey.
The real reason a lot recos are 'winging' is that the 33% green zone area covers 75-80% of fishable territory which equates to an attempt to shut out any form of fishing.

[SNELLY]

No Nibbles,

What you said - Well put



Snelly

[Kerry]

A question? If green zones "actually might put the off shore fishery on a sustainable footing in terms of protecting beeding stocks of targeted species" then why hasn't any of the many previous green area trials actually provided results that people are now quoting in support of these green zones.

Green zones to protect so called "biodiversity" so what's the "biodiversity" like around areas that have been in fact closed for 30 years, they're dying, there's no fishing either.

Really I would like anybody who supports these zones to actually provide some evidence especially based on all the data and findings of previous closed area trials, which in no way support any of the reasons (excuses) that many attempt to put forward.

Cheers, Kerry.

[kc]

Well said Kerry,

and Jim, with respect, its a bit rich of you to say our auguments smack of ignorance when you obviously have not done much research or followed the information posted,on this web site alone,about the science of coral reef spillover/spawning recruitment and available habitat. Have you read the Reef CRC tech reports? It is a bit like the published statements of the GBRMPA today in the Courier Mail which said quote " it dismissed much of the parties policy platform"...which is kind amazing considering they have not even seen it!! yellow zones don't ban commercial fishing?? It just bans netting. It certainly does not effect the live trout trade.

I have just had a good look over all the maps relative to your example of enhanced barra fishery as a result of coastal yellow zones. I looked for yellow zone areas with an adjacent river system/floodplain in the area Cape York to Rocky...what I would consider prime bara water. We have about 80 kilomteres of coast now effectively closed to barra nets and for this we give up 100,000 square kilometers...fair swap??

As for vested interests seeking compensation go express you views to a boat builder in cairns or maybe a few tackle shop owners who are looking down the barrel. Why is it fair for Government to pay off the commercial fishers and ignore the impacts on the industries which support the rec fishing community? Why?? Because it is not in their backyard and they don't really give a sh$#%!!

Regards

KC

[jockey]

I agree that a lot of the complaints are based on ignorance. I have posted links here to a lot of information showing how green zones improve fishing. People just seem to ignore it. You can't base you whole argument on coral trout. There will be a huge benefit to all the other species that live in the open water.

[Kerry]

Oh just in case you missed the questions, you know those things that some completely ignore then just for some blind people's benefit here they are again.

Now some really need to distinguish the difference between questions and ignorance otherwise those that don't know the difference could be classed as arogrant.


A question? If green zones "actually might put the off shore fishery on a sustainable footing in terms of protecting beeding stocks of targeted species" then why hasn't any of the many previous green area trials actually provided results that people are now quoting in support of these green zones.

Green zones to protect so called "biodiversity" so what's the "biodiversity" like around areas that have been in fact closed for 30 years, they're dying, there's no fishing either.

Really I would like anybody who supports these zones to actually provide some evidence especially based on all the data and findings of previous closed area trials, which in no way support any of the reasons (excuses) that many attempt to put forward.

Cheers, Kerry.

[jockey]

http://www.ausfish.com.au/cgi-ausfish/board/YaBB.cgi?board=General;action=display;num=10874602 61

Those results are in the second link I posted, with a general summary in the first. Please read them. There is also information about the increase in biodiversity (number of species) in green zones.

If you are more specific about the reasons people put forward for green zones then I may be able to direct you to the relevant information. But it would be much better if you actually read some of the information I supplied rather than pretending it doesn't exist.

[Kerry]

Given up reading what you don't have to say jockey as really you've had absolutely nothing to say and you can post all the links you like and much like this one that mean absolutely jack schitt, your just more BS after more BS after more BS

http://www.ausfish.com.au/cgi-ausfish/board/YaBB.cgi?board=General;action=display;num=10756442 51;start=0

Cheers, Kerry.

[jockey]

It's not me saying it Kerry. Read it. It's really not that hard. You'd probably find it interesting.

[Kerry]

waiting for you jockey, you got something to actually say or just going to flap on as usual.

[jockey]

Nothing to say Kerry I'll let the evidence speak for itself. Let me know when you've read it then we can move on to some sensible debate.

[Kerry]

.... I'll let the evidence speak for itself.

Duh evidence, evidence? what evidence, bloody hell you can't even speak for yourself let alone letting non existent evidence speak, get a grip, oh forgot you already have #:D