'traditional' hunting in Green zones

[Toby]

I have just read some of the legislation on the proposed green zones. And it has me really really PI##ed off!!!!!!(whish is not unual around here i have noticed)

I currently fish the zone 14-44 the creek and inshore reef section about 5h north of cooktown. you can see howick island from the bay we fish in. Anyway. all the creek systems adjacent around this area and all inshore reefs are proposed green zones. This land has recently been given back the aboriginals. I have just read that the green zones do not affect TRADITIONAL hunters. Thats right aboriginals can fish in all the green zones thay want!!!!

How bloody discriminatory does the government want to get???? Aboriginals can fish green zones because it is too difficult to change the native title act!!.
This has just put the icing on the cake for me.
Aboriginal can go in to these zones with there 40hp johnsons on a 14f tinny and fish all they want.
How blatantly racist is that????

The greenies say they want to preserve the reef so my 'family' can enjoy it in the future. The area where I fish is way to ruggard to take a wife and kids not to mention dangerous.

And there is no way in hell you would scuba dive. I would love to take a tourist opperator up to where I fish and let them jump in the water. they wouldn't last two minutes. So the only people who go up there are fisherman( in very limited numbers). if they ban fishing then no one will go there at all. So whats the point in having it in the first place???
I can understand certain zones where tourist diving is lucrative, but how many tourist opperators take people diving north of cooktown???

bloody rediculous if you ask me.

[whiteman]

We should leave the Aborigines out of the Draft Zoning Plan arguement as the new proposal is not based on racial descrimination. Following this thread will no doubt bring out the worst in some people.

[Toby]

Yes. I know the zoning isn't based on race yet it does have an impact towrds racial discrimination. That is why the GBR organisation proposing these green zones should be made aware this is occuring and put forth and equitable proposal. Other wise we will see misdirected racism rear it's ugly head. through no fault of the aboriginal people.

[landy1]

I think the spirit of the legislation in this regard is to allow coastal aboriginal cultural groups to keep alive their way of life in one of the few places they still can. I dont imagine that the legislation will stand for any comercial style gathering of ocean resources, however i dont have a problem with the use of current technology if only for safeties sake. Some of these "green zones" have been established as fisheries releif areas/breeding zones sort of like a wildlife corridor. They may not have any other intrinsic value ie. dive sites etc. I am not sure on the nitty gritty of how this legislation is enforced but if control of an area is given to an aboriginal community perhaps rec fishers approaching them would see a compromise/sharing solution for all
cheers
Michael

[PinHead]

The entire reef should become a green zone..protect the lot of it...within reason...no commercial fishing...very limited recreational fishing...strict control over tourism activities.

[jaybee]

I personally don't see any discrimination here, but if one person can pick it up, then there will be 50 for every 1 that does, which in the long term may cause problems for the aboriginals. not good. One must remember also that the Aboriginals have an excellent track record for looking after the places they take food from and investing in places that werent so bountiful. Then us white fellas come along and destroyed the lot. We don't look to good in this respect. Bit like looking after your own bank account eh, draw on it too much then realizing too late you have very little or none to survive then having to make tough decisions on what to sacrifice or go without until it comes good again.
cheers.

[Jack_Lives_Here]

Hey Pinhead - a green zone does not allow rec fishing of any kind - that's the crux of it.
I can see where Toby is coming from but I would believe the pressure from traditional hunters would would negligable - they have done it for a long time afterall.

[Gazza]

Hey Pinhead - a green zone does not allow rec fishing of any kind - that's the crux of it.
I can see where Toby is coming from but I would believe the pressure from traditional hunters would would negligable - they have done it for a long time afterall.

Hi Guys,
Point 1.
I believe we A L L should be allowed to fish in GREEN zones
(some limited methods and quantities is probably reasonable)

Point 2.
I think the term "traditional" gets lost somewhere in the translation ,as I understand 1/32 or 1/16 "bloodline" allows you to be "designated" aboriginal ??

Just a couple of points #:D :D ;D

Regards
Gazza

[lordy]

I think its a bit pointless to not allow Aboriginals to use modern "non-traditional" methods (tinnies, fishing lines etc). Its not as if their "traditional" way of life actually exists any more, colonisation saw to that. What I do find interesting is that they have tradional fishing rights to those green zones that they could never have reached pre-whiteman. Try as I might I just can't see 40 or 50 miles offshore as a traditional place of fishing for someone in a canoe. Not that I think its unfair as the have lost plenty of places where they use to fish and hunt.

[Jack_Lives_Here]

No matter what they come up with, there will always be people who exploit what is available. The old "worry about it when it's gone" cliche rings true.

[Lucky_Phill]

Hey Toby, The way I read the Proposals is that No Creeks are included in the Zones. Creeks belong to the State Government and the GBRMPA is Federal.

Thsi proposal will be the most contenious issue brought to the public attention. Although the Green zones seem to be placed hap-hazard, there has to be a starting point. These areas are NOT set in concrete just yet.

I see lots of Green Zones, but for me, I see limited use of these Zones by Rec Fishes. having said that, I'd hope that the closures effect the Commercial guys more.

I also get the point that by more closures, it'll meant a more condensed area for Rec guys to go, thereby creating another problem. And maybe more condensed areas for the Pro's to go. ! ???

What I don't want to see, is an explosion of Tourist operators, buzzing around the Green Zones, dumping oil, waste, sewerage, sunblocks, etc etc into the area. Put enough people in a small area and it will become a dumping ground.

If there is one bad apple in a barrel ( some one doing the wrong thing ) what happens when there is a 100 barrels in the same place !

I have read the stats on what the GBRMPA believes is the dollar value to the reef.

Commercial Fishing...........$119 million

Recreational Fishing..........$ 240 million

Tourism.........................$ 4269 million

So here -in lies the reason for the fishing closures.

I don't believe for one minute, that those Tourism figures are correct. The amount of Tourists that step foot on the Barrier Reef, that take a fishing Charter is enormous, and THAT figure was NOT included in the Rec fishing figures.

It's *&^%$$ y easy to caluclate. Count the number of Charter boats on the East Coast within the GBRMPA area, multiply that out in days fishing.

People who take a Charter ARE tourists.

Don't get me wrong here. I think there is way toooooooooooo many Charter operators out there already.

And I don't have the answer................... :'(

Phill

[NQCairns]

You are spot on Luck Phil, I have done a few trips north to the GBR towing a boat and I can say for sure that the few thousand I spent each time was not ever incluced in rec specs. How many more thousands of people per year do the same thing under the radar? Nq

[Toby]

Hello.
All very good points raised.
The point I was referring to was that the aboriginies get to fish the green zones and we do not!!!!.
No through no fault of the aboriginies this is breading and has bread racism. Not so much down in south QLD, but I have just been up there and seen it first hand.

If they have green zones then ban all rec fishing for 'everyone'. I guess Im just very annoyed at the governmets current legislation regarding the matter.

As for the creek systems , there has been some speculation that the state will 'mirror' all creek systems adjacent green zonez. Dont knowhow reliable this infor is but could mean athere may be even more angry fishoes will be affected!

[Jack_Lives_Here]

Heard exactly that, re vcreek systems, this morning there Toby. >:( The creek / river adjacent or running into the green zone will be zoned green also.

[nonibbles]

Remember the original "I fish & I vote" campaign? That was about the National Parks and Wildlife wanting to ban fishing in all waterways within and passing through National Parks.
If GBRMPA and WWF (read: Commonwealth Govt and overseas Multinational Corporations) and the tree-hugging-suckers-for-the-emotional-PR story get their way then there will be nothing stopping the re-introduction of the older proposal.
The only fishing that will be permitted then will be in stocked impoundments. It is all about overseas interests trying to lock up the dollar value in our fisheries for themselves.
Remember the reef is World Heritage - meaning we are dictated to by people outside our own country (Big Companies) on how the reef is used. This whole argument is to complete the sell out.

[Gazza]

Now another 'point' that needs attention....
IF 'Green Zones' WERE some 'Aboriginal Land Rights' grab ,you reasonably and realistically want 'them' to prove WHY it's theirs and not able to be 'used' by others......could even be some L-A-W to back it up.

Now please explain to me ,(at least ;) ) , why GBRMPA is "stealing" MY 'traditional' fishing grounds.......


And I'm being told , 'no ownership' of MY RecFishing ,but FUTURE developments ,can plonk themselves deadset in the middle of 'landgrabbed' from my 'historical' f-a-m-i-l-y.....


That 'is' Discrimination.....and very,very BLATANT ;)

Regards
Gazza