hmmm maybe we are just seeing the turn of the tide wonder if in a few years from now captain bligh will be changing her views on the bay.
hmmm maybe we are just seeing the turn of the tide wonder if in a few years from now captain bligh will be changing her views on the bay.
The EPA in their own documentation have admitted that their research was extracted from a survey conducted by the DPI&F some 2 years ago, I remember filling out the survey it read something like this: SE QLD recreational fishing is a large part of peoples pastime in the SE corner we wish to support this pastime and encourage all recreational fisherman to complete the survey so that we can adequately provide the resources needed to support this popular activity.
It started off with questions relating to ramp facilities, toilet facilties , picnic facilities and then the survey went to the darkside to where do you catch fish, how many fish do you catch, what do you consider the best areas to fish etc etc,
my coversation to the DPI&F confirmed that the EPA used this data for there own research, when I sent the DPI&F an email regarding there role in managaging the fishing stocks and sustainabilty of Moreton Bay, they were not prepared to answer any of my questions in writing, I had to ring them for their reply to my email...strange??
So there is your scientific research from the EPA, cheap ey? didn't cost them a cent. This response may sound oversimplified but as I was actively seeking answers in regard to Green Zones, their message was loud and clear
Last edited by BrewGuru; 16-03-2008 at 08:51 PM.
Barker Transport Logistic ServicesTransport Solutions for Every Job
For a fantastic adventure: www.mvwaiben.com
http://s269.photobucket.com/albums/jj63/Waiben/
Heres one
Pillans et al (2007) - available at
http://www.coastal.crc.org.au/postgr...e_pillans.html
I quote: In general, we found that the marine reserves in Moreton Bay did not have a significant difference in species richness than the non- reserve `fished´ areas.
They do indicate that they found a significant increase in the mean size
of the nekton in closed areas (fig 5a). Lets look at their data. Mean
size of nekton in closed area about 5.35 cm, in open areas near the
reserve, about 5.3 cm, and away from the reserve 5.15 cm. Ranges of sizes
overlap considerably. However the seasonal variation was larger fig 5b,
(mean 5.4 cm vs 5.15 cm), but still in the whole scheme of things ,
minisule differences. So statistically there is a difference based on,
presumably, enornous numbers of animals measured, but in a practical
sense, no real world difference (unless we get more detailed data on
exactly what species they were measuring etc.
Other data from Pillan et al. 2007 is similarly unconvincing.
I quote from sect. 4.4 community composition: "We propose that the
protection provided by the Tripcony Bight reserve has not generated a
change in the nekton community structure between the reserve and
non-reserves at this location. This result can be interpreted four ways:
(1) there is no difference in community composition between the marine
reserve and non-reserves at this location, (2) the pressure produced by
the recreational fishing at this location is not big enough to generate a
significant change in the nekton community structure, (3) the change
generated by reserve protection is gradual and five years after
implementation may not be enough time to detect this change, or (4) there
is an impact but the system is well-mixed so the scale of the study areas
(reserves and non-reserves) are too small to see a local impact.
These appear to be the data used to justify increasing the size of the
green zone at Tripcony. That is, if any local data were used at all.
Well, I wasn't going to say alot. But from the polls to the pumicestone areas. I'm delighted that John McNaught got royally "BOOTED!!!" He have been the voice behind the scene in regards to closing down sections of the passage, and rightly so, the local have shown him where the door was. Finally we get a fisho on the board and have a vested interest in the quality of life for the society as a whole and not a few vocal individuals with hidden agendas.
Humility is not a weather condition.
Noooooo, not exactly, folks.
"My" candidate is far from being a lefty.
Was perfectly happy to advocate greater consultation with all parties.
BUT - refused to take the populist view and proliferate untruths - although that would have been politically advantageous.
Far from telling "a few lil porkie pies", the opposition was awash with scaremongering, fraudulent major LIES about potential impacts.
If one feels the necessity to indulge in that sort of muck in order to achieve one's ends,
(a) it says a great deal about your character
and
(b) it demonstrates that, without doing so, your case must be incredibly weak.
I ALSO celebrate the departure of McNaught who was trying to be all things to all people on this (and other) issues regardless of the rights or wrongs of a situation.
The Save our Passage frauds endorsed Sutherland for Mayor and Percival for Divisional Councillor.
In doing so they continued their campaign of lies about Profishing, access etc etc and misled voters - particularly the aged and those who had not been following the issues and took their rubbish at face value.
Last edited by Tripcony; 19-03-2008 at 04:56 AM.
Gee. I was unware of any EPA activity in the recent Council elections.
The "Save our Passage" gang, on the other hand,
WERE at the polling booths wearing their S.O.P. T-shirts
purchased with the monies they have defrauded from local volunteer Community Groups by telling them that the proposed changes would mean the return of professional fishing to the passage and a whole pile of other baseless, scaremongering muck.
" Vote for Sutherland. He'll save the Passage"
Yep, the local Council is now going to be the determining authority ????
And the Mayor alone will outvote 12 councillors.
What rubbish.
I don't doubt for one moment that some of the EPA contentions are awry.
I am yet to be convinced that they have deliberately LIED.
Their opponents though, clearly, demonstrably have lied and are continuing to do so.
To this lay person who genuinely has tried to evaluate the scientific data from both sides,
that alone is just about enough to turn the tide.
Last edited by Tripcony; 23-03-2008 at 02:15 PM.
trippers..wake up..the EPA has based all this nothing but lies..they claim they want to protect turtles and dugongd from boat strikes..how can they prevent that yet satill let boats travel through these areas..surely even you can see that as a blatant lie.
This entire State Govt is about lies..take a look at the Health Minister at present..or perhaps Merrie Rose..or Purcell..or before that Wright, D'Arcy..all fine upstanding citizens. believe whatever you want but do not try and stop people looking at the real facts..and that is..the EPA has absolutely no scientific evidence to perpetuate their myths about stopping recreational fishing to enahnce the environment...anyone that believes that is seriously in need of help.
(1) Perhaps you can point me to one single place where the EPA has claimed that the purpose of Green Zones was to reduce boat strikes on turtles and dugong ?
The fact that they have NOT tried to limit access to these proposed zones indicates to me that they are making a genuine attempt to minimize the impact on recreational users.
Believe it or not, not all who use the waterways do so for the sole purpose of killing fish
(although personally I see no other reason for the existence of saltwater).
(2) The alleged misdeeds of the Health Minister, Rose, Purcell, Wright or D'arcy have NO relevance to the subject under discussion. You are really stretching mate.
hello Tripcony, i have been keeping an eye on this thread with much amusement for a while now, but im starting to gather from your responses that maybe you are more of a activist than fisherman/woman, would you be able to enlighten me as to why out of your 35 posts 34 have been trying to push/bully a political agenda that would be more suited to a WWF/Greenpeace forum, i mean no offence but would just like to hear what motive if any is driving this thread, Anthony...
"The underlying spirit of angling is that the skill of the angler is pitted against the instinct and strength of the fish and the latter is entitled to an even chance for it's life."
(Quotation from the rules of the Tuna Club Avalon, Santa Catalina, U.S.A.)
Apathy is the enemy
Tony. I'm afraid you would have to be a bit more specific.
I don't even know what "WWF" is !
I assure you I am no tree-hugging greenie.
I am just struggling to find any convincing evidence that this one tiny extension to the existing Green Zone in Pumicestone Passage is going to be detrimental.
PERHAPS it won't do much to improve things.
But it seems more likely to help than to hinder.
So I can't see why genuine fishing folk would oppose it.
AND, what really has riled me is that those opposing it have blatantly, demonstrably, inarguably LIED
and conned the gullible out of thousands of dollars to promote their bullshit.
Even to the extent of influencing an election.
THAT, I find sneaky, devious, dishonest and evidence in itself that their arguments must lack merit.
Last edited by Tripcony; 27-03-2008 at 01:27 AM.
Jeremy,
It is one thing to denigrate someone's credibility (as you have just failed to do), but nowhere have you tried to rationally oppose the rezoning proposals.
You would rather duck and weave and dodge the hard questions, and throw a few red herrings around to distract people from the fact that opposition to the green zoning may have no credibility.
"Minds, like parachutes, work best when open". You are in freefall.....
You claimed " I am a professional scientist with a PhD ..."
In what FIELD ? It clearly is not in any way related to fisheries.
And PLEASE, tell me that your academic discipline enables you to evaluate genuine research - and I'll refer you back to the luminaries on the EPA "Expert Panel" !
I think your punchline was the appeal to
THE PROS AND CONS OF MARINE PROTECTED AREAS IN NEW SOUTH WALES: WHO’S BEEN HOODWINKED?
(Address to The Australian Society for Fish Biology, Canberra, 12/9/07)
Bob Kearney PhD, DSc AM
Emeritus Professor of FisheriesUniversity of Canberra.
which referred to the Bateman's Bay environment and pelagic, migratory species.
VERY, VERY different to the situation in the Tripcony area.
Mate, I could be utterly wrong in every single word I have posted here.
But if so, I am sincerely wrong.
On the other hand, your Deep and Meaningful academic pronouncement
" HA HA What a crock.
It is you who has demonstrably lied and is continuing to do so.
You are full of it and clearly a publicity stunt by the EPA"
strikes me as being utterly childish.
If THAT is what academia produces, thank God for lay people with common sense.
Produce one IOTA of evidence that I have lied or that I am a lackey of the EPA.
Or apologize - which I cannot imagine is likely.
Last edited by Tripcony; 27-03-2008 at 02:57 AM.
The WWF is the World Wildlife Fund, not to be confused with a purile wrestleing competion and im hearing you with what you saying, like people with vested interests pushing the downgrading and abolition of green zones, on the same token the others with no vested interest in the sport/hobby/past time who are trying to wrap the world in cotton wool while playing back ground politics and a public campaign, what camp you lie in i cant see how trading insults with equally insulting people healps, thank you for the reply. Anthony