Reef Ball updates. MBMP

[Mark Robinson MP]

Mike. Too much misunderstanding for one post but I will try to explain it.
1. The LNP govts position is the same after the 2012 election as it was before. As I said we would do, once the election was called we would put out our fishing policies. And that is what we did ( see below) so your footer quoting me only re-affirms that we would put our policies out, and we did.
2. The policies that we announced were a) net licence buyback $9 million b) the marine infrastructure fund $120 million (including dredging) and c) more access for rec fishers

In our first year, a & b are well underway. I think that's good. And i am working with my colleagues wrt c. - just need to be a little patient - we still have time to make good on this but what we implement must be the best practice for rec fishing within MNPs.

3. Re the answer to the petition, it does not represent a change in the govts position, rather one expression that did not in my view articulate our position in sufficient depth.

[BC....]

Hi Mark,

Just wanted to check if any current research, such as diving the existing reef balls west of Peel was conducted before spending more money on new ones. I have sounded over and fished the balls many times since they were first placed. Unfortunately, from my experience, they are not big enough. Initially when they were placed there was a bit of bait starting to appear, which in turn brings larger fish. However, since they are very small (80cm high in up to 15m of water) they are easily silted up, rendering them ineffective. It is great to see something being done, but I just think we could have got a lot more bang from the dollars spent. Reef balls twice or even three times the size should have been used - even if this meant there were fewer of them. History tells us that structure holds fish. Just look at the HMAS Brisbane. Now I'm not suggesting we need to put something that large west of Peel, but substantial structure would be many time more valuable in creating a new ecosystem and not little dots of concrete all over the place.

Cheers,

Ben

[WalrusLike]

80 cm!?!? Bloody hell. Who thinks that's going to work?

I mean, I hope it does, but it seems too insignificant.

I went sounding for them and couldn't work out why I couldn't find em.

I did see tiny bottom bumps but I was expecting 3 metre high pipe size things not little ball bearings. When I read their size on the scale I wrote those little bumps off as not a arti....

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just drop those underground tunnel one fifth segments that are made by the thousands at wacol onto the bottom in a jumble?

It won't shift and settle for ever... Sooner or later it will consolidate and be reef.


(Using Tapatalk on iPhone so can't easily 'thank' or 'like')

[snapperbasher]

Totally agree Walrus!

Although you will be surprised at how little it takes to hold fish. I think its the boat traffic that keeps the fish away. if you get there midweek with no other boats around there will be fish on it.

The problem is that to keep the greens happy they needed to be made from approved materials and a whole pile of other things to get through the red tape.
Its funny how this is the case to make a reef but if they want to build a bridge or put in a pontoon there is no hoops to jump through for the materials used for that??

[Lucky_Phill]

The biggest issue we had to deal with in the case of theses Arti's was the fact they were being placed in a Marine Park. Government red tape and many departments.

EPA, ( DEEDI ), Harbours and Marine, FQ, NPWS as well as Federal issues ( marine transport , international shipping lanes ) and more.

The only concern brought up by the " green " member of the working group was " won't these reefs drag fish away from natural reefs ? " The response from a particular member of the group was............. well.... let's just say... You had to be there

cheers LP

[Gazza]

take 2 , the LNP efforts to date , are less than satisfactory , ~13% approval , if the ausfish "poll" represents QUEENSLAND

[Gon Fishun]

The biggest issue we had to deal with in the case of theses Arti's was the fact they were being placed in a Marine Park. Government red tape and many departments.

EPA, ( DEEDI ), Harbours and Marine, FQ, NPWS as well as Federal issues ( marine transport , international shipping lanes ) and more.

The only concern brought up by the " green " member of the working group was " won't these reefs drag fish away from natural reefs ? " The response from a particular member of the group was............. well.... let's just say... You had to be there

cheers LP

Here fishy fishy, Ball park play ground. Pole dancing, love you long time.

[WalrusLike]

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just drop those underground tunnel one fifth segments that are made by the thousands at wacol onto the bottom in a jumble?

Phil you are the guru on this..... Do you know what I mean when I mention the tunnel segments?

I think that's what they are.... A curved strip of concrete probably 200mm thick about 2 metres wide representing about one 5th or 6th of a circle. (Ie lay it on its 2metre edge and its part of a circle.... Get 5 more and they come round and would join the initial one.).

I think they are what they use to make the underground road tunnels.

They would make a great reef jumble if just dropped on top of one another.

Eco friendly reef? And cheap compared to custom designed stuff?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Mark Robinson MP]

Phil you are the guru on this..... Do you know what I mean when I mention the tunnel segments?

I think that's what they are.... A curved strip of concrete probably 200mm thick about 2 metres wide representing about one 5th or 6th of a circle. (Ie lay it on its 2metre edge and its part of a circle.... Get 5 more and they come round and would join the initial one.).

I think they are what they use to make the underground road tunnels.

They would make a great reef jumble if just dropped on top of one another.

Eco friendly reef? And cheap compared to custom designed stuff?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Walrus like,
Yes, Phill is an authority in this area, recognized by former and current state govts, so I certainly defer to his knowledge.
What you are referring to is described as "materials of opportunity", like the Hornibrook pylons that I had hoped to get the previous govt to use towards additional arti reef material that could have created 2 new arti reefs for the Northern part of Moreton Bay.
Whether those specific materials are ok to be used needs to be investigated by fisheries or marine scientists
Regards,
Mark

[Triple]

So when are they going to update the PDF with the new GPS marks?
http://www.nprsr.qld.gov.au/parks/mo...html#West_Peel

Something as easy and important as this should be done within a few days shouldn't it? It's been a month.

[Shark Poker]

Mark,
Good Evening. Thank You for being so approachable and being able to discuss this with us.
I am a long time admirer of artificial reefs. Used to fish reefs in Darwin Harbour made from what were former refugee boats.
These artificial reefs being discussed locally are one of the only positive, proactive and contributing projects towards rec fishing. For we always take, but never put anything into the equation. But we could do better.
In my opinion these reefs do not need to be so elaborate as a sunken ship or hundreds of thousands of dollars for a few hundred reef balls.
While there has been study into what works to form a visually successful or biologically prosperous reef, before the reef balls were chosen, there are other ideas.
Much less expensive ones. (Not talking tyres!)
While you are open and available to this subject, could you please tell us who and where we should enquire to find out how another project with approved materials could be raised and implemented in Moreton Bay without 6 figure plus red tape?
Surely the findings of the previous work that you guys were involved in could be released into a positive education program for the future?

[Lucky_Phill]

Phil you are the guru on this..... Do you know what I mean when I mention the tunnel segments?

I think that's what they are.... A curved strip of concrete probably 200mm thick about 2 metres wide representing about one 5th or 6th of a circle. (Ie lay it on its 2metre edge and its part of a circle.... Get 5 more and they come round and would join the initial one.).

I think they are what they use to make the underground road tunnels.

They would make a great reef jumble if just dropped on top of one another.

Eco friendly reef? And cheap compared to custom designed stuff?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Thanks.

I am aware of the materials. And as Mark Robinson stated, these are classified as Materials of Opportunity.

As a major priority of the working group deploying the Artificial Reefs in the MBMP, Materials of Opportunity were number one for " shallow " waters as most of these items were not " high " as in the purpose built structures we put in place in the deeper waters.

The " expensive " part of materials of opportunity is the transportation and deployment. I would love nothing more than the State Govt funding a dedicated deployment barge, which could also be used in Disaster Relief etc. It would literally save us ( Rec fishos and taxpayers , hundreds of thousands of dollars ), money that could be spent on enhancing the reefs.

Mark,
Good Evening. Thank You for being so approachable and being able to discuss this with us.
I am a long time admirer of artificial reefs. Used to fish reefs in Darwin Harbour made from what were former refugee boats.
These artificial reefs being discussed locally are one of the only positive, proactive and contributing projects towards rec fishing. For we always take, but never put anything into the equation. But we could do better.
In my opinion these reefs do not need to be so elaborate as a sunken ship or hundreds of thousands of dollars for a few hundred reef balls.
While there has been study into what works to form a visually successful or biologically prosperous reef, before the reef balls were chosen, there are other ideas.
Much less expensive ones. (Not talking tyres!)
While you are open and available to this subject, could you please tell us who and where we should enquire to find out how another project with approved materials could be raised and implemented in Moreton Bay without 6 figure plus red tape?
Surely the findings of the previous work that you guys were involved in could be released into a positive education program for the future? Can an individual make a suggestion?

Thank You
Paul Preston
(Wakerley)
38907141 / 0409 530097

The Arti's in Moreton Bay come under the management of NPWS and Steve Hoseck is the man to speak to about this.

Below is some insight into the funding etc.

I have contacted the revelant authority in regard to specific details on funding submissions for Artificial Reefs....... all along the Queensland coast.

Department of Transport and Main Roads administers the Marine Infrastructure Capital and Maintenance Program (MICMP). The MICMP is operated in two parts.

1) an annual maintenance program for recreational boating infrastructure - including maintenance of designated channels, boat ramps, landings and associated infrastructure used by recreational fishers and boaties

Access to maintenance funding comes from known maintenance issues (asset condition inspections) and infrastructure monitoring (such as hydrographic surveys of channels) plus specific applications from appointed managers (councils and port authorities) for public marine facilities maintenance.

2) a four year program of capital works for new and upgraded recreational boating infrastructure known as the Newman Government's $50 million Marine Infrastructure Fund

The four year program of capital works has three components:

A) an allocation totalling $5.3 million over four years to the Gold Coast Waterways Authority (GCWA)

B) an allocation to the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) in the Department of National Parks, Recreation, Sport and Racing totalling $2 million over four years ($500, 000 in each of the four years commencing 2012-13) for specific fishing infrastructure such as artificial reefs.

C) an allocation totalling $42.7 million over four years to the Department of Transport and Main Roads for the capital component of its Marine Infrastructure and Capital Maintenance Program for expenditure on marine infrastructure used by boating/fishing community

Administration of the GCWA allocation is with GCWA, which has representation by the Gold Coast City Council.

You can contact Mr Steve Hoseck from NPWS on steve.hoseck@nprsr.qld.gov.au or by phone on 07 3131 2851 for details of expenditure of the $2 million allocated to it.

The Marine Infrastructure Capital and Maintenance Fund (in TMR) has a four year program of capital works approved by government, based largely on the results of the 2011 Recreational Boating Facilities Demand Forecasting Study. There is a backlog of unfunded projects recommended for prioritised action in the out-years past the current four year approved program. Additional applications for TMR consideration in out-years are made by councils and port authorities. Individuals, clubs, and organisations need to lobby these councils or port authorities as their support is essential to any application. This is because new and upgraded boating facilities are constructed on a partnership basis with TMR providing the in-water components and councils or port authorities providing the land-side components (roads, car-parking, toilets, lighting, landscaping etc). Projects are being announced by government progressively after consultation and negotiation with the appropriate council or port authority on partnership funding and works programming has been achieved.

end:-

As you can see, there is no specific mention of artificial reefs and this funding has to be sourced from the MICMP through a submission. The submission will need the backing of recreational Fishing groups, clubs etc as well as council, State Govt and local MP's and the group or individual making the submission must have the revelent experience to manage the projects. The experience is at hand, by way of the MBMP working group program.

Hope this helps and be aware that the Artificial reef program for ALL Queensland is not sitting idle.

Cheers LP

[Horse]

The way I see it we are getting $500,000 a year being spent on artificial reef infrastructure. How much of this is going to NPWS internal cost and written off to monitoring of existing areas?
I am pretty embarrassed to see the programs initiated by the previous government grinding to a slow halt under the current regime (who I voted for). The $500,000 PA is about 1/2 of the pay increase Noddy and Seeny are set to receive. Its a bloody joke

[Shark Poker]

Mike,
Although you have acknowledged LP in this subject, I would really like to request an answer to my specific question from yourself.
Many Thanks,
Pauly

[Shark Poker]

Sorry Mark, (not Mike)!