Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 75 of 75

Thread: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

  1. #61

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    This is more of a white flag and a bit of humour to break this thread up.
    If australia's two million cats eat just one pillie each week, that's 14 million pillies down the furball hatch every week: around 60 million every month or 730 million pillies a year.
    That is a hell of a lot of baitfish. How long can our fishery sustain this sort of pressure?
    THERE IS SOMETHING YOU CAN DO.

    [smiley=thumbsup.gif]FEED A FISH A CAT TODAY [smiley=thumbsup.gif]
    REGARDS

  2. #62

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    Thanks for the tone of your response Maggie. I am sure when you investigate just where we stand on a whole raft of issues, both environmental and fisheries management you will come to appreciate what we are about and that we are offering a genuine alternative to current government policies. Our policies are rec fishing friendly, environmentally sound and anti overfishing...particularly commercially.

    But lets talk trout!!!

    If you were to purpose design a sustainable fishery. You would have a huge habitat area, a harvesting of stock each year in line with the spawning recruitment and methods in place which stopped expoitation of the "brood stock".

    Without quoting the studies involved (but they are available on the reef crc web site)

    here we have a commercial fishery which is limited to shallow water (due to needing the fish to live), prefers smaller fish and can (& finally is about to be) limited by TAC down to about 1500 tonnes (pre live trout boom numbers).

    You have a very healthy brood stock which reside in deeper water, are subject to much less pressure, are controlled by bag limits and are soon to have seasonal spawning aggregation protection.

    On top of this you have research which suggests that insufficent habitat exists on unfished reefs for annual spawning recruitment ie unfished reefs have a predominace of large male trout which prey on juvenille trout. Fished reefs, with less large male trout support a larger number of juvenilles each year.

    Once the TAC on trout comes into force, latent capacity is removed, brood stocks are protected by bag limits, deep water and lighter pressure and the commercial fishery is limited to lagoons this is almost the perfect example of a well managed and sustainable fishery.

    If you want biodiversity protection, have pink zones. The green zone thing, as you already pointed out, is a sham a PR stunt and a con job on the Australian public about how great the Howard Government is doing protecting the GBR.

    Regards

    KC

  3. #63

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    Webby,

    Tried that. Scratched the shit out me when I put a 14/0 through its back, kept trying to climb back into the boat all bloody day and to top it off the handbrake wouldn't talk to me for months after she found out!!

  4. #64

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    If you feed a toadfish a day to any cat you see, it won't be long and the pillies will be very safe.

    GES

  5. #65

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    Oops just realised those graphs are from a magazine not a website. Can anyone tell me which one (ie name and edition)?

    KC I just checked out the party's website and I think I agree with most of the policies. The one I disagree with is the 'one out all out' policy. You can't seriously believe that the threat from tourism compares to the threat from overfishing. Fishing has affected the entire reef. Tourism has probably affected less than 1%.

    What is the fishing party's policy on green zones as general fisheries management tool? Do you believe that they can increase total catch rates if implimented in a way that suits fishermen?

    I am a bit disturbed by some of the common themes that keep cropping up here:

    The reef and the fishery is under serious threat from global warming and runoff. People seem more concerned about the green zones than the governments failure to deal with the more important issues.

    People (including doctor Starck) claim that the reef is underfished and that the fishable zones will have almost as many fish as the green zones. If this is true then what is the problem? You still have access to over 2/3 of the reef that is supposedly in top condition. I don't believe the reef is underfished, mainly because people are travelling so far because the fishing is so much better in the less fished areas.

    Most of the discussion on overfishing seems to focus on one species - coral trout, which has unusual breeding habits that make it resilient to overfishing and less likely to spillover. What percentage of the catch is made up of coral trout?

    Dr starck (on the sunfish website) acknowledges the benefits of spillover but claims that green zones will make the situation worse (through concentration of effort) if the reef is under fished. This doesn't make sense. If the reef is underfished that will rerduce the net benefit from green zones but it won't change things around and make it a net detriment.

  6. #66

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    So Jockey of you have visited our web site, looked at our policies and agee with most but not the "one out all out" it's maybe a bit like going fishing and catching 3 barra and a catfish...still pretty good!!

    Our position is and I think will remain, that pink zones offer the only true meassure of protection from "on water" impacts.
    The big ticket issue are clearly to be adressed by government and if you look at some of the press releases attached to the web site you will find ample reference to the pressures we wish to place on government in this regard.

    "Our" problems with green zones are many.
    1. They do not offer the highest levels of protection possible for reef systems which are shown be require protection.
    2. They are more about being "seen to be green" than actually achieving anything meaningful.
    3. The "spillover effect" is, based on what we have seen, is doubtful. Coral trout and red throut (the 2 major recreational target species) are domecile. They are born, live and die on the same reef system. They do not move from reef to reef. A spawning recruitment has one chance, find a footfold on your home reef or be eaten. This is why the variuos case studies (www.reefcrc.org) have shown higher densities of juvenille trout on fished reefs and smaller densities of larger male trout on unfished reefs. During the public submission phases of RAP we pleaded long and hard for "split" reefs. Allowing an undisturbed brood stock in a green zone and fishing in the potential spillover area....submissions ignored!! Reason "We prefer not to split reefs". Down here we have had a split reef for years. A reef called Bait Reef. It supports a large tourism industry, a couple of fishing charter operators a recreational fishery (as it is the closest reef to the mainland) and is even visited by the live trout dories. This reef continues to fish well and the only area degraded is the green zone (as far as coral quality goes).
    This is now to be total green zone (at the behest of the home invaders) at least 1 of the charter boats is out of business after many years of careful use of the area. Do green zones work, this one proves they can, if GBRMPA took any notice and allowed for split reefs. But no, the home invaders won the day, fishos got shafted and the end result is rec fishers will now probaley fish the next closest reef (no green zone there because there is no tourism industry interested in Hook Reef) while the potential spawning recruitment, which has happily supported the yellow zone area, very sustainabley for years, will now have nowhere to go and hook reef will come under pressure it may not be able to withstand. Another fishable reef miles out to sea, won't change a thing. Concentration of effort clearly relates to close in reefs, it is also the close in reefs of most interest to tourism operators. The peak bodies past chairman is already on record as wanting fishing banned on 90% of the marine park. If GBRMPA had listened to sensible suggestions, if state government had not caved in to sensationalised Grey Nurse Shark propogander(whose main spokesperson killed more sharks than any 1000 fishos have ever seen) then The Fishing Party (Qld) would not even exist.
    4. That the "public consulation" phase was sham, GBRMPA and its SSC already had a clear agenda and took no notice of what rec fishers had to say. Their agenda was, we believe, set by its political masters, wanting a nice green outcome, is bankers (the tourism industry) and the pointy end of the green lobby who are most clearly anti recreational fishing...check out the PETA website of you doubt that.

    Like our policies suggest we don't oppose proper protection, we don't oppose best environmental practises, we don't oppose reduction in commercial pressure, or bag limits, or seasonal spawning closures, especially as the bulk of our seafood is exported but we do oppose being used as the scapegoat and whipping boys for a government with no credibility on environmental issues and no credibility when it comes to being honest.

    You are right. I don't believe the impacts of tourism are as great(individually) as the impacts of overfishing (not that I believe the reef is "overfished", but if the government wanted some "tourist zones" why not just be honest enough to say so. Every major tourist site in the Whitsundays is suddenly a green zone, in the name of biodiversity protection. So the 2 million(& growing) visitors to the whitsunday's each year won't make as much impact as the couple of thousand rec fishos who live here and maybe get to the reef 4 times a year.
    I think the faries in the garden Kerry was talking about must be running around here somewhere.


    I hate getting so bloody long winded and trying in 200 different ways to make the same point.

    We live in a democracy and collectively fishos are sick to death of being ignored. That is really the whole reason for The Fishing Party existing.

    Make I Fish & I Vote...actually mean something for a change.
    Regards

    Kevin Collins
    The Fishing Party (Qld)

  7. #67

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    For those who are as ignorant as me, pink means 'no acces' even for tourists. I had been told something else before.

    The example of coral trout and red throat does not disprove the benefit of spillover. It supports the general principle that the benefit to the fishery is greatest for smaller green zones and larger green zones get you closer to a natural (virginal) situation.

    Based on what you said KC it seems that split reefs are a better option than pink zones. So why not change your policy to be pro split reefs - at least for reefs close to shore.

    Pink zones are (IMO) the best option for grey nurse zones. However large pink zones don't make much sense for the GBR because tourism tends to have very concentrated effects anyway so there is already large areas in the green zones with no or minimal access by other users, so in effect there is no need for pink zones. I suspect that pink zones are being proposed as 'punishment' for the tourism sector for pulling a swifty on you.

    In Cairns I don't think the close in reefs are important to the tourist operators because of the pooir visibility.

    There is probably a good reason why that guy is the past chairman, not the current one.

    Public consultation is always a sham becasue the politicians are always accountable to the public. Official public consultation indicates either that the politicians don't know what the public wants, that they want to inform the public of what they should want, or that they are just trying to minimise the backlash from the group that is disadvantaged by change (and there always is one). You can tell your local rep what you think at any time. The govt can change policies at any time.

    IMO mixed zones (yellow I think) are a better option than pink zones.

    Thank you for the effort you have gone to in responding to my posts. Perhaps you should see it as practice. I hope that by having these conversations on a public forum you won't have to have them so often on an individual basis. Perhaps you should copy everything you have posted onto a word document. This has the following advantages: It allows you to do a word search for specific topics. It allows you to copy and paste appropriate responses, or parts thereof, rather than typing. It could form the basis for a simplified, better written, official policy at a later date.

    Also, thanks for remaining civil. There aren't many around who can have detailed debates without turning to personal abuse. You would probably make a good politician, and get my vote. But I will make you earn it.

  8. #68

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    Dear Jockey,

    Welcome to a lesson on the joys of zoning. The GBR has a number of zones ranging through dark blue, light blue, yellow, green and pink. basically open slather through to what are called total exclusion zones (pink) No such thing as a mixed zone but in places different cloured zones attached to each other.

    Pink zone is a no anyone zone and offers the greatest level of protection. No boat traffic, no "just anchoring here overnight and I promise I won't fish", no potential for boat strike of animals, no sewage being pumped out, no nothing.
    Yellow zones are a line only, one line per angler and 1 hook per line fishery. Basically designed to remove nets and trawlers.
    Overlapping the zones you have settings. Scaled 1 through 5. Setting one being open slather through a setting 5 being highly restricted. So you can have a setting 5 in a yellow or blue zone which means no access and no fishing. Each setting can then have a "plan of management" or a "special management area" which can then allow different activities in a particular setting than what is general allowed. eg a blue zone setting 5 (open zone but setting says no fishing or access) can then have a plan of management which says recreational access allowed in vessels under 10 meters, speed under 6 knots and fishing allowed. Confused yet?? And we have to live with it.

    We are, will and continue to lobby for split green reefs which have been shown very effective (Bait Reef). We will also lobby for pink zones in areas which need them.

    As to Cairns. major reef destinations for tourism. Green Island, closest to Cairns, Moore reef, close, sudbury reef, close, Michaelmas quay, close, Norman reef mid shelf to outer. Argincourt (off Port Douglas. outer) Low reef (off Port, closest in. Visabiltiy is not the issue, it is more suitablity for pontoons mooring & current flow which determines where tourist pontoons are located, bugger all to do with "vis" which will always vary based on tidal, seasonal and weather conditions.

    As to AMPTO, The association of marine park tourism operators, that past chairman is still one of the major power brokers in the industry...don't assume his opinion does not carry an awful lot of weight and have enourmous support within the industry. I have sat/do sit on the same boards and MACS as many of these guys.

    I personally have a rather paranoid sneaking suspision that the GBRMPA are trying to make the whole zoning issue just so bloody difficult that we give up fishing and take up lawn bowls!! The chances of the average few times a year fisho making an honest mistake and it ends up costing him his house are very real!

  9. #69

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    A mate of mine came home from a sailing trip thinking he is going to get a $1500 fine per person. New news yet on whether it happened.

    A potential policy - simplicity in zoning regulations. That is probably of greater value than being able to customise each zone.

    Would you make a preference for split reefs over green zoning a few entire reefs an official policy? Stating the preferred of two options (ie the lesser of two evils as some may see this) doesn't have to mean that you want either of them, but it could help you in bargaining.

  10. #70

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    "A potential policy - simplicity in zoning regulations. That is probably of greater value than being able to customise each zone."
    --------------------------------------------------
    Hey Jock....... Q. Why?
    p.s. are you saying your mate ,isn't sure whether his sailing trip happened? , or maybe he's waiting for the overhead satellite photo to be developed and sent in the mail?

  11. #71

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    I don't see the need for so many different levels of protection. I think it would be enough to have pink, green (no extraction), rec-only and one level of intermediate (eg one line one hook) zone. I don't know why they have so many different levels, but I think most rec fishermen would prefer simplicity. Maybe the hardcore fishos don't care because they'll know the local regs backwards after a while, but a travelling fishermen or a once a month fisherman may find it a real disincentive. I have been in a situation where I was shore fishing and I had a map showing me where the green zone was, but there was nothing to go by. Even if I had a compass I would have had trouble. I asked a fisheries officer beforehand how I would tell whether or not I was in the green zone without a compass or a landmark, and he told me I would be able to tell from the map ??? ??? ???. I think that making the boundaries easier to find for people without expensive equipment is probably more important than having fewer types of zones.

    My mate didn't know the regs well enough, but has looked into it and is pretty sure he was breaking the rules, so yeah he is waiting for the letter in the mail. But the situation was ambiguous (and perhaps rediculous) enough that he may not get done.

  12. #72

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    But Wait...there is more. It is not just the zinings but the settings which override the zonings and then the plans of management which override the settings and if you are fishing off the shore, both on a GBR Island or mailand which borders the GBR park, then, if you are standing above low water you are in state marine park, not federal marine park and not bound by zoning, settings or plans of management!!
    We have finaly found some common ground Jockey. The rules are debacle..and lets not even go into the species of coral trout fiasco with the rules applicable to them.

    I am sure the main job of most bureaucrats is to make things as complicated as possible to help justify their own existance and they have managed this with bells on on the GBR.

    Also you comments elsewhere about making a policy about split green zones...so we really can get some benifits from the "rumoured" spillover effect is going to be run up the party flagpole for comment on our web site soon. It will be interesting to get the feedback.

    Regards

    KC

  13. #73

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    Hey kc, this is the first I've heard of levels 1-5 applied to the zones. Does this mean that even if I follow the (zone) maps and the colour code rules provided by GBRMPA I can still be wrong? Would the "failure to disclose" defence work in this situation in court or would the poor fisherman have to suffer the "no excuse for ignorance of the law" crap if placed in the situation of breaching an undisclosed ruling?
    I'm gonna have to get a degree or something before I go fishing in the future!
    Any fishing is good fishing (should probably say Any fishing is...probably going to be illegal soon)

  14. #74

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    The "settings" are applicable to popular tourism destinations and , from what I understand, the answer to your question is yes. You do need to know about rules applicable to the settings regadless of the zonings & then know if a specific plan of management applies to that setting area. Like I said the more confusing they make it the more chance we just give up and go play golf.

    Just a quck example for any doubters.

    An area called "Hill Inlet" at the northern end of whitehaven beach. This is a yellow zone but a setting 5. ie can be fished both commercially and recreationally with one line one hook. It has been made a setting 5....highly restricted, which generally means no acess by anyone without a permit (pemits issued on a daily basis by QPWS in Airlie Beach) and usually no permits issued. So you go into a yellow zone but could be fined.

    But wait....after some seriuos lobbying by rec fishos a plan of management was implmented for hill inlet setting 5 which allowed access by rec fishers provided vessel was under 10 meters, speed was restricted to 6 knots and you did not go ashore.

    The end result. Go in your tinny on the plane (up an inlet about 3 ks long)...potential fine, go in in your 12meter cruiser at high tide and at 4 knots..fined...go in your tinny at 5 knots..OK...but sit and bait fish with 2 rods.....wrong!!

    The end result is just don't bother. I am aware they have settings and plans of management in Cairns and the Whitsundays. I don't think they have any in other areas.

    Regards

    KC

  15. #75

    Re: Fishing relief for Barrier Reef

    Quote Originally Posted by kc
    We have finaly found some common ground Jockey.
    We've always had a lot of common ground KC.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Join us