Draft For Bb Mp Zones....

[Gibbofisho]

http://www.mpa.nsw.gov.au/bmp/pdf/high-res-map.pdf

check it out, get down to your fav south coast spots asap and enjoy what you wont be able to ever again, unless we act NOW!

[coollamon]

Wow thats B.S makes me wonder why I am bothering refitting my boat

wont be able to go and fish anywhere soon

but really what can we do ....nothing I have emailed several mp's with this letter I copied from

fish raider

Dear Sir

I am writing to you to request clarification of your position in regard to marine parks and more particularly marine sanctuaries. As a recreational fisherperson I am concerned about the possibility of exclusion areas being introduced which may impinge upon my freedom to fish where I choose.

I fully support the conservation of fish stocks and habitats but do not support the imposition of marine parks which are totally lacking in scientific foundation as Seems to be happening in NSW and I am worried political parties may be prepared to back marine parks at the request of extreme “green” groups in exchange for preferences at the next state poll.

I would like to know where you stand on this issue as you will not receive my vote next election should you support unsubstantiated closure of marine areas to the recreational fishing public.

Looking forward to a response from you

John Lee

maybe the fisherpersons vote just doesnt count anymore

[Mondo Rock]

An interesting map.

I can definitely see why people are arguing that all the 'good' fishing areas are being closed - wherever there is a small island or exposed ofshore reef there is a pink sanctuary zone around it. Good to see, however, that Montague has at least partially survived.

One of the unintended consequences of these parks will be an increase in the levels of secrecy surrounding unknown reefs and pinnacles. Not only will you now need to consider an increased crowd potential if a new spot gets out, you will also need to consider the chance that it will be declared a sanctuary zone once the local Greens become aware of it.

Makes sense after all - a good fishing ground will, by definition, have high levels of marine life and will therefore be a prime target for future fishing closures. Looks like I'll need to keep my book of GPS marks in a safe now . . . .

[Gibbofisho]

I dunno Mondo, i'd be thinking, and call it logical (greens don't often use this method) but if a spot is regarded as a great fishing spot, doesnt that mean it is sustaining itself just nicely on its own? Whereas over fished barren spots would be my prime target of sanctuary zone, in an attempt to urge the fish to return to the area?

[pjbink]

Thats the problem with these so called sanctuary zones, they are full of potential unintended consequences. This is why the "precautionary principle" behind them doesn't hold up, because the so called precaution can end up doing more harm. As Mondo pointed out they could lead to overfishing in other areas previously lightly fished. And we all know the negative economic consequences for small coastal communties as well as the loss of a food source and a recreation.

Edited July 19, 2006 by billfisher

[Gibbofisho]

these conseqences are already taking place, a few YF fisho's i know reckon that because the longliners are hooking into the tuna, the top line predators are being taken out, as a result, there's an abundance of bait, meaning what YF are left swiming around are gorging them selves, makes them a bit trickier to catch, but its not really in keeping with the whole sanctuary belief of no human presence or interaction.

in short, its pointless protecting one thing and allowing a free for all in other areas.