Rec Fisho Confusion

[Grantm]

Hi all,

Thought id start another topic in regards to the confusing issues we as rec fisho's face. Not looking for drama just open discussion.

It seems pretty evident that there are differing opinions on what we should do and who we should support. Ignoring this fact and going ahead blindly is not a terrific way to go either so lets look at it.

What issues do we face ?

Here are my thoughts

MARINE PARKS :

Argueably the hottest and most important issue. Most fisho's totally oppose the current sanctuary zoning and believe they are fueled by politically motivated reasons. The extemest have jumped on board and are just totally anti fishing. They claim to improve our fishery and protect biodivirstiy but this is vigorously opposed by many through a lack of supporting evidence for the parks.

COMMERCIAL FISHING :

The sustainability of this practice is questioned by many. The practices of netting are damaging and potentially unrepairable. They do supply a percentage of local seafood and are a local industry supported by the government. The viability of the industry in questionable.

RECREATIONAL FISHING :

Bag limits are under question, are they tight enough ? Do we need slot limits, no anchor zones, closed seasons for spawning.

BLACK MARKET AND LAWBREAKERS :

RFH's have fuelled a new breed of black market netters taking advantage of the areas. Are commercials acurately reporting their catch ? Poachers ?

FISHERIES :

Is their enough resorces here. It is said that to police a marine park is the equivelent of funding hundreds of fisheries officers.

Where do we go with all this stuff ?

Well like many have said we have to face some facts. Perhaps a coastline free of commercials is totally unrealistic - great idea - but unrealistic. Closing down an entire industry is unlikely and not supported by either State Governenment. Trying to remove them completely may be a loosing battle but worth trying to reduce to a reasonable level as a comprimise.

Its impotant that you support anyone who fights on your behalf and who you believe in speaking in the best interest of you. You need to listen to all sides and not be swayed by (buzz word) emotional rhetoric. Listen to what the pro marine park people are saying, listen to their side of the story and make you own mind up. Dont be swayed by me or anyone here and do whats best for you.

I would love to see revised bag limits on some species as well as slot limits for fish like flathead and Bream. No anchor zones and closed saeasons dont even worry me.

Fisheries officers need to grow to controll the illegal activity we face and if they can fund a marine park they can fund more of these guys.

Marine parks in general. No problem if all sides agree they are needed. I believe the scientics need some untouched areas to study and use a benchkmark but think they should be in remote areas and away from the popular fishing ground and local communities.

Personally i am struggling with the following. $%^&* who I do support moslty have seemingly decided that it is best to fight the park issue on a united front with the commercial sector. Perhaps splitting from them would appear selfish and foolhardy as the arguement is that the parks are not needed because no evidence fully supports their implementation.

Because I dont believe that the commercial sector is really that viable and that their practices are damaging and depleting it has left me in two minds. Do i support this group and go against my belief on comm fishing and if so how many other people out their think the way i do !

I dont know many rec fisho's that support and have no problem with commercials. Id say the vast majority do have an issue. Im frustrated when fact come out that suggest commercial fishing at its current levels are fine when the Hawkesbury and Pittwater are stuffed to name a couple.

What happens if we win and the parks dont come in. Do we then turn on the pro's as the next course of action pretending we now dissagree with their practice ?

Im yet to see anything that I as an average rec fisho who is happy to comprimise on most things, can see working.

Im sorry if the commercial fisho thing has caused a ripple but i cant accept that they are doing no harm and wish their was a group that opposed the parks as well as $%^&* does, but had a firm policy on commercial buyouts so the parks could be stopped and commercial fishing reduced as well.

My ideal scenario

Remote marine parks in small areas for study and reseach or in areas of endangered species. Backed up by proper reseach of course.

Reduced bag limits and slot size limits. No anchor zones over sensative areas. Closed seasons only if required.

Commercial fishing methods modified to a less damaging practice, overall numbers reduces and high hit metro areas like Hawkesbury to have at least half the licences bought out. I can accept some levels of commercials. More way offshore activity which doesnt affect the majority of fisho's even the Game guys to top up the lost fish stocks from buyouts.

Im happy to comprimise on everything but just cant accept the view that our fisheries are not under any threat cause i think thats bullshit regardless of the figures.

Id love to hear what you fisho's think and see how we can come together completely on this

Cheers

EDIT

I didnt post this to cause any drama of take away from $%^&* efforts who ive mentioned. Id love a rep to post on behalf of them to help clarify some of these things. Bob Smiths input would also be good. If your feelings towards the parks are stronger than anything else I urge you to get your backside to Newcaslte with Shane and show your support !

Edited August 10, 2006 by Grantm

[Guest madsmc]

Thanks for taking the time to post your thoughts on this Grant, you have made some interesting comments on the state of fishing in our fair state.

As I have mentioned to you, I am awaiting a follow up comment from $%^&* with regard to their stance on commercial fishing in NSW. Once I have received that comment I will post it up, along with my response to your post.

If anyone wishes to make their protest against the Port Stephens marine parks first hand, please refer to this thread with details of the protest rally that is being held this Sunday. Your support would be appreciated by all of the Port Stephens fisherpeople.

Shane

[BOB_SMITH]

Hi Grant and all, Bob Smith responding.

I have been monitoring the debates here and other sites (including sweeps).

Since way back in 2000 I have been involved in sensible debates with most people and especially Grant here which has been fairly amicable. I hope my postings and replys are honest and open and I sign my name to them, and that is the case on all the sites. When I got on this political agenda back in 2000 here following is what I preached and wrote and recorded. I have NOT swayed my approach in any debate and it still remains as issues in brief on the TFP website. I have a cordial relation with fishraider and communicate with Ken on occassions in the PM and I am not affraid to say my piece. The problem is that it is all time consuming when the debate gets of the rails or becomes large.

I like to hear ALL the debate and appreciate difference of opinion, I also have taken the centre line approach in any agenda I promote and am prepared to expand on anything. Go for it. Of course the contact details have been changed since then.

From the Brief Issues Page back in 2000

The Fishing Party

11Watts Close

SINGLETON HEIGHTS NSW 2330

Ph 0265 560338 0408434591 0265 731197

Fax 0265560338

Email sinali@bigpond.com

sinali@hunterlink.net.au

Issues on The Fishing Party agenda >Fishing related items for Recreational, Commercial, Indigenous; The Chairmans comments

Briefly and not necessarily in priority and originated mainly for NSW reference during and since the development of the party.

Water Quality

Water quality in this country is collapsing at an alarming rate. The impact of human coastal migration and the urban water edge development on top of the already industrialised land use is killing our marine existence. The Government emphasis is avoiding the inevitable. The Government strategy of; emotional divide and conquer is trying to decoy the real issues. They are emotionally sucking up to the Greens on band-aid masquerades. Most river and lake systems are on the verge of environmental collapse and difficult for marine survival.

Part of the strategy would be to re-snag rivers and lakes with old cheap throwaways like wooden railway sleepers, create mini reefs and fish habitat zones. Not all locations would be suitable but surely a target location list could be developed. Small scale efforts by interested groups or divers would not

Fish Kills

Professor Leon Zann from the Southern Cross University has stated, along with the CSIRO that research has shown that maybe 50% of our coastal fish-stock have been destroyed by major fish-kills. Every water system suffers in one-way or another. Large and small kills occur with some on a continuous basis. Lake Cathie is a good example with not many answers from the bureaucracy.

The Richmond, Clarence and Macleay rivers are some of the larger systems that suffer dramatically.

We need to insist on "investigated reports by EPA" to establish on a predetermined "report-card" what the possible causes, likelihood of future occurrence and suggested means to rectify i.e. 10 questions with 5 or more multiple choices, in a matrix, to determine if any further monitoring is required.

Fishing License

This is the result of a carefully manipulated tax scheme implementation. Anglers have been hoodwinked into believing that this was the only way of getting the Labor Government to do anything for the resource. False. Firstly they already have over $300 million in annual recreational fishing related GST not counting the normal taxes, with NSW getting the major share that should have been put back into the resource by a responsible Government to achieve the same results. Secondly the license is discriminative and is for selective payers. Recreational anglers should not be responsible for the retirement funding of commercial fishers or paying public servants wages. Queensland rejects the license idea as this would be a threat to their tourism (Qld is capable of getting Commonwealth and State and Industry funding to finance their resource by the way), Western Australian Government refuses point blank to establish a license there, Victorians have threatened to burn their licenses on the steps of Parliament. Now there is another third tax in the form of dollar for dollar grants. The Government is now luring the community again with this spin of " We will give you back your own fishing tax money if you match it with some more of your own money" for you to do all the work anyway. This to me means the Government is holding the community at ransom to manage their affairs.

Questions arise here in NSW as to who really pushed for the license implementation and Why?

When getting licensed to legally go fishing there are no qualifying benchmarks, i.e.: anybody can purchase a license, I can get one for my dog if I sign his name, people can buy a license for a Christmas present even. There is not even a verification of names, addresses etc just as long as the Government gets the money. A bit of paper that is destroyed when wet is not very acceptable.

Who Owns What

The resource is community owned. Recreational anglers have the right to go fishing. The non-fishing public are entitled to enjoy the delights of the marine resource and the Indigenous food gathers have the right to their hunting grounds. Should one be favoured over the others, I dont think so.

Suggestions-: Because of the demand the community should be, if legal? be levied eg $0.50/kg and maybe (because its cheaper) $1.00/kg on imported or farmed /aqua to be re-invested in buyouts, fads, ramps etc.

Exported produce- does it attract GST?, and also allow a lot of tax deductions eg fuel to effectively be subsidised by the community, as well as losing their resource into the pockets of a very few (relatively)

Funding

The ruling Government needs to make sure that adequate funding from already paid taxes are made available for proper departmental management without the need to place extra tax burdens on stakeholders. Fisheries, along with National Parks and Wildlife do not receive the appropriate funding to satisfy the inherited responsibility. The dollar for dollar grant scheme associated with the RFL is the greatest rip of and greediest Government ploy ever of public purse. It also should not be the extra responsibility of anglers to pay public servants to do their job.

- What are the names of Fisheries Officers we supposedly pay for?

- Why? Is any RFL money used at all. With unfilled job vacancies, and therefore unspent monies already allocated?

Safety

This is a very sensitive issue relating to responsibility and where it lies. Now that fishing has become commercialised with money changing hands there is now a legal entity to duty of care by the authority that is in receipt of the dollars to which I intend to challenge. This safety issue is a can of worms that I will bet Government authorities doesnt want to know about.

Contentious points on safety issue>, Medical> can you read, can you swim, can you read and speak English, have you heart problems.

Further: Can you identify fish, especially poisonous ones, do you understand the powers of the sea, the weather, do you understand bag and size limits. You might think all this sounds silly but 90% of people who go fishing have not got a clue on fishing matters or safety. Some dont care, some dont understand and some arent capable of understanding but you will get a license.

Which leads to>

Education

Starting from youngsters at school right through to Adults of all nationalities. Hands on education would be beneficial to all facets of fishing i.e., environmental, understanding marine life cycles, fish cycles, catch quality, eating, safety, access, habitats etc. If you fish in a nursery you surely will catch small undersize fish and the temptation to keep them is strong if that is all that is there.

There would be no real cost to "establish" this.

No Take Zones

Any scientific evidence that proves and substantiates that this course of regulation increases the bio-diversity of such an area should be laid out on the table as a justification. Areas should not be closed off because of emotional or greenie based pressure, as this is usually an easy accessible safe fishing area close to facilities. Example: Areas such as Cabbage Tree Bay at Manly was one of the safest family fishing spots on our metropolitan coast, now is a no fishing zone because of green pressure and some lies told. If no take zones were to be implemented then surely out of the way areas would be more acceptable.

Marine Parks

Should not be used and highlighted as a fisheries management tool. There is this publicised bureaucratic belief that Marine Parks will sustain our fishery, I do not believe that. Most fish species are migratory or will follow the food chain. Again, it is not a proven fact that, the creations of Marine Parks are any better than before. There is great belief that these parks have been created for the benefit of Eco- Terrorists (Scuba fraternity) and the green agenda. This lot would create sanctuaries for gay sperm whales if they had the chance. Marine Parks strangely and coincidently always depict the best fishing spots, WHY?

Having said that, Marine Parks can be created so long as loss of amenity does not occur or one stakeholder is favoured over another, one out all out I say. I have to say that Marine Park legislation does stop activities such as Mining exploration and Oil drilling so it is good in that sense.

National Parks

Here lies one of the greatest threats to any outdoor activity imaginable. This is the green agenda to lock up Australia. Again, National Parks cannot be managed under the current system. More and more area is being inherited to this green masquerade tree-hugging lot but as we have witnessed all is not well in the Garden of Eden. The opposite results have occurred than what was intended. The green agenda has backfired. We have witnessed enormous disasters recently with massive devastation that I hope (and intend to pursue) will cause a rethink on Policy and Legislation. The unnecessary loss of human lives and more Koala BBQs than you could imagine must change the way National Parks are managed. The economic loss of livelihoods, possessions and memories along with untold wildlife is mind-boggling

We need for starters one access fee for all areas, just like the RFL structure.

Ministerial Appointed Yes Men Committees

I have never agreed with this style of committee. This is not a true representative organization as members are carefully selected that agree with the predetermined agenda. Members who dont seem to fall in line dont last long or cant stand the arrogance and resign. One-sided panels as part of the Judge, Jury and Executioner syndrome cannot see the big picture and that is what should be managed.

Rather I suggest that members be elected by popular vote and have independent status. Another suggestion is a secret ballot on issues to encourage "speaking up"

Wetlands

These are a must for marine nursery protection. You dont have to be a tree hugger to see this type of conservation needs priority but fall victims to development, run-off etc Development lobby seem to get privileged priority.

More IPAs and increased fines for offenders in this area.

Toxic Algae

Algae blooms are becoming more frequent and causing economic downturns in affected communities.

Toxic Algaes have destroyed pristine waterways and destroyed aquaculture. Excessive nutrient run-offs and bad land management practices are catching up with the waterways limitations.

Look at investing in eg, paddle wheels, aeration methods that are transportable to disperse. Funded by?????

Fish Nurseries

Mangroves, natural filter systems such as swamps etc, weed beds, backwaters create fish nurseries that are diminishing with time and human interference. These are the areas that need Special Habitat Protection rather than development approvals.

Manly Gas Works

Progress has been made here with the announcement of remedial drainage work being agreed to by the local committee and consulting group Sinclair Knight Merz. Now all we need is action by the appropriate bureaucrats and some commitment by the Government.

Little Penguins at Manly

Fishermen (Anglers and Commercials) have been wrongly made a scapegoat for the decline in this colony. Feral animals (cats) and foxes and domestic animals and possibly the Manly Gas Works chemical and metal run-off are to be the priority here. Seals have been spotted here as well and would certainly contribute to the penguin decline.

Cabbage Tree Bay

This Manly area has been made the brunt of a green agenda at Manly Council. The so-called protection of the weedy sea dragon, occasional grey nurse shark, a few square metres of sea-grass were the excuses for banning all types of fishing here. No scientific evidence supports these issues to any degree of reasoning. One of the safest family fishing spots in Manly are now out of bounds because of the green influence.

Boat Ramps and Parking

As prime development space becomes less and more expensive, parking for boats and trailers is decreasing. Encroaching residents are now whinging about early morning or nightly noise from anglers with Councils threatening some closures or installing gates with time limits and of course introducing increased fees. I guess if councils close ramps then they dont have to maintain them or be responsible insurance wise either. Fisheries are determined to confine anglers into designated areas but there is not the same agenda to create better facilities, launching ramps or secure parking. This push will create more ramp rage and fights over parking and probably theft. Anglers confined to certain areas also make for easier compliance and scrutiny. Development proposals should have ramp facilities as a matter of a community contribution as part of approval qualifications.

Beach Access

One of the most controversial fishing issues confronting the fishing community these days is 4wd on beaches and beach access. Over the last 10 years the coastal communities have seen a steady human migration and now at a faster rate. More people are retiring to the water or leaving the land. We now have an older population who like to wet a line up the beach and who are not athletes or a member of Bob Carrs green bushwalking folly. Beach access can be sustained with proper management, not banned because somebody saw a tyre mark on the sand 2 klms along a beach somewhere. National Parks are closing beach access tracks all up and down the coast for reasons that defy logic. Vandals have now a better variety and more vehicles to attack that are in roadside parks many klms from where the owner is supposedly enjoying himself. It has to stop.

Headland Access

Here again tracks are being closed off due to greenie pressure and National Parks. A locked gate means less maintenance, less insurance responsibilities and less compliance. A proper maintained access track benefits a lot of people including NPWS, RFS, and takes away the need for mindless users to bulldoze their own track out of frustration.

The Greenies

The Greens these days seem to be focusing on issues that oppose outdoor activities. No group is beyond green condemnation. The radical Greens want it all. To them there is no difference between preservation and conservation. Fishermen, Horse Riders, 4WDs, Hang Gliders, Boaters, Campers, Trail Bikes, Beekeepers and probably even bird watchers are on their hit list. There must be a balance and sanity must prevail. Tree huggers need to get a life and live outside the square. The problem is they seem to have an influence over Governments these days especially in NSW.

Grey Nurse Shark Sanctuaries

Up until a few years ago the same proponents of the current saviour programs slaughtered these sharks. There appears to be a determined decoy towards recreational fishers and on probably rare occasions this does occur and Grey Nurses are hooked but there are more destructive reasons for their decline than will be admitted. Lies have been told on this issue to over emphasis the low numbers of shark sightings. There is a perceived agenda on this issue to allow only the scuba terrorists to have access to these magnificent fishing grounds because of the eco dollars and of course the Government collects more taxes from this thriving business. My question is; Are there young sharks and if the answer is no then WHY? My guess is the reason is from more than fishing deaths. I would want scientific tests carried out on the reproductive organs and reactions to toxins and chemicals that are being pumped into the oceans from outfalls. The current recreation fishing rules introduced by Fisheries to these sanctuaries are stupid and are an insult to accomplished anglers. Ban all electronic repellents for these terrorists in all sanctuaries not just GNS ones.

Opening up Coastal Lakes

The coastal lake systems in NSW are now at a danger level of survival.

Most are sanded up at the entrances and have little or no tidal flow or water exchanges.

The green agenda of letting nature take its course is no longer valid. There now needs to be human intervention of some degree. Some systems need only minor help but a majority need major help, whether it is dredging or bulldozers, sand has to be shifted to get clean fresh sea water back into the systems. Some systems are completely blocked and are now lice riddled shallow infestations that were once a thriving marine resource and a Mecca for the fishing community and tourists. Its these systems that are getting shallower by the day because of sediment settling in the still water. I think this is also the reason that these lakes are now slightly higher than the outside ocean and would probably drain on opening. Too long the so-called do-gooders have left it to nature for. Lets change that idea with some Government commitment instead of sucking up to the Greens.

Sewerage Outfalls

This bandaid problem solver is going to destroy our marine world. It might not happen next year or the year after but it will happen. I believe there is enough evidence on the table now to indicate something is changing to the marine environment. More and more viruses and disease are occurring in the resource. The bureaucrats keep saying it is all-natural but that excuse is getting boring and outdated. THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG. If you keep pissing in the wardrobe the boards will rot, let alone the overpowering smell. There needs to be alternative ways of waste disposal or usage for the human race.

Baitfish

Baitfish is the lifeblood of the marine resource. The pressure that this specie must resist for survival is tremendous and comes from all sides on a continual attack. This bottom of the food chain is like money to humans, no money means starvation and death. Baitfishes need to be carefully managed. Some areas need more human protection than others as baitfish masses differ with locality. Commercial harvesting needs to be strictly monitored or in some areas banned as not to exceed recovery rate.

There has always been a conflict between commercial and recreational bait fishers that needs to be addressed.

Bait Collecting

This is a fundamental right of anglers. Bait should not be wasted for the sake of having too much.

I would encourage anglers to collect their own for a number of reasons. To get a better understanding of fish habitats, eating habits, less pressure for commercialised bait netting and the use of artificial bait for the same reasons.

Commercial Fishing

Commercial fishing has been a tremendous food industry for the populations. Unfortunately successive Governments have turned a blind eye on its management. For the fishing resource to be sustainable there needs to be TACs (total allowable catches) applied. There is a problem today of blaming commercial fishermen for the downturn in stocks. I believe that this is only partly true and only part of the downturn in fish-stock numbers, as this reality does exist but to put the blame in proper context commercial fishers are legally licensed to plunder by the appropriate authorities. Even now with commercial buyouts there is still no restrictions. What is the difference whether 2,000 commercial fishers take 1,000 tons of fish or whether 1,000 commercial fishers take the same 1,000-ton? There is no green dividend and recreational anglers have been hoodwinked by emotional political propaganda and forced into taking the financial brunt of contributing extra taxes to the Government coffers. Commercial fishing is a fundamental right also, for the non-angling but fish eating public. To be fair I must say that Recreational anglers must realise that they do not own the resource outright. I also have to say that since deregulation of the commercial fishery more scope exists for the black market to thrive. I would also say that this undeclared business is now more prevalent than ever and goes relative unchecked.

The rise in export tonnage has to be addressed, the demand is unlimited, the supply is not. TACs to be penalised if an increase in exports results in a scarcity or increase in price for local community. The loss in GST is to the advantage of overseas employers (effectively)

Compensation

This is my biggest bugbear with Government policy. Recreational anglers (some) should not be solely responsible for commercial fishers compensation or retirement payouts. Anglers did not have a say in the issuing of commercial fishing licenses to begin with but have been conned and decoyed with the emotional allocation of fishing havens to lure them on one hand and then take away other top fishing

spots with the other sleight of hand. In the meantime the Government keeps on collecting the taxes and I would say that more will be collected if there is an increase in angling activity. Also I have to say that the Government has not told the anglers publicly that they have borrowed $20 million dollars from Treasury on their behalf to pay this compensation and that anglers will have to pay interest on this as well in the payback. Wee should be lobbying for the cancelling of the RFL debt and for the Government (via consolidated revenue) to match $ for $ any Recreational initiative.

Aquaculture

Aquaculture! At What Cost

Will it solve the problems or create irreversible environmental catastrophes. Will it break investors hearts and who will compensate them if it does. Is the wild fishery being closed down so seafood prices will rise to justify the high cost of Aquaculture?

These are just some of the questions the NSW Government doesnt want asked as most Australians enjoy a good feed of some type of seafood.

As usual the Government spin-doctors saturate the media on how good they are (especially before an election) in creating these wonderful new ventures but alas! All is not rosy in the Garden of Eden as only the good parts get the attention.

In saying this I must agree that aquaculture sounds exciting but fraught with danger.

Is the NSW Government push on aquaculture putting the cart before the horse? I think so, or is theyre a dollar windfall lurking for the Government.

Firstly, there seems to be a very poor standard of science in association with our marine environment. Most decisions are made on emotions and precautionary principles rather than scientific fact.

Then we have poor environmental factors with water quality collapsing at an alarming rate, whether it is inland or coastal; there is rapid decline in marine habitat and survival conditions.

Evidence suggests that 99% of our waterways are suffering from some form of environmental catastrophe as witnessed in the Healthy Rivers Report. Water quality will not only kill Aquaculture, it is destroying the wild infrastructure. Every day we hear about some form of marine kill or disease or algal bloom or unknown virus and the excuse of it all being "Natural Causes" is getting boring and past belief. Band-aid decisions are only prolonging the outcome.

The NSW Government is seen as being supported and dependent on the development lobby for their power base, so there seems to be a reluctance to fall fowl of this support.

Let's look at whats happening on the coastal scene with aquaculture.

The oyster industry which is the "canary in the coalmine" of our waterways tells us the story of a failing environment. The shallowing of estuary systems causing restrictive water exchanges and even some systems completely closing off from the oceans are causing this industry major concerns, despite what the Government spin doctors' say. It might sound all right for the greenies to promote nature taking its course but nature needs a hand here to overcome the human problem. Disease is spreading, viruses are becoming more frequent with some of these resulting in oyster farmers loosing up to 80% of their product without compensation as we witnessed in Lake Wonboyn. Farmers spend up to three years on each crop only to lose it because of water quality. Some river systems such as the Hunter are now just degraded polluted drains.

With the threat of other species of oysters taking over (some say these are experiments gone wrong) and with this spreading QX disease this industry could again be devastated. Of course the Oyster Industry has not escaped the forever-increasing Government money grab either, as fees and charges placed on farmers rising by up to 3,000%

Next the Abalone is in trouble with a worm infestation indicating something terrible is wrong. Incredibly and maybe coincidently Abalone spat was introduce and seeded to bays and inlets on the NSW coast not so very long ago by Fisheries and now there is a ban on taking any Abalone from Port Stephens to Eden! Incidentally also this industry has been the focus of intense scrutineering involving a large costly labour force, so no wonder the ban came so easily.

Next we have the finfish aquaculture, a high cost process of fish farming. This process involves destroying some form of other marine resource to feed the fish up for sale. Sounds good but results of escapees being caught in the wild with some being drastically deformed causes concern for the wild stock. Antibiotics, along with added chemicals not only enter the fish but also enter the surroundings through droppings and tidal flow. We have also been witness to Genetically Modified fish specimens that are developing overseas into the ideal way for investors to make a quick buck. This has got a long term potential to expand to the rest of the world, which includes Australia. Short term might not see any changes occurring but what is the long-term affect on the wild surrounds? This is not just pointing the finger at NSW.

It has been witnessed in Scottish and Northern Hemisphere Sea farming stocks where years of work have had to be destroyed because of disease and unacceptable levels of contamination. Here in NSW we have witnessed waterways along the entire coast suffering fish kills, some of horrendous proportions and nobody seems to have come up with an answer except the 'natural cause' one. Our coastline has been subjected to huge algal outbreaks indicating high levels of nutrients but with sewerage outfalls continuing to discharge their contents (sometimes untreated and frightening in content and increasing in volume) attraction of unwanted viruses and diseases is just a formality that will invade our marine stocks if it is allowed to continue.

Next we have the prawns. NSW has a wonderful array of prawns of which a majority of Australians relish.

Without good water quality and wetlands and breeding grounds this delicacy will decline. There has already been some disease scares for this resource with prawning and fishing stopped for a while recently down south in Victoria from a virus. The white spot disease has been the cause of concern here in NSW and is probably just a matter of time before something like this happens. The current fisheries management plans are based on increasing the importation of seafood, whilst putting increased pressure on somebody elses fishery. Some of this will come from overseas and no matter what happens no amount of Government spin and excuses will justify a disease slipping through and causing more destruction. So now we have prawning aquaculture, great you say. Prawning aquaculture has the most devastating potential for environmental disaster. Firstly this industry needs the right seasonal conditions to survive, then it has an environmental responsibility with the effluent waste i.e. nutrients, chemical additives, food source, and now because only a certain type pf prawn is capable of being aquaculture there is a new disaster looming. The farmed prawn has apparently escaped in quantity from the Clarence area about two years ago, it has been found down in the Manning River in NSW. This prawn has the capability of preying on other prawns. Last year these prawns were small, about four or five inches long and were caught in about half kilo per day quantities. This year they have been caught ten inches long but are fairly quick on the move and most escape the type of prawning method carried out. Concern is already being talked about because of the small amount of prawns available in the river this year and it might not be all attributed to the drought. Concerns are also being raised as to why Indonesian prawn specie is being farmed in Australia.

As you can see there are problems facing the Aquaculture industry, which this Government or any Government must address.

The Fishing Party suggestion is the formation of a Task Force or maybe a Coastal Lakes Commission given the finances and power to commence action and in affect would take away the Ministerial Authority to be Judge, Jury and Executioner.

Commonwealth Fisheries

The Offshore Constitutional Settlement between the States depicts management deficiencies. Dual Com/State commercial fishing licenses are lawless. There is a problem with fish sizes as Commonwealth Fisheries do not have size restrictions and this reflects at the point of sale with these dual license holders. The slimy mackerel issue highlights these problems along with the Flathead fishery in the South East Trawl. NSW Fisheries has 20 purse seine boats under its jurisdiction that fish inside the three-mile zone and that creates friction between recreational and commercial fishers. South of Barenjoey the Commonwealth Fishery starts from the shoreline and there is no State three-mile limit. In essence the tiger flathead here are under Commonwealth jurisdiction and that means no size limit.

The Japanese tuna quota has been increased to the final allocation contractual limit. Where this ends is anybodies guess for the future.

Why does Fisheries and AcoRF allow this to happen? Set sensible size limits.

Total Allowable Catches

I see this as an important ingredient of sustainability of the resource. I am not against commercial fishing for a number of reasons and I believe both recreational and commercial fishers can share the resource but there is no limit on what can be harvested, it is an open chequebook and probably there needs to be some sort of independent scientific examination of stocks.

Fish Exclusion Devices

I believe that this is a priority to be adopted in fish harvesting and not enough independent study has been done on the harvesting of marine resources. Some current methods might have to be totally banned, other methods modified or completely changed.

Spawning Fish Stocks

This is the area that needs to be protected because if stocks are continually taken before they spawn the overall specie mass will be eventually decreased. The most damage to stocks occurs at this time. Also what is the point of flooding the markets and receiving very little money for the catch? To me a commercial fisher is better off having a reasonable income spread out over the year where he gets fair prices most of the time and not get a transport bill instead of a cheque.

Suggestion is that no netting allowed in spawning, for specific target specie, eg even if netting for other specie the closed specie must be released.

Closed Seasons

As seen with the inland Trout fishery there should be consideration given to having closed seasons for both recreational and commercial fishers around spawning periods.

Only recommend eg 3 times at 7 days, over 2 or 3 months i.e. specific moon phase related, and only line caught (if necessary to release breeders)

Bag Limits

Sensible bag limits should apply to anglers catches. The black market exists here amongst recreational anglers just as much as commercial fishers but that should not stop honest anglers from getting a good catch. Bag limits are rarely achieved these days and suspicion must be raised on anglers who continually do so. Bag limits are the way of fisheries management on species that are in decline.

There is one thing to remember here and that is that one pair of mature breeding bream have the potential to produce the entire bream catch of NSW (theoretical). Anglers should be encouraged to only take what they need for a reasonable food source. Target and increase fines to those that buy as well as sell to deter.

Public demand on resource

Public demand for good quality seafood is rapidly increasing. I dont blame people for wanting to eat seafood as it is not only delicious but is recommended for medical reasons. Every nationality has a different view and value on what they like to eat. It could be also part of their custom. Sustaining this resource is the priority, which incorporates more than perceived overfishing. One of the problems I see is that bureaucrats are pushing this problem onto other areas rather than managing our own resource.

Importation of seafood

Danger exists in this form of food source. The danger is disease and viruses that have the potential to wipe out Australian marine products. We have already witnessed what can happen with viral diseases that virtually wiped out the pilchard population. The tuna had a scare with huge deaths of farmed stock. Tasmania nearly suffered the potential loss when salmon were going to be imported before the public uproar. White spot in the prawn industry is their biggest scare. Why do we import inferior seafood when we have first class local products?

Whole of Government responsibility

Our marine resource needs more than just Fisheries management. The resource survival depends on all facets of proper policy structure. Currently legislation gives the NSW Fisheries Minister the job of judge, jury and executioner as we can see in the run up to the election. Fisheries Management appears to be mainly politically motivated to maximise the vote potential. This brings back the water quality issue that Governments avoid. Even the Greens are decisively invisible on this issue. For over 200 years Fisheries have mismanaged this resource. Our rivers and lakes are dying and not just because of drought. Government needs to address this issue and prioritise.

Further Information:

Robert Smith

Contact as above.

Edited August 10, 2006 by BOB_SMITH

[Guest bluecod]

My ideal scenario

Remote marine parks in small areas for study and reseach or in areas of endangered species. Backed up by proper reseach of course.

Reduced bag limits and slot size limits. No anchor zones over sensative areas. Closed seasons only if required.

Commercial fishing methods modified to a less damaging practice, overall numbers reduces and high hit metro areas like Hawkesbury to have at least half the licences bought out. I can accept some levels of commercials. More way offshore activity which doesnt affect the majority of fisho's even the Game guys to top up the lost fish stocks from buyouts.

Grant,

I don't think there is a need at all for the Marine Park Authority or the grab for large tracts of marine areas to porkbarrel preferential votes from the "psuedo green or hard core radical". Adequate legislation exists in the Fisheries Management Act to protect scientifically proven sensitive areas so as to restrict use of these areas to scientific study [e.g Ship Rock/Maitland Bay etc]

I fully agree with you on your suggested improvements to recreational fishing practises, however I would add that many more suitably trained enforcement officers are needed.

I don't see the sense in allowing any form of commercial net or trap fishery in ANY estuary These areas are scientifically proven nurseries. Commercial fishing in estuaries is like letting Mandingo loose in a harem. After witnessing first hand the pillage of mullet just for their roe, I am totally opposed to beach hauling during spawning runs of predominantly estuarine species [mullet/blackfish/bream].

[Gibbofisho]

Great thread, I don't have much time to reply with the depth that lots of other people have gone to the trouble of doing!

But ideally, i'd be taking a long hard look at Canada's fiheries management, Atlantic salmon was in almost disrepair, but with some clever managemnet, its back and thriving, this is due to seasonal commercial efforts.

Also with Our proposed marine parks, i'll also add that i'm not against marine parks, but locking up "Sanctuary Zones" for eternity, is simply irresponsible. It will only result in increased pressures on other areas, so when the greens go back and research the effects of their "Marine Park", all they'll find is that new "Sanctuary Zones" will be imposed on the newly depleted areas. Spillover my arse.

that's all for now....

[Guest madsmc]

Here is the response I received earlier today from Rod Burston of $%^&*:

$%^&* works collaboratively with all fishing interests, including commercial fishers. We do not and cannot support unsustainable fishing practices, whether commercial or recreational.

Some commercial fishing practices have been identified via the EIS (Environmental Impact Statement ) process as having a high impact on the biodiversity. For instance, five species of shark, seven species of finfish and two species of mollusc have been identified as being at high risk of being overfished by the Ocean Trawl Fishery. Remediation of this situation can be brought about by fishing method and gear modifications.

Any differences we have are not necessarily with commercial fishers. Those differences are with Government which licenses, regulates and manages both commercial and recreational fishing.

We all access the same resource and it must be managed and shared sustainably. $%^&* supports resource sharing and sustainable commercial fishing because non fishing Australians have the same right to access fresh local seafood as recreational fishers.

Recognising the legitimacy of sustainable commercial fishing is an important step in convincing non fishing Australians to support sustainable recreational fishing.

$%^&* encourages solidarity amongst fishers (and outdoor people in general). A united front is the only way to address the greater challenges ahead of us. We can always thrash out our differences "in house" but to do so in public is not in our best interest.

In this way, $%^&* continues to work for sustainable outcomes for the resource and the community.

Regards

Rod Burston

CEO $%^&*

"Conservation through sustainable use - making people part of the solution"

This has also been posted on the $%^&* forum.

Shane

[Grantm]

Thanks Shane, thats what i was after. Thanks to Bob Smith too for a great post.

An interesting point in regards to the problem being moreso with licencing and practices rather than the fisherman. I agree with that. Its the government responsibilty to get this right. Im happy that there is at least some acknowledgement that things could be better and its not all roses in the commercial sector.

Perhaps it is what the acceptable level of these practices are that is the sticking point for me.

As for keeping things in house that fine for $%^&* no probs. This however is a public fishing forum for rec fisho's. This is our house. If I could convince the wife to have 2000 Fishraiders over for a BBQ to discuss it I would ! Thats not going to happen so we need to do it here.

Discussing these issues to me is more likely to bring us closer together other than what is currently the case where only a couple of people ever have an input. Lets talk.

I just feel that if we have any group out thier saying they are OUR voice that we should get all the info and I will continue to probe. Their is another group called the FFC who also claim to be representing rec fishos but who strongly support marine parks. Im over their too posting like crazy trying to find out more and posting my thoughts. I openly question their philosyphy although sweep is a passionate inteligent bloke whos opinion i respect, just dont agree with, and cant see them suppoting my philosyphy.

To me $%^&* truly have the best interest of rec fisho's in hand but i simply have a different view on commercials. It is important however that we all post our thought on all these issues so groups like $%^&* can best represent us. Apathy has been a problem in the past.

If I do nothing else at Fishraider I will continue to keep the marine park and other important issues moving as a lack of interest and input could cause a split in the ranks as mentioned by Gibbofisho.

I think we are united and strong but with some minor differences. I cant simply forget about the commercial issues and will keep them hot too. I accept $%^&* position and wont refer to them in regards to any further commercial fishing posts now i know where there at.

I URGE ALL FISHRAIDERS ( AND MEMBERS OF OTHER SITES ) TO POST A COMMENT NO MATTER HOW SMALL TO SHOW YOUR SUPPORT, DISSAPPROVAL, OR ANY OTHER COMMENT YOU WANT IN REGARDS TO THESE ISSUES. PLEASE AT LEAST SHOW YOU CARE BY A SIMPLE POST. THIS THREAD SHOULD BE 10 PAGES LONG.

Marine Parks wont beat us - apathy will.

CHEERS

[Yoda]

Their is another group called the FFC who also claim to be representing rec fishos but who strongly support marine parks.

Hey Grant, can you post the link to this website, I am aware of a group of environmentalists who are promoting themselves as a rec. fishing group.

[Guest madsmc]

I'm not that thrilled about the commercial fishing side of things either, but as it stands there is no rec only group (that I'm aware of) that is actively protesting and lobbying the issues at hand. If there was, then I'd be supporting them 100%.

Even though my views don't align perfectly with theirs, $%^&* appears to be the way to go.

Shane

[BOB_SMITH]

Yoda

Check the previous thread under "Environmentalists turn out in force at Bega". FFC posted as SWEEP.

Here is the page> http://www.fishraider.com.au/Invision/inde...12519&st=40

Bob Smith

[Grantm]

Thank Bob,

Just to make it a bit easier here is the link.

FFC FORUM

Just remember to keep it cool and refrain from abusive posts. That certainly doesnt help our cause.

Actually I forgot to mention that Bob Smith and The Fishing Party have been representing rec fisho's for a long time. Unlike $%^&* they are a polital party which can be voted for,,and in a show of the solidarity we are all talking about, have worked together with $%^&* to better help our cause. Sorry I forgot to mention it Bob.

Cheers.

BTW keep the posts coming with your thoughts Raiders. No matter how small. Do you support $%^&* ? The Fishing Party ? Commercial fishing or whatever lets here them !

Dont let it slide