Super trawler banned

[Guest hawkesbass]

I have just read elswhere the super trawler has been banned for two years too allow for more studies and research regarding its impacts to be conducted so a reprieve off some sorts untill two years is up

[Krispy !]

Great news1!!

http://www.news.com.au/business/labor-to-ban-super-trawler-abel-tasman-from-australian-waters/story-e6frfm1i-1226471683034

[bharris]

Best news I have heard all year

The aim of the game is to fool the fish

[sifisho]

Great news!

People should remember at the next election that this is down to the Labor and Green parties and the Liberals were in favour of it operating. What is best for our sport is not always what "popular opinion" on message boards makes it out to be!

[shak4g63]

Well done to tony Burke, the best thing this labour governments done, I hope in Conclusion to the 2 year study on possible environmental/ economic impacts from the super trawler they update the laws to prevent this ever happening again!

Tight lines,

Shakeel

[Nick1987k]

Great news

Nick

Barcrusher 610î‡

[mako2000]

Dont get too excited yet..they are PROPOSING new laws, they havent been approved yet.

[pogsy]

Should sink the piece of crP and make a reef out of it,that would be ironic.

Sent from my HTC Incredible S using Tapatalk 2

[boattart]

Wait for it. I can hear a compensation claim coming from Seafish for the cost so far to bring it here.

[Basil D]

Thank goodness

[FISHLETIC]

What a relief ! Phew ...

[rockfisherman]

Relieved to read it, I dread to think what sort of impact it would have on the Eco system.

My shout at the pub for who ever decided to put this off.

Fishingphase

[Twinfisher 4.9]

That is great news......finally. The Government were aware of this vessel a long time ago but ignored it. There was a huge protest in Victoria 2 weeks ago with Fishos towing their boats over the Westgate Bridge - hundreds of them.......and guess what the pollies took notice. We must be ever be alert to the threats of our passion fishing and when necessary make a stand. I know the Moderators would like this moved, but congratulations to those who protested. And let it be a reminder to all of us - who are all conservationists if you are are fisher-person - because we want our grandchildren to also enjoy the thrill of fishing. We can make a difference!

[elferoz777]

The gov has bent on a few things recently and I am glad this is one of them

[Geoff]

There was an interview on the ABC last night & the guy , did not catch his name but appeared to be well informed on the situation.

He made some interesting points ,

The trawler may not be allowed to opperate for 2 years but the 18,000 ton quoter remains & implied this could be used by the Tassie company on smaller boats.

The Tassie company already has an 18,000 ton quoter so the total is not 18,000 but 36,000

The name change to the Able Tasman is it's 5th change since going into operation.

There was then dicussion on the "by catch" & an example of 10 seals was used which posed the obvious question , what happens if the number is greater than 10.

This aspect was not covered.

I don't think we have seen the last of this story.

Geoff

[Catchin Jack]

Here's an interesting video from ABC CLICK HERE <-- flv format OR full video from website CLICK HERE

[chrisawright]

BUT WAIT - LIBS and some independents are now saying they will oppose the Government's legislation TODAY to ban the Supertrawler and are defending it!!!

Unbelievable - if Tony Abbott has any brains he'll back off this right now - so much for those who want to vote this mob in at the next Federal election - if the Libs end up allowing the Supertrawler it will be a very dark day for recreational fishing and won't be forgotten - email and tweet your local Liberal members and let them know.

[Howdoweplaythis]

Shows the power when people speak as a group. Good to see the politicians directly listening

[Geoff]

Unbelievable - if Tony Abbott has any brains he'll back off this right now

Agree. There is a lot more votes in supporting the ban than there is in opposing & is that not the name of the game ?.

Geoff

[T jack]

It's great to see people power has won. I just hope it keeps winning.

[Noodles]

I make no apology for entering into this controversial thread and wish to make it very clear from the start that this whole matter is real dilemma for all parties directly involved and otherwise. To the posters above who have just said "that's good to hear" or similar, you should perhaps examine the further implications of such legislation, should it succeed. This is a two-edged sword if ever there was one.

I am truly in two minds on this. As a recreational fisher, I am pleased that the baitfish stocks of the Southern Australian waters will not be scooped from the ocean in a single massive event, but I understand that the pre-existing quota will most likely be lifted anyway. However, there is a difference between the two approaches. Smaller trawls will take lesser quantities over a longer period of time and possibly do less significant localised damage. The less efficient manner of this method will cause higher operating costs and keep the greater risk to individual fishermen, as well as concentrating the hawl on areas closer to shore and the processing plants. Good or bad? Which is better? It's very hard to say.

Obviously the next step is for the parties with invested financial committment to seek some sort of redress for their losses by taking legal action against the Government. That will be your tax payer dollars being distributed to the legal professionals on the gov't side and should the fishermen win, it will be your money paying their compensation. This event has been in the planning for several years so it wasn't as if the Minister didn't know it was coming.

There are very good reasons why the Opposition may not support this bill. The implications of it upon future commercial operations and investment in this country will be widespread. The Bill is going to give the Ministers the discretion of halting any operations based on there own whim or concern.

This is not just a matter of saying "Oh isn't it great what the ALP and Greens have done". Remember that Christine Milne came out last night and said it was only a halt progress, not a stop. You can't just say that the Coalition is doomed if it opposes this Bill. This is a far greater problem than just this one ship catching fish in our waters.

[chrisawright]

Oh please!!! There were NO good reasons for the Opposition to oppose the bill apart from the fact that that is ALL the Opposition do - oppose the government on everything - period. People complain about the current federal government but here is an opposition that do nothing but filibuster and block at every opportunity with no policies of their own.

All this muttering about commercial uncertainties and risks to investment is rubbish (indeed it didn't stop the Libs promising to repeal the clean energy legislation - ask the energy utilities about that for investment risk!). Seafish knew exactly what they were getting into when they started this process - supertrawlers have been banned and given their marching orders right around the world - US, Africa etc. They knew it would encounter strong public opposition - but they decided to take the risk. What sort of royalties or licence fees were Seafish paying the Government for the right to commercially plunder these natural resources? Indeed I believe the government was actually providing them with subsidies to kick-start this operation. And employment? - 40 jobs! (the same week the Lib premiers are sacking people by the thousands!!). And the product - well the company says they were going to export the mackerel to Africa at $1 a kilo (after these boats had wiped out the west African fishery) well that's a great use of the marine food chain.

Frankly, there is no justification for this scale of industrial fishing - the so-called science is coming under increasing question as the biomass estimates are at least 10 years old and AFMA is clearly too close to industry players like Seafish.

It's been a huge victory driven by environmental and rec fishing groups and a great outcome. Farewell Margiris!

[Noodles]

@raider:- You will notice that my post looked at the issue not the politics. I would be happy for a conscience vote on issues like this. You on the other hand, have clearly indicated your allegiance for all to see. This discussion is not a place for partisanship as recreational fishermen come from all political persuasions. Well probably not The Greens though, but you never know. Sometimes it's best to leave your colours at home and just discuss the issues without carrying the big banner.

Read it again and you will see that I was simply suggesting that, as with any kneejerk, on-the-fly legislation, there will be unexpected and possibly undesirable outcomes as well as the desired ones, so it isn't appropriate to just all shout "Hooray". Nothing about being a supporter of this political team or that one.

Where I live it will not make much difference to me personally, but I too am glad to see it gone. I'm just saying that it may not be a very manageable or effective legislation if it is only short term, which it is, having now been passed, albeit with a sunset clause imposed by the cross-benchers. This is another of those very loosely worded laws that are open to a wide range of interpretation and there could be many business people and investors out there who would not be sharing your certainty that this law will have no effect on the countries commercial opportunities. It is a law that allows the forced cessation of commercial activity based on the discretion of an individual Minister. Not exactly the way things are usually done in a democracy. I wonder if they will ever use it when people complain about CSG or Open-Cut. There is no reason why they can't.

Now, if as you say, the Government was subsidising Seafish's operations in this venture, then all the more reason to question the backflip and justify their seeking compensation for their losses. I'm sure the legal teams will be debating exactly that point.

[Twinfisher 4.9]

I must admit, that initially I was totally opposed to the this "massive seafood processing vessel" but as the facts evolve you need to reconsider, well at least I did. It is not a monstruos net that takes all before it - before it enters the "capture zone" it needs to fit into a 20cm by 20 cm mesh. There are escape hatches prior to the capture net and also cameras monitoring what is going on. The quota of 1800 tonnes will still be filled by other fishing vessels. But what does it say about doing business with Australia - an arrangement that has been years in in arranging and at the 11th hour our Government does a back-flip yet again and introduces what is in effect retrospective legislation. Sorry, but how does that look to the rest of the world who may consider investing in this country - and yes, that 1800 tonne quota will still be harvested. We need to keep things in perspective and obtain the facts. I admire all of the Victorian fishos who protested with their boat convoy, lets not ever allow emotions get in the way of facts. It was a "Balls up" and should have been handled much better - from the company's side they should have told us how they processed and the precautions they take and certainly from Mr. Burke - it embarrases the country.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Twinfisher 4.9