Aussies swindled - fraudulent marine park science

[ellicat]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/11/2925172.htm?section=justin

Will be an interesting Landline episode on Sunday.

Australians swindled by 'fraudulent' marine park science

Posted 4 hours 49 minutes ago

The Australian public is being deceived on the effectiveness of marine parks and other fishing sanctuary zones, according to one of the nation's leading scientists.

Bob Kearney is emeritus professor of Fisheries at Canberra University and a former head of fisheries research with the New South Wales Government.

He recently told a NSW parliamentary inquiry into recreational fishing that the basis on which marine parks have been sold to the public is fraudulent.

"What I said was the science we've used to justify the creation of the parks was fraudulent and I stand by that absolutely adamantly," he told ABC TV's Landline program.

"The science that was used and put out at the time of the Bateman's Marine Park, called the science paper, contained blatant abuse of scientific practises.

"It claimed that authors said things in their papers which they did not say. That is worse than plagiarism - it's as bad as it gets in the scientific community."

Professor Kearney, who now also works as an industry consultant, says marine parks do not address the real threats to the marine environment such as pollution, agricultural run-off, coastal development and introduced species.

"Marine parks in New South Wales have already cost more than $30 million in the last three years alone and probably tens of millions more than that, and they can't demonstrate any benefit," he said.

"In fact, the latest report by the Department of Industry and Investment, formerly New South Wales fisheries, actually concludes that the sanctuary zones cause a decline in biodiversity."

'Proof in the pudding'

Industry and Investment's fisheries conservation head, Bill Talbot, argues that report was not relevant to NSW parks, but the weight of scientific evidence supports an increase in biodiversity in sanctuary zones.

"Well I guess the proof is in the pudding, you look at these sanctuary zones and there generally are more fish and bigger fish than in areas immediately adjacent or in other areas unaffected by the park," he said.

The NSW Government's submission to the recreational fishing inquiry cites a global study of marine protected areas in 29 countries including Australia, which shows a 446 per cent mean increase in biomass or living things across 124 different marine reserves.

Australia currently has more than 200 marine protected areas and by 2012 more than 240,000 square kilometres are expected to have some form of protection.

Conservation groups such as the National Parks Association (NPA) have used the NSW inquiry to lobby for an increase of no-take sanctuary zones, where all fishing is banned.

The current average of these total protection areas in NSW Parks is 6 per cent.

"Twenty per cent is the minimal figure recommended by the International Union for Conservation of Nature that needs to be conserved worldwide if we are to have sustainable fish stocks into the future," NPA spokesman Gary Schoer said.

"There are predictions that the whole fisheries could collapse by about 2048 if current trends around much of the world continue."

Politics over science

Professional fishers such as Ross Fidden, who heads the Commercial Co-operative on the central and mid-north coasts of NSW, claim marine parks are more about politics than science.

"It was a deliberate ploy just to get the green vote in Sydney. It was the Sydney green vote they wanted," he said.

The Sydney Fish Market, which is the principal source of fresh seafood for a quarter of Australia's population, agrees.

"Addressing the real risks is a lot harder because if you want to address the risk posed by agricultural run-off for example, as a government, that's a pretty hard ask," market managing director Grahame Turk said.

"Drawing a dotted line around the ocean and saying to people 'we're going to protect that area' and everyone applauds it, is a lot easier, so yes to some extent it is political."

Since marine parks and recreational fishing havens were first established in NSW in 2003, about 400 fishing businesses have been bought out of the industry.

Some who remain, like Alfie Patane, a third generation fisher from Port Stephens, think the current restrictions have gone far enough.

"Instead of being 20 fishermen over a 100-mile area there's 20 fishermen now in a 10-mile area," he said.

"They've locked us into a little tiny zone, hence we've gone from making money to wages."

The effect of fewer fishermen on less fishing ground is having a market impact and Australia's current 75 per cent reliance on imported seafood is likely to escalate as the population grows.

Conservation Council of NSW spokesman on marine issues, Ben Birt, says marine parks should not be seen as a scapegoat for a dwindling global supply of seafood.

"People are going to ultimately have to be prepared to pay more for fish," he said.

"It's a finite resource and I think its not quite right and it's a little bit misleading to point the finger at marine parks and say that's why we're not catching as much fish."

Professor Kearney is worried that conservationists will now target the Coral Sea, which is part of the South Pacific tuna fishery, the world's largest.

"The catch is in now several million tonnes a year. Australia's total fish catch is 200,000 tonnes a year, we're effectively shutting ourselves off from the world's biggest fishery where we have a legitimate right as a coastal state," Professor Kearney said.

Sean Murphy's full report will screen on ABC TV's Landline program on Sunday from noon.

[Travis]

Ag runoff is a biggie..... you can see on aerial shots when it rains heavily up north.... the GBR gets blanketed by silt and crap

[flexo]

Travis wrote:

Ag runoff is a biggie..... you can see on aerial shots when it rains heavily up north.... the GBR gets blanketed by silt and crap

Nahh you ask any greeny it's the rec fisho that does all the damage to bay not the farmers and developers.

[Travis]

A satellite image from the CSIRO shows brown and green river runoff sediment flowing across the the Great Barrier Reef, threatening its fragile ecology Source: The Australian

[ellicat]

Well, if you believe the validity and honesty of the department, Green Zones have been proven to be good for crabs :whistle:

I guess one of the Green plants in the media wrote the headline though :evil:

See if you can pick the wool that's being used to cover eyes.

/>http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/02/3000816.htm

Fish stocks recovering in Moreton Bay green zones

Posted 10 hours 15 minutes ago

Researchers are finding more fish in Moreton Bay's green zones compared with areas nearby.

New research has found more fish in Moreton Bay in south-east Queensland because of an expansion of green zones.

Climate Change and Sustainability Minister Kate Jones has told Parliament crab sizes are also up since the introduction of the protective measures 18 months ago.

She says research by the CSIRO is promising.

"While the data is preliminary it's certainly encouraging with mud crabs already larger and more abundant in the green zones than in the adjacent non green zones," she said.

"The longer a green zone has been in place the more effective it is in protecting mud crabs."

[rayke1938]

Ellicat the link took me to a story about horse biting mans artery. Would be more apt if it was story about horse biting Kate Jones on the rse. :S

Cheers

Ray

[ellicat]

Oops :laugh:

Link fixed.

The horse link I sent to shortie as he is scared of horses :laugh: :laugh:

[kriso]

what a load of horse shit! deadset mudcrabs! cause yeah there just about all wiped out!

[dhess]

Yep complete crap. Makes me sick.

The Greens are candidates for retrospective abortion.