Proposed No-Go zones for SEQ

[ellicat]

Just been reading about these \"areas of interest\" to the EPA on Ausfish. Seems these have been leaked and whilst not the \"final\" zones, the opinion seems to be they will be pretty close to it, with some extras not yet indicated on the maps.

Post edited by: ellicat, at: 2007/08/18 00:53

[dhess]

What a crock!

Maybe they should just make recreational fishing illegal everywhere.

I find it hard to see how recreational fishing would have a significant impact in those area.

Time to go out and get a few electric reels so I can go target the really deep reefs.:evil:

[ellicat]

I like to think I was brought up on facts to enable me to form my own opinion. Seems a lot of people are brought up on opinions and then form their own facts.

Unless the media and others that influence the way people think and form (populist) views return to some sort of balance, we're pushing it up hill and will be for a long time.

I personally yearn for the day when I can hear a news item reported without sensationalism or being subliminally bias by using emotive language.

EG

\"A fish kill has occurred at Lenthalls Dam\"

rather than

\"A tragic fish kill...\"

Whether it's tragic or not is up to me to decide.

Rant for the day:huh:

[ellicat]

Here's some more. Also heard all of Hayes Inlet and out from Bribie including the Spitfire Banks out to the NE Channel north to the Hamilton patches.

Better get out for a fish soon or we'll be shoulder to shoulder at NPD.

[Gazza]

Theres more than that mate from what I read in the paper the whole of peel will be closed as will amity bank's Dam idiots

dont know sheeit :evil:

Maybe we should show em how hard it is to find a feed and look more at what is actually the problem is boat traffic comes to mind water rats /look at me boats

etc speed restictions would be a better start than BANS

just a thought

Gaz

[Feral]

So does the changing of areas from yellow to green zones mean the yellow zones were a failure?

THey should be made to mark the no fishing areas same as they do in dams, they would keep them bust for a month of sundays! :evil:

Post edited by: Feral, at: 2007/08/19 05:32

[rayke1938]

I predicted this last year when they first made the announcements. Their comsultative seminars were all smoke and mirrors and even now they are not being completely honest.

I cannot comment with the offshore area

closures but some of the local closures are absolutely rediculous. Closing off the area between Green and St Helena is going to close off one of the prime crabbing areas so we can certainly look foward to a loud scream from all the pro crabbers.

And closing off the entire foreshore off Victoria Point is another stupid decision.

Coochie closure area is unspeakable.

Sorry my limited vocubulary doesnt allow me to continue.

Have they thought about the impact on the areas that they dont close?

It is only going to force heavy fishing pressure onto those not so productive areas.

I believe that more proactive enforcement and reducing in possession limits and also looking hard at increasing size limits is the real answer to preserving our fishing future.

They will do the same as they have done with all the other northern closures and give in on a couple of minor areas but in the end we will all loose.

I do not like to bring politics into fishing but it is certainly looking more and more like it is true that a deal has been done to placate the greenies and the only pollies speaking out are one national senator and our local federal( choke) liberal member.Not a word from any state members so give your local member a serve.

Surely Tom Burns would roll over in his grave.

Ray

[mackmauler]

The one to the east of mud is prime spotty ground, the offshore ones look like round patch reefs and then onto tempest area, then into summer time where the reefs are unfishable its worth a surface troll over that 20square km, having to watch a gps to make sure you dont cross over into the red square would suck.

the offshore grounds are restricted by weather most of the week and then you have the added cost to go that far, really not sure what the aim is.

I dont think these measures will go far towards preserving any fishstocks, there are still loads of commercial offshore and net lisences in place.

just a token ban to please someone i think?

[Cliffy]

Yet another example of the far-left greenie movement repressing the population generally and the rights of the individual specifically . Y'know, they tried this in New Zealand around the Auckland Harbour 20 years ago, with the result that the most-fished locations were immediately next to the closed areas, resulting in the most extreme cases of fish depletion the region had ever seen . Shame some of these people don't think and/or research properly before they stick their oar in - this is exactly the type of nonsense that has subjected us all to the recent wailing and gnashing of teeth over global warming, and unfortunately the arguments carry roughly the same amount of weight and credibility.

On a more positive note, the sooner someone manages to get elected to senior public office on a rec. fishing platform, the better - how'd you all like a 2-day working week with 5-day weekends :evil:?

[Cowfish13]

Well, just saw it on the nine news and they confirmed everything that you said. Looks bad:(

[James W]

its gunna put some real pressure on the rest of the bay:(

[Ash]

I for one and very much for no fish zones. How ever that said, like its been mentioned already, i agree when they have been fully researched, thought about are practical. It'd be a shame to see something that is supposed to be brought in to protect how fishing future actually wipe it out or deplete it massively due to over fishing of the areas that are left.

The answers not just in banning us from certain zones, there are many, many things that should be put into place, or atleast heavily researched. restocking of salt water fish is one of them. Lets just hope this doesnt completely ruin it for us and our kids!

[Feral]

Hey! you b*ms keep out of my dams when you've got no where left to fish!

[jeff f]

might be time for a good old '70s style protest

there are enough fishermen and women in the southeast corner of the state to really make a statment

[Feral]

There was a protest about it a few months ago.

[ellicat]

There's a further map here -
/>http://ronboswell.com/?p=477

which also includes the following -

Leader of The Nationals in the Senate, Ron Boswell, today released a map displaying the potential impact of state government fishing closures in Moreton Bay, and called for the immediate public release of more detailed EPA mapping.

“Commercial and recreational fishermen need to know that the Green grab we feared for Moreton Bay is officially on,†Senator Boswell said.

“The map I am presenting was produced from incomplete data supplied to stakeholders by the EPA as part of Beattie Labor’s Moreton Bay zoning plan review.

“It clearly shows some of the areas of interest for ‘green’ protection zones that the radical environmentalists are intent on claiming.

“Alarmingly, nearly half of the areas described as areas of interest for closure by the EPA don’t have accompanying co-ordinates, so although we have an idea of the general area of these proposals, it has not been possible to include them accurately on my map.

Mapping coordinates were provided for only 21 of the 35 areas described. Areas named without the provision of coordinates include Amity Banks, Myora/Wanga Wallen Banks, Lamb Island, Pannikin Island, Willes Island Protection Zone, Cobby Cobby Island, Swan Bay Protection Zone & Never Never Creek, McCoys Creek Protection Zone, Coombabah Lakes, Westaways Creek Section, Cape Moreton, Hays Inlet, Bramble Bay and Moreton Banks. The extent of these proposed closures and extensions to existing closures are unknown at this stage.

“Fishermen will be alarmed at the mention of such areas as Bramble Bay, Hays Inlet and Amity Point as possible closure areas,†Senator Boswell said.

“The complete EPA maps referred to in their data would be more detailed and better show the extent of the areas under consideration for closure. They should be provided to the public immediately and I am talking to my State colleagues about how this can be achieved.

“However, even if we only take into account those areas that I have been able to map from the data provided, you can see that the closures would have an effect on family fishing and the commercial fleet supplying much of Brisbane’s seafood.

“If Labor want to close off fishing in the Bay as part of their preference deal with the Greens at the last election, then they will need to pay a huge price.

“I repeat my call today for a full social and economic impact statement to be undertaken.

“I am of the view that, when the full cost of any closures is investigated and presented and it is made clear that the State Government will be held responsible for that cost, they won’t want to go down the track of such extensive, unnecessary closures.

“We have already seen the hundreds of millions of dollars that similar zoning has cost on the Great Barrier Reef as a result of fishing closures like those planned for Moreton Bay and we don’t want to ever see that kind of unnecessary impact on our fishing industries again.

“Now that we have this map before us, and commercial and recreational fishermen can see just some of the extent of the proposed Green grab, I expect that there will be a lot more strong opposition to this proposal to follow from local families and fishing businesses.

“This kind of ludicrous, radical plan is what we get when Labor and the Greens combine.

“You can see the influence that the Greens have on Labor when they are in Government at the State level and there is no doubt it would be disastrous if this partnership were to be repeated federally.â€Â

ENDS

Media contact – 07 3001 8150 or 0428 714 779

[Oceandonkey]

does that mean harry A is ok???

[Brian D]

Not the Pelican Banks No No No - that's my seceret shark spot.

I suspect that they will name way more areas then they hope to achieve, then when some areas are conceded or given back we dumb fishermen think we get a good deal.

But are we going to do anything about it? Well the truth is I won't as I am too busy. I might attend a few meetings and stuff but I wont be able to do anything other then change my vote.

[ellicat]

Oceandonkey wrote:

does that mean harry A is ok???

If you catch fish there it's probably at risk.

.....Maybe I'm being a bit cynical....

[pepe66]

Will this keep the honest fisherman who do the right thing from fishing in those areas. Just like sizes and bag limits - there are plenty of people who disregard the rules when it comes to that. It does make it harder for those of us who do look at the fun aspect as well as sustainablity for the future.

[dhess]

Good luck to them trying to police those areas. Especially at night.

[rayke1938]

dhess wrote:

Good luck to them trying to police those areas. Especially at night.

No trouble at all they prefer night time spot you on their radar motor over if you have any fishing gear on board you are deemed to be fishing. Bingo Gotya! Its a bit better than it was it used to be a criminal proseqution in court and you ended up with a criminal record now its just an on the spot fine.

Ray

[dhess]

Couldn't one use the defense that they were passing through the no fish zone on your way between areas?

How many fisheries patrol boats equipped with radar are there in SE QLD anyway?

[rayke1938]

Its the water police around here up north all the fisheries are equiped

and having the gear on board is sufficient they dont have to catch you using it. Have seen ski boats pinged on somerset when they had rods on board and didnt have sip.

Ray

[mackmauler]

Ray, thats not accurate information. check green zone rules.

[Feral]

I believe they changed it to having to catch you with fish or lines in the water a year or two back because of all the furore they were creating.

Same deal with using GPS's to ping you for being in a green zone, GPS co-ords are not enough to book you now, (Ever since the judge threw several hundred fines out last year) they actually also have to do some real navigation!

Although I suspect that was based around people trying to fish the fringe of the zones.

[rayke1938]

mackmauler wrote:

Ray, thats not accurate information. check green zone rules.

Sorry i plead guilty as i have not read rules I know that last time I was in Cairns there was a lot of local press about fishos getting pinged in the newly established green zones by the use of radar and that they stated that they were actually out of the zone or never in the zone when pulled up.

Re somerset we were camped next door to the bloke who got pinged for fishing whilst he was skiing. ( mind you he was also fishing at other times and was a loudmouth so he probably stirred them up.

[Dimo]

I think the main reason why our fish stocks are depleating is because of mass developments. Developers are Destroying mangroves to construct water front homes and apartments. Which in this case gets rid of the fish habitat. Many mangroves around SE have been destroyed for this. Well for my second reason would have to be trawlers, sorry if there are any trawler owners or workers but personally I think more rules and regulations should be in place for trawling. I think these are the cause as for these Stupid No zones for fishing. And who has to suffer recreational fisherman. The goverment is at fault and we gotta pay. HMMMM why not just ban fishing all together.:ohmy:

[rayke1938]

mackmauler wrote:

Ray, thats not accurate information. check green zone rules.

Just had a bit of a look for rules on green zones and the only reference I can find is a question and answer section on the GBrmp website.

Can I travel through a GREEN Zone with fish onboard?

Travelling through a Green (Marine National Park) Zone with fish onboard is

allowed, provided the fish were caught outside the Green Zone. You can also

anchor, swim, snorkel and sail within a Green Zone.

How must my fishing gear be stowed or secured to travel through a GREEN

Zone?

You can travel through a Green (Marine National Park) Zone with fishing

gear on board provided that all fishing lines are stowed or secured; that is,

any line or hand-held rod is inboard the boat or in rod holders. While a hook

can still be attached to a line, no part of any fishing gear may be in the water.

If a commercial trawl fishing vessel is navigating through a zone where

trawling is prohibited, any equipment that is used for fishing must be stowed

or secured in accordance with the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Regulations.

What happens if I unknowingly drift into a GREEN Zone while fishing?

Fishing, unknowingly or not, is not allowed within a Green (Marine National

Park) Zone. Fishing or collecting in a Green Zone may only occur if written

permission is obtained from the GBRMPA.

Ray

[dhess]

Thanks for the clarification.

[Do$tylz]

Seems as though everyone is against the zones at all.

Not having a stab at you Cliff, but apparently most of the 31 green zones in NZ have actually been a success. They've helped replenish some of the stocks around the islands (eg Goat Island Bay). Mind you I have only read this from one source (National Geographic April 07 issue) and just looked at this page: http://www.seafriends.org.nz/issues/res/gi/index.htm#history

Does anyone else see the potential benefit in having these green zones? Yeah the other areas will be fished heaps, but these zones that are protected will help fish breed and grow safely without being hooked/netted. The logic is that once these green areas establish themselves, fully stocked with fish that are no longer pulled out one at a time, they will start to \"spillover\" to the other ares that we CAN fish in.

[Brian D]

Do$tylz wrote:

Seems as though everyone is against the zones at all.

Does anyone else see the potential benefit in having these green zones?

Mate I am on record in saying that I do not appose the zones. My thought is that the zones are only a small part in what is required.

From a selfish view I don't have time for the fish to fill up the zones and flow over. I wont them to start a SEQ salt water restocking program that puts fish back. This should be funded by a combo of rec licence fees and pro boats % of catch contribution.

Further I would like to see \"no catch or keep seasons\" be placed on species and rotated to a different species every year. Meaning no bream to be kept 1 year, then no flatty's the next, then no squire etc (for eg only.)

But my problem is I don't have time or contacts to do anything so I'm just doing a Bob and blowing in the wind.

Post edited by: Brian D, at: 2007/08/20 12:21

[Do$tylz]

haha, fair enough Brian. Mind you I'm sure you're just as not selfish to want to preserve this for your kids and grandkids.

Yeah, restocking is a good idea but is there any place in the world that currently does it?...i actually don't know this so just asking. What are the success rates of the restocked fish?

I dunno if a \"no catch\" will really work...coz you'll always get by catch even if you're not targeting a specific species. The \"no keep\" part might work better.

Realistically though they are not closing that many areas down. For the entire Moreton Bay area, a few ares closed off for future preservation and better fishing in the long run I don't see as that big an issue.

Maybe coz I don't have a boat that I have this view. So yeah, maybe I'm biased.

But yeah a combination of rules and regulations will really be more productive for helping the stocks. However they do need to start somewhere. Maybe these Green Zones are the starting point of a couple of other changes.

[mackmauler]

I see no benefit in the green zones do$, and 1 source for those findings from nz, \"seafriends\" not exactly your independent testing agency LOL

these mobs have no interest in maintaining the fishery so we can pull them out. they want to protect the rights of the \"fish\".

if there is a stock crisis and we must have green zones. (insert findings to show one)

why wasnt there a reduction in the tac or spawning closure prior to this.

these guys do not know how to manage a fishery thats why.

[rayke1938]

I think that everyone agrees that something has to be done to protect out and our childrens future.

What the furore is about is the methodology that has been used to introduce the changes and the fact that the EPA have NOT done a full overview and impact study of the process.

It all reminds me of the B?S we used to go through at work to introduce change.

They get up and have sham/controlled topic meetings and say something is wrong and everyone says yes.

They then say we will fix it by doing A or B or C. when A is cutting off your right hand,B your left, and c both hands.

They dont listen or ask for any of your input. So the majority of people being righthanded opt for cutting off your left hand. ( Bad luck Feral and other lefties)

They then get up and preach that they have gone through the full consultative process and given everyone a say and everyone picked B.

When everyone screams blue murder they then say OK you win you only have to cut off your left thumb which was what they wanted in the first place and everyone is supposed to feel warm and cosy and say well that wasnt too bad afterall.

Isnt it strange that they can dredge up half of the bay for sand to build new runways for the airport and totally destroy the fisherman island area to build a new port?

Did you hear any word from Simon Balitis and his greenie mates about that?

Unless a full study is done to justify their no go areas and a full review of size limits and in possession limits they will have done little to protect the future.

If they can justify an area as a prime breeding area well and good protect it but make certain of the facts first not just the opinion of one person who they have selected to give the opinion . I am certain that I would give a different opinion to professer Fred Nurke and his fish ( or maybe I should say @rse ) licking mates

I see a lot of value of Brians suggestion of fully protecting a species for a period of time or even during their known spawning time.

I understand that in NSW the amateur licence fees are utilised to buy out pro licences in certain areas and also to stock both fresh and salt water species.

The state government has just released a blurb on how much they are going to spend on improvements to ramps and facilities over the next few years compared to the income they receive from boat licencing fees but fail to mention the other benefits they receive indirectly from boating/angleing activities.

As it said elsewhere its all smoke and mirrors to appease their political obligations.

Ray

PS sorry if I have offended anyone with my views but I feel that the whole process is flawed.

[Do$tylz]

Mackie - I don't think we should let it get to a crises level and I think this is trying to stop this from happening.

Yeah unfortunately can't vouch for the credibility of seafriends, but I like to think that Nat. Geo. are independent enough to give unbiased views and reports.

Btw.....whats tac???

Also I am by no means a pro fisher or someone who has really got into this too much or trying to be a pr*ck...I'm just trying to gauge peoples opinions and views to help me in my own decision. Also maybe to help people see it another way.

[mackmauler]

Do$, I think we all need to hear from an independed not to mention the agency pushing this before jumping to conclusions, much of what Ray said sums it up.

just what are there expectations of our fishing performance now and into the future, stocks are still in good shape at present, we have dozens of commercial fishers and bag limits are achievable well over min size. as far as im concerned total lock up is the end of the rd as a management tool, concentrating effort onto smaller areas especially if there is no science or facts behind the zones just makes no sense.

are you saying you agree with zoning just to be sure? have you considered any of the other management tools?

[ellicat]

What Ray and Mack said

[Do$tylz]

Nah, it just seems as though green zones have the potential to work.

And as I've said before, if a number of water management tools are in place together it will work better than just one.

And yeah probably...don't know the exact science behind the selection of the areas to zone, or anything like that. So yeah just agreeing because it seems as though its a move more towards conservation than pissing off fisher-dudes.

[ellicat]

Would like that to be the case Do$tylz. But this is far more politically based then scientifically based.

Here's a bit more \"info\" -

Mr HORAN (Toowoomba Southâ€â€NPA) (12.10 pm):

The Speech below was made in Qld Parliament on Tuesday afternoon by Mike Horan, Shadow Minister for Fisheries.

I want to warn the people of south-east Queensland who love to fish and go boating on Moreton Bay about what the Labor government in Queensland will do to them. I want to warn them on the basis of what has happened to the people who like fishing in north Queensland. 21 Aug 2007 Matters of Public Interest 2659

This Labor government has form. Just look at what it did with the complementary zones: there was absolutely no compensation paid whatsoever. What the government has done, through the EPA, is brought in five people from the Great Barrier Reef organisation who have been through this process of rezoning to review the Moreton Bay plan. In a nutshell, they rezoned 30 per cent of the Great Barrier Reef and in the same process put a stop to 70 per cent of the fishing. That is what will happen in Moreton Bay. They will come out with all these areas of interestâ€â€and they have some 35 areas of interest at the momentâ€â€they will cause a few major demonstrations about areas like the Redcliffe pier and other types of areas, and then they will slip in all the other zones while people are concentrating on other areas.

At least in relation to the Barrier Reef in north Queensland compensation was paid by the federal government. But, in relation to the complementary zones along the coast, there was not one dollar of compensation. Who is going to compensate the people in Moreton Bay? Who is going to compensate the commercial fishermen whose families have been doing that for generations? Who will compensate the mums and dads who like to go fishing in Moreton Bay but who will now find that it is far too stressful because they cannot just go down and throw in a line; they will have to have GPS reference points or they could be prosecuted. Over 300 people in north Queensland have now been prosecuted and who have records. It will be beyond the average person who likes to go on the bay occasionally to enjoy their fishing and boating.

Who is going to compensate the people of Brisbane and south-east Queensland who enjoy eating fresh fish from Moreton Bay? They will be like 60 per cent of the rest of us who have to eat the imported catfish from the polluted rivers of Asia. That is where we are heading if we do not have accurate, honest and fair dinkum consultation in this whole process.

But how can it be fair dinkum when the Greens let the cat out of the bag before the last election? In their press release of 27 August they talked about the government’s plans for no-go zones. Then they disgracefully picked out the 13 seats that Labor considered marginal and they directly gave their preferences to Labor because that was the deal. That is why I am telling the people of south-east Queensland. That was the deal.

Mrs SULLIVAN: I rise to a point of order. I find that offensive and I ask that it be withdrawn. Under no circumstances did the Greens give preferences to me in Pumicestone.

Mr HORAN: Madam Deputy Speaker, I made no reference to that particular member.

Mrs SULLIVAN: I find that offensive. There were no deals done in Pumicestone. I find it offensive and I ask that the member withdraw it.

Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER (Ms van Litsenburg): Order! Would the member withdraw

unreservedly?

Mr HORAN: I withdraw. I also want to table a letter that was sent to the Minister for Environment and Multiculturalism from the Moreton Bay Game Fishing Association which clearly states the problems that they are having with regard to how they deal with this consultation process and the way their rights and knowledge have been trampled upon.

Tabled paper: Copy of a letter, dated 14 August 2007, from Dr Evan Jones, Conservation Officer, Queensland Game Fishing Association Inc, to the Minister for Environment and Multiculturalism (Ms Lindy Nelson-Carr), relating to the Moreton Bay Marine Park review.

I also want to ask: where is the Minister for Primary Industries and Fisheries, who is supposed to represent the people who fish in Moreton Bay, be they recreational or commercial fishermen? He has gone missing in action. I call on the minister to stand up and fight for the people who like to use Moreton Bay so they can have a fair, decent and honest review of Moreton Bay and not be trampled over by these prearranged deals that have been done with the extreme Greens. I call on the minister to guarantee that the Moreton Bay Access Alliance will be able to complete and show the details of its independent research which has been funded with a $226,000 grant. At the very least that is what the government should allow because that is independent research, not the desk research that was done by the environment department itself.

I say to the people of south-east Queensland: be warned. This government has form. Those opposite have a prearranged plan for Moreton Bay. They are professionals; they know how to do it. They know how to rub out fishing and stop people from doing what they love to do. I say to the people of south-east Queensland: kick Labor in the shins at the federal election and kick them again in the shins at the state election. That is the only thing that an arrogant government understands: a great kick in the shins. Look what they did to the people of Queensland over council amalgamations. If you do not kick them in the shins, they will walk all over you. People might think they are getting consultation, but they are not and the accuracy, the honesty and the true science of the people who fish and boat in Moreton Bay will be disregarded.

Time expired.