Courier Mail Article:1 Moreton Bay under threat

[charleville]

Have just read this on the Courier Mail site...

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...1-3102,00.html

"This almost unlimited fishing access had severely depleted fish stocks over the years, Dr Hughes said, and would contribute to a total degradation of the park if allowed to continue.

Over-fishing is a big problem, but it's just scratching the surface of the myriad of issues threatening Moreton Bay."

There are no reader responses attached to the article so I assume that Ausfish people have not seen this article. I have just posted my response - it is up to the Courier Mail if they choose to publish it...

[DR]

you have to remember that this crap comes from the same newspaper that had front page that John Howard had lunch with a "violent porn king" when it was a charity lunch that anyone with a spare $200 could go to..
& the same paper that put posts on a Vic. fishing sites asking for any comments on problems with 4x4s on fraser island, all she wrote about was the bad stuff, she got a lot of people offside by not mentioning anything good that they told her & her headline was something about '4x4 cowboys'
they are full of it & i doubt that they are capable of an unbiased story...
i like the ad (that accompanies the story) for dugongs, warning the bay could become a wasteland

[SeaHunt]

I had already stuck it to them before I read about it here.
I questioned that Dr. DH's qualifications to make comments on Moreton Bay given that he is a Coral Reef Specialist, I like to know where he found all the Coral Reefs in Moreton Bay to study?
But we will see if the Courier mail publishes my comments or not?
Like most publications and journos they are fairly Green and left wing.

[badger007]

Well done mate. I have also given my two bobs worth and hope all Ausfish members show some real fight for this one. I say all Aufish members because if they start closing the bay we will be fishing elsewhere and that could be where your spot is so jump in fishos and give em hell!!

[SeaHunt]

Hey they published my comment, pretty surprised really.
Reading it again , I might have overdone it a bit.


Here it is, I bet I get a few know nothing enviromentalist types trying to tear strips off me.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...1-3102,00.html

[kc]

Didn't publish mine but I was having a "bad" afternoon and let rip

KC

[fishingjew]

Moreton Bay under threat


16Mar07
IT'S a haven for turtles and dugongs, an angler's paradise and a natural tourism drawcard just minutes from one of Australia's major cities.
But scientists are warning Brisbane's Moreton Bay may soon become a barren water wasteland.
Mismanagement and overuse have led to depleted fish stocks and polluted water, and corals, seagrass beds and animals are now under threat.
Scientists say it's a prime example of how the natural beauty of an area can become its downfall.
"Moreton Bay is an absolute treasure on Brisbane's doorstep, yet it's in danger of being loved to death by more and more people," said director of the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies Dr Terry Hughes.
"There's no other major city in the world where you can still see dugongs, whales and dolphins, but unfortunately there are fewer today than not so long ago.
"A lot of people think of Moreton Bay as being a pristine region but in fact it has been quite changed by people's activities."
Dr Hughes has become a champion for the preservation of the Moreton Bay region, as he believes it will become one of the country's most important havens for marine species as global warming threatens to destroy the fragile ecosystems in the north of Australia.
Dr Hughes said the degradation of Moreton Bay was a very real threat and was one that must be urgently addressed by the community and the Queensland government.
In February, Queensland's Environment Minister Lindy Nelson-Carr launched the first stage of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) review into the management of the Moreton Bay Marine Park Zoning Plan.
Under the current plan, which expires in September next year, only 0.5 per cent of the Marine Park is classified as a "green zone", or a "no-take zone" which prevents any type of fishing activities.
A report on the EPA website states Moreton Bay "now accounts for one-third of the state's recreational fishing effort, even though it has just 3 per cent of the coastline".
This almost unlimited fishing access had severely depleted fish stocks over the years, Dr Hughes said, and would contribute to a total degradation of the park if allowed to continue.
Over-fishing is a big problem, but it's just scratching the surface of the myriad issues threatening Moreton Bay.
The EPA lists a staggering number of problems: toxic algae blooms, removal of mangroves seagrass and salt marshes, increased numbers of turtles and dugong being hit by boats, migratory birds being killed by vehicles and dogs, and more frequent incidences of coral bleaching.
Despite these threats the Queensland Government has so far failed to commit to any extension of the green zone, even though the population in the area currently at 1.5 million is predicted to explode in the coming decades.
"I want to make it absolutely clear that, despite claims from some interest groups, no decisions have been made about what changes may be needed," Ms Nelson-Carr said in launching the review.
"There are no pre-determined zones, we are working from a blank sheet of paper."
The community has now been invited to have its say on how the park should be used, and Dr Hughes is tentatively hopeful they will vote to extend protection within the park.

The same Bulls#$t on the coast paper

[fishingjew]

JUST CHECKINING EMAILS . Well how about this one. Says it all PICK THE MOST BARREN PLACE OR LOSE IT!


http://www.bribieblog.com/2007/03/16...zoning-review/

There are many ways to participate, one of which is by filling in an on-line survey - click the maps and get specific. The overall map shows the whole Moreton Bay marine park zone and much like Google maps, click a zone to zoom in. Once you’ve zoomed in to a location you’re happy with, fill in the survey. For example, if you’ve zoomed in somewhere that you like fishing, write something about the area being a great place for recreational fishing. If enough people are seen to prefer certain areas, then these may be protected for that purpose.

Or lock it up so you can,t fish!

[charleville]

Didn't publish mine but I was having a "bad" afternoon and let rip

KC

They didn't publish mine either - which is the first time this week. I had four or five published on other topics this week.

They obviously are a bit selective and like to exercise the "power of the press" as they want to.

[iank]

It is amazing how their catchcry is "freedom of the press", they then publish one eyed stories, then censor any rebuttals they don't like . Just my 2 cents worth.
Cheers Ian

[PADDLES]

I find it interesting that only two people either in the replies on the Courier Mail site or on this thread has made any mention of development and industry pollution as a factor in the decline of the bay.

One person (on the Courier Mail site by the way) still blamed fishos (either pro or recreational) for the "problems???" in the bay even though in his response he mentioned that he had seen development have a negative effect on the Logan River near him.

Alarmingly, this tell's us what our profile actually is out there in the community. By the way a guy called Grant pretty much told 'em how it is, and wasn't rude about it either, top work I reckon.

[kingtin]

Hey they published my comment, pretty surprised really.
Reading it again , I might have overdone it a bit.


Here it is, I bet I get a few know nothing enviromentalist types trying to tear strips off me.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...1-3102,00.html

Betcha they don't publish mine but I just had to get it off my chest anyways


So "Chris of Brisbane" wonders how a developed country with 'supposedly smart people" can let any situation develop until it is too late? Rather ironic coming from someone who lived in a country that let the 3rd Reich develop

Just how does he propose to compensate all those who have worked hard, struggled and saved, to purchase their motor boats, or is there to be no compensation? Are we to be simply downtrodden by the jackboot of yet more unnecessary legislation. There'll be plenty of leisure time for 'sailing and paddling" if he was to have his way. Just think of the impact on jobs and the local economy?

Education is the key to maintaining the bay, not dictatorial, simplistic, draconian measures. The Bay is the healthiest it has been for years and the DPI&F is doing an excellent job in managing the fishery as are the recreational fishers and boaties, who abide by the legislation. Let development agencies do likewise. The major threat to the Bay arises from development and not from recreational or pro fishers.

If Chris of Brisbane would like to see water devoid of motor boats, and if he grows tired of "supposedly smart people" in this "developed country" then I suggest he takes himself off back to the German Lake District where he can have "so much more fun" "sailing and paddeling.

kev

[kingtin]

I find it interesting that only two people either in the replies on the Courier Mail site or on this thread has made any mention of development and industry pollution as a factor in the decline of the bay.

Three

kev

[PADDLES]

Yep, it makes four including me. A mate here at work showed me that article in friday's paper and when I read it I was not too surprised to see that there was nothing in there pointing towards industry and development being possibly detrimental to the bay's condition.

This article should hit it home to all of us what the public perception is of fishermen and boaties. The paper sees us as a bunch of redneck fish slaughterers and therefore a top target for a bit of hassling because we'll bite back and help them sell papers (this is what the public will then see and think we all are), and here we are responding just the way they want it.

The government is laughing because the whole time that greenys and fisho's are taking aim at each other there's no bullets being aimed at government policy on development and pollution. You only have to look at developments like the proposed industrial area and marina ($880 million dollars worth) up the caboolture river to see how stuff is getting chucked through under everybody's noses whilst we all are fighting about green zones. If we don't watch out there won't be much green in the green zones. Have greenies ever combined with user groups (ie. TFPQ) to give a combined force to change government policy or will the two be forever opposed?

[Adamy]

Some valid points there Paddles, I personally dont know what to do to change the tide of anti-fishing sentiment - to anti-development (or pro sustainable development) sentiment. But the idea of Parties coming together to achieve a common goal certainly seems to have some merit, and worthy of consideration. I think in due time, if we can somehow convince the "green" stakeholders that there is a bigger "enemy" out there then we may indeed see cooperation - of sorts.

Of course you have nailed the biggest problem on the head - that is the Govt and council make massive amounts of money from development projects - so they dont want to hear about it. It's much easier to kick a few fishos. In economics we call that the marginal cost to society - the cost to society of kicking fishos is much less than the societal cost of losing development - so they go with the least cost method. We have to try and balance the two out so that at very least its an even way bet - which means just as you say - highlight the problems of development and encourage campaigns which make Govts change their policies (and then actually enforce them).

Do-able I think - but no easy ask!

Adam