Redcliffe Jetty saved??

[Greg P]

I am still trying to get my head around the reasoning for some of the grounds. Take the area off Bribie and North to Hamilton Patches - granted there is quite a few patches of rubble/reef but the majority of that is sand patches (as they have identified in their description) and they want to green zone (or whatever) it just because it is representative of that environment type - fair dinkum - it's sand and it moves plus the whole area is the main shipping transport corridor to POB


Same goes for the Offshore reef zones off the Cape - they want it only because it is typical of that habitat and they want to protect dolphins, whales and turtles - Hello !! they dont just live there 24/7


The whole thing is a farce but I hope that some of these areas of interest are just negotiation points. Also just because they have nominated some areas dont think that is it - we could be blind-sided. The maps that were being done by the EPA last year had a lot more areas than the ones they put out there for a bite

[Blueroo]

I agree Greg.

I haven’t seen any turtles at the northern end of Deep Tempest. Hmmm.

Does the EPA have people that have actually been to the areas of interest and researched them? I don’t think so.

They don’t take into account the very real risks to our marine life by such things as marine pests and parasites being introduced in ballast water carried by cargo vessels coming into the bay daily.

Ditto with pollution. The creeks flowing into the bay are a disgrace. Paddle a kayak or canoe up Hayes Inlet and into the creek and you will know what I mean. This pollution is caused by land use not fishing.

Isn’t that the sort of thing the EPA should be worried about instead of taking over the management of the fisheries by stealth from another department?

I love the bay and wish to keep it as pristine as possible. The idea of blanket fishing closures is not called for.

Stue

[cuzzamundi]

Firstly, that is right on the money 4reel. Land-based pollution is the primary concern for the general population, not recco fishos. also, i believe t hat we as tax paying citizens should be provided with EVERY scientific reason they have for closing EACH of the areas. this would enable us to decipher what really is an issue (not many, if any of them i bet), and what is the result of green bullying. elucidate the 'facts' for all to see, and then listen to the counter arguments. but, at the risk of sounding confounded, the counter arguments would remain just that i believe, without a massive bout of publicity in our favour. we really do need to elucidate the REAL facts to the general public, as im sure then the greens would be taken for what they really are.

cuzza