Certainly didn't contain the 'venom" of the last article did it.
I see our old mate Daphne Haneman has resurfaced again, this time in the B/Magazine. She must have taken onboard some of the constructive criticisim from us knuckle dragging fisherman after her Courier Mail story as she hasn't gone after the anglers like last time and there's not as many inacurate quotes. Same angle though & I don't know about the AMCS turtle & dugong figues.
Cheers
Mike
PS It's a pitty that wasn't her on the front cover, she may have had a better chance of getting me on her side.
The weather forecast may predict clear skies ahead but storm clouds hanging over
Moreton Bay will be around for some time yet, reports Daphne Haneman
M
oreton Bay angst has raged for
nearly a quarter of a century and
the damage radius has spread
overseas, attracting the attention of
the UK’s Dr David Bellamy - botanist, author,
broadcaster and environmental campaigner - as
well as senators, scientists, musicians, writers,
conservationists, fishermen, Bay lovers and
thousands of Queensland residents who have all
at times joined the fight to save “The Bay”. And
it’s no petty squabble. It is a fight for life.
But the Bay’s issues are not really about
fish. In fact, in this quasi-combat zone the
problem’s nub is more about demographic
strain: climate change, sand mining, new
bridges, boats, proposed desalination plants,
rail networks, new resorts, ferries and the
Queensland Government’s infamous zoning
plan add to the uncontrolled mosaic of pressure
on the Bay’s subaqueous creatures.
According to Wildlife Preservation Society
of Queensland spokesman Simon Baltais,
things were already going awry in 1989, “an
era of developing the hell out of anything,”
he said. More recently the local Bay Journal
reported: “On current projections 14,000
people, double the current population, will be
residents on the islands within the Moreton
Bay Marine Park. They will require, if policies
don’t change, double the number of ferry trips,
double the barge places, double the buses,
double the car parking spaces and double the
services.”
It is precisely the increased human impacts
on the wildlife of Moreton Bay Marine Park
that has the Australian Marine Conservation
Society (AMCS) “deeply concerned”. And
they have not been reassured things are likely
to get better before they get worse following
the state government’s announcement that
it has identified certain “catalyst” projects
to trigger further development in the region
(Premier Anna Bligh outlines them in her
column on page 11 in this issue). Among them
are proposals to develop a major Moreton
Bay ferry terminus at or near the mouth of
the Brisbane River for a quicker link to the
CBD; a second shipping terminal up river
to accommodate new and larger cruise ships
visiting Brisbane; a Moreton Bay aquarium
and marine discovery centre at North Bank;
and an eco-lodge on Moreton Island using the
existing lighthouse and existing infrastructure.
While more than 300 industry operators,
developers and investors were consulted in
the preparation of the report, apparently the
Marine Conservation Society was not one of
them, yet developers and operators are already
being invited to show expressions of interest in
projects.
“The park’s threatened turtles and dugongs
continue to be killed by boat strike and so
any proposal to increase boat traffic in the
park must be seriously questioned. Moreton
Bay needs to be protected from overuse and
abuse so any proposals for ferry terminals or
increased commercial use of the park must
be tested against strict criteria - which are
currently lacking,” says Society campaigner
Craig Bohm.
“The Australian Marine Conservation
Society has supported the community-led
proposal to develop a marine discovery centre,
preferably located on the shores of Moreton
Bay Marine Park. We have not been briefed
on the proposal recently released by [Tourism]
Minister Desley Boyle to combine the marine
discovery centre proposal with a commercial
aquarium and to house these within the
controversial North Bank development,” he
said. Nor has Bohm seen any details of the
proposed ecolodge. “We would only support
such a proposal if it truly was a low impact
proposal that did not damage the island
or impact on the beautiful scenic vistas of
Moreton Bay Marine Park,” he said.
Ecotourism operator Moreton Bay Escapes
runs day and overnight group tours to Moreton
Island but even its owner Tom Skorzewski
would like to see some control over tourist
traffic.
“Areas such as the wrecks at Moreton
Island and Horseshoe Bay on Peel have some
significant issues at peak holiday periods. I
would like to see a buoy system for anchorage
to stop multiple anchors disturbing the sea
floor and coral areas,” Skorzewski said.
According to the Australian Marine Science
Association a sprawling urban Brisbane is
the greatest threat to Moreton Bay’s habitats.
Brisbane’s CBD roughly marks a halfway point
between the Bay’s northern and southern tips
and whether you’re jet skiing off Caloundra’s
Bulcock Beach, boating off Bribie Island,
fishing at Redcliffe, lazing on North Straddie
or four-wheel driving along Moreton Island,
you’re in Moreton Bay. And the view from
Manly is panoramic.
What many don’t often see are the 300
small islands that are shielded from the ocean
by the big three – beautiful Moreton, North
Stradbroke and South Stradbroke Islands.
Flanking the land is the sea country that
sustains precious underwater coral reef estates,
dolphins, dugong, endangered loggerhead
turtles, mangrove forests, seagrass meadows,
shorebird feeding and roosting sites, and much
more. But beyond the blue, 200 turtles and 15
dugongs are found dead in Moreton Bay every
year, according to the AMCS.
When the state government released its
Draft Moreton Bay Zoning Plan 2008 earlier
this year and called for submissions, the
AMCS, the Wildlife Preservation Society and
the Queensland Conservation Council together
gave it an overall C+ report card.
“The public cares deeply. The Queensland
Government has received more than 4000
public submissions calling for at least 30
percent habitat protection, up from less than
one percent,” says the AMCS’ Craig Bohm.
While the conservationists say at least
30 percent of the Bay’s habitats should be
sheltered in ‘green zones’ - now called ‘marine
national park zones’ - the government has
drafted a plan for 15 percent zoned habitat
protection. Such zones are places in the sea
that are free from extractive activities such as
fishing and mining.
Submissions on the plan have closed and
the Queensland Government’s 10-year, legallyenforceable
Moreton Bay Marine Park Zoning
Plan is expected to be unveiled in September
this year, but the debate is not over, according
to the AMCS. It is encouraging people to
continue to put their views to the Queensland
Minister for Sustainability, Climate Change
and Innovation, Andrew McNamara, via its
website (www.amcs.org.au).
Despite the controversy, Bohm says there
is a way forward. “Low impact eco-tourism
is the way forward for Moreton Bay – that’s
‘low impact’ not ‘industrial scale’ tourism.
Our challenge and responsibility is to adopt
lifestyles and businesses that tread lightly on
Moreton Bay.”
Last edited by Mike Delisser; 26-05-2008 at 04:17 PM.
Certainly didn't contain the 'venom" of the last article did it.
I actually agree with what she's saying and I think the more national parks the better. If the fishing and mining is not sustainable than it should be stopped or altered to the point where it will be sustainable. How can you argue for the continuation of non-sustainable practices, it's basically selfish.
I'm a fisherman myself (obviously) but I don't want to see any natural environment being destroyed - which apparently is what's happening to Moreton Bay
Originally Posted by Atriplex
You're taking the piss right?
Well we are starting to move forward. If all the dills like you gave up fishing and using Moreton bay then those people who want to use it responsibly and fish the place would ba able to do so happily.
What do you suggest we do for enetratinment and enjoyment, go to work, go home and wrap ourselves in a cacoon? Yeah there will have to be some changes, but there are smarter ways then the sledge hammer aproach being taken by this Government in it's undisguised quest for votes and power. Bag and size limits do make sense and realistic restrictions on access are fair, not this sucking up to the greens that is barely disguised as public consultation.
Bending over with comments like that will end with us having no access to anything worth a damn.
I don't understand what you've said. Can you please explain how sustainable fishing is a bad thing? All I'm suggesting is that Moreton Bay should be fished sustainably. What's you're problem?Well we are starting to move forward. If all the dills like you gave up fishing and using Moreton bay then those people who want to use it responsibly and fish the place would ba able to do so happily.
What do you suggest we do for enetratinment and enjoyment, go to work, go home and wrap ourselves in a cacoon? Yeah there will have to be some changes, but there are smarter ways then the sledge hammer aproach being taken by this Government in it's undisguised quest for votes and power. Bag and size limits do make sense and realistic restrictions on access are fair, not this sucking up to the greens that is barely disguised as public consultation.
Bending over with comments like that will end with us having no access to anything worth a damn.
What can I say to you're response? Honestly, you haven't actually said anything about what I said.
Atriplex your making the assumption that recreational fishing in Moreton Bay is unsustainable without large green zones or as you put it national parks. If you looked at some of the fish photos posted on this webb site you would see that that was far from the truth. Check out this link http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/sho...d.php?t=131216
All these great fish were caught in the Brizzie River and they wern't even using bait. Earlier last week we were catching snapper to 70 cm in the river and mack tuna were busting up all around us. The river and bay extreamly sustainable with only the tweaking of some size limits and the introduction of quite a few more bag limits.
I agree we shouldn't ignore other enviromental issues like run-off, overpopulation in the SE Corner, polution, too much netting ect ect but green zones will not deliver the sustainabilty result that lower bag and increased size limits will.
But you know what the problem with lower bag and increased size limits is don't you, it won't achieve the aim of the Wildlife Preservation Society, the Aust Marine Conservation Society (AMCS) , the Qld Conservation Council and all the other animal liberationists that seem to have worked their way up the ladder or transfered into the EPA. To them it's cruel to hook a fish and drag it in and even worse if we then go and release it (fishing for enjoyment is an animal libbers worst nightmare). If the public knew what the motivation of these groups was they would get nowhere with their agenda, but if they can hoodwink everyone into thinking the ONLY WAY to make fish stocks sustainable in the bay were Green Zones they stand a much better chance. Fortunatly anyone who fishes the bay knows better.
I can respect anyone's beliefs or values but when they try to enforce that belief or value on to others, well that gives me the sh#ts.
Cheers
Mike
Last edited by Mike Delisser; 26-05-2008 at 11:39 PM.
If we stop fishing, the fish will multiply. Soon there will be so many, that the sea won't be big enough. They will invade the land, and boot us out.
The fish will inherit the Earth, as it should be.
...I hate watermelons. Green on the outside... very, very red in the middle.
Carbon Really Ain't Pollution.
I had a dream like that once. The fish people were terrifying, thank goodness I woke up before it ended......what were we talking about ?If we stop fishing, the fish will multiply. Soon there will be so many, that the sea won't be big enough. They will invade the land, and boot us out.
I didn't make any assumptions about the sustainability of Moreton Bay; all I said was that if it's unsustanable it shouldn't be fished. What's wrong with that?
Sorry Atriplex, I'm a 100% lure fisherman, that means I don't take bait.
If you wish to argue about semantics you'll have to find some one else.
Mike
I'm not being semantic. I just don't understand what you're saying. What's wrong with sustainable fishing? That's all I said basically. What I said and what I didn't say is not a matter of semantics.Sorry Atriplex, I'm a 100% lure fisherman, that means I don't take bait
If you wish to argue about semantics you'll have to find some one else.
Mike
This all sounds too familiar ... where are you Tripcony?
Atriplex (Á-tri-plex) is a plant genus of 100-200 species, known by the common names of saltbush and orache (or orach) ... WHAT'S GREEN ABOUT THAT???
Same thought crossed my mind!This all sounds too familiar ... where are you Tripcony?
Atriplex (Á-tri-plex) is a plant genus of 100-200 species, known by the common names of saltbush and orache (or orach) ... WHAT'S GREEN ABOUT THAT???
Dave
So you are basically Anti- Semantic then !!! We'll have none of that on here thankyou very much!!!!!!!
Posting Permissions