The Green's policy towards fishing

[Atriplex]

A lot of people seem to hate/strongly oppose the Greens party because they think that their fishing will be compromised by the Greens. Well after reading the Greens environmental and Natural resource policies I would like to disagree with this view.

http://greens.org.au/policies: have a good look as I imagine that you will all be interested to read their policies.


Of course what they say now might be different to their actions; but as you should be able to see under a Green government the fishing should improve.


Perhaps, the Green zones would be unpopular (as they seem to be now) but the area that surrounds a marine national park will always fish better than areas where there is large fishing pressures. I live to the right of a Marine National park called the Bunurong Marine National park which is fantastic because the fishing around it is amazing. The Marine park has been around for as long as I can remember so I and any other fisho can benefit from it right now.


Have a good look and tell me what you think: do you think Fishing would improve if the Greens fishing policies were implemented?

[Atriplex]

Fisheries
Goals
The Australian Greens want:
19. the management of recreational and commercial fisheries to maintain sustainable populations and fisheries, and to minimise the environmental impacts of fishing.
20. protection of fish nursery habitat.
21. environmentally benign aquaculture industries.
22. a strategy to maintain adequate, biologically representative ‘no-take’ areas within each fishery and/or marine bioregion for the conservation of marine biodiversity and fish stocks.


Measures
The Australian Greens will:
23. complete the independent ecological assessment of Australia’s commercial fisheries under the provisions of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.
24. expand fisheries assessments to all Australian fisheries, including recreational fisheries, and develop and implement a national framework for managing recreational and charter fishing.
25. increase the number of Australia's marine reserves, particularly where these improve the resilience of vulnerable fish populations.
26. strengthen and continue Australia’s proactive stance on illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing, including assisting in the development of alternative employment opportunities for impoverished communities now relying on the illegal trade.
27. in cooperation with the states and territories, develop a nationally agreed framework for the assessment and regulation of aquaculture developments based on ecosystems management principles.
28. implement a moratorium on deep-sea bottom trawling in Australian waters and require by-catch reduction in all trawl fisheries.
29. maintain adequate, biologically representative ‘no-take’ areas within each fishery and/or marine bioregion.
30. ban all factory-ship based fishing in Australian pelagic fisheries.

[billfisher]

Perhaps, the Green zones would be unpopular (as they seem to be now) but the area that surrounds a marine national park will always fish better than areas where there is large fishing pressures. I live to the right of a Marine National park called the Bunurong Marine National park which is fantastic because the fishing around it is amazing. The Marine park has been around for as long as I can remember so I and any other fisho can benefit from it right now.


Have a good look and tell me what you think: do you think Fishing would improve if the Greens fishing policies were implemented?

The benifit you describe is totally unproven, epsecially with regard to Australian waters. Any effect of a marine reserve will be smaller in proportion to the overall fishing pressure. And Australia has the lightest fished waters in the world.

They call for no-take zones in every fishery/ bioregion. They don't mention the proportion in the policy you put up but I have heard they are calling for 30% - which will no doubt pick the eye- teeth out of the best fishing spots! I don't see that as giving better fishing. Actually there is nothing wrong with the fishing now in most of our waters.

[Gary Fooks]

Dear Artriplex

My friend you are either a member of the Greens or sadly optimistic

Take a closer look at some policies:


POLICY A5 includes animal “rights” - that’s not just animal welfare but "rights."

That’s vegan speak, and argues for no use of animals – for food, medicine or pets. For students of history it harkens back to animal worship found in the middle ages.
There was an animal rights Bill before the senate last year - in the fine print it would have banned all fishing - All. It didn’t even get a reading but it was put up by a Senator.


POLICY A3 -“the application of the precautionary principle is fundamental” that means lock out fishing … just in case. This is the argument used to justify marine parks. Marine parks ban nothing other than fishing

“the native title claims to sea country by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples must be acknowledged, including their right to sustainably access customary fishing grounds.”

So by exclusion – the traditional rights of my sons to my family’s “traditional“ fishing is NOT respected (Their great grandfather kept the family fed with fish in hard times - such is the tradition)

The Qld Greens policy is even more demanding - of a continuous chain of marine parks along the entire Qld coast.


POLICY D14 Sport and Recreation

No mention of fishing. However “the staging of sporting events and the building of sporting facilities must minimise ecological impacts”




A MEASUREMENT
Let me put this test to you. In the fist year of the GBRMPA marine park some 360 people were found to be fishing in a green zone. Most hadn’t caught a fish – but had a line out and a navigation error.

In an apparent legal drafting error - they ended up with a compulsory criminal record. With all the permanent scars on ones record. After a time the law was changed yet these 360 remain ‘criminals”

Would the Greens support legislation to quash the criminal record? (still maintaining the hefty fines - about $2000)..

Answer me this question and we will see if your theory about anglers and Greens has a chance.


Gary Fooks
Eco Friendly Fishing Association.


PS – let’s look at what the Greens have done in Europe

A fishing licence in Germany is a 30 hour TAFE course - all on ecology - nothing on tying knots or safety

Catch and release is banned (no putting back the small ones)

Tournaments of any kind are banned

Live baiting is banned etc etc

[billfisher]

One thing though you may have plenty of time to go fishing with a Greens government. Their policies have been described as economic vandalism by those who should know.

[TimiBoy]

Not to mention the fact that you won't be allowed to use your car to tow to the ramp (unnecessary use) and; you won't be able to start the motor because
(1) they say you should row,
(2) fuel will be taxed at a rate of 400% to reduce demand
(3) if you have a valid use you can't do it anyway because a bird might get cancer from the exhaust.

Let alone not being able to fish with hooks (they hurt fish) or nets (they drown fish) or a spear (only traditional for Aborigines are to use these), or a club, unless you can prove you are Neanderthal (red hair is a good start).

I respect your attempt to read what they say and to be balanced in your appraisal of it, it shows a maturity that many out there could do with. BUT -

Do NOT trust anything a Greenie says. They are, like all political forces, only interested in getting in to power. The difference with them is, though, that once they get there they will be far more radical than anything you can possibly imagine. They believe in telling you to think and do, because you do not share the same ideals regarding the environment as they do. They believe that only their opinion has validity, and respect no other position.

Cheers,

Tim

[Pi]

Hi,

The Greens - like a watermelon, a thin layer of green but red all the way through. They are not an environmental party, but more of a socialist party with a thin veil of green credentials.

Phil

[Jim_Tait]

I think destroying the world for capitalistic policies which sees the world's wealth concentrated in fewer and fewer hands and the disparity between the haves and have nots greater than ever - is more radical than anything I have ever seen the Green Party promote - goodonya Atriplex for having the guts to put you views on the site - I by no means support every Greens Party policy - but I do recognise that without major socio - economic paradigm change the world is going to be toast - I'm a greenie and proud and I dare anyone to challenge my fisher credentials !

PS We're all going to be a lot fitter and healthier and have more productive fisheries when we have to paddle our boats to go fishing!

[TimiBoy]

Bunk. People have been screaming that since society began. Nothing's changed, and nothing will. Dreaming of a paradigm shift is like wanting to fly. Armageddon will come first - people have been predicting that for a couple of millennia too.

Greens Party reads like the Communist Manifesto.

Sorry for disagreeing!

Cheers,

Tim

[Jim_Tait]

Nothing's changed, and nothing will. Dreaming of a paradigm shift is like wanting to fly. Armageddon will come first - people have been predicting that for a couple of millennia too.

Well I'd suggest that the world's never had 6.5 billion rock apes (i.e. humans) on it before (and counting) - so there's one key change I'd note.

Wanting to fly...well humans have pulled that one off (with costs of course!)- so maybe dreaming of a paradigm change isn't out of the question - especially if they're are confronted by the increasingly real prospect of Armageddon - not the big fella up top doing his nana in a big bang - but more like a slow whimper of natural resource overexploitation and drowing in our own sh**t and suffering the accumulated cost of global ecosystem collapse.

PS I have more faith in human capacity than that...including our ability to change and embrace paradigm change!

[TimiBoy]

Well I'd suggest that the world's never had 6.5 billion rock apes (i.e. humans) on it before (and counting) - so there's one key change I'd note.

Wanting to fly...well humans have pulled that one off (with costs of course!)- so maybe dreaming of a paradigm change isn't out of the question - especially if they're are confronted by the increasingly real prospect of Armageddon - not the big fella up top doing his nana in a big bang - but more like a slow whimper of natural resource overexploitation and drowing in our own sh**t and suffering the accumulated cost of global ecosystem collapse.

PS I have more faith in human capacity than that...including our ability to change and embrace paradigm change!

I was probably a little remiss in my comment - there is a big difference between Green thinkers, and Political Greenies. I think of myself as a conservationist, to the extent I think sensible. There is a very significant difference between what I believe is sensible, and what The Australian Greens Party wants to do (not what they say, but what they are really after).

Just because a person is Green, doesn't mean they have to join the Party, Comrade!

Cheers,

Tim

[CHAPPY]

I was probably a little remiss in my comment - there is a big difference between Green thinkers, and Political Greenies. I think of myself as a conservationist, to the extent I think sensible. There is a very significant difference between what I believe is sensible, and what The Australian Greens Party wants to do (not what they say, but what they are really after).

Just because a person is Green, doesn't mean they have to join the Party, Comrade!

Cheers,

Tim

Dead right , I support the Broncos but I do not have to wear their jursey. We can fish responsibly without having to be a card carrying member of the greens. Some of the policies the partY has are left field and down right pie in the sky. Anyway who are they to tell me what to do? THATS WHY IVE GOT A WIFE.

CHAPPY

[Jim_Tait]

amen brother!!

[Atriplex]

I'm glad we can all have a proper discussion about this

Billfisher: More fish means more fish; I don't mean to be rude but if green zones are put in areas were fish breed, more fish will breed, and therefore there will be more fish, which should mean that there are more fish out there that anglers can take.

Perhaps as you say the areas surrounding Marine Parks don't actually fish any better than your average fishing spot, but Green Zones will still equate to more fish.

It's great that Australia experiences relatively very low fishing pressure, but that does not justify getting rid of Green Zones and preventing the establishment of Green Zones (this is just a general statement). If Australia's fishing improves because of Green Zones other nations may be pressed to implement similar messages.

You may remember not to long ago there was all this debate about the Kyoto protocol. Australia didn't want to sign it for reasons I didn't understand; us and the US were the only 1st world countries that didn't sign to it. Which was bad in itself, but if I remember correctly China said that they weren't going to sign the Kyoto because Australia wasn’t going to. You see, if Australia is proactive environmentally other countries may follow which would be great.

[Atriplex]

Gary Fooks:

I'll answer your response systematically

I don't vote. EDIT: Because I'm not old enough.

The Greens aren't all vegan; I have fished with plenty of Greens whom love their fishing and are great fishermen and women. In fact the best fisherman i've fished ever fished votes for the greens.

I can't see anything wrong with animals having rights.

"POLICY A3 -“the application of the precautionary principle is fundamental” that means lock out fishing … just in case. This is the argument used to justify marine parks. Marine parks ban nothing other than fishing"

I'm pretty sure your misunderstanding the comment; perhaps, the policy is just advocating conservation before it's too late.

“the native title claims to sea country by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples must be acknowledged, including their right to sustainably access customary fishing grounds.”

So by exclusion – the traditional rights of my sons to my family’s “traditional“ fishing is NOT respected (Their great grandfather kept the family fed with fish in hard times - such is the tradition)"

I'm sure acknowledging Aboriginal cultural traditions won't really affect you too badly.

POLICY D14 Sport and Recreation

No mention of fishing. However “the staging of sporting events and the building of sporting facilities must minimise ecological impacts”

That seems like a good thing to me


A MEASUREMENT
Let me put this test to you. In the fist year of the GBRMPA marine park some 360 people were found to be fishing in a green zone. Most hadn’t caught a fish – but had a line out and a navigation error.

In an apparent legal drafting error - they ended up with a compulsory criminal record. With all the permanent scars on ones record. After a time the law was changed yet these 360 remain ‘criminals”

Would the Greens support legislation to quash the criminal record? (still maintaining the hefty fines - about $2000)..

Answer me this question and we will see if your theory about anglers and Greens has a chance.

I'm not to sure what the greens would do. Perhaps they would and perhaps they wouldn't, anyhow the Greens probably wouldn't make the situation worse.



PS – let’s look at what the Greens have done in Europe

A fishing licence in Germany is a 30 hour TAFE course - all on ecology - nothing on tying knots or safety

Catch and release is banned (no putting back the small ones)

Tournaments of any kind are banned

Live baiting is banned etc etc

The only questionable thing that the Greens and Europe have done is banning catch and release. But I can't really properly question their actions when I don't know the full story.