We would all like for your little bloke to be able to catch fish when he grows up BUT:
The existing green zones are based on nothing. There was no credible research done into these closures. They are in place to meet some International convention on protection of sea bed types, bioturbated mud, bioturbated sand, sea grass and coral etc. It really has nothing to do with the fish. It is hoped they will flourish if these types of sea bed are protected.
Now regardless of the sea bed type, fish will not breed nor eat there if the water is of poor quality. The EPA has been neglectful in approaching this. Read the Healthy Waterways report and see how most of the streams running into the Bay are going backwards. The Logan and Albert Rivers especially. Perhaps you should be asking the EPA why this is happening and what they are doing about it.
The DPI is also neglectful with insufficient policing of current size and bag limits. This comes back to the Govt and insufficient funding to police these.
So you think green zones are a good idea and then just let the water quality deteroriate further..there will be no fish for your young bloke regardless of how many closures there are.
No one is against green zones but first it has to be proven that they will make a difference..no point implementing them on the precautionary principle if nothing beneficial is achieved.
We all want fish stocks to improve but it has to be achieved through correct research and implemention of the correct laws and also thorough policing of these. Anything else is just a load of political drivel.
Perhaps, your brain could be used in contacting the EPA..Peter Shooter is the man to contact and tell him of your concerns...if not your young bloke had better be good at his playstation..there won't be any point in going fishing.