Be wary of fishers’ claims
JOHN JEAYES
17 Aug, 2010 08:32 AM
I HAVE recently written on the need for marine parks and the storm of letters from the ECOfishers group has been illuminating, as it has displayed the full gamut of tactics and inaccurate claims made by that group.
Rhett Smyth of ECOfishers NSW (The Argus, August 6) sent me “back to the drawing board” to ponder whether Peter Garrett’s creation of the Coral Sea Conservation Zone would result in our fishing zones becoming open slather for the Chinese when the federal government, having used those fishing grounds as collateral, was unable to pay back the stimulus loans.
Well, I pondered that for about five minutes and reread it a couple of times in pure disbelief that ECOfishers could use my praise of the Howard government and Peter Garrett’s plan for a network of marine parks to preserve our fish resources to mount such a ridiculous fear campaign.
So I rang Peter Garrett’s office and read the claim to a staffer who cracked up laughing while I was reading it. I was transferred then to Ben Pratt, an adviser to Peter Garrett while they were in Western Australia at the time.
Ben told me: “The federal government is continuing a process commenced by the Howard government to establish a series of Marine Parks in Commonwealth waters.
“The outcome will be based on best available science and developed in consultation with key stakeholders.
“Our priority is to minimise impact on existing users while at the same time ensuring environmental protection.
“The suggestion of any ulterior motive is absurd.”
This claim is typical of the exaggeration and fear-mongering the ECOfishers will go to to attack anyone writing a contrary opinion.
Mr Smyth also wrote that what I had “neglected” to tell you was that “most” areas where marine parks have been successful had previously suffered exploitation by methods involving cyanide and blasting, and so of course marine park protections in those areas worked well.
He is trying to say the evidence is not valid when talking about our waters.
However, the assertion that “most” areas where marine parks were successful had previously been blasted and poisoned is simply not true.
Mr Smyth also criticises my citing the 245 scientists from 35 countries who confirmed their support for the creation of large-scale ocean marine parks as the best way to help fish stocks recover and restore ecosystems (Pew Environment Group, Global Legacy report) and claims there is no consensus, just opinion, and that those opposing marine sanctuaries can provide a list just as long with an opposing view. Well, let’s see it then.
Leter writer Peter Hemmings pointed to the review of the Role of Marine Reserves as a Fisheries Management Tool by the Bureau of Rural Sciences and the CSIRO.
This review considers sanctuaries are not enough on their own to conserve fish stocks as a management tool.
That is not disputed but the review actually points out that, “Sanctuaries help to make fisheries management more precautionary and contribute to reg- ional conservation goals.
“Sanctuaries assist with biodiversity conservation by providing refugia for many species and reducing impacts of fishing on habitats.”
Nowhere in the review does it say sanctuaries do not work to improve marine biodiversity.
In fact we would all be relieved to see one, just one, peer reviewed scientific paper which states categorically that marine park sanctuaries do not work.
There may be one somewhere in the world, not just NSW, but I can’t find it.
Chris Wallis also wrote to advise me that when I had written of the threatened black cod surviving at Solitary Island Marine Park and Fish Rock I had made a mistake because Fish Rock is not a sanctuary zone.
I did not say it was.
Fish Rock is in fact zoned ‘critical grey nurse habitat’ and yes, you can fish there all the time.
I know. I have dived it and seen the sharks with hooks protruding from mouths and gills. I have also swum beside and marvelled at the beautiful black cod.
Mr Wallis also advises that “ECOfishers was not formed to save the planet. ECOfishers has one mission and that is to stop unnecessary lockouts of recreational fishing”.
One cannot help wondering then why the greenwash in the name.
Ian McCarthy of South West Rocks wrote that the National Parks Association and their fellow green travellers, if they get their way, will have us all trying to survive on warrugal greens and lentil burgers.
Mr McCarthy notes the decreasing commercial fishing activity at SWR and predicts a threat to commercial fishermen and associated businesses.
These claims of financial disaster for coastal towns are bandied about all the time by marine park opponents who refuse to recognise the reports coming from the tourism industry at Bateman’s Bay on the South Coast of NSW.
In a report in February this year, the Marine Parks Authority said it was very pleased with feedback it was receiving from visitors and representatives of the local tourism industry about this year’s summer holiday period in the Eurobodalla Shire and the Batemans Marine Park.
In the report, National Parks Far South Coast regional manager Tim Shepherd said: “We are hearing the message loud and clear virtually every day - ‘it’s been an excellent season.”
The Narooma News editorial on January 6 declared: “... Narooma swells with visitors. The boat ramps and beaches have never been busier.”
John Sloan, in a letter to the editor on the same, page said “it is wonderful to see so many happy fishermen in Narooma for the holidays … the kingfish have been terrific … Ocean Hut has sold something approaching 2000 licences this week alone”.
In the same paper a week later under the headline ‘Billion dollar summer’ it reads … “If it’s not the best season we’ve had it’s certainly up there and this has all occurred at the tail end of the greatest financial crisis since the Depression”.
Mr Shepherd said “the Batemans Marine Park is thriving and so is the local tourism industry. This is fantastic.
“We know for a fact following an AC Nielson survey in 2007 that 95 per cent of those surveyed were either strongly supportive or saw some value in a marine park compared to only 2 per cent who were strongly opposed.
“I think the time has come where even some of the naysayers accept the Batemans Marine Park is a good thing for the community and for fishing.”
If fishers are in favour of marine parks where they are operating, I believe the public need to be wary of the ECOfishers claim to be ‘The Voice of NSW Recreational Fishers’.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by bigbrian47
