CONTROVERSIAL marine park proposal for GSS

[BAIT_MAN]

Fraser to be in marine enclave
Malcolm Cole, State Political Correspondent
20feb06
A CONTROVERSIAL marine park proposal for the Great Sandy Region around Fraser Island has been given the go-ahead but State Cabinet is yet to make the tough decisions about fishing, whale watching and recreational use.

Premier Peter Beattie and Environment Minister Desley Boyle announced the 6000sq km Great Sandy Marine Park would be gazetted in August and said $1.3 million would be spent to launch it.

But the zoning issues that will determine which areas are open to commercial and recreational fishers, tourism industry boats and private vessels have been deferred "because we wanted to give people the chance to put their case to us . . . before that decision was made".

Mr Beattie said it would be difficult to resolve differences between the competing interests in the zoning plan "but it will strike a balance between tourism, recreational fishing and environmental values while minimising the impact on the commercial fishing industry".

"There'll always be some people who hate it," he told the Community Cabinet meeting in Bundaberg.

"In the end we'll probably please no one but we'll do our best to get it right for the long-term future of the reef and those industries."

Ms Boyle said the new park would complete a chain a parks stretching from Double Island Point north of Noosa right up to Cape York.

She said the new park would not only help attract more tourists to the Great Sandy Region but would help ensure the area was managed sustainably.

"Predictions are that there will be a tremendous increase in international tourism to this area over the years ahead, so we're getting in first, as it were, and creating a marine park that will mean there is integrated management across all the state agencies and with local agencies as well," she said.

Ms Boyle admitted the process for creating the marine park had been lengthy, but said it was important to get the balance right between industry, recreation and conservation.

"When I first got into the job, that's what I said – 'how come this is so slow?'.

"And now I know the answer to that.

"We've done a lot of consultation therefore to find a fair way forward.

"I think we're in reach of that but as the Premier said, it is a matter for Cabinet to settle exactly what that balance will be."

[Gazza]

"In the end we'll probably please no one but we'll do our best to get it right for the long-term future of the reef and those industries."

hehehe...tourists come for the RECREATIONAL fishing

and...dolphin-feeding *oops*

p.s. Premier ,maybe not the best strategy outcome you profess, so just please me, make it <5% of known recreational fishing spots , are denied to qlders and recreational tourists to appease...whoever??

[Derek_Bullock]

Premier Peter Beattie and Environment Minister Desley Boyle announced the 6000sq km Great Sandy Marine Park would be gazetted in August and said $1.3 million would be spent to launch it.

$1.3 mil to tell us how we have been ripped off. > > > > > >

[BAIT_MAN]

But the zoning issues that will determine which areas are open to commercial and recreational fishers, tourism industry boats and private vessels have been deferred "because we wanted to give people the chance to put their case to us . . . before that decision was made".

I think we might be going to the polls soon. Why would this be defered. Maybe they are worried about the recreational vote. JMO

[fish2eat]

Looks like the public better get used to eating "freshwater basa" as there won't be any fish caught in Qld soon.

[Fisher_Boats]

Be interesting to see how much of a bum deal us reco's are going to get >

A lot of submissions were against pro's netting in yellow zones.... so we'll see what happens.

TFP has got to be state registered....the sooner the better...it's our only way THE VOTE.

I will be very surprised if there is much there for reco's ...our submissions are just a formality and I don't think Desley and Peter give a rats about recreational fishing.

Enough ranting ...fingers crossed

Col

[Deelirious]

This proposal is going to have a serious impact on all fishery stakeholders both recreational and commercial for a large secton of Estuary and Ocean Beach. It is sad that the press release about the decision is made so long before the decision is implemented. I'm sure it won't be the first time politicians have exploited the publics short term memory. All of this on the back of GBRMPA closures and a host of other regulatory changes.

Death by a thousand paper cuts - at least the Democrats have the balls to come out with a policy that blatent states it intends to ban all forms of fishing on the basis of animal cruelty.

Ed

[Scott_Mitchell]

Is Sunfish & The various Fishing party Branches keeping an eye on these marine parks - and will they be making another submission now reinforcing the importance of recreational angling to the Hervey Bay community. And highlight the low impact sportsfishing has in the area's we want to fish i.e.:drifting over the flats to chase migratory , pelagic species etc.

Morton Bays next - Scotto

[Derek_Bullock]

Is Sunfish & The various Fishing party Branches keeping an eye on these marine parks - and will they be making another submission now reinforcing the importance of recreational angling to the Hervey Bay community. And highlight the low impact sportsfishing has in the area's we want to fish i.e.:drifting over the flats to chase migratory , pelagic species etc.

Morton Bays next - Scotto

Scott

I admire your enthusiasm but as someone who has followed this matter with great interest I am of the opinion that this has been finalised. Submissions closed early last year, the Government then did a lot of negotiation with everyone but recreational fishers. We got snippets here and there of what was happening.

The Fishing Party tried to get to see the final draft that went to Cabinet but were refused. Interestingly the pro fishing groups got to see it as did the Wilderness Society. This has been confirmed by the way.

Boyle and Beattie have already decided what it will be and are now embarking on a spin doctor exercise at the expense of $1.3 million of tax payers money to convince everyone that they have it right.

In saying all that there is no harm in continually pressuring the Govt and all Ministers over this matter and everyone and I mean everyone here, should be writing or emailing there disgust at what the Beattie Government is/has been doing.

See my post above at http://www.ausfish.com.au/cgi-ausfis...num=1139631173 for contact details of all members of Parliament in Queensland.

Wouldnt be any harm in writing to your local/national newspaper as well. See above at http://www.ausfish.com.au/cgi-ausfis...num=1139664930 for contact details of all Australian newspapers.

Regards


Derek

[Derek_Bullock]

Last Update: Wednesday, February 22, 2006. 1:24pm (AEDT)

Marine park fishing restrictions could reduce jobs, industry says

The Queensland Seafood Industry Association says proposals which would make a third of the Great Sandy Marine Park off-limits to commercial fishermen could lead to a loss of jobs.

The association's president, Neil Green, says the idea, put forward by the Fraser Island Defenders Organisation, could have a devastating impact on commercial fishermen's livelihood.

He says while he agrees the park needs to be protected, he does not believe having areas off-limits to fishermen is the answer.

"Commercial fishing in there produces enough product to keep five processors on shore actually working and probably 400 jobs on shore," Mr Green said.

"So if they start taking these minority groups' opinions on shutting things down just for their own personal benefit they quite possibly could cause huge job losses in the area."

[Scott_Mitchell]

Derek:It's never too late up to the point of the final release - even then with enough back lash there can be changes

I personally don't see a lot of merrit working with the commercial sector on these issues - as rec angling is a LOT different to dragging non-selective nets all over the place !

I also notes :-

Review of regulations under the Marine Parks Act 2004

The Marine Parks Regulation 1990 will expire on 1 September 2006 and is proposed to be remade as the Marine Parks Regulation 2006 (MP Regulation). The MP Regulation will need to be redrafted to conform to contemporary legislative practices and standards.

The MP Regulation is the primary legislative instrument to support attainment of the object of the Marine Parks Act 2004 – the conservation of the marine environment.

A major review of the Marine Parks Act 1982 was completed on 12 October 2004 when the new Marine Parks Act 2004 (‘the new Act’) received Royal Assent. The MP Regulation will bring the regulations into line with the provisions of the new Act.

The MP Regulation is intended to replace the current Regulation before it expires. Many aspects of the current Regulation have been incorporated into the new Act. In addition, some provisions in the current Regulation were reviewed and remade during the preparation of a zoning plan for the Great Barrier Reef Coast Marine Park in November 2004.

The MP Regulation is to be remade with a number of changes in effect and operation. These include:

- the application of the ‘Tourism in Protected Areas’ initiative (TIPA) to marine parks. The MP Regulation will enable the Chief Executive to designate ‘particular visitor sites’ as areas where commercial activity agreements will apply. These concepts are currently in place under the Nature Conservation Regulation 1994 and their extension to marine parks will allow for a single agreement to be negotiated for national park islands and the adjoining marine park beaches;
- marine park permit assessment fees. That is, bringing fees into line with current Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority charges for joint State/ Commonwealth marine park permits in the Great Barrier Reef, and reviewing assessment fees for tourism operators where these joint permitting arrangements do not apply;
- investigating merit review processes for development related decisions and non-development related decisions in State marine parks;
- providing for integrated management of protected areas and marine parks by standardising zone names and objectives; and
- creating powers to accredit management plans and other instruments made under legislation other than the Marine Parks Act 2004, and to remove marine park permit requirements in such instances.

Read the Review of Marine Parks Regulation. http://www.epa.qld.gov.au/publications?id=1766

Invitation to comment

Public comments are invited on the proposals contained in the RIS. For further information telephone 07 3227 6124, fax 07 3225 8029, or email mpr.review@epa.qld.gov.au.

Submissions must be in writing and must be submitted to:

Post

Environmental Protection Agency
MPR Review
PO Box 15155
CITY EAST QLD 4002

E-mail mpr.review@epa.qld.gov.au
Fax 07 3225 8029

Marked “MPR Review”
Hand delivered
Naturally Queensland Shop
Ground Floor
160 Ann Street
BRISBANE QLD 4000.
Marked “MPR Review”

The closing date for submissions is 5.00pm on 3 March 2006.

[Scott_Mitchell]

Last Update: Wednesday, February 22, 2006. 1:24pm (AEDT)

Marine park fishing restrictions could reduce jobs, industry says

"Commercial fishing in there produces enough product to keep five processors on shore actually working and probably 400 jobs on shore," Mr Green said.

And I ask " How sustainable is that "

Four hundred jobs - compared to the money spent by local and visiting anglers fishing the Hervey bay region

NSW Fisheries did an interesting study on the value of recreational angling on two coastal towns last year - Would love to see one done on the Hervey Bay / Sandy straights area - http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/aboutus/re...rts/rec-report

Regards Scotto