grey nurse shark

[bugman]

Jeremy,

You're right - not all the information about Grey Nurse Sharks came out in the RIS - if it had, many would have been complaining about the waste of taxpayers money in mailing out volumes of papers. I think commonsense prevailed in the summary that was attached.

If you want some more info try here:

http://www.deh.gov.au/coasts/species...rse/index.html

If you're unhappy with that, why don't you contact one of the people who has been contributing to the research in NSW in recent years. I'm sure he would be keen to answer your questions if you want to find out more.

http://www.daveharasti.com

I understand your point of view and your argument but comments like - "If they were serious about protecting the sharks, they would stop drum lining on the beaces and long lining in the oceans. They catch ALOT more sharks than rec. fishoes." - don't help your cause.

If you had read the information about GNS you would understand about the animals habitat. Longliners are only allowed to work in the 80m+ contour line and GNS don't seem to live there.

Kerry - I agree with you in this case regarding the decision that was made in lieu of having all the scientific data. However I think erring on the side of caution regarding the extinction of a species may have been a good thing rather than a bad thing. Probably better to act sooner rather than later. If it's found later that they're not under threat then maybe we can have those fishing areas openned back to us. I have extreme doubts about that however.

I must admit I'm a bit of a hypocrite on this issue. I argued for troll fishing in the designated areas - and if not - a total ban for all rec users. The decision now allows me to still scuba in those areas if I so wish. I'm sure I'll be taking up that option in the future.

Bugman

[Duncs]

Heres a reference for anyone to chase up:
Pollard, D.A., Lincoln Smith, M.P., and Smith, A.K. 1996. "The Biology and Conservation Status of the Grey Nurse Shark (Carcarius Taurus Rafinesque 1810) in NSW Australia". Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 6:1-20
Try any uni library in the journal section.

Also the summary of shark data listed in my previous post.

For more references have a look at Section 20 of the RIS. You wont find much Science in the RIS because thats not its job. It exists to inform people of changes to the methods used to manage a species or ecosystem. Different management options are presented along with discussion of the impacts that those changes will have.

It would be good for the GNS to have drum lining and beach meshing banned but the vast majority of the community sees the lives of beach goers as more important.
As for longlining, I think it is a federal govt issue (I could be wrong there). The current federal govt doesn't care about sharks, tuna, marlin or anything else as long as they get the licence fees and tax dollars. It would be the best thing that could ever happen to gamefishing on the east coast if longlining could be banned on the basis that it was endangering the GNS.

The old argument that there isn't enough research, is exactly the argument that commercial fishers use to prevent reforms to their own industry- Tailor, Spotty Mackeral, Orange Roughy, Southern Bluefin Tuna, yellowtail kings are just a few examples. The orange roughy was a relatively recent 'discovery', by the time the research was done, there was no fishery left - a classic example of where the precautionary principle should have been applied but wasn't.

As for divers, its been 20 odd years since its been legal to spear one. They may have been responsible for its initial decline, but Im not sure how punishing them now will bring back the sharks. Perhaps their presence alone is enough to stress them out, but I don't know enough about that side of things.

Cheers

Duncan

[Kerry]

Bugman, For sure if erring on the side of caution and acting sooner than later is the go then fine as hindsight is such a wonderfull but useless thing.

But acting on the information basically provided by parties who deem themselves to be exempt, basically because they say so then that doesn't really fit erring on the side of caution.

My decision if erring on the side of caution, 100% all out until there is better conclusive information one way or another.

Cheers, Kerry.

[bugman]

I really don't want to keep this thread going but I'll have one last say anyway.

Kerry, I agree with you - one out all out.

However.

Look at it from the government or fisheries perspective. The people that did all the hard work in gaining research on the GNS were rec scuba divers who gathered data in their own time and for free.

If the Government bans them - then they've got to fund their own research people to go and dive the areas on a regualr basis.

Under the current new GNS regs, all the Government's data gathering is done for them. Probably not ethical but if you look at it from their point of view you can understand why they did it.

Brett