Marine Park Mayhem
Posted by Meggs | Environmental Posts | Posted on December 8th, 2008
Greetings all,
I have been asked to provide a response to the NSW National Parks Association’s proposed 103,000 hectare marine park that will encompass waterways from the Central Coast to the Royal National Park.
Now most readers of this blog will realise that I am all for conservation, protection of the species, tag and release and the rights of fish stocks to be maintained to actively breed and multiply. To this end I have raised issues where the minimum sizes allocated to fish that can be taken conflicts with their chance to breed successfully.
I have discussed at length the life cycles of various fish – particularly those caught in northern Australian fisheries.
I am absolutely passionate about the conservation of fish stocks for the future.
So where do I stand on the issue of the proposed marine parks?
Well, let me put some perspective on the proposal…
For those of you that have fished in areas such as the Whitsundays you would be familiar with the different zones allocated to marine parks. The point is that many areas within the so-called marine park will still be able to be fished.
The problem for anglers will be that the you can bet your bottom dollar popular spots, and for the resident fishermen the most accessible fishing areas, will be targeted by the NPA as this has happened time and time again when any new marine park has been announced.
The complaint that it will send the fishing industry broke in NSW I believe is a red herring. Yes there will be marine parks, but yes people will still be allowed to fish. Even our charters will be able to adapt – just as they have done in other areas throughout the country.
Personally what I would like to see is more research into the life cycles of various fish species to ensure that the areas that we intend to protect make sense. Sorry but I don’t tend to see people for instance fishing directly for sea horses, hump backed whales and sea sponges and yet these were all referred to in the NPA’s release as being preserved due to zoning. Hmmm… curious.
The fishing lobby maintains that the greatest threat to our fish species is more likely the quality of the water when it is affected by pollution – particularly the ballast water of international ships. This is a stance that I tend to agree with and I have written before about the impacts of pollution in my Environmental Posts.
My take is that whatever the outcome, we as anglers need to protect the future of fish stocks and if this means that we have to yield to the NPA then so be it. Our fish need to be protected to breed and flourish and if we have to give up some grounds where this takes place I don’t believe it is a bad thing.
Is this the end of fishing as we know it for people living along the coastline of Gosford to Wollongong? No I don’t think so. In fact, if the proposal leads to a better informed community on the need to conserve particular areas for the survival of the species then that’s great.
I don’t agree with David Lockwood’s article in last week’s Sun Herald that “Anglers will fight them (the NPA) on the beaches”.
There just won’t be the need to.
For the full release see;
http://www.npansw.org.au/web/news/media_release.php?id=329
I’d be happy to respond to concerned anglers on this issue.
Sea you later,
Skipper Meggs