South Australia needs World Class Sanctuary Zones

[TJwildernessSA]

We need marine sanctuaries so that all marine species to be able to exist in their own right. It is about building the resilience of our marine environment and protecting the important areas for ecosystem functioning to be able to be sustainable. Fishery management is different from conservation management!But they can complement each other. It is long over due our marine environment was given protection

[fr33zie187]

Become a fan of "SA marine parks" on facebook and show your support.

[danstancobra]

You talked about the difference between environmental management as oppose to fisheries management. We have fisheries management to look after the species we target already, yes! they probably could be improved as I’m sure they will as we learn more. We all understand that generally if you remove fishing from an area, it will have a greater number of species anglers target, please explain one thing to me, how will a no fishing area protect the species that are eaten by the fish angler’s target?

[danstancobra]

how will a no fishing area protect the species that are eaten by the fish angler’s target?

[MICKSWINCH]

Michael Pengillymp for finness – The Wilderness Society have sent me correspondence which is absolute garbage. There are many stories going around, which most are incorrect.

[TJwildernessSA]

@MICKSWINCH I agree there is alot of misinformation going around - one that marine parks are completely no take - this is a complete untruth. As i am involved with the campaign material production I would be interested in what information you are referring to? and whether you opinion is based upon personal opinion or fact.

[danstancobra]

Considering that the smaller species, that spend most of their lives living in the areas that are mostly effected by the things we do on land, and as most reports show are the species in most danger and in greatest need for protection, your no take areas will do nothing to protect them but instead increase the pressures on them by having a larger number of the their predators in the area, and what will happen to the species anglers target when they run out of food in that area?

[TJwildernessSA]

I dont think pro-sanctuary people are closed minded people that aren't open to others opinions. From my experience I have found the opposite to be true.

People want to be informed about the issue - but if there mind still supports sanctuaries despite hearing the opposite side u r calling this closed. If I was closed I could have blocked u from posting despite having a difference of opinions as fishing forums have done to me.

[MICKSWINCH]

The Liberal Party has received numerous complaints from people who in good faith were asked to and did provide the locations of where they fish. They have been shocked to see that in many instances this is exactly where the sanctuary zones have been located!

[MICKSWINCH]

We anticipated that the community would have valid reasons to be concerned about the Government’s zoning, which is why we sought to amend the recent Marine Parks (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Amendment Bill so that all of the zones would be subject to greater parliamentary oversight. This was unfortunately opposed by the Labor Party and the Greens.

[MICKSWINCH]

This means that the zoning process is entirely an internal decision of the Government. Anyone who has concerns should make a submission through their MPLAG by the end of January and also cc it to Minister Caica, the Liberal Opposition and their local council. It would also be beneficial to call talkback radio to tell of how these zones will impact on yourself, your family and your local community.

[MICKSWINCH]

This Government needs to understand that it cannot take away people’s livelihoods by the stroke of a pen on a map. Marine parks will not work unless the process is transparent, the community supports them and is actively involved in the process.

[MICKSWINCH]

All South Australians also need to understand that fresh and sustainable locally caught seafood will be denied to them through this process. We will ultimately be more reliant on imported seafood which is subject to much less rigorous environmental and contamination standards.

Contacts

Hon Paul Caica MP, Minister for Environment and Conservation

GPO Box 1047, Adelaide SA 5001

minister.caica@sa.gov.au

[danstancobra]

@MICKSWINCH Very good point, be carful that our attempt to improve the our ocean isn’t responsible for the destruction of other countries oceans, and the health of our kids, by importing more poor quality polluted sea food from developing countries. Who have very poor fishing practices, look at what the push for eco fuels has done to them, land which was once used to grow there food is now used to grow fuel for rich countries. We feel good about our selves but their kids are starving

[TJwildernessSA]

No doubt there will always be many reports for and against as is the nature of science. In term of Tim F statement just protecting one species is not an effective way of looking after an environmental association that the species is dependent upon.

Are u familiar with naturelinks and the wildcountry concepts?

[danstancobra]

@TJwildernessSA These reports I am quoting and taking about are not against, but for marine parks, everything I have said is in your own reports, I haven’t used any fishery based reports, as you will just say they are biased. I think your missing his point, protecting the habitat doesn’t ensure you are protecting the species.

Vaguely! in these naturelinks, I assume you are replacing lost habitat, and not just locking people out of the area in the hope that that will protect the biodiversity

[danstancobra]

Quote former Australian of the Year Professor Tim Flannery,director of the Australian Wildlife Conservancy

''I guess I shouldn't be so frank but even the environmental organisations don't care so much about individual species for some reason. They just want to preserve ecosystems but don't see the inevitability that if you keep losing species, you don't have ecosystems, so it is incredibly important to draw the line at 'no more species will go extinct in our country'.''

[danstancobra]

Why are pro sanctuary people so closed minded to other opinions, why do they ignore it when they are shown that the very studies they put up, highlight that their theory doesn’t work?

Stopping people fishing in an area will not and can not protect the biodiversity of the area, we should be looking at protecting individual species that need it and drop this biodiversity crap.

[TJwildernessSA]

In NSW, the Batemans Bay Marine Park has been in place since 2005. The manager of the marine park has confirmed that fish populations have increased by 210 per cent, including the popular snapper.

"On the south coast of NSW, local newspapers have had headlines such as 'Get on the snapper revival' and 'The best snapper fishing in a decade',"

[danstancobra]

@TJwildernessSA

I said early on that you don’t need to spend millions of dollars and have a uni degree to work out if you stop people fishing in an area it will eventually have larger numbers of the species anglers usually target, but is this advantageous for the biodiversity? Is this were you tell us that you want sanctuaries so there will be more fish for us to catch?

[TJwildernessSA]

@danstancobra As i have mentioned before there is studies and articles on the spill over effect of marine sanctuaries which are proven to benefit fisheries. But no i'm not telling you this it is what others have proven.

We need to ensure the system of marine parks is world class - that the zoning is done right in the right places. There are areas that are essential for marine ecosystem functioning such as mangroves and estuaries. We want the right places protected, including nurseries etc

[danstancobra]

Why don’t you tell us the snapper numbers in the Great Barrier Reef marine park?

[TJwildernessSA]

@danstancobra Since you seem to be very well informed and my little girl has just woken up - how about you find out these figure and share them here.

[danstancobra]

In QLD they just introduced a closed season for snapper, due to (apparently) their low numbers, I guess years of marine parks in that state didn’t protect the snapper, I guess the spill over effect didn’t work there!

[TJwildernessSA]

Claims that marine parks in SA are negative for the regional economy and will damage local tourism are misleading. You only have to look at the Great Barrier Reef to know what sort of positive economic benefits are on offer from a marine park

[TJwildernessSA]

"The head of the Great Australian Bight is one of the most important breeding and calving sites in the world for the southern right whale. Populations of these whales are still slowly recovering from whaling, so they need safe havens for their young to grow and thrive." here is also a local case example of the how a marine national parks has been successful in SA waters.

[danstancobra]

Getting a little desperate there are we? Time to bring out the emotion species, The Australasian, South American and South African southern right whales don’t mix so the area might be important to Australian whales but would have little importance on non Australasian whales, I wasn’t aware anglers targeted whales, and in this case they don’t even target their food, but they do target some species that compete with the whales for their food.

[TJwildernessSA]

@danstancobra I wasn't aware marine parks where all about fish. I Wouldn't call it desperate ;) - i would call it thinking about more than just the fish in the sea!

"Up to 95 per cent of fish species in SA are unique. There are almost 8,000 marine species found in these waters, including more than 700 species of fish," That is a lot of diversity. Lets not be tricked into thinking that marine parks are just about fish.

[danstancobra]

But removing fishing will protect all the species, the entire biodiversity, you don’t see the irony with your comments obviously.

I agree dont be tricked!

[TJwildernessSA]

@danstancobra I wonder if you understand the basis of environmental management as oppose to fisheries management. The fact the coastal waters do not currently have any system of environmental management alone should be enough to warrant the need.

Also to say that our oceans have not been affected and are in need of rehabilitation is also irony. Trawling affects our ocean beds, long line fishing affect more than the targeted fish species. There needs to be some areas that are off limits.

[danstancobra]

@TJwildernessSA

You talk about the difference between fishery and environmental management, then you list a number of things that clearly fall under fishery management, environmental management should include the entire environment not just some selected areas, for it to have any real effect, from the mountains to the oceans. And just for the record bottom trawling has been shown to be beneficial on soft bottoms, stimulating growth, and long line fishing, I am not even going there.

[danstancobra]

Do you understand the model you are proposing, take a percentage of each unique environment, and remove fishing and mining pressures from it so it can better handle the other threats, like an insurance policy for the future, that’s your idea of environmental management. Now tell us again that this is not anti fishing! Once you have your protected areas it will be harder to do the anything about the real threats, this model is a lazy solution and should not be expectable.

[danstancobra]

We want real action to do something about the pollutants running off land into our water, we want to re establish lost habitat and create new habitat, we want to look at the individual species that are under threat and introduce measures to really protect them, we want to tighten the regulations with oil and shipping companies to reduce the threat of accidents and introduced pests. And work with all the people involved to come up with the best solutions, not create conflict!

[TJwildernessSA]

@danstancobra I agree with you whole heartedly in this comment. I'd be interested in what you would propose to do as you state above - what is your personal vision to how marine conservation could work effectively?

[danstancobra]

@TJwildernessSA in less then 500 characters

[TJwildernessSA]

@danstancobra I agree the model needs work - this is why consultation takes place - but not everyone is going to agree with the end result and that is why we are advocating for world class marine parks which have learnt the lessons from other areas.

South Australia has an opportunity to get the system right. Also if we continue to delay implementing a system of marine environmental management then all of the areas you are concerned about will just continue to be threatened.

[TJwildernessSA]

@danstancobra I don't think you will find much out there in support of positive impacts from bottom trawling.

There are tens of thousands of trawlers worldwide. They fish for shrimp and finfishes. Some bottom trawling operations catch 20 pounds of bykill for every 'pound' of targeted species. Studies show that bottom trawling kills vast numbers of corals, sponges, fishes and other animals. Bottom trawling is the most destructive of any actions that humans conduct in the oceans

[TJwildernessSA]

@danstancobra also look at Margot L. Stiles, Julie Stockbridge, Michelle Lande, Michael F. Hirshfield paper from 2010. Bottom trawling is one of the most destructive ways to catch fish, and is responsible for up to half of all discarded fish and marine life worldwide.

Also the studies upon the effects of trawling seagrasses - You can not tell me this is beneficial - it effectively strips the ocean floors.

[danstancobra]

Ok PEWs Oceana, first of all why would an operator drag his expensive net along coral and rocks? Second this report is full of selective information like most or PEW stuff and one of their goals is to turn recreational anglers against commercial guys, which they have been quite successful in some areas hence the bottom trawling banned areas.

goolge these first 2 of the top of my. search NOAA Soft Bottom Trawl Impact Study

and 

Effects of Bottom Trawling on Soft-bottom Sea Whip

[danstancobra]

Recent studies show that bottom trawling on soft bottom isn’t that destructive, and can in fact stimulate growth and feeding, although still far from being conclusive, recent studies in NZ have shown that trawled areas are richer in biodiversity then non trawled(sorry cant find the study right now) her in PPB since the banning of scallop dredging the scallop numbers have reduced drastically, one theory is that introduced pests are responsible the other being the banning of the scallop dredging

[danstancobra]

As for nets not letting anything through that couldn’t be further from the truth, not only are most nets designed to target certain species, and reduce bycatch, but the areas they working are selected to also reduce bycatch, think about it time is money why would an operator waste the time if he was catching 20 times more bycatch?

Google Annual status report 2010- East Coast Otter Trawl Fishery

And

adl.brs.gov.au/data/warehouse/­fishrp9abc_011/fishrp9abc_0111­011a/FishStatusReport2009.pdf

[TJwildernessSA]

Section 10 of the literature review "more than fishy business" by Dr Melissa Nursey Bray section has 51 examples of the effectiveness of MPA's including local Australian studies and global studies.

Edgar & Barnett (1999), Kelly et al (2000), Rice (1989), Wallac (1999), Murawski et al, Rogers-Bennett & Pearse (2001), Shears et. al. (2006). The list goes on - we can learn alot from other examples across the world.

[danstancobra]

Have you even read the full reports? Let’s take the first one Edgar & Barnett (1999), clearly says that since the introduction of the marine park, the scallop numbers in the protected area have drastically declined, due to the increased numbers of their predators, now unless you don’t consider scallops part of the biodiversity, doesn’t this show that a sanctuary doesn’t protect the biodiversity of the area as claimed by you and your group? Are you overstating the benefits of protected areas?

[TJwildernessSA]

@danstancobra Or are you understating them by pulling one case example of a full report which clearly shows the overall benefits? The Lit review clearly outlines 63 science-based studies that provide evidence that the healthier environments found in marine sanctuaries led to an increase in fish numbers and a decrease in marine predators, such as the Crown of Thorns Starfish.

[danstancobra]

@TJwildernessSA

It’s not just one case example I have read dozens of full reports and most show that a sanctuary doesn’t protect the biodiversity, the one you mention about the reduced Crown of Thorns Starfish, says the most likely reason is that their is a reduced number of medium size fish in the area.

Of course they show a healthy environment that’s what they set out to do. You need to read the full reports to get the full picture.

[TJwildernessSA]

Or are you understating them by pulling one case example of a full report which clearly shows the overall benefits? The Lit review clearly outlines 63 science-based studies that provide evidence that the healthier environments found in marine sanctuaries led to an increase in fish numbers and a decrease in marine predators, such as the Crown of Thorns Starfish.

[TJwildernessSA]

Personally i don't have any vested interest - except for the fact i have an amazing child who is 2 who i want to be able to enjoy the full benefits from marine parks.

What are your vested interests ?

[danstancobra]

@TJwildernessSA Have you got one local study that shows that sanctuary zones protect the biodiversity of that area yet?

[TJwildernessSA]

It is important that the need for marine conservation and education is not watered down.

Sanctuaries are essential for spill over effects and to create places for species to be able to be left alone and live in their home.

Marine parks are long overdue and sanctuaries are an important part of them.

[TJwildernessSA]

Some of the media over the last few weeks driven by antimarine parks sentiments have been misleading!

The price of seafood will go up. The biggest issue that will drive seafood up is overfishing!

That marine parks will cause deaths. Marine parks are multiple use the sanctuary zones are the only places with are none extractive- 90% of our coastal waters will remain open to fishing. The misleading channel 10 report implied the whole of a marine park would be off limits, this completely untrue.

[danstancobra]

@TJwildernessSA

90% of all big fish are gone from our oceans, there will be no fish in our oceans by 2048, we are fishing up the food chain, our fishery is being over fished, fishing is the biggest threat our oceans faces, a marine sanctuary will protect the biodiversity from overfishing climate change and other threats, ect……..

[TJwildernessSA]

Scientific papers are works on progress and are open to criticism that is the nature of science. They r based upon a concept and they explore through facts and backed ip by others references.

What is your thoughts of literature review? As this explores all available papers on a subject. Don't just assimilate to PEW, they r 1 organization inthe enviro sector - also this review was done independently.

[danstancobra]

PEW is just one organization. Now that’s funny!

What started of as a small group of USA scientist, with their almost unlimited resources started the PEW ocean agenda, along the way this group took the media, politicians, government agencies and the non-governmental organizations (including the wilderness society), using its endless supply of cash, to make sure there theories were the only alternatives considered, today more adept at feeding the media frenzy then actual real science.

[TJwildernessSA]

@danstancobra this sounds like they are an effective environmental organisation. A rarity to have one which is well funded, and effective at engaging media, politicans, government agencies and non-governmental organisation.

I think the same can be said for the commercial fishing industry in all of the statements above particularly more adept at feeding the media frenzy then actual real marine conservation

[TJwildernessSA]

I wonder than what the correct figurers are?Do u have this information available? I wonder how

From talking to fishers it has been interesting to hear their stories and the amount of people who have noticed a decline in catch rates. It has also been encouraging the support for marine parks as this issue is masked by misinformation and a lack of understanding.

There are lots of anti- PEW sentiments but I wonder what vested interests people driving the criticism of any marine science because

[danstancobra]

@TJwildernessSA The vested interest are, we actually want to do something that will work, show me one local study were a marine sanctuary, protects the entire biodiversity of the area, so far I have shown in 3 of the examples, given by pro sanctuary zones people, put up as an attempt to show studies of how well marine parks work, that they in fact don’t.!

You say you want to have open discussions with anglers, but your actions tell a different story! What are your vested interest?

[TJwildernessSA]

"World per capita fish consumption has climbed steadily from an average of 9.9 kilograms in the 1960s to 16.4 kilograms in 200.5 Technology allows us to fish more species in more spaces more efficiently than ever before. Nets have been cast wider and deeper, gradually draining the oceans first of big fish. Ninety per cent of the world's big fish have disappeared from the ocean. 100 million sharks are killed each year for their fins.

[danstancobra]

@TJwildernessSA

Here we go again, 90% of the big fish are gone came from B Worms paper, which has since been criticized for not one but a number of things, one being the data used, it was flawed and even Worm has come out and said so, two the peer review process it underwent has put a shadow on the entire peer review process, and the fact that PEW started funding media to give them the missing link, they now control the scientist, the science and the media which promotes its crap

[danstancobra]

And probably control most of our environmental groups, the fact that WWF publicly came out against PEWs Coral Reef marine park, when it was announced, yet a few weeks later fell into line, is a clear example of this.

But yet this paper alone with others that have been shown to be flawed and incorrect are still used as references for papers written today.

[danstancobra]

90% of the big fish are gone from our oceans, is an incorrect statement from a flawed paper, but groups like this, that know its false or should if they cared about the environment like they claim, continue to use it to con the people and there own supporters, along with other un truth’s.

[danstancobra]

Does the Wilderness Society agree with the piece from Jenny Moxham in the Geelong Advertiser?

Google JENNY MOXHAM : Cruel, cold, stupid ... and hardly sporting

[TJwildernessSA]

@danstancobra i just read the article mentioned above, and no we have no comment in response to Jenny Moxham's personal feelings about fishing being cruel, cold, stupid. You can tell she is a passionate vegetarian and disagrees with fishing.

What we are in support of is a system of protection for our marine environment. Which is long overdue.

[TJwildernessSA]

The Wilderness Society (SA), is committed to talking with fishers and creating a dialogue. Our volunteers have been engaging fishers on jetties and beaches, at boat ramps and we have had stalls at fishing shows.

We have very much been committed to engaging with fishers as can also been seen through these comments. We have a lot in common - a lot of us are fishers too the recreational kind.

[TJwildernessSA]

We all need to be specific when we are referring to marine parks from which state! Each have various design and meanings.

In SA marine parks are multiple use and the majority of the park still allows fishing. In fact in SA the proposed zoning 90% of the coastal waters are still open to fishing.

The Vic model is different. Sanct. Donot allow oil and gas plants.

I agree we all have a lot of common ground we care about our seas.

The Wilderness Society is committed to public relations with fis

[RJ5023]

You were unbelievably lucky to locate and film all those beautiful creatures in our degraded, overfished and nearly destroyed SA coastal waters. Must have been just about the last of each of those species - well done TJ. No doubt about it, without your help the whole place would become a marine wasteland. It's obvious that up till now, no-one has cared less and we've just about destroyed the place. Your video proves it. Wilderness Society free zone needed - no mindless propaganda allowed.

[TJwildernessSA]

@RJ5023 The video footage is thanks to Ron and Valerie Taylor. It is is incredible footage and highlights just how diverse our marine environment is. Despite the sarcastic tone from your message. We all care for our marine environment, fishers conservationists and we have more common ground then given credit. I believe that sanctuaries are needed, and so is marine education - we all have a part to play, and your right mindless propaganda is not needed danstancobra video post counts in this

[RJ5023]

@TJwildernessSA OK. It's absolutely true that we fishers care a great deal for our marine environment - and that is a fact. Why not - we use it far more than you ever will! A challenge for you. If you truly believe that conservationists and fishers share common goals - and I believe we should - start a dialogue directly with all 236,000 of us. Let's find the common ground without relying on DENR playing umpire to achieve it via legislation. A good outcome for all, wouldn't you say?

[lysflet]

@RJ5023 Hey there, I was just wondering if you could let me know how to start a dialogue directly with fishers? It is important and I would love your feedback on how to go about the process. (But honestly from the aggression and violent language I've seen on some sites, facebook pages, and comments on videos like this, it seems that calm conversation and compromise is impossible - if I had to personally engage with any of the people who have written those things I would fear for my own safety.)

[RJ5023]

@lysflet Yep, most rec fishers are ill-informed violent yobbos! They are also your brothers, Grandpa, Aunt, cousins, neighbours, and children. They are all around you. - talk to them and find out what they want. If you can find a way to communicate with all 236,000 though please let me know. Maybe a professional Wilderness Society public relations expert can come up with some ideas? Keep in mind that recreational fishing is a social activity, not mass killing. It binds families together.

[lysflet]

@RJ5023 Thanks for your response. Personally I'm disappointed because I've tried to talk to rec fishers about what's currently happening with marine parks process - but I've been met with unreasonable opposition. For example, I've been blocked on some facebook pages for simply asking questions and posting links to interesting information - always in a non-aggressive and balanced way. I feel frustrated because my attempts at reasonable dialogue have been knocked down.

[RJ5023]

@lysflet I'm not surprised. Fishers commonly feel that greenies just want us to stop fishing. You haven't done enough to convince us otherwise. Talk to peole you know who fish - not to strangers. Show them that you REALLY have no issue with their pastime. Show them that you've got no problem with them taking wild fish - within limits. Show how you support them. In our current situation people can talk - groups can't. Fishers and greenies really do have a LOT in common. You'd be surprised.

[lysflet]

@RJ5023 I know that it's only a minority of people who act in that way but there is so much anger out there, and even worse, there is so much misinformation and blatant lies being published all the time about what marine sanctuaries will mean for all of us - to all those who are publishing information about marine parks, check out the facts first. It would be great if we could all work together to come up with a reasonable solution for our people and environment. Cheers :-)

[TJwildernessSA]

I have also uploaded a link to a pdf (in the info section of this video) which has straight up information about the 'tall stories' being told about marine parks - local fishers will particularly be interested.

[danstancobra]

@TJwildernessSA

Using catch rates to show a decline in fish stocks? Catch rates are a poor and inaccurate indicator at looking at species stocks in that context. There are so many other factors that influence catch rates that it’s not funny. This is exactly why so called environmental groups have lost the trust of anglers, stop trying to use science to prove your point, and start using it to protect our environment, we are all on the same side.

[TJwildernessSA]

sanctuaries zones are part of Marine Parks - the majority of Marine Parks will remain open to fishing! We are not trying to change this. what sanctuaries will do is set up important breeding, feeding, nursery areas as non-extractive, this includes drilling for oil.

the fact that our oceans do not have a system of protection todate is crazy, it is about time the government was serious about looking after our marine environment and marine parks are going to help this happen.

[TJwildernessSA]

In response to some of the comments below. What marine parks will also establish is management plans which will address some of the issues mentioned below. If we want to be serious about marine ecosystem management we need to realise that fishing is one aspect of the story.

One which brings up a lot of emotion because it is the number 1 recreational past time. Fishery management is addressed through the fisheries act.

[TJwildernessSA]

It is good to see a healthy discussion on this video.

There is alot of misinformation and lack of understanding to what marine parks mean. I've added a link to a literature review in the information page - it is well worth reading, particularly because it has reviewed over 350 'peer review papers'.

[danstancobra]

A marine park is not the way to protect our marine environment, as clearly shown in Worm and Hilborn’s 2009 paper, as shown in the marine parks in Queensland the example always put up to show the success and yet this year they closed they snapper season in Queensland, due to low numbers, like in Tasmania where the marine park have increased the numbers of the species anglers usually target but unfortunately they have eaten all the scallops and there numbers are dangerously low

[danstancobra]

We have tools to protect the species anglers target, bag and size limits and closed seasons, the spawn of some species anglers targeted is monitored, so we know years in advance what the numbers will be, it’s the species that anglers don’t target that are the ones that are in need of protection, its these species that are usually smaller in size and live in the close reefs and that suffer from the pollution, also note that its these species that are the prey for the type of fish anglers target.

[SD5214]

@danstancobra Traditionally, fisheries management has sought to achieve Maximum Sustainable Yield which has led to target species being fished down to around 30% of their unexploited population size. Hardly "just a few". And it's not just the commercials who have a significant impact on fish stocks - here in SA the rec fishing community harvests 60% of the total mulloway catch, 50% of whiting, 46% of blue swimmer crab, 40% of squid and 20% of garfish and snapper.

[danstancobra]

If you stop people fishing in an areas, the numbers of fish they usually target will go up, what will happen to the numbers of the smaller species the ones that are eaten by the fish anglers target? But then the same amount of people fish for the same amount of time in a reduced area what will happen to the numbers there, And how long will it be till we compared these 2 areas, look how well marine parks work, let increase the size to protect even more fish.

[danstancobra]

A marine park can not an will not protect the biodiversity of the area, it has been shown time and time again, creating a marine park doesn’t protect all the species of that area, yes some species will flourish and there numbers will go up, but at the expense of other species. These groups pushing for marine parks, not a peep from them about the recent fish kills in Anglesea, the Murray and Jarvis Bay, when the time was there do something real to protect it the silence was deafening

[TJwildernessSA]

@danstancobra please check out the literature review i have added to the information page, here you will find extensive peer reviewed papers in regards to marine parks. I'm interesting in reading more information about what you have mentioned in Anglesea, the Murray and Jarvis Bay, please supply some linked info where i can read some more - i like to be fully informed and would appreciate it ... thank you

[danstancobra]

@TJwildernessSA

Information on the fish kills is readily available with a simple Google search for those interested, I would also like for people actively pushing these marine park proposals to be full informed. Ps the fish kill in Jarvis Bay was in a marine park.

[danstancobra]

Just like the Boris Worms and Ransom Myers paper, 2003, Rapid worldwide depletion of predatory fish communities' , Nature,vol. 423, pp.280-283. It was peer reviewed, it claimed 90% of our large fish species are gone. Funny how even Boris Worm has come out and said that the research was flawed, yet this paper is still used as a reference for papers being written today. I am afraid that the peer review process, now holds little weight, with groups like PEW throwing around so much money

[danstancobra]

Out of all the fish that are spawned, few make it to spawn them selves, and very few of those that don’t make it are taken by anglers, the majority are eaten by other species or die due to environmental factors, you want to protect fish species look at the beginning of the story not the end, improve the environmnet so that more survive, replace lost habitat and create new habitat, stop the things that are destroying the current habitat that fish and other marine species rely on to spawn.

[SD5214]

@danstancobra Worm & Hilborn's 2009 paper actually supports the use of sanctuaries in conjunction with other more traditional fisheries management tools. Direct quote: "A combination of diverse tools, such as catch restrictions, gear modifications, and closed areas, is typically required to meet both fisheries and conservation objectives". They also give a number of real world examples where closed areas have been an important tool for rebuilding fisheries, including in North West Australia.

[danstancobra]

@SD5214

Strategically placed fishing closures, for particular species, big difference to sanctuaries.

[SD5214]

@danstancobra For a quick & realistic overview of what the Worm & Hilborn paper really means for the future of the world's oceans, visit the Guilty Plant blog entry entitled "We Want Seafood and We Want Hope". For some reason YouTube won't let me post the link.

[danstancobra]

@SD5214

Realistic view? Are you serous, written by a PEW made scientist Jennifer Jacquet that works in the PEW fisheries centre, under Daniel Pauley another PEW made scientist. anything but a balanced view.

[TJwildernessSA]

In response to effects from landbased pollutions or oil spills, it only highlights some of the issues where further studies and action is needed. It is so important that we finally get serious about marine management and create a sustainable marine environment for all to enjoy.

[TJwildernessSA]

in response to Dazza, i think your perspective is a bit narrow sighted - the issue is not about stopping recreational fishing, and it is laughable to suggest this, i'm a conservationist and i enjoy recreational fishing - it is about whole of ecosystem sustainability.

People who get caught up in the argument that it is just about fishing are not seeing the bigger picture.

[ultratech100]

@TJwildernessSA if its not about stopping rec fishing the why is this the only thing that is banned in the parks? I can do doughnuts on a jet ski, I can drop my anchor on to the reef to go diving, I can take my speed boat in and do 100mph and cut up the sea grass but I cant catch a fish. Banning fishing in select areas in no way makes the whole ecosystem more sustainable, all it does is put more pressure on the remaining areas, as I have seen first hand. Anglers are the true guardians of the sea

[SD5214]

@ultratech100 Not true Ultratech - within sanctuary zones ANY activity which harms or removes plants or animals will be restricted. This means establishing dedicated anchor locations to prevent reefs being damaged, no collection of firewood or other detritus from the beach up to the high water mark, no oil & gas activities etc etc. And no grand conspiracy to bring an end to life as we know it for rec fishers, really.

[ultratech100]

@SD5214 In all of the Marine parks in my area there are no designated anchor areas. All of these activities i mentioned u will see any weekend of the year in Marine Parks. Gas and oil exploration is in fact permitted in many parks, but I suppose money talks. In fact lets stop calling these areas Marine Parks/ Sanctuary's, and call them what they really are NO FISHING ZONES. Rec fishers are the only group of people these NFZ's effect. Anglers are the true guardians of the sea!!!!!

[bigglesOz]

Hey Dazza...get an education. Cruddy redneck. It's idiots like you that will overfish given a chance

[danstancobra]

@bigglesOz You tell him,! bloody fisherman rapping and pillaging the sea, they will not be happy until there isn’t a fish left, why don’t you explain to these uneducated red necks how a marine park is going to protect the fish that are eaten by the species these fisherman are catching, you know the ones, the ones that are listed as endangered and needing protection.

[Dazza3094]

All bull shit, if you got 20% of the coast line for marine parks next year you would want another 20% . This is how radical conservationist work, at there core they are anti fishing. Ultimately they want recreational fishing stopped.

[TJwildernessSA]

@Dazza3094 I strongly disagree with this statement. We do not want recreational fishing stopped! we want a system of protection which will help ensure that our marine life (including fish stocks), are sustained for future generations.

On the opposite hand it is the fishing lobby that wants to stop any form of protection in our oceans. How come land based parks are accepted, yet marine based is so hard for people to comprehend?

[danstancobra]

@TJwildernessSA

If you want to compare terrestrial with the marine lets do it properly then, both are used for a number of thing one including food, terrestrial farming removes all the biodiversity and plant mono crops, using pesticides to kill of any native insects that might feed on the crop, fertilizers and a number of other chemicals are used, most ending up in our rivers and oceans.

[danstancobra]

Just recently in a number of states we introduce spraying of pesticides to kill the so called locus plague, the same locust other species are relying on, so they to can breed up to survive the next drought. Imagine the outrage if commercial fishers wanted to kill off a species to protect there crop

[danstancobra]

Terrestrial farming also robs our system of precious water that is needed, look at the Murray Darling system, the mouth of the Murray now ceases to flow 40% of the time compared to the normal 1%, At least 35 bird species and 16 mammals that live in the system are endangered many listed for protection on the EPBC act. Twenty mammal species have become extinct since 1900, not to mention the effect its having on remaining River Red Gums on the Murray River floodplain.

[danstancobra]

PS a lot of these endangered mammals and birds live in so called protected areas, now you want to use this same system to protect our marine species.

Please show me any type of fishing in Australia that has done even close to that sort of damage (listed above) to our marine environment.

Fishers have done a great job looking after our marine species, yes we could do with more help, support and definitely more money!

[ultratech100]

So how does a "marine sanctuary" protect the marine life from oil spills, agricultural run off, insecticides, pollution and the ever increasing urban sprawl?? The answer is it doesn't. There have been no studies done on the effect of these no fishing zones in South Australia and we are relying on studies preformed overseas in areas that had been previously subjected to massive amounts of over fishing. These same studies can almost always be traced back to the same financial backers, PEW.

[SD5214]

@ultratech100 Sanctuaries may not directly protect the marine environment from all of these threats but they do make marine ecosystems more resilient. Take marine pests for example. In the GBR, crown of thorn outbreaks are 3.75 times more frequent on fished reefs than in closed areas. And no argument here that to be most effective, sanctuaries need to be "no input" as well as "no output". That means no coastal stormwater outfalls, effluent discharges etc as well as no extractive use.

[ultratech100]

@SD5214 Hi m8, could u please give us some links to crown of thorns info and also the PIRSA data and the studies from Tassie and NZ. :) In Port Phillip Bay we have an out break of the introduced Red Alge and it is localized mostly to within the limits of the Point Cook Marine Park. Rec fishers are not the enemy and stopping rec fishing will in no way protect of safe guard marine environments, it may in fact do the opposite as it is rec fishermen who frequent and love these areas.

[danstancobra]

@SD5214 Its easy to look at studies and pick the information that suits your argument while ignoring everything else, this study gave the likely reason for the reduced numbers of crown-of-thorns starfish, as there are more big fish in the area due to no fishing, big fish then ate the medium size fish, reducing their numbers to the point where in turn, increased the numbers of small size fish which ate the eggs of the crown-of-thorns starfish. sorry haven’t got the study in front of me to quote.

[danstancobra]

crown-of-thorns starfish lay millions off eggs, which float in the currents, seeing as the increased number of species anglers target are indirectly responsible for the reduced crown-of-thorns starfish, you then assume the areas were you are still allowed to fish, now having greater pressure would have the opposite effect with a increase number of crown-of-thorns starfish, and as the eggs drift in the current any benefit from the marine parks would be negated by the non marine parks area.

[SD5214]

@ultratech100 30% of South Australia's fisheries are classified as overfished - PIRSA's own data shows this. Species on the overfished list include whiting, garfish and lobster, all firm favourites of the rec fishing community. And there are plenty of (independent) studies showing that sanctuaries work in areas with similar regulatory environments to SA i.e. Tasmania & NZ.

[danstancobra]

@SD5214

The study you talk about in Tasmania has shown reduced scallop numbers, in fact scallop numbers, in that marine park are at a dangerously low level. More lobster means a greater pressure on their food supply, it’s very simple.

[danstancobra]

I haven’t looked at the SA, NZ studies in detail but I am sure they will show the same thing, sanctuaries do protect the species anglers target, but usually at the cost of other species in the area, and as was mentioned before its these species that are the ones in greatest need for protection.

[danstancobra]

Also banning fishing in an area, and you are giving away one of the most cost effective tools to monitor the fish health, numbers and environment. It’s usually the anglers that first raise the alarm with something going wrong in the system.

[13dazza13]

Come on Aussies lets look after our world. Thanks guys

[lysflet]

Awesome video! Those underwater shots are just stunning. Who knew that South Australia had such wonderful and unique marine life?

[hookforever]

Looks like something worthwhile. I like the bit about more fish!