Snippets from the Greens Policy Launch
Submitted by BIG on Mon, 2010-08-02 10:51
THE Australian Greens, the party almost certain to hold the deciding vote in Federal Parliament next year, have vowed to turn one third of Australia's territorial waters into marine park where fishing would be banned.
The policy will be one of the central planks of the Greens campaign launch in Canberra, which will also feature a call to end native forest logging in Australia in a bid to ignite a forestry debate in the federal election.
In an exclusive interview, Greens leader Bob Brown, 65, denied he was retiring and vowed to stay in politics while his party had the balance of power in the Senate.
"The Greens more than either of the other parties offer that." The marine park policy would turn a minimum of 30 per cent of Australian waters into reserves with no fishing and no exploration or drilling for oil or gas."
Snippets from their launch in the Sun Herald
THE Australian Greens, the party almost certain to hold the deciding vote in Federal Parliament next year, have vowed to turn one third of Australia's territorial waters into marine park where fishing would be banned.
The policy will be one of the central planks of the Greens campaign launch in Canberra, which will also feature a call to end native forest logging in Australia in a bid to ignite a forestry debate in the federal election.
In an exclusive interview, Greens leader Bob Brown, 65, denied he was retiring and vowed to stay in politics while his party had the balance of power in the Senate.
"It's not coming for a long time," Senator Brown said.
He said middle and rural Australia were ready to support the Greens.
"We've been around a long time and I come from a bush background. I understand where these folk are coming from," he said.
"Above all, they want to know their children are going to have a safe country to live in.
"Above all, they want to know their children are going to have a safe country to live in.
"The Greens more than either of the other parties offer that." The marine park policy would turn a minimum of 30 per cent of Australian waters into reserves with no fishing and no exploration or drilling for oil or gas."
Australia needs a much greater area of our precious oceans protected through marine reserves," Senator Brown said. "Currently in Australia less than 5 per cent of our ocean waters are protected in marine reserves. "The Greens will also push for a high-speed rail link between Sydney and Melbourne, releasing a Galaxy poll today showing that three in four Australians support the idea.
The Greens industrial relations policy will focus on giving carers the right to request flexible working hours under Fair Work Australia. Senator Brown said the Green agenda to move to renewable energy, protect coastlines and tax the mining industry would be of benefit to all Australians. He said the party would work co-operatively with whoever won the federal election and he had met both Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott prior to the campaign to tell them that.
One thing the Greens rejected last time around was Labor's emissions trading scheme.
Senator Brown was scathing about the lack of talent in Ms Gillard's Cabinet on climate change ."There's more nous about climate change in the average primary school in this country than there is in the Cabinet," he said.
.thumbnail.JPG "Fanky Dhui")
Deckie
Posts: 1296
Date Joined: 03/04/09
Greens = Labor
Yet the Greens preference vote goes to Labor. I'm not even sure why there is a Greens party, the only time ya hear from them them is around election time then after they dissapear into obscurity (or back into the forrest), kinda like Peter Garret.
Choose your vote well. Rob
Cheers & Stay safe
Leemo
Posts: 3712
Date Joined: 22/02/07
well, in the last election,
well, in the last election, the greens had about 15% and didnt even occupy a seat!
bludgin' since 94'
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
I think a lot of people who
I think a lot of people who vote greens will be very specific about where their preferences go. I like the idea of a slight shift of power away from the major parties, as neither of them seem to address the real issues choosing to leave them in the "too hard" basket.
Not saying the greens have all the answers as a heap of their policies are too extreme, but giving them a bit more power is very unlikely to result in 30% marine parks and might force the major parties to look at some of the issues that otherwise would be ignored. JMO
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
Unlikely - Brave call
I think if the greens get the balance of power, 30% is a small trade off for a major party to say get an ETS or Mining tax throught the senate
saltatrix
Posts: 1081
Date Joined: 30/03/08
The Greens more than either
The Greens more than either of the other parties offer that."The marine park policy would turn a minimum of 30 per cent of Australian waters into reserves with no fishinghat
That would be where the fish are, We be left with the bits where the fish arent..
Now if that isnt as good as a fishing ban with the list of regulations we have in this state I dont know what is..
Angling tourism is worth $10 billion to the Australian economy - 90000 jobs; more than any sport; spread the word
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
maybe if we protect where
maybe if we protect where the fish are now, we will be able to catch them in other areas in the future? I dont think that the 30% marine parks will happen, but even if it did, if the pay off was that other greens policies regarding social change get through then ill be happy.
saltatrix
Posts: 1081
Date Joined: 30/03/08
I dont think that the 30%
I dont think that the 30% marine parks will happen,
You need to look at this then:
http://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/qld-fishermen-fuming-over-new-bans/x0wxope
Why arent the Greens more focused on improving river health? Because it is political..
The greens are happy to bribe Labour without taking the flak..
Angling tourism is worth $10 billion to the Australian economy - 90000 jobs; more than any sport; spread the word
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
Yea I had seen what the
Yea I had seen what the Gillard government was considering. Still not sure if it will happen or if it would be all that bad if it did. Also, I havent been able to find any direct statements from Gillard about policies in this area.
I have to admit though, as much as I love fishing, potential marine parks are a small issue in the big picture for me.
saltatrix
Posts: 1081
Date Joined: 30/03/08
Someone forgot to tell Mr
Someone forgot to tell Mr Brown MPRAs wont help Marlin and Tuna being highly pelgic..
Maybe he should focus on Vinyards polluting our rivers with nutrients and using large quantities of water..
Fat chance on that because hes a plonker..
Angling tourism is worth $10 billion to the Australian economy - 90000 jobs; more than any sport; spread the word
Nelly
Posts: 518
Date Joined: 04/05/08
A Vote for greens is a vote
A Vote for greens is a vote against fishing in my opinion!
till
Posts: 9358
Date Joined: 21/02/08
I'd say improved river
I'd say improved river health is more economic than political.
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-
http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/large-fine-for-monster-catch-20100803-1157v.html
things like this just don't help our rec fishing or the pro's.
and with an active campaign now begining by the marine conseration groups to lock up large sections on the SW with marginal seat votes, can see us locked out down south as well.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/wa/7694670/green-groups-ad-blitz-on-marine-parks/
( yes it's against oil & gas, but will be used to leaver out the fishermen as well.)
Tony Halliday: ~Meals on Reels ~
It takes a strong fish to swim against the current. Even a dead one can float with it
"It is always in season for old men to learn." Aeschylus (525-456 BC)
"In a mad world only the mad are sane." Akira Kurosawa (1910-1998)
pale ale
Posts: 1755
Date Joined: 02/01/10
They are not stupid, they
They are not stupid, they dont want us to hurt any of the fishies.
They will make all the most popular recreation areas "marine parks" then go on to say "if you want to go fishing, just drive 2500kms to the middle of no where" where there are no boat ramps anyway. This will in effect make 80% of our coastline "no fishing"
Check out where they want the marine parks in Vic, NSW. All of the popular seaside tourist towns. Unless you have a huge boat, and can travel 80 - 100kms, there is no point towing your boat there for a holiday
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
Hey pale ale, hadnt seen
Hey pale ale, hadnt seen that, can you show me where the Greens want to put their marine reserves in NSW and Vic please? From what i have seen of the greens they actually take a semi scientific approach to things unlike the other parties so interested to see their proposals.
cheers
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
Just look where it begins + ends = blue shade
http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mb ... fs-afa.pdf
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
http://www.nsw.greens.org.au/
http://www.nsw.greens.org.au/policies/coastal-management
read it and think hard before you cast your vote, this is what they pushing in NSW.
They could close off 20% of WA fishing waters and in real terms cut us out of 80% of the coastline.
how many here can fish from Two Rocks north to Jurien and even Ledge Point?
A popular vote move for them would be a closure from Mindary to Mandurah, and say you got everything north and south of that. Anyone with a penned boat is stuffed, anyone not cappable of beach launching up north of Jurien is stuffed, in fact would you like to be off shore 20 miles north of Jurien in anything smaller than a 18 foot boat??? Not me!
local WA Greens policy : http://wa.greens.org.au/policy/marineandcoastal
We not alone, look at what Queensland now could be facing in a trade off for prefferances!!!
http://nqr.farmonline.com.au/news/state/agribusiness-and-general/general/extreme-greens-threatening-fishing-grounds/1881332.aspx
Tony Halliday: ~Meals on Reels ~
It takes a strong fish to swim against the current. Even a dead one can float with it
"It is always in season for old men to learn." Aeschylus (525-456 BC)
"In a mad world only the mad are sane." Akira Kurosawa (1910-1998)
Gazza56
Posts: 6
Date Joined: 24/07/09
Have a look at this map !!!
Have a look at this map !!! any area in blue is the proposed no fishing zones ! If you think 30% isnt much ..... think again !
http://www.prestigefishing.com.au/images/proposed%20marine%20parks-large.jpg
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
I see what is being said, in
I see what is being said, in that 30% could potentially be a huge issue (more so for others since I dont have a boat). I still doubt that such measures would be put in place as is and if Labour makes any deals for preferences they are getting screwed since i reckon the majority of greens voters will decide their own preferences.
I reckon its like any form of bargaining where people make outrageous demands in hopes of a more favourable offer being accepted. But lets say Labour get into power, I dont think they would give into the pressure for the marine parks as they are being suggested by the greens or proposed in Queensland, its gonna cosr em too many votes. Gotta admit I could be wrong, but I think ATM im willing to take that risk.
Still have to say that marine parks are a small issue considering some of the social policies being considered (but this aint the place to debate them). At the same time though, it is an issue and I will be contacting my local candidate for their opinion on this issue.
Cheers for the info guys
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
I believe they will do it,
I believe they will do it, and give the Greens power sover things like that.
They did it here in WA by locking out the horse riders from tracks and trails they been using for over 100 years. Hell you cna't even ride a horse on the trail dedicated to the Light Horse brigades last great charge...WTF
Next you will loose the dog beaches, same way the horses have lost 90% of their tradional access to beaches, you can't fish in water cathcment dams etc...
The Greens would be more than happy to push the Senate in Labors favour, if they got marine parks and say over larger tracks of grovement / fedral land & water under public access rights.
The big Social issues, well market forces and finacial orders of the days dictate that. But what dictates true policy to the marine and parks???? not science as we have seen, but trade off's in a bartar game.
I don't think they (Labor) believe that horses, dogs and fish can cost them votes...
so think carefully about what you trading off to make sure you get what you want in future.
JMO
Tony Halliday: ~Meals on Reels ~
It takes a strong fish to swim against the current. Even a dead one can float with it
"It is always in season for old men to learn." Aeschylus (525-456 BC)
"In a mad world only the mad are sane." Akira Kurosawa (1910-1998)
yellow and black
Posts: 65
Date Joined: 11/08/09
if you vote greens
and your a fisho your a fool ,put them on last place on your ballet paper reguardless of who you vote for. dont give them a chance to do this
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
Comes down to proirities
Comes down to proirities mate, calling me a fool is a bit harsh. Family first is going last for me lol. Perhaps the important thing is to show how unpopular the proposed marine parks would be, as done in the video from queensland. A bit more action from fishos could go a long way....
yellow and black
Posts: 65
Date Joined: 11/08/09
pollies only understand one thing
and thats thier vote count & thats the only way to make them listen these guys have lost the plot and need a wakeup call
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
very true, votes are all
very true, votes are all that matter too them. But without action they wont know how many votes this issue may cost them
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
You don't think if there was
You don't think if there was a large say "shooter fishers " vote in the senate that would bring it to their attention.
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
yea it might, though I
yea it might, though I wouldnt be voting shooter fishers, but i would take part in some kind of demonstration.
saltatrix
Posts: 1081
Date Joined: 30/03/08
Ive sent the proposed areas
Ive sent the proposed areas to a few fishing amtes so it gets around
http://www.prestigefishing.com.au/images/proposed%20marine%20parks-large.jpg
Angling tourism is worth $10 billion to the Australian economy - 90000 jobs; more than any sport; spread the word
Jody
Posts: 1578
Date Joined: 19/04/07
OMFG
They can't be serious ..... thats like ALL the best bits :(
And whats with closing down the whole of the Kimberley region .... not to mention the Metro , Exmouth and ... and ..... and ........ shit we are screwed
EDIT: Looks like Tassie got the rough end of it
TWiZTED
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
note large "open sections"
note large "open sections" of NT into Arnhemland, that only indigenous people can access!! And the open sections off Kakadu that is almost impossible to launch and get to, as you need to go 40 miles down the West Alligator to get to the coast!
It’s a case of locking you out of the easy access lands and leaving near impossible areas behind to fish!
Even if they get a third of that map, then we screwed well and truely
Tony Halliday: ~Meals on Reels ~
It takes a strong fish to swim against the current. Even a dead one can float with it
"It is always in season for old men to learn." Aeschylus (525-456 BC)
"In a mad world only the mad are sane." Akira Kurosawa (1910-1998)
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
I have been looking for that
I have been looking for that map from an official source but cant find it. Anyone else had more luck finding it?
The Greens policy seems pretty unspecific about where the marine parks would be. I spoke to a person i know who is a Greens candidate and she thinks that map may have been put out by an anti greens lobby group. Not saying it was, just that i cant find any official statements about the location of the proposed reserves.
Alan James
Posts: 2298
Date Joined: 30/06/09
Then ask her for her map
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
she said those decisions are
she said those decisions are yet to be made, will be based on research and in consultation with fishos etc. Deff not doin them any favours not being specific about their proposals, but I dont think the maps being distributed on fishing websites can be believed.
They would also have to get the changes aproved so recreational fishing would no longer be allowed in marine parks. Im not in support of their marine policy, but a fair bit of the info doin the rounds looks a lot like a scare campaign.
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
This From the Greens Website
I believe this is the current green policy on marine + coastal.
http://greens.org.au/policies/enviro...-coastal-areas
of particular concern
20. ensure that the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas program has legislated targets of a minimum of 30% ‘no take’ areas per bioregion by 2012.
22. fund the next regional marine planning process with a requirement for its completion around Australia within 10 years. (SO THIS FOR NOW 2012 and in 10years when everyone is use to 30% lets go again??)
23. require States to implement regional marine planning processes in State waters that complement national Regional Marine Plans.
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
I think you will find that
I think you will find that those maps come from organisations like the NPA and other groups that receive funding from the Greens. Essentially doing the dirty work for them and some are up on government websites from previous deals.
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
I have been searching mate,
I have been searching mate, but cant find them. Thats what makes me think they may not be official maps. Also old maps for marine parks arent really relevant now that they wanna change the rules and levels of protection associated with marine parks.
Searching the National Parks Association now to see if there is any info there, though i doubt it.
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
http://wa.greens.org.au/polic
http://wa.greens.org.au/policy/marineandcoastal
did you read this link?
it clearly says 20% of each marine habitat!
quote
" establish a comprehensive, adequate and representative network of Marine Parks and Reserves throughout the State and ensure these Parks and Reserves
- are selected on the basis of bio-physical criteria recommended by an independent scientific working group
- are zoned and managed following an agreement, across government agencies, on specific, measurable biodiversity conservation outcomes
- are adequately resourced and managed on an ecosystem basis
- contain functionally-effective, representative no-take areas of at least 20% by area of each marine habitat type
- exclude exploration and mining
- provide for full community involvement in its planning and development "
now that says to me we will loose 20% of each area of habitat, ie 20% minimum of coatline and areas out deep.
Tony Halliday: ~Meals on Reels ~
It takes a strong fish to swim against the current. Even a dead one can float with it
"It is always in season for old men to learn." Aeschylus (525-456 BC)
"In a mad world only the mad are sane." Akira Kurosawa (1910-1998)
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
yep I understand that mate,
yep I understand that mate, my question is which 20% are they looking at. Links were provided above showing maps suggesting which areas were being considered, but these maps were not from official sources.
Suggestiong have been made that the greens would intentionally cut out metro areas and other popular fishing areas. Just trying to find out if there is any truth to that.
cheers
Alan James
Posts: 2298
Date Joined: 30/06/09
I can't help you with a map
but if I was wanting to preserve fish stocks by declaring no fishing areas or marine parks I wouldn't be looking at areas that are inaccessible as their remoteness already protects these areas. I see it as a no brainer. The areas will be where the fishing pressure is i.e. on your doorstep.
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
thats a good point mate.
thats a good point mate. Though they say these decisions will be made in consultation with fishos, so you would think some kinda compromise could be reached.
I think the info in links from Terry F below and the difference between this and the map above which shows the so called proposed marine parks, demonstrates that a lot of the info that is being pedalled about what will happen should Labour or Greens get their way is actually pretty innacurate and just scare mongering.
I dont doubt that more marine parks will be introduced and that marine parks may become complete "no take zones" but i reckon the 20% of each type of marine environment might not end up being as bad as some would have us believe.
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
just get a map laying out
just get a map laying out the bio-diverstiy zones, then take out the easiest to access areas and those with tourism access / holiday places ( read my lips...Hamelin Bay, Jurien, Exmouth, Coral Bay...etc)
Kind of like being promised half of the apple and getting the core, skin and bit with the worm in it left for you...
Tony Halliday: ~Meals on Reels ~
It takes a strong fish to swim against the current. Even a dead one can float with it
"It is always in season for old men to learn." Aeschylus (525-456 BC)
"In a mad world only the mad are sane." Akira Kurosawa (1910-1998)
Alan James
Posts: 2298
Date Joined: 30/06/09
So we should all trust the politicians
Libs / Labor and Green because they have our best interests at heart.
How do you know when a politician is lying? Their lips are moving!
Consultation is a great process but I am not convinced that the fishos got a fair deal last time around with reductions in catch rates an the RBFL.
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
Thats true, thats why i
Thats true, thats why i reckon a bit of a demonstration showing our numbers is a good move. I remember you used to be able to get those "I fish and I vote" stickers. Havent seen any around for a while though.
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
What is the use of
What is the use of demonstrating and showing numbers if it doesn't translate to votes, they know fisherman are unorganised, they know we are reactive rather than proactive and that is why they do it to us everytime. The only thing politicians understand is votes and the PERCEPTION is Green have the votes to give and as such they are the ones getting their agenda across.
I don't know what the answer is, but it must first start with unity and from this thread you can see we are a long way from that.
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
maten 100% with you.the
mate 100% with you.
the Equine ( horse industry) was devided between proffesionals ( racing ) and Recs ( dressage, sport horse, riding schools, trail rides etc)
Some of them ended up working with the Greens back in 2002~2003 to help draft info on the horse usage, tracks & trails, yard management etc. Next thing they the info derived from the study group was used to lock them out of areas of public access ( tracks & trails in the Hill, Swan area, Peel region etc) Also tradional horse ownership areas got locked down to two horses and less and even now you have to apply for permision to have horses on your ground, even if you have the space etc.
Bottom line was the Greens could not be trusted, they came out as seeming fair and interested and consultant to the industry, but they used every thing for their own ajenda and faulty science to say that horse pee effected the ground water..WTF how many horses have to pee before you'd get a reading in the water table...millions and millions, but what they did was sample soil in padocks and take that localised reading where the horses liked to pee and exstrapilated that across a region. PURE BULLSH!T science.
today those bloody figures are still quoted by water corp why you can't ride horses near water catchment areas. Oh seems roo pee and other wild life is ok, but horse pee is deadly...lol.
So will I ever trust the Greens, no they bonkers and off on a planet way far from us.
Oh and am I pro-animal, yes, I served as a chairman of a very large RSPCA back in 1994~1995, so I can wear the "greeny" badge if I wanted to, but I'm a realist and know that leopards don't change their spots.....
Tony Halliday: ~Meals on Reels ~
It takes a strong fish to swim against the current. Even a dead one can float with it
"It is always in season for old men to learn." Aeschylus (525-456 BC)
"In a mad world only the mad are sane." Akira Kurosawa (1910-1998)
out wide
Posts: 1535
Date Joined: 30/12/08
Just don't go near the dopey bastards.
This mob are a danger to the rest of society. They are in a world of their own.
Please remenber THEY ARE IN BED THE THE ALP. Do not vote for either .
TerryF
Posts: 489
Date Joined: 11/08/05
That map is misleading. The
That map is misleading.
The real maps are in the documents "Areas for Further Assessment" which are not all proposed sanctuary/no fishing zones and not all even proposed Marine Parks, from the 4 remaining regions - south west, north west, north and east in http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mbp/index.html
The South East (Tasmania etc) has already been done. That map shows the entire South east region. The reality is a lot less. See http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mpa/southeast/index.html
TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background......
till
Posts: 9358
Date Joined: 21/02/08
That looks a lot less
That looks a lot less threatening than people would have you here believe.
TerryF
Posts: 489
Date Joined: 11/08/05
Don't get too relieved. 30%
Don't get too relieved. 30% of the total area closed to fishing is still a lot. And you can bet it would include many areas very important to rec fishers.
In WA the equivalent of that percentage protection OR MORE is already provided, in effect.
The trouble is the conservationists' and the Greens' objective includes an idealogically driven target of 30% areas closed to fishing, in the name of "protecting the environment". They don't care about whether the environment is actually protected already, because that doesn't meet their objective of 30% areas coloured green on maps = sanctuary no fishing zones.
Will they recognise http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/frr/frr169/index.php?0401 ?
TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background......
Recreational anglers want sustainable fishing and good fishing experiences and a FAIR GO!.
Informed Recreational anglers aren't opposed to Marine Parks.
Informed Recreational anglers aren't opposed to sanctuary zones in the right places for the right reasons.
Informed Recreational anglers want to protect nursery areas, spawning fish stocks and spawning fish aggregations, but these don't need total closures all year long. Example:- Cockburn Sound Pink Snapper seasonal spawning closures championed by concerned recreational anglers.
Recreational anglers want to protect the environment, but locking up large areas is not the only way to protect the environment and is not sufficient to protect the environment.
Informed conservationists would talk about the outcomes they want, and not just keep promoting one of the methods which might achieve them and ignore all the other methods.
till
Posts: 9358
Date Joined: 21/02/08
Sure but the paranoid
Sure but the paranoid conspiracy mongering about greens, peta, sex party, labor and what-have-you going on here doesn't give a shred of credibility to the pro-fish-only-now-but-perhaps-not-later vote either.
out wide
Posts: 1535
Date Joined: 30/12/08
Well research and spoken Terry
A lot of informative information in that piece.
joe amato
Posts: 731
Date Joined: 21/12/08
dont vote liberal or national party(its a dictatorship)
dont vote liberal,send them a message about our fishing rights and no i would never vote the greens,whoever ends up in power will still kick you in the ass
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
Greens don't mention marine parks??
I have just seen the green phamplet for this election, it talks of what they are going to do about climate change, health, education, political donations. But not one word on the Marine parks or the "no take" zones, strange, why?
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
I emailed the greens
I emailed the greens (Senator Seiwert) to ask about this 30% people keep talking about, Here is part of their response. If anyone is really interested I can post all of my questions and their response to them
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
I am
I am interested
especially in the difference between marine park vs marine reserve? An authentic map would also be useful in any explanation. As stated I am a swing voter and try to the best of my ability make an informed choice. If there is a difference then the Greens have done a lousy job at articulating it.
thanks for the info.
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
dont mean to be rude mate,
dont mean to be rude mate, but for a swing voter you have sure been pushing one side of the debate.
I had marine parks, marine reserves and the different levels of protection explained to me the other day, but i realised I dont care so long as our fisheries are being managed properly and I can still fish the majority of the spots I have fished before. From what I have been able to find out the Greens dont threaten that, despite the info (often very inaccurate) that has been pushed on this site recently.
any thing you wanna check about their policy maybe email and hopefully they can help.
Alan James
Posts: 2298
Date Joined: 30/06/09
And the barrow you are pushing is
GREEN.
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
Yes IN THIS election i am
Yes IN THIS election i am pushing the barrow against the Greens because of the information that is at hand, I disagree with you that it is all misleading and a conspiracy. People can read the literature and make their own minds up, as you have done and come to different opinion to me, I have no problem with that, I have tried to see your point of view but from what I read I have a different take on it.
If the Greens wanted to they could have had plenty of consultation. From where I sit in this election the Greens knew they were in position of power and went for the jugular. I think that rec fishos have about 80% in common with the greens, the remaining 20% could easily be nutted out.
For example instead of lock outs they could have surface trawling only areas targeting migratory fish, which will swim in and out of sanctuary zones and leaving bottom dwellers alone, the sizes of fish could be increased so that they have more breeding cycles, there could be closed breeding seasons as they do for trout and bass where I am and certainly review bag limits. And they could have rec only zones. IT IS THE COMMERCIAL HARVEST and illegal fishing (black market) that is the main problem. In Sydney harbour by buying out the licenses of the pro fisherman and stopping floating traps, increasing surveillance and giving the fishing associations hot line to dob in illegals, the kingfish have re-bounded so that they are becoming a nuisance and only within a 7-10 year period and at the same time the size has gone from 50cm to 65cm and is about to go to 70cm, with minimal fuss. Amateur rec fishing has increased in this time in the harbour and the fishing is amazing, it is better than I can ever remember. What is left to do there in my opinion is have a closed snapper breeding season and increase the snapper take size + introduce boat limits.
I don't see the Greens agreeing to this type of approach first. This would bring the recreation fisho with them instead of them dictating draconian terms. By buying out the commercial licenses at ABOVE market rate and trying successful approaches with the support of the rec fishos this whole fishing pressure debate is dissipated without any need for lock out zones. BUT NO they want to be militant because they have leverage. They have just proven the old adage give an inch they request a mile.
Since you are friendly with the Greens maybe you can take some of these suggestions and get a response why they are against these first steps. If these approaches are proved to be unsuccessful they can go to the next step with significant support.
Cheers
BIG
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
I have to admit Big, I agree
I have to admit Big, I agree with you on most of what you say. I think the devil is in the detail and as we both know its often hard to make sense of the fine details of political policies. I was under the impression that the Greens do plan on making areas of marine parks accessible for recs but not pros. For example I think that is what is happening in parts of the coral sea reserve near Queensland? As for size limits and closed seasons, I would have thought those kinda things would be state legislation and that fisheries would play a large role in deciding those things, but I admit im not certain.
I am all for the other steps you have suggested, but perhaps where we dissagree is that I believe the "no take zones" being imposed are necessary and I reckon they are going about it in a good way. On this I guess we can just agree to dissagree.
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
Just to be balanced Here is
Just to be balanced
Here is the Labour press release on marine parks
Campaign Media Release
THE MARINE PARK PLANNING PROCESS UNDER THE GILLARD GOVERNMENT
Minster for Environment Protection Peter Garrett and Minister for Agriculture Tony Burke today said the Coalition was waging a dishonest fear campaign on the future of commercial and recreational fishing.
The Coalition are deliberately misleading fishers and their families and causing unnecessary concern.
The Gillard Government is continuing to work through the same process on Marine Protected Areas which was begun under former Prime Minister John Howard.
This process is based on science, detailed planning and community consultation.
And, as it always has been, the process will involve close consultation with fishing communities, coastal communities, recreational and commercial fishers, marine and tourism businesses and environmental groups, to reach the right balance and ensure our marine regions remain sustainable into the future.
This feedback will be carefully examined when determining the possible location and size of any marine parks.
MINISTER FOR ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION, HERITAGE & THE ARTS MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE, FISHERIES AND FORESTRY
No decisions have been made on the location of any new marine parks and we will consult further with the community before any decisions are made.
Federal Labor does not support the Greens’ calls for arbitrary targets which do not reflect the science.
Importantly, marine parks have no impact on beach fishing and minimal impact on recreational fishing – because they only affect Commonwealth waters which generally begin more than five kilometres out to sea.
Tony Abbott has not offered any alternative plan for industry.
He has only offered to suspend the consultation already underway – which would leave the industry in limbo and leave fishers with more uncertainty.
16 AUGUST 2010 COMMUNICATIONS UNIT: Phone: (02) 9384 2220 | Fax: (02) 9264
2213 www.alp.org.au AUTHORISED N.MARTIN for the ALP, 5/9 Sydney Ave. Barton ACT
Seems like Labour is doing a little back peddling.
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
quote: "Importantly, marine
quote:
"Importantly, marine parks have no impact on beach fishing and minimal impact on recreational fishing – because they only affect Commonwealth waters which generally begin more than five kilometres out to sea."
and where do we do most of our fishing in WA??? more than 5km out to sea if you targeting species that live 60m or deeper, the Rotto Trench, the major banks north of Mindarie.... etc. Yes it won't effect the beach boys, yes it won't effect 70% of the small tinny fishermen, but YES IT WILL EFFECT 80% of those with a boat over 5m and fishing deeper waters.
Tony Halliday: ~Meals on Reels ~
It takes a strong fish to swim against the current. Even a dead one can float with it
"It is always in season for old men to learn." Aeschylus (525-456 BC)
"In a mad world only the mad are sane." Akira Kurosawa (1910-1998)
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
It sure is mate fair point
It sure is mate fair point :-) but i dont try and push incorrect info about other parties...
If i was gonna comment on Liberal policy, I would make sure I had my facts right first
cheers
Alan James
Posts: 2298
Date Joined: 30/06/09
Good for you
If I was to comment on Labor or the Greens I would ensure it was a pack of lies just like ALL the pollies current representations and promises. If it's all about which party can be trusted then imo, none of them can be. The Greens being owed favours by Labor however directs my vote elsewhere.
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
Australian Marine Biologist Report on Marine park
http://www.fishingandlifestyle.com/pdf/digsfish.pdf
The_Wanderer
Posts: 735
Date Joined: 24/09/08
As others have discussed
As others have discussed Greens is bad for fishing , 4wding, shooting and any other outdoor activity that most of us enjoy.
Thats why I'm voting for Sex Party at least thier honest about shafting you! :P
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
Check the preferences, you
Check the preferences, you may find them going to the greens?
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
fishing and lifestyle party policies
1: stop the Greens
2: see number one
http://www.fishingandlifestyle.com/policies.html
LOL When exactly are we meant to check back? sunday?
EDIT: To be fair I found some more info on this page
http://www.fishingandlifestyle.com/philosophy.html
But its much more a broad list of principles rather than any specific policy details.
Everyone has made some good suggestions about what is needed in addition to the no take zones proposed by the greens, but I cant find any of these ideas being proposed by this party?
I would have thought this party would have worked out the fine details of their policies at least in this area if nothing else......
out wide
Posts: 1535
Date Joined: 30/12/08
I hope the greens get lost on the way to the polling booths.
I greatly disaprove of a minority party of mostly unemployed misguided fools who can blackmail a major party like the alp into pasting some of their nutty policies. If this minority group had their way we would be farked in no time.
Their policies are shit, band this band that, don't eat red meat stop killing the kittens of the sea [fish]. Fark the farmers stop live export .Hug a tree. Don't dig it up. Make all wars illegal [Taliban would love that one] Blow up a jap. No one to make more money than them, which isn't much. [Anti capitalism]
They go on and on with bullshit unworkable policies. Their leader is a poof. Dislikes women so why would they vote for him, is it because the poor buggers are brainless ? I think so.
Drew Tagote
Posts: 59
Date Joined: 02/08/10
anyone who votes green
anyone who votes green tomorrow is a moffie
Megadon
Posts: 21
Date Joined: 14/08/10
Right on out
Right on out wide
Greens haha more like queens.
cuthbad
Posts: 1266
Date Joined: 22/04/09
haha some deep and objective
haha some deep and objective examination of the flaws in the Greens policies right there.
Clearly its the greens who are brainless.... LOL
ah well, at least its done with now, can get back to the fishing and forget about politics...
Gadsy
Posts: 1467
Date Joined: 01/05/10
Bugga - we have a green elected to the lower house now!
Not a good result
harro
Posts: 1959
Date Joined: 07/02/08
joke
what a joke, obviously they dont fish, stuck in the parly orgy room,
this is shit... hope they dont get in,..
:::: Bass Hunter ::::
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
with the hung parliament and
with the hung parliament and Green power in senate getting stronger, we could be in trouble.
If Labor gets in with independents and the one
Green vote, then that Green vote is very powerful in shaping non commercial & social policy, like fishing and outback access, parks etc..
A Lib plus independents would be a better deal for many, with independents not after your fishing rights etc, but more main line policy issues. They more likely to push Broadband, health reform and transport / rural development.
But that still leaves a Green strong hold vote in the Senate to fight every bill and issue they want to.
Tony Halliday: ~Meals on Reels ~
It takes a strong fish to swim against the current. Even a dead one can float with it
"It is always in season for old men to learn." Aeschylus (525-456 BC)
"In a mad world only the mad are sane." Akira Kurosawa (1910-1998)
till
Posts: 9358
Date Joined: 21/02/08
Don't be silly Tony, the
Don't be silly Tony, Katter, one of the independants were on tv last nite saying that the Lib's lack of a plan for broadband was a strong turn off.
Did anyone see the excellent spoof of the coalition video for the broadband plan on Yes We Canberra? Is it on youtube?
Can't really see Wilkie getting into be with the Libs after they tried to shaft him for blowing the whistle over their misrepresentation of information for political gain re: Iraq.
Tony Halliday
Posts: 2500
Date Joined: 14/06/07
Till, they all lay down with
Till, they all lay down with the devil when it comes trading souls!
Bet you a Broadband issue would be resolved quickly if a deals on the table, as for Greens and Independents in same room...( better hide the knives!)
As my wife would say, $46b broadband vs $46b hospitals and education.... guess where most would put their bet. As for rural people wanting broadband, it's only useful if you got your band-aid! ( excuse the pun) Hospitals out way internet any day.
ps I'm still trying to figure how this $46B broadband is going to make us richer and more jobs etc!!! We can't offered to pay call centers the wages they want in Ozz as it is and thats why they go to Asia for those services. We don't make anything we can sell on the internet, that just leaves us maybe with the porn industry! maybe a super fast broadband could make Ozz richer by porn? how the else can it????
Tony Halliday: ~Meals on Reels ~
It takes a strong fish to swim against the current. Even a dead one can float with it
"It is always in season for old men to learn." Aeschylus (525-456 BC)
"In a mad world only the mad are sane." Akira Kurosawa (1910-1998)
BIG
Posts: 28
Date Joined: 11/02/10
Tony I also heard today it
Tony I also heard today it is more likely that the independents will go with labour because they are so pissed off with the Nats. I think Gillard has one foot in the lodge. Simply put people get what they deserve and so it will be again. Hopefully the marine parks can be sensible and not too radical, but I won't hold my breath.
out wide
Posts: 1535
Date Joined: 30/12/08
Three of the independents
are ex conseratives, so i can't see that happening. I think we will avoid the fishing bans yet.
pale ale
Posts: 1755
Date Joined: 02/01/10
I would like another
I would like another election, and more people should vote below the line.