Email and call Tony Windsor

The Rally at Torquay has had a very positive outcome with the Coalition bringing forward a disallowance motion on the Commonwealth  marine parks management bills, and Minister Burke is feeling the heat with even members of his own party asking him some hard questions, unfortunately Mister Burke  is about to attempt to rush through the legislation before we can gain any momentum.  Its vitally important the we do what we can to stop this, the independence are the key to stopping Burke, if we don’t stop this then even if the Coalition win the next election, with the Greens controlling the Senate for at least another 2 years it will be a long drawn out process to change the management plan.

Contact Tony Windsor as well as your local MP

Ask them

Do they support recreational fishing in Australia?

Do they support this commonwealth marine park process being used as an anti-fishing campaign?

Are they aware that according to the classification fishing will be banned in all IUCN II category national parks including terrestrial national parks?

Do they think recreational fishing is the biggest threat to our marine environment?

Are they prepared to stand up and support recreational fishing in Australia?

Will they support the disallowance motion and stand up for recreational anglers in Australia?
Tony Windsor
Telephone: 02 6761 3080
Online contact form   http://www.tonywindsor.com.au/contact.html

Example letter 1

I would like to bring to your attention some examples of how our recent Commonwealth marine park process was little more than an anti-fishing campaign. It’s quite possible that shortly you might be asked to vote on a disallowance motion on the marine park management bills.

The government claims that these marine parks will not affect anglers, as they are far offshore, and that only 1% of commercial fishing will be affected, if what they say is correct, what is it exactly that they have done to claim that these areas are now fully protected?

I haven’t heard the government mention other threat besides fishing much at all in this entire process, in fact all the submissions on the Coral Sea by Australian NGOs only talked about fishing and nothing else, yet now that the process is over they think that shipping, port development and mining is a threat to the Great Barrier reef, why were none of these other threats mentioned in there Coral Sea submissions, or any of the other threat for that matter? During this process we had two ships that almost ran aground in the Coral Sea, yet still no talk about the impact of increased shipping through this area, there is substantial scientific evidence that noise pollution from shipping has a very detrimental effect on not only marine mammals but many species, but nothing about these threats by the government or the NGOs, all they talked about was fishing, anglers who according to all the marine park advocates don’t go to these areas anyway.

Specifically if you look at the so called jewel in the crown, “the Coral Sea”, and the particularly Osprey reef, the science used to justify banning anglers from this area, basically claim’s that because the sharks of Osprey Reef (unlike sharks of other reefs) don’t leave the area to any great extent or numbers, creating a no fishing area means these sharks are less likely to stray into so called non protected areas, but this very same science also says that the reasons that the sharks at Osprey Reef don’t leave the area is due to the shark dive feeding activities, which has not only negatively modified the behaviour of these sharks but also altered the entire biodiversity of the area.
So they banned fishing for no other reason but the fact that these sharks no longer participate in their natural migration, but not only allow shark feeding to continue but actively encourage it.

This is the science quoted as the reason Osprey Reef was made a no fishing area.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0036574

List of submissions

http://www.environment.gov.au/archive/coasts/mbp/coralsea/consultation/submissions/index.html

How is this anything but an attack on fishing? Perpetuating the myth that fishing is a threat while not only doing absolutely nothing about the real threats the area faces, but actively encouraging one of the greatest threats the area faces, organised shark feeding dives!

We are greatly concerned at how fishing has been portrayed by not only our Environmental NGOs but our government, Australia has some of the best managed fisheries in the world even according to many global environmental groups, we should be held up as an example to the rest of the world not attacked, but what we are even more concerned about is how our government and our environmental NGOs wasted this opportunity to truly offer some real protection to our marine environment by using this process as nothing more than an anti-fishing campaign, and it’s become very clear that it’s now up to recreational anglers more than ever before to stand up and be the custodians of our marine environment as we have quietly done so in the past.

The model of marine park we have legislated are known as the CAR model,

Comprehensiveness: The NRSMPA will include the full range of ecosystems recognised at an appropriate scale within and across each bioregion.

Adequacy: The NRSMPA will have the required level of reservation to ensure the ecological viability and integrity of populations, species and communities.

 Representativeness: Those marine areas that are selected for inclusion in MPAs should reasonably reflect the biotic diversity of the marine ecosystems from which they derive.

The principle of this model is to select areas that represent a full range of healthy ecosystems of an appropriate size and lock them up for the future, with the hope that by removing the threats you can control, the area will be in a better position to look after itself in the future from the threats we can control.

This model was chosen not because it is the best model to provide a safe guard to our ocean habitats but because it was the one that would have had the best chance of winning over the public and the hardest for opponents to fight.

The long and winding road: The development of a comprehensive, adequate and representative system of highly protected marine protected areas in Victoria, Australia. This paper written in 2006 for the Victorian National Parks Association describes and discusses the factors that contributed to the establishment of the Victorian system and the relevance of these factors to other jurisdictions.

Abstract 

In 2002, the state of Victoria, Australia increased its ‘‘no-take’’ marine protected areas (MPAs) 100 fold to cover over 5% of its coastal waters in a comprehensive, adequate and representative system of marine national parks and sanctuaries. Given the ambitious targets set for MPA establishment globally in 2003 at the World Summit for Sustainable Development this apparently remarkable achievement could be an example to other nations and states attempting to establish substantial MPA systems.

http://wefishaustralia.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/normal-0-false-false-false-en-au-x-none.html

Minister Burke has excluded recreational fishing from IUVN category II national parks, and according to my understanding this includes both marine and terrestrial national parks, the Appendix A outlining the principle of IUCN category II says that

Minister Burke has determined that the ICUN II classification exclude recreational fishing, Yellowstone National Park in the USA the world’s first national park, is also classified as IUCN II, but recreational fishing has always been allowed.

According to the IUCN category objectives.

IUCN category II, its primary management objectives are;

(a) to protect natural and scenic areas for spiritual, scientific, recreational, and tourist purposes;

(b) to perpetuate, in as natural a state as possible, representative examples of biotic communities and species; and

(c) to manage visitor use for inspirational, educational, and recreational purposes.

In Australia thanks to Minister Burke IUCN category II national parks ban fishing!

Visitor use should be managed for inspirational, educational, culture and recreational purposes at a level that will maintain the reserve or zone in natural states.

These marine parks have not been preceded by the necessary and appropriate risk assessment and the risks to the area have not adequately been identified and management prioritised in proportion to the magnitude of the threat.

So the question of whether well managed recreational fishing is a threat to the natural state of these areas is the question. Almost all our marine species breed and spawn in large numbers at the same time for a reason, this spawn and the young of almost all the species make up a vital part of the marine food chain, they have evolved to cope with being exploited, or extracted from the system, figures on some targeted species show that the in relation to the entire spawn the amount extracted by fishing is very small, an in fact the majority of the spawn that doesn’t make it to spawning age die due to environmental factors or are simply eaten by other species. We all understand that a poorly or non-managed fishery can have very detrimental effects to the natural sates of marine areas, but that is not the case in Australia. In Australia we have one of the best managed fisheries in the world, Australia’s total commercial catch stands at 241.123 tonnes, out of the 143 million tonnes of the global commercial fishing production, yet we have the world’s third largest EEZ.

 Then we have to ask what other threats that can be managed have been removed from these so called highly protected areas, as I showed in the example on your Facebook page there are clear threats to other areas that have not been addressed, in that example of Osprey Reef, the science they used to make ban fishing also clearly says that the area no longer is a true representation of the natural biodiversity, due to the shark feeding dives, and that’s just one example of many.

 This is a whole lot more than being angry about this anti-fishing propaganda or being locked out, this is about doing something so that my kids and all future generations can enjoy what we all enjoy today, this entire marine park process offer absolutely no protection to our marine environment, and even worse by pretending that it does the general public are less likely to support any action that will offer some real protection.

 I hope that this gives you an insight into why I am so passionate about this subject and an understanding that we as recreational anglers are the true custodians of our marine environment, the evidence is clear, anglers actions of the past have had real positive measurable effects on not only our marine environment but also our rivers, in NSW the fish habitat network is doing fantastic work that is having tremendous benefits to our native fish species, it was the Game Fishing Association of Australia that removed the Grey Nurse shark from its acceptable species list some ten years before anyone else even mentioned the species, our peak recreational body in Victoria which I am a state council member has just agreed to base our marine policy on habitat and not the species we target, we are the true conservationist and we deserve to be treated as such, and not dictated by people that have probably never experienced what our marine environment has to offer. 

I will leave you with this quote from one of the scientist that is strong advocate for these marine parks, please not that a the majority of information a marine scientist gathers is from catch and release fishing, so is this a scientific statement or a political one?

Professor Terry Hughes, Director of the Australian Research Council Centre for Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, at James Cook University.
“At the moment there's almost no recreational fishing taking place within the Coral Sea, so we think it's not a good idea to encourage the development of widespread recreational fishing that's based on catch and release technologies.”

The Coalition has announce at our rally in Torquay last Sunday that they will put forward a disallowance motion on the commonwealth marine park management plans bills.

I hope that you will support recreational fishing in Australia and help put an end to this reckless anti-fishing campaign.

Awaiting your reply with anticipation

Example letter 2

As one of many local residents that is an avid responsible recreational angler, I am writing to you to ask for you to support fishing in Australia.

Our country is incredibly fortunate to enjoy one of the healthiest and richest marine environments in the world, due in a big part as a result of our great fisheries management. There is no need to unfairly lock anglers out of areas we already protect ourselves.

According to the IUCN category objectives.

IUCN category II, its primary management objectives are;
(a) to protect natural and scenic areas for spiritual, scientific, recreational, and tourist purposes;
(b) to perpetuate, in as natural a state as possible, representative examples of biotic communities and species; and
(c) to manage visitor use for inspirational, educational, and recreational purposes.

In Australia thanks to Minister Burke IUCN category II national parks ban fishing, both marine and terrestrial.

I don’t understand why this entire marine park process has been little more than an anti-fishing campaign. Minister Burke and our environmental NGOs have wasted an opportunity to truly offer some protection to our marine environment instead unfairly attacking fishing while totally ignoring the real threats.

Minister burke claims these areas are now fully protected yet in the same breath he claims they will not affect recreational anglers as they don’t go there and only 1% of commercial fishers will be affected, that’s an interesting way of protecting something wouldn’t you agree? Banning people that don’t go there.

I ask that you, as my MP, support the disallowance motion on the commonwealth marine parks management plan so that we may take a step back and address the real threats these areas face, and stop this anti-fishing campaign.

Australian fisheries are considered one of the best managed in the world, we should be used as an example to others not attacked by our own government. Fishing in Australia is hardly the threat that it’s portrayed to be.

At the next federal election, my vote will go to the person that supports me and what I do, not the one that unfairly attacks fishing.

Yours sincerely,