Dodgy science "Marine park success increases stocks in nearby fishing zones"

"THE first conclusive evidence that no-fishing zones in marine parks increase fish in neighbouring areas has been revealed by Australian scientists.

One of the main concerns of recreational and commercial fishers has been the lack of formal proof that no-take zones in marine parks have an effect beyond their borders.

"Using DNA fingerprinting technology, we now can clearly show that the benefits of (marine parks) spread beyond reserve boundaries, providing a baby bonus to fisheries," said Professor Geoff Jones of ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies (CoECRS) and James Cook University, who led the study presented yesterday at the International Coral Reef Symposium in Cairns.

In the ground-breaking study, scientists tracked the dispersal pathways of juvenile coral trout and stripey snapper larvae from marine park protection zones in the Keppel Island group on the Great Barrier Reef.

They found that 65 per cent settled in nearby areas that are open to fishing.

Most of the baby fish settled within 1km-5km of the reserves but a significant proportion dispersed 10km or more.

The study found that the six marine reserves, which cover 28 per cent of the total reef area of the Keppels, had generated 50 per cent of the juvenile fish found both inside and outside of the no-fishing reserves.

"This means there would have been a lot less fish if the no-take areas weren't there," said Leanne Fernandes, a leading advocate of no-take zones"

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/marine-park-success-increases-stocks-in-nearby-fishing-zones/story-fndo317g-1226424833329


This doesn’t show an increase at all, what was the recruitment before the park was introduced?

This study makes misleading claims, you don’t need be a brain surgeon to understand if you remove fishing in an area it will hold a greater number and larger size of targeted species, by creating a protection area the areas around it, if the same amount of people fish for the same amount of time, will see an increased pressure on the targeted species, thus a marine park creates a situation where we have increased the size and numbers in one area and decreased them in all the other areas, so you don’t need fingerprinting DNA technology to tell you that the area with the increased amount of fish will be responsible for great recruitment. What this study claims and fails to prove, has this resulted in a net benefit? If the recruitment is the same but has merely been redistributed, what we have now done is concentrated the spawning into a concentrated area, leaving the species vulnerable should something happen to this protected area.

It also fails to look at the prey species in this protected area, I bet if they use their fingerprint DNA technology on the prey of the fish anglers target you will see the opposite that the majority of their recruitment comes from outside the protected areas, not from the protected area that now holds a larger number of the predator species, they also fail to clarify how these protection areas now holding a larger amount of the species we target is effecting the total biodiversity of the area.

Commonwealth marine reserves network 60-day consultation period has commenced

Attention!   Attention!   Attention!

The Director of National Parks has published in the Commonwealth of Australia Government Gazette an invitation to comment on the proposal to declare the Commonwealth marine reserves network covering the South-west, North-west, North, Coral Sea and Temperate East Marine Regions as released by the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, the Hon. Tony Burke MP on 14 June 2012. 

The statutory 60-day consultation period has commenced and closes on 

Monday 10 September 2012.

Further information on each of the proposed marine reserves and how members of the public can provide comment, is available from the department’s website: 

 www.environment.gov.au/marinereserves.

 

Enquiries about the final Commonwealth marine reserves network should be directed by email to marinereserves@environment.gov.au

Consultation Paper link

Draft South-east Commonwealth Marine Reserves Network management plan

The Australian Government has developed a draft management plan for the South-east Commonwealth Marine Reserves Network.  The South-east network was established in 2007 and is currently managed under interim management arrangements. The draft management plan was developed after considering the information received as part of the public consultation process on the intention to develop a management plan and the effectiveness of interim management arrangements.

Comment is now invited on the South-east marine reserves draft management plan. The statutory consultation period has commenced and will be open for 45 days, closing on Monday 27 August 2012.

Further information, including the draft South-east management plan and information for stakeholders who operate in the South-east reserves network is available from the department’s website:

www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mbp/south-east/consultation

Enquiries about the South-east Commonwealth Marine Reserves Network draft management plan and the information available should be directed by email to South-Seast.MarinePlan@environment.gov.au

Marine Parks editorial

What we all need to understand about this marine park issue more than anything else, is not all marine parks are equal, the model being introduced in Australia is known as the CAR model of marine parks, this model is not about trying to protect a vulnerable species, be it a species that is targeted or not targeted by anglers. In theory it is about removing all man made impacts in selected areas so this area can be in a better position to handle other threats we cannot control, like global warming, coral bleaching and so on, and the area can better look after itself. CAR stands for Comprehensive, Adequate and Representative, the idea is to select areas that are in pristine condition, each area representing a healthy example of what that type of area should look like, and be of an adequate size that if something should happen to all the other areas this one will be large enough to be almost self-sustaining, it’s like an insurance policy for the future.

This model was chosen not because it offers the best protection for our marine environment but simply because it is the hardest to oppose and can be introduced all across the country at one time, if they were introducing specifically designed marine parks to look after individual species then any opposition can concentrate on that one area and make it difficult to introduce, by having this one system fits all areas approach the opposition is divided among all the different types of areas and locations.

I see a few problems with this model, for one it makes a general assumption that if we remove man made impacts in an area , every species in that locked up area will benefit, according to the most recent scientific data the species that are most at risk in Australia are the small species that live in close to shore, and not the species anglers target, in fact these usually smaller species that are at most risk generally make up the prey species of the fish anglers target, so in simple terms it’s not the fish we target that are in danger but there food, by locking up areas to fishing we are only increasing the pressure on these very species that we should be looking after most, if we lose the food for the species we target then no amount of protection, bag limits, size limits or anything else will save the fish we target. There are a number of reasons these small prey species are at risk, they live close to shore so they are greatly affected by what we do on land, things like pollution run off and modifying the way this run off enters our marine environment is not only affecting these small prey species directly but also having a huge impact on the habitat they rely on,  as the majority of these small prey species spend most of their lives on the one patch of reef or seagrass they don’t have the advantage that most of the species we target have in being able to move not only in and out of these areas but also the ability to relocate to a different area if they need to.


The CAR model of marine parks is great for areas in the world were that have poor fishing management, unstable governments, and nothing else can be done, fortunate in Australia we have the political will the means and some of the best fishery management practices in the world, this CAR model is far from adequate here, we should be setting an example for the rest of the world, currently in Australia we have 1/3 of the world’s marine parks in our waters already, that’s right 1/3! We have been seen as a soft target by some overseas groups and they have attempted to exert there financial and political will on us even more, on things they would not even dream of doing in their own oceans.

This push for these marine parks has been dishonest to say the least, reading comments from the groups advocating for these marine parks they all agree that fishing is a very minor activity in these areas, even all the governments statements since the release of the draft proposal have stated that these parks will not affect anglers because anglers don’t go there, now if this was correct, then what man made impacts have they removed from these areas, to call them fully protected, they can’t have it both ways they have either displaced fishing or they are not doing anything to protect these areas that they now call fully protected.  Recently it has been announced that a USA Tuna purse-seine fleet has payed USD$630 million dollars to catch in excess of 4 times Australia’s total fish production in the same areas Australian fishers will be banned from, if these marine parks go ahead.

Our criteria of success in marine conservation needs to change from how much area we have locked away to how the individual species are actually doing, we need to move from this approach, of this is what we have left  and  lets protect it, to this is what we need now, this is what we predict we will need in the future and what do we need to do to ensure we have the numbers so there is enough fish for everyone in the future, and the only way this can be achieved is that we start from the beginning of the food chain, any increases in the start of the marine food chain should see a direct increase in all the species up that food chain. Records from scientific groups have shown that with the global increase in both the terrestrial and marine protection areas there has been no slowdown in the species lose, in fact if you look at the graph it appears that as the protection areas have grown over the years so has the amount of species lost.

What has happened in other countries is that these groups that want to stop us fishing have used recreational anglers to attack commercial fishers, once they have effectively restricted commercial fishing they then turn their attention to the now easy target, the recreational anglers, we cannot allow this to happen here, the more united we are the greater our chance of success will be, we must all understand that to have a united front we need to make compromises and work together for the common goal. Commercial fishing in Australia has the lowest carbon and water foot print, has the least environmental damage, and is totally sustainable, no other mass food source in Australia even comes close, if terrestrial farmers had to abide by the same regulations that commercial fishing does they simply would not be able to operate.

We as recreational anglers should be out raged with this marine park plan, not because we are being locked out, but because this will offer no protection and is misleading the public that it will.

Daniel Stanilovic

2012 Melbourne boat show video, Dale McClelland on fire regarding marine parks and the threat to Victorian anglers and their Southern Blue Fin tuna fishery.

Marine Parks 6O day’s consultation period

I have been asked by a number of people what they can do about the federal government’s bio regional marine park proposal, you can write letters to the ministers concerned (contact details on a previous blog).  We will have a 60 day consultation period, from the time the legislation is gazetted, as this was not done before parliament’s winter break the earliest this can be done is when parliament returns on the 14^th of August , at which time we can make a formal submission that will need to comply with the terms of reference of the submission to be considered.

What all that means in basic terms is, the government hasn’t lodged the paper work it need to yet, once it does we have 60 days, the submission might have a limited term of reference meaning that we are limited on what areas of the policy we can bring up in the submission, for now make sure you stay on top of the information and be ready when the time comes to make a formal submission, as you can bet the environmental groups will be flooding the government with submissions.

USA tuna purse-seine fleet has agreed to pay Pacific Island countries USD$630
million dollars to catch in-excess of 4 times Australia’s total fish production, in the same region.

If you missed the launch of “Keep Australia Fishing” by Rex Hunt on Saturday you can listen to it here!

Victorian Tuna rally / meeting

On the South West coast where it will hurt the most!

Warrnambool / 27th July 7.30 pm at the 

South Rovers Football Club 
Coulstock St
Warrnambool, Victoria

 
Anthony Hurst (DPI) will be there

We will follow this up with a meeting in the western suburbs and then another at marine house dates etc pending but will be august if this is not resolved.

Petition will be at the boat show and we will try to get it in to a few tackle stores

Last week’s press release almost out of the blue stating that the state government asked DAFF (Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry) for clarification and assurances that we will still be able to fish for SBTs.
Now why would they ask and what have they heard, are questions that need to be asked! and there have also been rumblings around the traps about a push for catch share to allow for the rec fishing take to be included in the international quota.

Things are still murky, but one thing is clear our tuna fishery (recreational sector) was definitely being discussed at a federal level.

Although where this goes and where it came from is still a little unclear, one thing is sure, we need to make some noise to help get to the bottom of it.

SEE YOU THERE!

Please note! A correction has been made to the location previous location was incorrect, the correct location is South Rovers Football Club, Coulstock St, Warrnambool, Victoria

2012 Melbourne Boat Show Fishing Stage



If you are going to the boat show try and catch one of these if you can, there might be something about the future of Victorian recreational SBT fishery, at those sessions.


Friday 6^th June  7:00-8:00pm

Sunday 8^th June  11:30-12:00am

Monday 9^th June  5:00-5:30


http://www.biavic.com.au/melbourneboatshow/

VRFish backs Victorian Government push on southern bluefin tuna

VRFish, Victoria’s recreational fishing peak body, has echoed calls to the Commonwealth Government for assurance that the recreational fishing community be guaranteed long term access to the southern bluefin tuna fishery in the south west.

‘It’s extremely heartening that the Victorian Coalition Government recognises the importance of this fishery,’ said Christopher Collins, Executive Officer of VRFish. ‘It gives recreational fishers some surety that the Government recognises our valuable contribution to the economies of regional communities such as Portland as we enjoy our pursuit.’

The southern bluefin tuna fishery is extremely popular with recreational fishers, many of whom spend considerable time and money in the south west of the state. ‘Almost every Monday over the past few months, VRFish has received emails from our members, with photos and reports from a fantastic weekend chasing the bluefin,’ said Mr Collins. ‘We applaud Minister Walsh in his endeavour to ensure that this can continue through allowing full access to this magnificent fishery on behalf of Victoria’s recreational fishers.’

‘VRFish commends the great work conducted by Fisheries Victoria which quantifies the popularity of this fishery,’ said Mr Collins.
‘It’s particularly pleasing to witness such strong commitment to a fishery and a community that means so much to the many hundreds of thousands of Victorians that enjoy recreational fishing.’


http://vrfish.com.au/wp-content/uploads/120628-Southern-Bluefin-Tuna1.pdf

THE US-based anti-fishing organisation Pew has admitted it pressured the Australian Government to lock anglers out of vast areas of the Coral Sea but would not take the same action in American waters because it would harm the US economy and disadvantage local fishermen.

http://www.fishingworld.com.au/news/pew-admits-it-targeted-australia-for-lockouts-left-us-alone

We Fish Media release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

29^th June 2012

Victorian recreational tuna fishery is under Threat from the Federal Gillard Government!

“The Commonwealth government has been formally asked by the Victoria Coalition government to give assurances that recreational fishing for Southern Bluefin Tuna will be allowed going forward but the request has either fallen on deaf ears or more concerning, is being totally ignored” said Dale McClelland campaign coordinator for WE FISH

“The Federal Minister responsible for Fisheries Senator Ludwig is saying nothing and with the Gillard Government’s track record of unjustified fishing lock-outs while paying total lip service to recreational fishing this continuation of Gillard government policy is very worrying.

“The detrimental impact of stopping recreational tuna fishing in Victoria, to the south west regional economy in particular and the recreational boat manufacturing and retail fishing industry sectors would be catastrophic.

“The current marine policy environment under the Federal government is anti-recreational fishing and is being formulated by fringe environmental groups from within the very offices of our elected representatives. Now it seems that the Gillard government wants to ban the recreational take of Southern Bluefin Tuna. WE FISH will fight to the death on this issue.

“WE FISH applaud the hard work by Victorian Fisheries Minister Peter Walsh and his Parliamentary Secretary Dr Bill Sykes. Their unflinching support of recreational fishing is an assurance and more importantly, WE FISH offers 100% support to the Victorian Coalition government’s endeavours in making sure that the recreational tuna fishery and all Victorian recreational fisheries are to remain.

“This battle starts now and I can personally guarantee all parties taking up this cause the support of EVERY recreational fisher man, woman and child in this state” said Dale McClelland.

Media Contact:

Dale McClelland

0400 902 492
we_fish@hotmail.com

Rex Hunt Keep Australia Fishing

Victoria seeks assurances on southern bluefin tuna

Wednesday, 27 June 2012

From the Minister for Agriculture and Food Security

The Victorian Coalition Government is seeking assurance that the valuable southwest Victorian southern bluefin tuna angling sector will be guaranteed long term access to the fishery.
Agriculture and Food Security Minister Peter Walsh today said southern bluefin tuna was an important fishery for recreational anglers in Victoria who were entitled to an ongoing share along with the commercial sector.
"The southern bluefin tuna fishery is a significant resource for recreational fishers, charter operators and tourism operators in southwest Victoria while also supporting an important commercial fishery based in Port Lincoln in South Australia," Mr Walsh said.
"We are seeking assurances from the Commonwealth Government that fair consideration will be given to both the recreational and commercial sectors in future decision making about access to the southern bluefin tuna resource."


http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/4303-victoria-seeks-assurances-on-southern-bluefin-tuna-.html

DPI Exucutive Summary

Fisheries Victoria initiated this study, following consultation with the Victorian recreational fishing community, to provide the first quantified estimate of the recreational daytime trailer-boat catch of Southern Bluefin Tuna (SBT) off the south west Victorian coast.



http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/fisheries/about-fisheries/publications-and-resources/fisheries-reports/your-licence-fees-at-work-reports/2012/quantifying-the-recreational-catch-of-southern-bluefin-tuna

FV Margiris (super trawler) raised in parliament

Monday, 25 June 2012




Mr WILKIE (Denison) (14:24): My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, what on earth were regulators thinking when they gave approval for the world's second-biggest trawler, the 142 metre Margiris, to operate around Tasmania? Will you review that decision with a view to revoking it or at least put in place safeguards to protect Australia's best fisheries by ensuring that the super trawler's massive quota is broken down into smaller limits for specific areas?

Ms GILLARD (Lalor—Prime Minister) (14:25): I thank the member for Denison for his question. I know that he is seriously concerned about this matter. I can assure the member for Denison that, contrary to a report in the Daily Telegraph on 7 June, no application has been granted for the vessel he refers to. I believe that the member for Denison's concerns were probably triggered by that report or by follow-up media occasioned by that report. There has been no application to the Australian Fisheries Management Authority by the vessel which the member for Denison refers to and which is a large, mid-water-trawl factory vessel—and the member for Denison is concerned about its size. No application has been made in respect of that vessel to the relevant independent authority, the Australian Fisheries Management Authority.

I can also assure the member for Denison and the House in general that, if such an application were to be made, it would be subject to all of the normal considerations that the Australian Fisheries Management Authority goes through. These include catch limits—and the member for Denison's question refers, effectively, to catch limits. They can include requirements to have observers on the vessel who monitor fishing activities. They can also include issues about the kind of equipment used, including technology which, for example, can detect the presence of seals. So, should an application be made, each of these issues would be the subject of consideration. Other requirements can also be engaged in and considered by the relevant authority, including logbook reporting, satellite vessel-monitoring systems, mandatory reporting of any interactions with protected species and the like.

I can assure the member for Denison that what determines the size of any taking of fish is not the size of the vessel—and he has referred to a large vessel—but the constraints that are put on it by the relevant independent authority, who would work through the issues should an application be made.



Recreational fisherman and fishing journalist, Marty Ellul, explained how the ship will harm both the local tuna population and economy.



http://www.abc.net.au/local/audio/2012/06/19/3528816.htm?site=southwestvic




The extraction of over 17 thousand baitfish off the coast of Portland will have a small impact, if any, on the broader eco-system according to CEO of Australian Fisheries Management Authority James Findlay.


http://www.abc.net.au/local/audio/2012/06/20/3529352.htm

31 May 2012
AFMA is aware that an Australian company has proposed the use of a large vessel in the Commonwealth Small Pelagic Fishery, however to date AFMA has not received any application for this vessel to operate in the fishery.


http://www.afma.gov.au/2012/05/super-trawler-fears-unfounded/

Vessel details and current live location 

http://www.marinetraffic.com/ais/default.aspx?mmsi=277330000&centerx=4.5803&centery=52.46147&zoom=10&type_color=2



A search for the FV Margiris, on the Equasis (Database containing safety-related information on the world's merchant fleet from both public and private sources) using both name and IMO number. No record, so ownership, Insurers, etc, survey status cannot be checked



Seafish Tasmania

http://www.seafish.com.au/_content/assets.htm

ANGLERS release almost a quarter of the southern bluefin tuna caught off south-west Victoria, according to new research into the huge recreational fishing boom.

http://www.standard.net.au/news/local/news/general/tuna-in-abundance-off-southwest-study-finds/2594763.aspx

Half page add in The Australain 22/06/2012

As you can imagine it takes some time to find and put together this information on this blog so if people that are interested follow the blog and either share the link or the information around, so I don’t have to keep posting, up dates everywhere it would  be a big help.

What is the answer if Marine Parks are not (opinion piece)


People often ask what a better solution if marine parks are not the answer, well we need to change on how we view this issue as well as our response, currently the criteria for success in conservation is how much area we have locked up, this needs to change to a fundamental evaluation on the actual health and numbers of the species, the very ones we are trying to protect, no point having a marine park if there is nothing left living in it. The other thing we desperately need to change is this idea that” this is what we have left” let’s divided it up between the users and locks up a percentage as an insurance policy as such and hope that works. That is a great system in countries where they haven’t got the financial means, political will, poor or no fisheries management as well as all the other problems. In Australia we couldn’t be further from that, what we should be doing in Australia and setting an example to the world is estimate not only what we take out of the system today, but envisage what we are likely to be taking out of the system in the future, then start making changes to ensure that in future there is enough fish for everyone. To do this we must turn our conservation approach on its arse, instead of concentrating on the end of the food chain we need to turn our attention the beginning of the food chain, it the species we target have nothing to eat then you can protect them as much as you like but they will still disappear. The majority of the start of the food chain is greatly affected by what we do on land, this is for a number of reasons first they are usually located in the close to shore reefs, and second most of these species will not leave this reef for almost their entire life.

As an example out of all the ecosystems we have the one that has suffered the most is the saltmarsh, seagrass mangrove system it has been far greatly affected then our coral reefs, although going by some of our environmental groups you would not now this, in Western Port Victoria this habitat is now believed to be at below 10% of its original biomass. But how does this affect us, well the very species we target either use this area as a spawning or nursery ground, the ones that don’t only enter our bays to feed on the species that do. The four species the Philip Island Penguins eat depend on this very area.

An increase in this area should result in a direct increase in the numbers and health of the species we target, could you imagine a 10 or 20 fold increases in species we target?

What do we need to do? Well as anglers we need to gain not only control over the science but the funding for this science so we are the ones calling the shots of what it looks at and why, we need to unite not just recreational anglers but with the commercial sector as well, understanding that we will all have to compromise and toe the line just as our opposition is doing. We need to stop being on the defensive with every issue and start being proactive in fighting for our rights.

If like where I am the weather is wet, windy and cold for you, spend some time looking at this video below, it tells the story in simple terms of what the problem is, and don’t forget there are ten year old marine parks in Westernport Victoria.

As you can imagine it takes some time to find and put together this information on this blog so if people that are interested follow the blog and either share the link or the information around, so I don’t have to keep posting up dates everywhere it would  be a big help.

 

More about the CAR system of marine parks.

The Strategic Plan describes the three principles, also referred to as the CAR principles, as

follows:



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. (Source: ANZECC TFMPA 1999, pp 15-16)

Comprehensiveness

 Adequacy

 

Representativeness