By JAMES WOODFORD
A plan for a massive marine park stretching off Sydney’s coast, from Gosford in the north to the Royal in the south and three kilometres out to sea, will be launched today.
The proposal by the National Parks Association of NSW(NPA) is ambitious, but, if successful, will lead to an overhaul of the management of the city’s surprisingly rich coastal waters.
The Association says it simply wants the state government to fulfil a long-standing election commitment to create a full system of marine reserves along the NSW coast, including off Sydney.
If the plan is adopted, the new marine park would be the only one of its kind, neighbouring such a large capital city.
At 103,000 hectares the park would take in all four of the region’s estuaries, including Sydney Harbour and Botany Bay.
However, not all of the Hawkesbury Marine Park would be closed to recreational and commercial fishing, says the NPA’s marine program manager, Ms Nicky Hammond.
She says, if adopted the park would have a system of gazetted multiple use zones and only a small percentage of areas would be protected from all forms of exploitation.
The marine park would take in part of the area used annually for the humpback whale migration, penguin habitat and large tracts of ocean and estuaries frequented by dolphins. There are also populations of seahorses and seadragons.
In Sydney Harbour alone there is an astonishing nearly-600 species of fish.
“There’s a huge diversity of marine life,” Ms. Hammond said. “It’s a teeming underwater world down there next to a huge, bustling city.”
Already large and extremely controversial marine parks have been created in areas including near Batemans Bay off the Eurobodalla coast, in Jervis Bay and at Port Stephens.
But primarily, for political reasons, the state government has failed to declare a marine park in Sydney’s coastal waters.
As part of a report by the National Parks Association, to be released today on marine conservation in NSW, a second major coastal reserve is also proposed – for the Eden/Twofold Bay area, just north of the Victorian Border.
In addition the NPA is calling for 1,500 metre exclusion zones to be imposed around all of the known habitats for the critically endangered Grey-nurse sharks.
The author of the NPA report, Paul Winn, says anew marine park off Sydney is important because the area is under so much pressure.
“A Sydney Marine Park represents an opportunity to provide ecological sustainability to a much loved and used part of the Australian coastline,” says the report.
Recreational fishing groups have bitterly fought the creation of marine parks and will almost certainly oppose any further conservation measures.
The executive chair of Oceanwatch, which represents the environmental interests of the commercial fishing industry, Brad Warren, said the process had to be based on rigorous science.
“There would need to be compensation for all businesses negatively impacted including commercial fishing operators, bait shops and tackle shops,” Mr Warren said.
I don’t think any conservation minded person, fisherman or not, can oppose the implementation of a marine park based purely on good science and lengthy public consultation. The problen i see is that traditionally this has not been the case with the other established parks. The agenda is purely selfish and lacks any scientific rationale. Utlising the political clout the greens have will go a long way to pushing aside the humble recreational angler. But this is a highly populated area of concerned anglers ready to mobilise against this selfish and righteous proposal. The Labor government better tread carefully. They are on unstable ground as it is and 1 million angry anglers can overthrow this government… along with the greens.
sure, protect the native marine life by regulating boat traffic speeds and commercial fishing zones but don’t stop the recreational fisherman from using sydneys local areas. We do not impact the areas welfare as we follow our size and bag limits already set in place!
I enjoying fishing, it is one of my favourate activities. I always take great care to do as little damage as possible.
I would be deeply upset if this marine park stopped me from fishing in my local area. By the way i don’t catch much but i enjoy the activity.
Surely there are better ways to improve the areas, such as reducing pollution, reduceing bag limits in the area.
“.. Oceanwatch, which represents the environmental interests of the commercial fishing industry…”.
I can’t decide what term best describes this phrase – satire, irony, oxymoron, … litotes perhaps?
There will be NO prohibition of “single hook” fishing so no w/e kerplunker need fear.
I agree with Gus and Sam. We don’t need Sydney’s recreational fishers chewing up fossil fuel driving ( and possibly towing boats) to areas north of Gosford and south of Royal N.Pk for a “bit of fishing”, adding to our environmental woes and hardly relaxing considering Sydney’s weekend traffic.
Quote “There will be NO prohibition of “single hook” fishing so no w/e kerplunker need fear.”
They definately need to fear …As seen in other marine parks they are denied access due to sanctuary zones…And we know that you want to increase them dont you……The fun police here they come…
I guess by the time this issue has been through its debate we will acknowledge the selfishness of humankind coming to the fore, ie “it is my right to fish where I please and I will destroy you if you don’t allow me to do this” as well as the repeating cycle of bureaucratic ineptitude regarding public consultation being brought into the light and exposed for the ridiculous attitude that it highlights.
Personally I gain much enjoyment from being close to nature and enjoying the life within it and cannot appreciate the joy gained from hooking an animal and then watching it gasp in agony as it dies while usually flopping around helplessly. Each to their own.
I ask everyone to think of the endangered species that this proposed park would be established to protect. Reflect on what it would be like if you were an endangered species?
Perhaps you are…
Quote “Reflect on what it would be like if you were an endangered species?
Perhaps you are…”
Seems to me it has had an opposite effect in awakening a sleeping giant….
endangered far from it…..
Good on you NPA for uniting all types of anglers…..
You need to come for a fish and then you will realise what you have been missing out on….
Allan Kessing – you are naive and simply WRONG if you think there will be no restrictions on recreational fishing. Open your eyes and take a look at the Marine Park Act and regulations for existing NSW Marine Parks. up to 20% of every park is NO FISHING WHATSOEVER. Get your head out of the clouds (or is it the sand?).
Nanette, you are more than welcome to your opinion and morals about fishing. I object to to you and your “conservationist” (read “anti-fishing) friends pushing it down my throat under the thin disguise of “protecting biodiversity”. Do a little research (instead of believing the propaganda) and you will find that recreational fishing has minimal impacts on the environment and is a perfectly sustainable and legitimate activity. I challenge you to find me ONE species at risk of recreational overfishing and I will gladly stop fishing for it. Leave out the emotion of the fish “gasping in agony”. Fish rarely die of old age in nursing homes.
Nanette what endangered species are you referring to that recreational fisherman target? I’m just asking as no recreational fish targeted are endangered? Also i love nature too, i prefer it to be healthy enough for me to catch a fish in than just look blue and pretty. Also it is our right to fish, as long as we follow bag and size limits our fish stocks will be fine.
Marine parks triple govern areas of ocean! We are spending our money to create a Marine park that is not needed. No marine species is endangered in NSW, not even the Grey Nurse. Unfortunately with bad science, anything can be made to look the way you want it.
Guys the government has cut the money for school kids to travel for free, reduced the health budget by 500 million and cancelled a rail line to the North West. Yet the squander OUR money on proposals like this! We are paying for this due to preference votes from the Greens that have kept the Labour in power.
Professor Robert Kearney on 30th October 2008 at the NSW Department of Fisheries, Cronulla, demonstrated a shocking process of a deliberate misleading the people of NSW, by the NSW Labor Government and the NSW Marine Parks Authority, that the marine environment is being ‘protected’ in NSW in the coastal NSW Marine Parks.
Professor Kearney stated that the Marine Parks Authority has used its powers to ban fishing in large swathes of the six parks in NSW with absolutely no scientific proof that current fishing practices have any detrimental effect on either NSW fish stocks, or marine biodiversity.
He detailed the the real threats to the marine environment as pollution, agricultural run-off and control of sediment inflows. he astonished the audience when he revealed the Marine Parks Authority claims that “Marine Park zoning arrangements are NOT designed to address threats such as pollution, disease, invasive species and climate change”. Professor Kearney stated “NSW marine parks are merely fisheries allocation tools … even after 15 years they show only marginal change, which cannot be shown to have any real benefits, let alone cost-effective ones.”
Marine parks have a ‘warm and fuzzy’ feel that the Labor Government and the Marine Parks Authority have relentlessly used to put a spin on their specious claims of so called ‘benefits and protection’.
In response to Nanette, if you want to ban fishing on purely animal welfare grounds, you will seriously upset 1.5million people in NSW.
Nanette, do u eat fish?
what a joke. locking people out of areas is not the answer. if it is then why dont we ban people from swimming at beaches, why dont we ban cars ,boats and aeroplanes and shut down all industry. it might sound good but it aint practical. The state government and the greens will suffer a great backlash if this is brought in as there is around 1 million rec anglers who will be affected by this. More than anything i think this is all about creating jobs for themeselves rather than conservation.
Richard Tizley, a retired senior marine biologist summed up this issue rather well:
The proposal by the National Parks Association (NPA) for yet more marine parks in NSW warrants strong comment, particularly as Minister Tebbutt will be referring their report to the NSW Marine Park Authority (MPA) for advice. The MPA has consistently made fallacious claims about the so-called harmful effects of fishing to justify the exclusion of recreational fishing from 20% of marine park areas in NSW. Recreational fishing has been unfairly singled out as a major threat to biodiversity, despite there being no substantiated evidence to support this claim.
The bulk of evidence used to denigrate fishing is derived from overseas studies on destructive commercial fishing practices and on over-exploited fisheries. The press release from the NPA states that “No-take marine sanctuaries can double fish and invertebrate densities, triple biomass, increase mean fish sizes by 20 to 30 per cent, boost the number of species by 23 per cent, quadruple catch-per unit efforts in nearby waters, and make marine ecosystems 21 per cent less vulnerable to environmental changes. Such claims amount to scientific fraud and demonstrate the spin-doctoring emanating from the NPA. Good science is certainly not about the selective use of information, in this case used by the NPA and MPA to advance their dodgy hypothesis that recreational fishing is impacting on biodiversity.
As a fisheries scientist I have searched the scientific literature for peer-reviewed papers demonstrating that recreational line fishing in NSW estuarine and coastal waters has had an adverse, or any, impact on biodiversity. No such hard published evidence exists. The real threats to marine biodiversity are coastal development and associated pollutants, not fishing. The many millions spent on creating and policing the meaningless no-take zones along the NSW coast would be far better spent combating such threats, rather than being wasted on green placebos.
Richard Tilzey
Central Tilba
Nanette, your comments are predominantly unjustified. Recreational anglers pose no real threat to endangered species such as Grey Nurse Sharks. Commercial trawlers? Maybe, but certainly not recreational anglers. If you don’t like fishing, that’s fine, but these people who are proposing this park are trying to impose their hatred of fishing on everyone. Areas such as Port Hacking, Botany Bay and Sydney Harbour do not have commercial fishermen operating in the region, so why impose no take zones? The fishery in these areas is flourishing.
There is also NO scientific evidence to reinforce this proposal, on page 8 of the NPA’s full report they state”there is an inadequate knowledge base on which to determine effective management action”, and furthermore state “We have little understanding of marine biodiversity and the impact of fishing on it”.
If they really want to help the marine environment, deal with the commercial fishermen working around Pittwater. Leave Port Hacking, Botany Bay (both of these are recreational fishing havens by the way, which recreational fishermen pay for) and Sydney Harbour alone.
I feel that alot of the so called research used to create marine parks is based on falicy and not facts.Recreational only fisheries such as Lake Macquarie and Botany bay have flourished since there closure to commercial fishing.
Most modern day recreational fisherpeople are enviromentally enlightened and have a deep love and care for the waterways they fish.
My message for the radical green movement is do not try to impose your will upon others,especially when your arguement mainly consists of mis-information.
I enjoy eating seafood and being able to provide the occasional fish meal for my family.
I do not know of 1 Rec fishermen or women who has ever targeted, hooked or caught a single species this park is proposing to protect. The very idea that this is the case is an insult. Rec fishermen and women appreciate the enviroment and love to be out in it, love to be in the presence of these animals and have a better understanding of them than the people who are trying to force a park upon rec fishers that will exlude them. Any other idea or impession that people have of rec fishermen and women is totally off the mark, but I suppose so is the “science”, “evience” and “research” that went into forming the “proposal” in the first place.
A sleeping giant we are, but I doubt that we can coordinate ourselves to truly awake, we may stir in our slumber, maybe mumble something.
We didn’t awake when MPAs were being implemented up and down the coast, didn’t care when it wasn’t in our backyard.
How many people made a submission to the recent zoning review of the Jervis Bay Marine Park?
Unfortunately its uneducated responses from bleeding hearts like Nanette that perpetuate the notion that fishing is immoral and cruel.
Simply, fishing is the purest sport left. It’s one activity left that links us to our past. In an age of mass produced and pre-packaged goods its refreshing and liberating to feel like your providing for your family rather than going down the local Coles and buying food bred for mass slaughter.
How many children these days cannot indentitfy with the food they put in thier mouth??? Do not comprehend it’s origins???
Fishing is not just about catching. It’s a life pursuit in reading the environment, understanding nature and animal life, comprehending how it all fits together. Nothing is more fulfilling than building on this knowledge then passing it onto your children, just like my forefathers before me.
Fisherman are enviromentalists purely by default!
Nanette, I would hope that someone in the correct capacity could actually take you fishing and see what conservation and naturalism is all about.
I am a conservationalist at heart, and enjoy nature in its finest and fullest, as do my children, my friends, family and extended family. We also love fishing as part of the process. I respect the oceans and what it holds and the enjoyment in nature that it creates.
The teachings of nature and the understanding that we show it back are what you lack in your own single minded understanding. Protect something you understand rather than understanding little of what you protect
Hi All,
Idive and I fish. I have never seen anybody hook a Weedy Sea Dragon and only once seen an Eastern Blue Devilfish caught. Are they really endangered. You don’t see as many KingParrots as Rainbow Lorikeets but that does not make them endangered.
As for Grey nurse sharks tell the truth about the latest count and apologise to all the readers for misleading them.
Unfortunately it is the damage the anglers don’t see that is the big problem. You may comply with bag limits, but you do not comply with the littering laws. As a scuba diver I see first hand the broken rods, fishing line ripping sponges from their anchoring, the hooks stuck in the few small fish swimming by, the fishing knives rusting in the sand. I collect the colourful lures that attract fish that nibble on them, the lead and hooks. But worst of all I have collected thousands of bait bags. The worst of the rubbish that is so easily discarded by fishermen.
I rarely see sharks and the fish we do see are infrequently of any decent size.
When will enough be enough. There is more to this that what you see on the surface.
Again we have this inane unsupported argument to ban fishing. The real agenda for the greens is a marine zone covering all Australian waters out 200 kilometres. They have admitted this much is true the media is totally bamboozled by them.
The Grey nurse shark lies, are a prime example of the lengths these zealots will go to get what they want.
Jenni
Its not only the fisherman who is at fault with all the rubbish washed in the oceans…Humans in general are at fault ….We have storm water runoff and sewage that pollutes the oceans every day….Maybe the NPA should focus on fixing that…..Leave the anglers alone….
filling scuba tanks with a compressor powered by electricity uses energy derived from burning coal.
how can these iresponsible and ignorant environmental vandals justify their need to submerse themselves just to look at what can be seen in countless books already in existence.
even if you only choose to snorkel, your snorkel and mask is made of silicon and other plastics which will inevitably become landfill.
snap out of it and let people live, I would risk being sentenced to jail for the opportunity to show my children how to catch a fish and eat something that didnt come from woolies.
I live on the Hawkesbury & on some days i have 5 trawlers going past , so im all for getting rid of commercial fishing , but i think its important that our future generations get to experience life on the water , fishing etc.
They would be prawn/squid trawlers, Jody. A study done by Underwood on prawn trawling on the Clarence River found it to be quite benign and sustainable. In any case much of the commercial effort (80%) has been removed from NSW waters since the 1990’s. There are less than 1200 commercial fishermen now. Also NSW now imports 90% of its seafood!
Would that be the same Darryl Bullock who produced that incredible photo of hundreds of grey nurses that look identical to each other? If they aren’t endangered they sure are a bit too closely related to each other. They look like clones….
Lou,
I absolutely would not leave the anglers alone when we clean up masses of discarded fishing line, unravel line from sponges and pillars, collect masses of bait bags and enough fishing rods and knives to open a store.
I am not stupid enough to suggest that it is not all humans, but anglers contribute significantly. Both on shore, on boats and commercially.
If you cleaned up the marine garbage you would know.
Nick,
You are correct, Grey Nurse Sharks do look very similar, but are differentiated by patches of spots on their side flanks. These spots can and are being mapped almost like a fingerprint to distinguish the individuals and their movements along the east coast of Australia.