Fishing Today – April/May 2003 - Issue 16/2
TFIC News
By Bob Lister
.
New TFIC Board announced
The TFIC elections have once again come and gone and the Tasmanian Electoral Office has announced our new Directors for the next two years.
Many thanks to all those industry members who voted in the ballot and I am pleased to advise that the successful candidates were (in alphabetical order) Rod Behrens, Steve Gasparinatos, John Hammond, Rodney Herweynen, Mick Murphy, Neville Perryman, Sandra Phythian, Stuart Richey and Neil Stump.
A special welcome to our new Directors in Steve and Neil, both of whom have served in the past, and Rodney Herweynen.
I would also like to extend my appreciation to the three retiring Directors in Tony Johnston, Bill Smedley and Tony Wurf and to thank them for their support and assistance over the last two years which has been very much appreciated.
The first meeting of the new Board will be held on 28 April and consideration of office bearer positions is on the agenda for that meeting.
.
Sponge Beds suck up resources
A conservation assessment report from Environment Australia on the so called Bass Strait sponge beds has been released with predictable results.
For the last 18 months or so industry people have been saying that the sponge beds may not exist despite very limited research 20 years ago which trawled up sponges at six locations in a horseshoe shape area in waters off northern Tasmania.
This assessment was one of 11 priorities throughout Australia being considered by EA and whilst industry members have participated in many meetings EA has committed considerable funds looking for and trying to establish if the so called sponge gardens really exist.
The CSIRO summary has confirmed that the project was ill founded from the start.
The report states that CSIRO is not able to specify the location or extent of the sponge beds and cannot envisage an effective process leading to the selection and design of conservation measures, i.e. MPAs, to protect whatever it is they want to protect.
Short of carrying out new marine surveys this matter has reached a predictable conclusion at great expense in terms of time and money and in our view no further action can be justified.
.
State MPAs at Port Davey and the Kent Group likely
The Resource Planning and Development Commission (RPDC) has released a Draft Recommendations Report on proposals to establish MPAs at Port Davey/Bathurst Harbour and the Kent Group of Islands in Bass Strait.
Copies of this report are available from the RPDC by phone on 03 6233 2795 or you can access the Commission’s website at www.rpdc.tas.gov.au Comments on this Report closed on 28 April.
Following a series of TFIC industry meeting at Dover, Taroona, Strahan and Whitemark in March and April we developed a TFIC position on these difficult issues and have since lodged our third submission with the RPDC.
The general view at these meetings was that no one wanted any further locking up of areas of water and very reluctantly we would only agree to limited "no take" areas if this was absolutely necessary and only where the impact on commercial fishing businesses was limited.
Issues such as the practicalities of enforcement of MPA boundaries, compensation, sustainable fisheries management arrangements already in place and existing restrictions over marine waters were common themes highlighted during our meetings.
The RPDC has suggested two options for the Kent Group and four options for Port Davey and in both areas a total "no take" over the whole reference area is one option.
All proposals from the RPDC restrict future commercial and recreational fishing access within these important areas and the eventual outcomes will set the scene for the establishment of even more political MPAs throughout the rest of Tasmania.
From a whole of fishing industry perspective we are of course very concerned about any loss of productive fishing areas.
Catches of abalone, rock lobster and scalefish at Port Davey are worth around $5m p.a. and at the Kent Group approximately $1m p.a. and the introduction of any "no take" MPA puts at risk the substantial benefits that our fishing industry provides to local coastal communities and to the economy of Tasmania.
As we have a well managed and sustainable industry with already over 300 marine areas in the State where fishing is either prohibited or restricted it is difficult to see why we need even more MPAs.
If creating marine reserves is a political or numbers game then existing protected areas could be renamed Marine Reserves and we would have more of these areas in Tasmania than anywhere else in the world.
There are also great difficulties in establishing a multiple use concept and enforcing any restrictive boundary decisions in very remote areas and it really just creates a mine field of issues.
The RPDC will eventually provide their recommendations to the Minister for Primary Industries, Water and Environment who after consideration may seek State Cabinet approval to declare the MPA proposals.
Any MPA restrictions will be implemented under the National Parks and Reserves Management Act 2002 and/or the Living Marine Resources Management Act 1995.
I urge all interested persons to obtain a copy of the RPDC draft recommendations and to very carefully consider all the issues.
Whilst it is now too late to respond to the RPDC a statement to Minister Bryan Green of your individual concerns may be well worth the effort.
A copy of our latest TFIC submission is available on our website at www.tfic.com.au or we can post you a copy on request.
.
MPAs in Commonwealth waters still on the agenda
The National Oceans Office and Environment Australia continue to move forward with their South East Regional Marine Plan with even more papers released and more meetings scheduled.
There are now six "broad areas of interest" in Commonwealth waters adjacent to Tasmania and the stated intention is to develop a representative system of MPAs as part of this plan.
Whilst the six areas are not yet considered candidate MPAs they are intended to focus attention on these areas that allegedly accommodate the greatest diversity and could contribute to a representative MPA system.
The next step proposed by NOO and EA is to move from broad areas of interest to candidate MPAs presumably with some sort of balance between conservation needs and economic/social interests.
I have a great deal of concern about the process and plans to exclude fishing activities from these commonwealth waters for very little apparent benefit to anyone.
To me this is a political process gone mad with inappropriate priorities being pursued to satisfy some conservation political needs – and ignores the benefits that our industry contributes to regional economies and Australia generally.
We will continue to promote and protect our members’ interests and will use all available resources to minimise any damage that these proposals may bring to our industry.
.
AFMA directed to review allocation of shark quota
The Federal Court recently upheld the decision by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal which had directed that AFMA reconsider the way it had originally allocated quota for school and gummy shark to individual permit holders.
The principal reason was that the AAT considered AFMA had erred in not accepting that permits were transferrable. Essentially non transferrable permits had been traded under the table and the fact that permits therefore had some value was not considered in the original allocation process.
The Federal Court decision was based on acknowledgement that permits could be transferred even in limited circumstances and this was a matter that AFMA should have taken into account even though those considerations may not be decisive in arriving at a correct and preferable decision.
The judgement makes it clear that catch history has not been ruled out.
As the case was specific on the allocation of school and gummy shark in the Southern Shark fishery which is now part of the Gillnet, Hook and Trap fishery the Federal Court did not consider the circumstances of any other Commonwealth or State fishery.
AFMA therefore currently believes that the Court’s decision is not a reason why allocations that have been finalised in any other fishery needs to be re-opened.
Unfortunately the AFMA review will mean a further period of uncertainty for Commonwealth operators with shark quota and potentially this matter could go on for years.
In the meantime all stakeholders should be aware that ITQs in the Southern Shark fishery are still in place and all quota management arrangements continue to apply. All shark entitlement holders will be fully consulted by AFMA before any decision is made affecting their quota allocations.
.
TFIC Board deliberations
At the last meeting of the retiring Board a range of issues were discussed and positions developed on matters as broad as:
- The National Standard for Commercial Vessels,
- Marine Protected Areas in Tasmanian and Commonwealth waters,
- MAST issues, legislation and compliance matters,
- The Seafood Standard,
- Environmental Management Systems,
- The Slipways Management Project,
- TSQAP,
- A Native Title Claim,
- Tributyltin,
- East Coast Tuna Management,
- The Southern Shark fishery,
- Marine rubbish,
- Mid water trawling
- and the Giant Crab/Trawl interaction – plus a whole lot more.