THE Australian Labor Party has sent campaign emails to anglers around the country in an attempt to counteract what it says is a “scare campaign” about contentious plans to lock recreational fishermen out of proposed marine parks.
WA-based Labor Senator Glenn Sterle is quoted in the email, which is titled “The Facts on Fishing”. In the email, which was sent from Labor’s office in the ACT, Senator Sterle says he is a keen angler who likes nothing better “than heading out on the open water and relaxing with mates and a few beers”.
The Senator goes on to say:
“As you probably know, Labor is delivering the world’s largest marine reserve network, the vast majority which will remain open to recreational fishers. There has been a bit of a scare campaign about what this means for fishers like us, so I wanted to share a few quick facts with you: In the Commonwealth regions in question, 96 per cent of the ocean within 100 kilometres of shore remains open to recreational fishing; Iconic fishing spots such as Sydney Harbour and Melbourne’s Port Phillip Bay are not Commonwealth marine reserves and will never be. Commonwealth reserves can only be established in Commonwealth waters, generally starting three nautical miles from the coast; On the east coast, anywhere south of Mackay, you would be hard pressed to find an area where rec fishing was banned. If you are at Mackay and headed north, you’d have to power for around 400km before you hit a new reserve no take zone.”
Fisho has contacted Senator Sterle’s office and sent him the following questions:
* In your view, should the Government provide scientific data detailing exactly why Australian recreational anglers should be locked out of 1.3 million sq kms of Australian water? As we understand it, there has been no scientific data relating specifically to recreational fishing provided as a reference as to why anglers should be banned from such large areas of water. Do you understand angler concerns about this seeming lack of hard data?
* If there is no specific data outlining unacceptable environmental risks caused by recreational fishing, would you lobby the Prime Minister and the Environment Minister to reconsider locking anglers out of the marine parks?
* Do you have any concerns about the influence of foreign organisations such as the Pew Environment Trust in regards to the Australian Government’s marine protection plans?
* Do you think the Australian Government is being unfair and discriminatory by compensating other user groups (ie, commercial fishing operations) disadvantaged by the new marine parks but refusing to compensate the recreational fishing sector?
* To focus on one particular area, the main reason cited to close a popular marlin fishery off Perth was to “protect” pygmy blue whales. Considering all whales are totally protected in Australia, and there is no evidence of any interaction between blue whales and anglers, is this really a legitimate and justifiable reason to lock anglers out of an area which they have sustainable and responsibly fished for close on 50 years?
Another area of particular interest to anglers concerns the Coral Sea, which is regarded internally as an iconic sportfishing location visited every year by many thousands of local and visiting anglers in charter boats and private vessels. Other tourist-based activities (ie, scuba diving, whale watching and so on) are allowed to continue in this remote and spectacular area but anglers have been banned from all the key reef systems. It has been argued by the Government that these areas are “too far out” for anglers to visit so locking them up is not an issue. However, the Government has recognised the importance of recreational diving in these locations. Divers and anglers use the same sort of boats. If it’s too far for anglers, surely it’s also too far for the divers? Do you agree that this distance argument put forward by the Government to ban anglers is flawed and discriminatory? If not, why not?
* Why, in your opinion, did the Government reject submissions from the angling sector proposing catch & release and “wilderness fishing zones” around key reefs in the Coral Sea? As a self-professed keen angler, what is your position on allowing this sort of sustainable “eco-fishing” in and around reef systems? Would you support national angling groups in calling for these zones to be implemented in the new reserves? If not, why not?
* What is your opinion on allowing certain methods of recreational fishing in and around “protected” areas? For example, if an area needs protection because of significant benthic structure or vulnerable demersal species, would it be appropriate to allow forms of fishing which do not impact on these habitats or species? IE, allowing trolling for pelagic species but not allowing bottom fishing? Why, in your view, have these forms of proactive management not been considered in the Government’s marine park plans?
* Many anglers seem to have the view that the current Labor Government has been unduly influenced by the Greens, and other more extremist anti-fishing groups, in the formation of these commonwealth marine parks. Do you consider the marine park lock outs to be an election issue and do you think the ALP will lose votes because of its stance on locking anglers out?
* Has the Government been surprised or concerned by angler protest and discontent about the proposed marine parks?
* Do you think the Government’s decision to lock anglers out of 1.3 million square km of Australian water sets a precedent that will result in more areas being closed off?
* Conservation groups have released media statements calling for more marine parks in Australian waters. What is your position on this? Would you personally support even more marine parks in Commonwealth waters?
We’ll let you know Senator Sterle’s responses to these questions if and when he responds to our email. We’ve also contacted Opposition fisheries spokesman Senator Richard Colbeck for his take on the issues raised in the ALP email.
For further federal election news, see our policy Q&A HERE.
