Core questions
These questions may not all be applicable to every interview/workshop, they are
included here for the sake of completeness.
1. Do you have any comments on how NSW is contributing to Australia’s
international commitments to protect marine biodiversity?
Not enough focus on water quality and other environmental impacts of factors such
as agricultural runoff (including toxic chemicals), urban stormwater, and sewage.
2. Do you have any comments on how science is conducted and used by the
Marine Parks Authority and the departments responsible for managing marine
parks in NSW?
Professor Kearney has defined in detail how the science on Marine Parks as
biodiversity tools is complex, the benefits are not well defined, and there appears to
be bias in the way prohibitions are placed on fishing. The selective use of certain
studies, often from very different marine environments around the world, has been
used to underpin restrictions on fishing that have impacted severely on fishers'
rights.
3. What are the most significant issues with respect to the management of NSW
fishing and the interaction of this with the management of NSW marine parks?
The misuse of MPA sanctuary zones to exclude fishers from fishing areas without
proper science and explanation as to why the exclusion has been made. We regard
the existing consultation process as flawed with pre-arranged outcomes. It was a
"Clayton's consultation" for us. We believe the use of Marine Parks, particularly
prohibition (sanctuary zones), as a fisheries management tool is impractical and
unfair, and will not produce sustainable outcomes.
4. What are the most significant threats to the maintenance of the biodiversity of
marine parks and are these being appropriately managed?
Water quality and other environmental impacts of factors such as agricultural runoff
(including toxic chemicals), urban stormwater, and sewage.
5. Do you think the NSW marine park system as it is today is the best
mechanism for managing the State's marine biodiversity?
OR if you prefer
How can NSW more effectively and efficiently achieve marine and estuarine
biodiversity conservation?
No. Both fisheries management and the issues of water quality from terrestrial land
use should be managed in a holistic way for both fisheries harvest and biodiversity
outcomes.
6. Do you think that the social benefits and costs of marine parks are
understood/assessed when marine parks are established? And do you have
any suggestions for improvements?
No. In our experience these impacts are not well understood. The costs of initiating
and implementing Marine Parks in our region in terms of loss of amenity and the
harvest of the resource have had an enormous impact on local communities, and
this appears not to have been understood by the authorities.
7. Do you think that the social benefits and costs are understood and used when
the zoning of existing parks is reviewed? And do you have any suggestions
for improvements?
We have not as yet experienced a zoning review but hoping we can get a best
practice based on science and human uses.
Our suggestion is for a committed and honest consultation with practical users of the
fisheries resources, and based on demonstrable science of biodiversity protection.
8. Do you think that the economic benefits and costs of marine parks are
understood when marine parks are established? And do you have any
suggestions for improvements?
As above and because the MPA has never conveyed costs and benefits to the
community it’s difficult to make suggestions other than for MPA’s to be transparent in
the future.
9. Do you think that the economic benefits and costs of marine parks are
understood and used when the zoning of existing parks is reviewed? And do
you have any suggestions for improvements?
Our suggestion is for a committed and honest consultation with practical users of the
fisheries resources, and decisions based on well-founded science of biodiversity
protection.
10. Can you comment on how consultations involving marine parks are
conducted? And do you have any suggestions for improvements?
As above. We regard the existing consultation process was flawed at the Cape
Byron Marine Park with pre-arranged outcomes. It was a "Clayton's consultation" for
us. As above, our suggestion is for a committed and honest consultation with
practical users of the fisheries resources, and based on well-founded science of
biodiversity protection balanced with human uses.
Final Questions
1. Considering the answers to date, are there any other significant information
gaps hindering robust, evidence-based decision-making on marine parks?
Lack of solid presentable science on the benefits of Marine Parks, particularly
sanctuary zones, to justify the large scale impacts on traditional fishing rights. We
find a general lack of education, inadequate signage and a definite lack of marker
buoys denoting sanctuary zones. Please give consideration to renowned scientists
Professor Robert Kearny, Matt Landos and Ben Diggles submissions.
2. Considering the answers to date about all current and potential threats to the
marine environment, which bodies or agencies would be the most appropriate
to address these threats?
We feel that the Department of Primary Industries (Fisheries) should continue to
have the primary role in managing fisheries biodiversity and the harvestable
resource. We believe further that this body should receive resources to reflect the
scale of the management task, including the issues of water quality, land use and
land management.
3. Considering the answers to date, are there any additional mechanisms
(legislative or administrative) that would achieve better management of the
NSW marine and estuarine environment?
As above. We believe that the Department of Primary Industries (Fisheries)
should receive resources to reflect the scale of the management task,
including the issues of water quality, land use and land management.
4. Do you have any other matters to raise with the Audit Panel?
Please give consideration to our submission to the Independent Scientific Audit
of Marine Parks in NSW from Byron Services Deep Sea Fishing Club as
presented by Mr Dan Bode.
The comments on the above three pages on “core questions” are
presented by The Byron Services Deep Sea Fishing Club.
President. Ken Smith.