More news on super trawler!

[Grazz64 0]

Whilst taking this website with a pinch of salt (and possibly some of the details being over-emphasised for effect)' date=' a little googled backgroundhttp://newmatilda.com/media/Seafish_Tasmania_Ownership_briefing.pdfThe ASIC basicshttp://www.abc.net.au/radionational/linkableblob/4198198/data/seafish-tasmania-pelagic-asic-report-data.pdf[/quote']I kind of take acception that kon, all ive written and spoke of is facts ive obtained from various media resources and sites discussing the super trawler issues. If you can show me where ive over emphasised something for affect then please show me. The letter i wrote to Mr Geen may of been over emphasised on some points by me in particular the wealthy and their love of money to the detriment of the enviroment but i wanted this idiot to understand my complete contempt for then man and his Dutch fishing partners, every other post ive made is based on fact and easily accessible to anyone who cares to take an interest.

[Grazz64 0]

For those that are interested in expressing their views to Mr Geen and Seafish Tasmania you can email him at gerryg@seafish.com.au

[kon 300]

Grazz!The sentence with "this website" then segued to NewMatilda and Greenpeace... I will try to include semicolons next time to make things perhaps a little less ambiguous.

[Grazz64 0]

Grazz!The sentence with "this website" then segued to NewMatilda and Greenpeace... I will try to include semicolons next time to make things perhaps a little less ambiguous.

Still unsure if your having a dig at me or not kon.

[urhookedfish 12]

Grazz!The sentence with "this website" then segued to NewMatilda and Greenpeace... I will try to include semicolons next time to make things perhaps a little less ambiguous.

Still unsure if your having a dig at me or not kon.

Nah Kon is definately not having a dig at you Grazz.The interesting question is whats going to happen to the death ship now? How long will it remain in Pt Lincoln.Brett

[Grazz64 0]

Just wasnt sure uhf as i have been vocal regarding it and i do stress points of concern so wasnt sure. I think the ship will remain as long as they see a viable chance of suing the Government for losses incured getting here and while remaining here. Theres also the other school of thought that says where else can it go, not sure why the New Zealand partners and major owners dont take it there and earn a dollar in their waters, New Zealand has some pretty good fishing or is it because they know what they'll get should the try which makes me wonder did they take us for an apathetic lot that would welcome this ship with open arms.

[Tacklebags 404]

Grazz!The sentence with "this website" then segued to NewMatilda and Greenpeace... I will try to include semicolons next time to make things perhaps a little less ambiguous.

Still unsure if your having a dig at me or not kon.

Nah Kon is definately not having a dig at you Grazz.The interesting question is whats going to happen to the death ship now? How long will it remain in Pt Lincoln.Brett

No one is having a go at you Grazz.Your letter is ballsy and includes a lot of statements many would love to say themselves on said topic but only ever do behind the scenes.I understand your opinion and obvious motivation because it reminds me of 'me' especially a while back on unobstanciated Marine Park lockouts/claims along with some other fisheries issues.Knowing kon and never underestimating his ability to see the reasons behind anyone's argument, I would suspect he sees your post as he would of seen many of mine....that is in an understandable light Grazz.Sometimes we need to just vent our frustration as it keeps us sane. It may not change or help the situation big picture but as indivisuals it forces one to reflect their place in this crazy world from my experience.CheersTB

[kon 300]

GrazzAbsolutely no dig intended - I can see how someone could have misinterpreted "this website", and assure you that I have no conceptual issues with your posts on the matter.All good, mein herr!

[Grazz64 0]

GrazzAbsolutely no dig intended - I can see how someone could have misinterpreted "this website"' date=' and assure you that I have no conceptual issues with your posts on the matter.All good, mein herr! [/quote']Cheers Tacklebags.No worries Kon it wasnt a big deal mate as we are all entitled to an opinion, i was just wondering which part i had over emphasised if indeed you actually were refering to me, i would of attempted to explain, i just wasnt sure if you were speaking to me or not.. Its all good mate and i hope if anyone has any issue with what i post would say so and i would endeavour to explain my point etc. I can see it clearly now lol and probably should of realised "this website" wasnt directed at me so tbh im feeling a little bit silly, sorry for the confusion it's all on me really mate, my fault not yours.

[khombi 10]

Hey Grazz, well said i believe you have said and written everything that we all wanted to say but didn,t. good on you mate, the rest of the rec fishers in Aust would or should be right behind you. regards Khombi

[Tacklebags 404]

Fisheries authority 'compromised'

THE management of Australia's fisheries is compromised by serious conflicts of interest and a "pro-fishing culture", said scathing submissions to a review due to report to the federal government on Monday. The review, by former bureaucrat David Borthwick, was commissioned by the federal government in September as it banned the 142-metre super-trawler, the Abel Tasman, from Australian waters. At the time, Environment Minister Tony Burke said the Australian Fisheries Management Authority had not been cautious enough when it assessed the impact of the trawler on ocean life and approved its catch. In a submission to the Borthwick review, marine scientist and conservationist Jonathan Nevill argued the authority is captive to the commercial fishing industry, is often dishonest in its statements and makes short-term decisions that favour the industry rather than ecosystems. "There has been a long-standing and intractable problem with the organisational culture within AFMA, an agency which tends to act in a way subservient to the commercial fishing industry," writes Dr Nevill. "In my view, radical change is necessary now," he says. Dr Nevill's allegations were so detailed and serious the AFMA responded with a second review submission to argue his claims were "without foundation". The authority's chief executive officer, James Findlay, wrote that "AFMA has been recognised by global, independent organisations as a good fisheries manager" and that its decision-making was "based on the best available science, government policy and is consistent with legislative objectives". However, the authority also came under fire from one of its own advisers, Graham Pike, who is the recreational and charter fishing representative on AFMA's Small Pelagic Fishery Resource Assessment Group, which made decisions that paved the way for the super trawler. Mr Pike alleges this group's decision to increase the quota of jack mackerel that could be caught was based on faulty, outdated science and the process of making this decision was perverted by participation of the director of the company which brought the super trawler here. "It has become clear that AFMA has lost its way, becoming 'captured' by its commercial fishing clients, upholding the ­economic provisions of its legislation and increasingly failing to integrate or de-emphasising the ecological, environmental and social imperatives of its legislation in decision-making," Mr Pike wrote. The federal government initially approved the super-trawler but then revoked this and rushed legislation allowing the Environment Minister to ban a commercial fishing vessel if there is uncertainty about its environmental, social or economic impacts. To secure support of the cross-benchers, the government agreed the powers would expire after a year, by which time new fisheries management would be in place. Mr Borthwick is due to hand his report to Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Minister Joe Ludwig on Monday but the government is likely to take some time before releasing it and responding.

http://www.theland.com.au/news/nationalrural/agribusiness/general-news/fisheries-authority-compromised/2638993.aspx?storypage=1

[urhookedfish 12]

Is the ship stil tied up alongside at Pt Lincoln? and if so how much longer do people expect it will stay there??

[Guest]

Yes its still in Lincoln. I assume no other countries will have it in its waters otherwise it would be gone by now.

[Del 245]

yeah saw it last week wondered the same thing..

[Savagelip 4]

Is the ship stil tied up alongside at Pt Lincoln? and if so how much longer do people expect it will stay there??

i hear they're poaching workers from around lincoln.. shame job

[Del 245]

any more news.. was in lincoln on the weekend but didint get a chance to check the wharf.

[Tacklebags 404]

Super Trawler saga continues: Now it's the super freezer!21 Jan 2013News comment by Fisho staff writersTHE arrival last year of a massive foreign-owned super trawler wanting to decimate baitfish stocks around most of the southern half of the continent caused considerable controversy, with angry anglers pressuring the federal Government to ban the huge industrial fishing vessel.The campaign was a success, with federal Environment Minister Tony Burke forced to act after protests by thousands of fishos. But Seafish Tasmania, the company behind the super trawler venture, hasn't given up. Fisho understands the company now wishes to use the 142m vessel as a floating freezer so that a fleet of trawlers can feed it with baitfish. The vessel is able to process and freeze thousands of tonnes of fish per day.Traditionally, the fishery operated by having trawlers come back to port each day to offload their catch of redbait and blue mackerel – both important baitfish for key recreational species such as southern bluefin tuna, marlin, yellowfin tuna and sharks. The fish are also a vital food source for seals, dolphins and other marine mammals.Seafish Tasmania plans to sell these fish to African nations for about $1 a kilo. In previous years fleets of foreign super trawlers ravaged the African fisheries, thus making them unviable for local fishermen and causing food supply issues.Anglers and environment groups have questioned the rationale around letting a super trawler responsible for wiping out the African fisheries catch Australian fish to sell to African people who could easily feed themselves if the super trawlers hadn't caught all their fish!This latest bid by Seafish Tasmania has been strongly questioned by angling leaders. "We need to understand more about this proposal. Having a fleet of smaller boats supply the super trawler continuously with baitfish may causes the same sort of concerns that we had with the supertrawler – localised depletion," Australian Recreational Fishing Foundation CEO Allan Hansard said."In fact, it could even be worse as you'll have numerous trawlers all fishing a specific area and bring their catch back to the 'super freezer' for processing."Our position on this is the same as for the supertrawler, we want to see the science on the stock and movement of the SPF before any decision on how it is fished is made."Fisho understands the Australian Fisheries Management Authority is currently assessing the super freezer proposal. In Fisho's opinion, the federal Fisheries Minister Joe Ludwig needs to take control of this situation and purchase Seafish Tasmania's "small pelagic fishery" quota. Further, Fisho takes the stance that industrial fishing is not an option in Australian waters – we've all seen what it's done to fisheries in other parts of the world. It's just not sustainable, no matter how allegedly "well managed" it is. Surely no one apart from those who stand to profit from this venture and maybe a few old school fisheries scientists and managers who believe in the "fish it hard" philosophy, would want super trawlers/super freezers working our waters?And how in all honesty can the federal Government allow this sort of intensive exploitation occur when it is currently planning on banning recreational fishers from 1.3 million square kilometres of Australian waters as part of its marine parks plans? Doesn't the Government realise how hypocritical it would be to allow a factory freezer to process thousands of tonnes of baitfish while at the same time banning mums, dads and kids from wetting a line?Stay tuned for further updates!http://www.fishingworld.com.au/news/super-trawler-saga-continues-now-it-s-the-super-freezerTB

[Boyington214 0]

Gerry Geen and his mates need to get over themselves! The Australian People DO NOT want that THING in our waters period. Either get rid of it back to where it came from or sink the bloody thing and give us a new artificial reef!

[Tacklebags 404]

Boyo...its the timing of this issue that gets me?Between all state and federal MPA's we are looking at 3.2 million square kilometers of ocean. 43% of the world's total MPA's combined. Read this....

After proclamation, the total area of the 60 Commonwealth marine reserves is 3.1 million km2 This affects at least 57 Commonwealth and State fisheries.State and Territory marine reserves add another 130,000 km2, giving a total of 3.2 million km2 of MPAs in Australian waters. This is equivalent to 42% of Australia's land area. The situation in Australia's marine environment contrasts that that on land where only 4% of the Australia's land mass being managed as a national park, a further 6% of Australia's land mass is state forest, nature park and conservation reserve bringing the total land area in Australia under some form of "protection" to about 10%. In other words marine parks are about four times larger than terrestrial national parks.In spite of the long term existing protection on land, Australia already has 27 species of mammals, 23 birds, four frogs and a freshwater fish that are extinct. There have been no extinctions of marine fish even though there was no network of marine protected areas until very recently.Australian marine parks are equivalent to 38% of Australia's exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Australia has the third-largest exclusive economic zone in the world, behind only the United States and France.Australia now accounts for a massive 43% of all MPAs on the planet but only contributes 0.3% of the World's wild caught fish.

http://www.fishingworld.com.au/news/australia-s-marine-parks-four-times-larger-than-national-parksLord knows the environmental groups will not care even if the venture was sustainable.History shows these methods are devastating for the environment and local communities where they have fished before. Lets hope AFMA put common sense first and manage it well if it gets the nod otherwise all hell will break loose a few years later and no doubt reccies will suffer more political battles because of it.TB

[fridge 6]

Either get rid of it back to where it came from or sink the bloody thing and give us a new artificial reef!leave it were it is a dive site within walking distance,tourism "boom" there :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

[archerfish 685]

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-01/super-trawler27s-operator-surrenders-registration/4548604

[Tacklebags 404]

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-01/super-trawler27s-operator-surrenders-registration/4548604

Odds are it is for the best. AFMA would have had their work cut out for them keeping that thing away from both public and media scrutiny.

[Hallows 0]

Supertrawler destroys wildlife- Supertrawler affects snapper population-

[Del 245]

do we have any news on who bought it?where its gone??

[Stever 0]

do we have any news on who bought it?where its gone??

According to the video it's been sold back to a Dutch joint venture partner and is no longer registered in Australia.The key words here, both written and spoken are, "two years".I have NO doubt that when this time elapses we will see another attempt to get it back working in Australian waters.There's a fair chance that by then we will be under a different government. I'm sure hoping that they will also ban this monster from decimating our fish stocks.Cheers, Steve.

[Tacklebags 404]

Supertrawler destroys wildlife-Supertrawler affects snapper population-

As for 'destroys wildlife' the same could be said for many activities including rec fishing. Like anything it is the level of destruction which determines sustainability and this should be the basis for regulation.Lastly regarding snapper populations...have any evidence of this claim? Seeing as the super trawler never operated here? Just asking because the current pilchard wild catch is 30,000 tonnes from a more localised area of SA waters and surely would be far worse than 18,000 tonnes caught across the southern half of our EEZ by the super trawler.TB

[wisdom 0]

The current sardine catch ( pilchard ), is in the order of 30 000 tonnes as stated, and is the largest fishery in Australia by tonnage ! Several years ago after a maths mis-calculation by SARDI on the egg count, the TAC was allowed to expand to 40 000 tonnes before the error was discovered. So SARDI does make mistakes on stock assessments and this was a big one !On localized depletion, and prey predator relationships, this subject has been argued over the past 15 years with no concern shown by PIRSA on both issues. Given the amount of time that has past and on reflection, the stock doesn't seem to have changed much which could give rise to the suggestion that the stocks of sardine are being managed sustainably ??????All this is on the assumption that the public are being told the truth !You be the judge !

[Tacklebags 404]

The current sardine catch ( pilchard )' date=' is in the order of 30 000 tonnes as stated, and is the largest fishery in Australia by tonnage ! Several years ago after a maths mis-calculation by SARDI on the egg count, the TAC was allowed to expand to 40 000 tonnes before the error was discovered. So SARDI does make mistakes on stock assessments and this was a big one ![b']On localized depletion, and prey predator relationships, this subject has been argued over the past 15 years with no concern shown by PIRSA on both issues.[/b] Given the amount of time that has past and on reflection, the stock doesn't seem to have changed much which could give rise to the suggestion that the stocks of sardine are being managed sustainably ??????All this is on the assumption that the public are being told the truth !You be the judge !

Post initial complaints by both rec and pro fishers over the super trawler, Minister Gail Gago responded to the department advise from PIRSA and subsequently through the media explained that the super trawler was not welcome in SA waters. They also held concerns for the existing pilchard fishery/wider ecosystem effect caused by the super trawlers introduction.I think 'no concern' is a bit harsh considering existing regulations on the pilchard species and concerns of over exploitation from the super trawler by catch.I understand the vested interest to our state coffers and how this influences such state decisions but the basis of environmental sustainability was still a point for the resultant Government position in this instance.I have spoken with Fisheries scientists Caleb Gardener and Colin Buxton on the super trawler issue. My issue sits with....- the rate of extraction potencially being over too shorter periods even within the TAC.- the entire extraction taking place in localised areas.- the monopolisation of the market through by outs of small local Aussie operators despite the huge latent effort.- The ethics of making a profit selling fish to those same African communities who have seen their livelyhoods destroyed by these super trawlers.As far as I am concerned if AFMA scientists could regulate the first two issues I stated and justify the last two as a benefit greater than the detriment then who could argue without being partial?

[Hallows 0]

Supertrawler destroys wildlife-Supertrawler affects snapper population-

As for 'destroys wildlife' the same could be said for many activities including rec fishing. Like anything it is the level of destruction which determines sustainability and this should be the basis for regulation.Lastly regarding snapper populations...have any evidence of this claim? Seeing as the super trawler never operated here? Just asking because the current pilchard wild catch is 30' date='000 tonnes from a more localised area of SA waters and surely would be far worse than 18,000 tonnes caught across the southern half of our EEZ by the super trawler.TB [/quote']One snapper gone counts as affecting the snapper population

[Tacklebags 404]

Supertrawler destroys wildlife-Supertrawler affects snapper population-

As for 'destroys wildlife' the same could be said for many activities including rec fishing. Like anything it is the level of destruction which determines sustainability and this should be the basis for regulation.Lastly regarding snapper populations...have any evidence of this claim? Seeing as the super trawler never operated here? Just asking because the current pilchard wild catch is 30' date='000 tonnes from a more localised area of SA waters and surely would be far worse than 18' date='000 tonnes caught across the southern half of our EEZ by the super trawler.TB [/quote'']One snapper gone counts as affecting the snapper population

Well we should ban every detrimental human activity based on that premise just like the environmental zealots would have us do. Shut down this forum and every other sector of societies forums because there is no need to speak about or conduct ourselves in any activity, ever!

[wisdom 0]

With all our rants and raves, I think there are times to clear the head and perhaps.....just perhaps look at the more meaning full things in life. This won't be the last post but "Il Silenziu" is more commonly known as taps.On this day and in the military its called the "Last Post", Melissa was only 13 at the time and if this doesn't bring a tear to your eyes, then ......get a life.http://www.flixxy.com/trumpet-solo-melissa-venema.htm#.UXg76aJ0xSQI will go polish my medals now and march down the the parade. Hope the link works.

[archerfish 685]

Update for an older topic:http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-21/federal-court-upholds-the-ban-on-supertrawlers-in-australian-wa/5276218Cheersaf

[fridge 6]

anyone got a date as to when the ban is over ?

[khombi 10]

We are all worrying about this so called super trawler and all the fish it may take and I was just as vocal as the next on this subject, but don't you all think we should be cleaning up our own act first before we start criticizing someone else,s . We all tend to jump on the band wagon and have our two bob,s worth and then turn a blind eye to what our own people and industries do. Just recently some professionals { so it is said} moved into the western side of Gulf St Vincent around Pt Vincent area and took all the Blue swimmer crabs they could catch to a point that the locals are left with nothing, but nothing is being said about that , I suppose that's because their boats are to small to worry about, but the principle is the same regardless who does it, and what about these scallop and prawn boats and the damage they cause to the seabed and the killing of the by catch dragging their nets, we never say anything about them because they acting with in the boundries of the law . I like every one else do not want to see overseas boats fishing here under any circumstances ,but if we are going to be critical of them then we should also be critical of ourselves.

[kon 300]

Khombi, an interesting observation indeed...I haven`t heard Greenpeace or CCSA jumping up and down at PIRSA and the local pro industry over BSCs - maybe GSV crabs are not a high enough profile issue for them?Protecting the cute little seals and locking away already "pristine" areas is more their thing it seems... :whistle: