Grazz64 0 Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Thanks CBKon i think we will see more of these comments from Geen and co, its the standard lines that always seem to follow a decision that goes against a business. Id like to know what the 25 employee's of Seafish Tas were going to be doing anyway considering the Trawler has its own processing plant, were they going to be used to run that or would it be business as usual at Seafish Tasmania's plant in order to process the catch from existing trawlers employed by Sea Fish Tas. If there is a threat to these 25 jobs its been brought about by poor businesspractice/management. Although i have little information to support that the Super Trawler scenario smacks of poor managerial decisions, for example if i was going to invest said millions into bringing this trawler here i would be wanting more than a verbal confirmation or a handshake, i would want uummm let me think hey that's it "Some documentation like a fishing licence and all the relevant paperwork" that says i can do so. Then id have a leg to stand on in Court should that permision be revoked.One theory i have and its only a theory is should Geen of got/get permission to use the Super Trawler to fish here, what would stop him using 100% of his 18,000 tonne quota for the Super Trawler thus eliminating all the smaller trawlers from the process that work for him. If the Super Trawler makes such good economic sense and would enable the company to turn a larger profit this would have to be considered wouldn't it. As Geen said when pressed on the issue of trying to buy or lease existing quota's it is a "Commercial enterprise" and the rich do like there cash. How many jobs would be lost then across the country if my theory is correct including the 25 at his plant in Tasmania. All that would be left would be the truck drivers pulling onto the wharf to load the already processed fish. Just a theory.Buxton can rant all he likes this blokes lost all credibility with me. Ive only got one thing to say to him "Democracy is a beautiful thing Mr Buxton". What Geen and Buxton keep forgetting is the Government works for all of us and is elected by all of us, so when the majority show concerns and genuine fear over what could happen to our oceans aren't they within their right to act on the behalf of all of us that have these concerns and fears. It's not third world politics idiots its Democracy. CARL 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
afishyfish 4 Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 As AFF said: Great Post Grazz. I watched the 4 corners report as well and one thing that stood out to myself and the wife was that neither Gerry Geen' date=' Dirk Van der Plas nor Colin Buxton were able to look straight at the camera or the interviewer. To us that meant, shifty as all hell!! [/quote'] You're spot on there Wahoo !Maybe we should get Frank Pangello, the reporter from Today Tonight chasing them around :woohoo: Something nobody in the media seems to have latched onto is: If this thing can process 4' date='500 tonnes per day and has a catch limit of 18,000 tonnes it can fill its quota in 5 days, even if they did manage to double the quota to 36,000 tonnes it will still be finished in 8 days. It can fish in some pretty heavy sea states so the only thing preventing it getting a quota in 8 days is actually finding the fish. Conservatively it should be done in a month. [/quote']And thats the problem so many people have with it.Short sharp extraction seems more " economic " :pinch: :whistle: No mention of how it may disrupt breeding cycles etc etc, i.e. there's plenty there :whistle: Lets go back to the 1800's and kill every whale we can, while we can :whistle: What does it do for the rest of the year? Go somewhere else to do the same , "while it can " ? Wahoo 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 The Victorian Government is organising itself to ban Super Trawlers fishing in Victorian Watersi urge everyone here to petition the South Australian Government to do the same via emails, letters and or phone calls to their local members and state members. Don't sit back and let Tasmania and Victoria carry the can lets get behind them and support them as strongly as we can.No Super Trawlers fishing in South Australian waters ever. CARL 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
khombi 10 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Hey Grazz64, can you give us an email address,i,ll send them an earfull. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Found this while doing some research today, its an extract from comments made by Paul Oosting from an organisation called Get Up." Under the proposed conditions for fishing the super-trawler could have legally killed up to ten seals a day"I was a little taken aback by this i have to say. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
khombi 10 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Ripping out 18000 tons of fish of any kind within a month has to upset the breeding cycle of any species,and cannot ever be called sustainable fishing,eg if you have a farm with 1000 sheep on it and you kill off 800 0f those sheep,how long is it going to take to get your stocks back up to a sustainable level again if you get where i am coming from, super trawlers from overseas are not concerned about breeding cycles or sustainable fishing practices, they are concerned only about profits and that has been proven by what has happened in overseas countries and our goverments have to be made aware of these facts.....regards Tugboat Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Hey Grazz64' date=' can you give us an email address,i,ll send them an earfull. [/quote']Ive sent a few off to this email address mate.http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/About_Us/Provide_feedback Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Ripping out 18000 tons of fish of any kind within a month has to upset the breeding cycle of any species' date='and cannot ever be called sustainable fishing,eg if you have a farm with 1000 sheep on it and you kill off 800 0f those sheep,how long is it going to take to get your stocks back up to a sustainable level again if you get where i am coming from, super trawlers from overseas are not concerned about breeding cycles or sustainable fishing practices, they are concerned only about profits and that has been proven by what has happened in overseas countries and our goverments have to be made aware of these facts.....regards Tugboat[/quote']Unfortunately khombi the current legislation is set up to cover trawlers with 2000 tonne freezer capacity thus the need to return to port more regularly hence regular relief in fishing pressure on a given area. The legislation is not in place to protect our waters from a Trawler that has triple that freezer space possibly more depending on which article you read. It is one of the most efficient fishing vesels that exist today and our current legislation falls down when it comes to a vessel of this size and efficiency. After 20 years they certainly need to be reviewed across the board and brought up to date considering how far the industry has developed (ie super trawlers) in that time. afishyfish 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 I used the SA government website to send an email requesting all members support the private members bill that independent Leon Bignell is trying to introduce this week to stop Super Trawlers from fishing in SA waters and the other one to send emails to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.Emailwebmaster@daff.gov.au = Federal Govwww.environment.sa.gov.au/About_Us/Provide_feedback = State Gov Quote Link to post Share on other sites
afishyfish 4 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 The advantage of the super trawler' date=' w[i']hich has its own processing facilities and freezers[/i], was that it could fish over a large area without being tied to ports. Double from me Kon And that is an advantage to what or who You have to like this staement :evil: `Seafish Tasmania has got to wear this because they are the ones that went out and employed people before they had a licence,'' Mr McKim said. :whistle: :evil: Did Mr Geen actually think that all Aussies have their heads completely buried in the sand One could be forgiven for thinking that maybe it was Mr Geen and his company that had their heads buried in the sand if he really thought Aussies were that ignorant regarding sustainability concerns :dry: :whistle: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Agreed AFF majority of it rests on his own shoulders, some flack needs to be appointed to AFMA and the Government as the legislation should of been reviewed and updated to encompass all modern technology including super trawlers long before the boat got here. AFMA have alot of dirt on their hands. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
afishyfish 4 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 I forgot to quote this part before the last quote "Tasmanian Greens Leader Nick McKim said Seafish Tasmania had no one to blame but itself."GrazzaAt least AMFA's off the hook a bit, but agreedModern technologies a wonderfuyl thing, and its amazing what can be done with it, I mean look how safe that seal looks trying to get out the nets escape hatch :dry: :evil: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 I forgot to quote this part before the last quote "Tasmanian Greens Leader Nick McKim said Seafish Tasmania had no one to blame but itself."GrazzaAt least AMFA's off the hook a bit' date=' but agreedModern technologies a wonderfuyl thing, and its amazing what can be done with it, I mean look how safe that seal looks trying to get out the nets escape hatch :dry: :evil:[/quote']Yeh i read that regarding Nick Mckim, i think Wilkie is saying the same thing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kon 300 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 GrazzFound this while doing some research today, its an extract from comments made by Paul Oosting from an organisation called Get Up.Tread warily with "GetUp!"They are not, and never will be, "our" friends from an overall ideological perspective.The Abel Margiris catalyst is nothing more than a marriage of convenience with that mob, on one specific matter... " Under the proposed conditions for fishing the super-trawler could have legally killed up to ten seals a day"To be fair, they ain`t about to become extinct, not in SA at any rate. :whistle: afishyfish 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 GrazzFound this while doing some research today' date=' its an extract from comments made by Paul Oosting from an organisation called Get Up.[/quote']Tread warily with "GetUp!"They are not, and never will be, "our" friends from an overall ideological perspective.The Abel Margiris catalyst is nothing more than a marriage of convenience with that mob, on one specific matter... " Under the proposed conditions for fishing the super-trawler could have legally killed up to ten seals a day"To be fair, they ain`t about to become extinct, not in SA at any rate. :whistle:Yeh well aware of that fact kon regarding "GetUp".I was a bit surprised that the number was ten a day, the number can get pretty large over a year, fishing a couple of hundred days a year. kon 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
khombi 10 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 morning Grazz, regards your imfo on quotas,does this mean that super trawlers with a capaicity of more than 2000 tons are not subject to the same legislation as smaller trawlers,or does it mean that the quota system still applies regardless of size and once you reach your quota your done for the year as aplies in alaska with crab boats. I take the point that a boat that retuns to port to unload on a regular basis will allow the stocks to disperse.Regards the legislation,i would have thought that after a certain period of time the rules of the game would automaticly be reviewed to balance out fish stocks and allow for proper breeding.It does not make any sence to me that goverments that are hell bent on putting in marine parks to protect marine life of all species would deliberatly over look such an important piece of legislation in regards to trawler type fishing any how thanks for your imformative post , i take great pleasure in reading them many regards Tugboat... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
khombi 10 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Hey Grazz i should have said khombi not tugboat LOL Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 Hello khombi As i understand it the super trawler would of operated under the same legislation that governs the smaller trawlers. The problems that concern ARFF, the Greens, Federal Gov,Independents, Scientists,Greenpeace etc is the current legislation while protecting the enviroment ie scale,fin stocks protected or otherwise from small trawler operations will not be sufficient to protect it from a vessel this size that can travel further and remain longer in a given area therefore applying much more fishing pressure to a given area for an extended period of time. The concerns are not just about the target species of the vessel such as Jack Mackeral, Red Bait, Blue Mackeral (Slimeys), but also protected fin species and marine mammals. By that i mean the nets are not selective of what they catch, anything and everything in the path of what is the second biggest vessel/net set up in the world will be taken on a larger scale. Little scientific evidence if any has been done on what enviromental factors this could have on the whole Marine Food Chain offshore and in local waters when up tp 90% of that bycatch goes back dead or dying due to being drawn up from depth and dragged onto the vessel.The actual existing quota for Jack Mackeral for Seafish Tasmania was 5000 tonnes then it was doubled by AFMA to 10,000 tonnes but revised back to 7,500 tonnes when the backlash started.Sea Fish Tasmania were actively out and about buying up other quotas off pro fisherman who found it difficult to find Jack Mackeral so were keen to sell their quota thus increasing the total allowable quota for Sea Fish Tasmania and therefore increasing the pressure even more on a given stock and area and bycatch. As i see it the main bone of contention for the Government isnt the set quotas although when the company is seen to be actively buying more it is concerned that the numbers are continually changing for bycatch ie the more you are allowed to fish for a target species the more bycatch is produced and this is their main concern i feel "bycatch" and the sustainability of that bycatch across the whole Marine Food Chain which basically affects everything in the ocean. More science is required to fill the gaps on an operation this size regarding enviroment and sustainability. Alot of science that has been used to support the trawler is a decade old and only relates to small trawlers with small nets and their impact not the impact of the 2nd biggest operation on the sea today.Other concerns for the Gov aswell as all the other groups i spoke of are what has happened to European small pelagic fish stocks that have collapsed due to super trawler fishing which has seen the fleets have to find other areas to fish in which they have also collapsed or decimated such as West Africa where the Senegalese Gov ordered them out of their waters after they decimated their local fishing industry, funnily Sea Fish Tasmania will export fish to West Africa now, well i found it funny NOT. They have a bad reputation for exploiting areas to maximise profit by saving on fuel costs and costs for time at sea ie wages etc and not selectively fishing areas in small doses like they claim they will here. How do we police that, how do we know they are doing the right thing out there when history suggest they dont.Also issues with the 600 metre nets and their affectiveness in releasing seals, dolphins etcthey can leagaly kill up to 10 seals a day but tests showed that 55 seals were killed in one pull of the net,the company and AFMA tried to suppress the video evidence of seals dying in nets which is a concern.The Gov wants monitoring officers on the boats at all times when at sea and atleast 3 amendments to the current legislation/super trawler legislation im aware of which are 1) Restrict the legislation to Commercial Fishing to protect Recreational Fisherman. 2) Remove the words "Social & Economic Impact" from the proposed law so the legislation focused only on Enviromental concerns. 3)To add clauses that would protect existing fishing operations from any changes made concerning super trawlers.Hope this helps answer some of your questions khombi. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
RJ5023 230 Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 Good info Grazz - and a good discussion by everyone. As well as the issues you've all been talking about, the problem I have with the whole concept is the fact that 18,000,000 kg of wild fish would be taken from the Aust Marine environment every year and sold overseas for just $1 per kilo. The first 15,000,000 kg have to be sold to pay for the cost of actually catching them. It was reported that pro fishermen who sell their quotas to Seafish Tas would be paid $0.10 per kg. Makes no sense and devalues the marine environment that we manage. If this is such a great economic idea why not use farmed Basa for the purpose?2 cents...Cheers,RJ afishyfish and Boyington214 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 I agree RJ it does seem odd, hence Sea Fish Tasmania trying to purchase more quotas of certain species to make it even more viable as a Economic enterprise. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
khombi 10 Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 Hi Grrazz,you explain things very well, but a couple of things bother me, [1] if there is 100,000 tons up for grabs and there is 100 small boats fishing, that would be 1000 tons each so if some of these small boats relinquished their quotas, that said quota would then be devided amongst the rest of the fleet, or sold to the highest bidder, is that correct if so i can then understand why seafish tasmania would be anxsious to buy them. the other thing that im not to sure about is the netts that are used, are these netts all the same regardless of vessel size and origins and if so would not the smaller boats have the same restrictions and problems regarding bycatch and would they be, or are they being, monitered in the same way, i hope you dont mind the questions but i am just trying to get a better understanding of how things workregards Khombi afishyfish 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tacklebags 404 Posted October 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 27, 2012 Hi Grrazz' date='you explain things very well, but a couple of things bother me, [1'] if there is 100,000 tons up for grabs and there is 100 small boats fishing, that would be 1000 tons each so if some of these small boats relinquished their quotas, that said quota would then be devided amongst the rest of the fleet, or sold to the highest bidder, is that correct if so i can then understand why seafish tasmania would be anxsious to buy them. the other thing that im not to sure about is the netts that are used, are these netts all the same regardless of vessel size and origins and if so would not the smaller boats have the same restrictions and problems regarding bycatch and would they be, or are they being, monitered in the same way, i hope you dont mind the questions but i am just trying to get a better understanding of how things workregards KhombiHi Khombi,Brian Jefferies from the SA sardine fishery has informed rec fishers that other boats already in operation have similar size nets. However, they cannot store such large quantities onboard or process them while continually fishing 250 tonnes a day.Brian also informed rec fishers that a boat bigger than the current one of concern (Able Tasman) fished the same waters years ago. Brian also conceeded this large vessel did have a detrimental effect on the resource.As far as buying up quota goes, from all documentation I have read, Seafood Tasmania was looking to maximise its quota to 36,000 tonnes per annum. Double that current allocation before it was banned (temporarily) and more than double again on what was considered safe (9,000 tonnes) prior to the suspect AFMA desicion to double it to 18,000 tonnes for venture profitability reasons.Hope this answers you questions?TB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tacklebags 404 Posted October 27, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 27, 2012 Post all the initial history at the start of this document attached...a great majority of this article should provide great information to all on here concerned regarding the super trawler.Graham Pike is on the AFMA board as the recreational fishing representative and these are his words...Pike's bio below as well... Graham PikeDriven by a desire to ensure his son and peers experienced higher quality recreational fishing thanhe did as a young fisher, Graham has dedicated nearly 40 years to very actively and stronglyadvocating and lobbying at local, state and national levels for fish and fish habitat conservation andenhancement and for wiser use and management of the vast and complex range of natural resourceson which fishing uniquely and entirely depends as a sport and recreation. His work on behalf ofrecreational fishers has been reinforced by a degree in political science and environmental sciencefrom Canadian and Australian universities and a career including national and internationaljournalism and broadcasting, book publishing, state and federal public service at a senior level(including policy formulation, advice and implementation), guided fishing tourism and fishingtuition, business administration and company management and directorship. In 1983, he co-foundedthe peak national recreational fishing representative body, now known as Recfish Australia, was itsfoundation president for six years and national executive director for another eight of its first 21years. As a member of a number of government fisheries’ management and advisory bodies,Graham continues to advocate the interests of recreational fishers and the betterment of recreationalfishing. GrahamPikespeech.pdf Quote Link to post Share on other sites
afishyfish 4 Posted October 27, 2012 Report Share Posted October 27, 2012 I agree RJ it does seem odd' date=' hence Sea Fish Tasmania trying to purchase more quotas of certain species to make it even more viable as a Economic enterprise.[/quote']Meanwhile buying themselves time and maybe trying to set some kind of precedent or argument as to their "right" to justify there existence here Quote Link to post Share on other sites
khombi 10 Posted October 27, 2012 Report Share Posted October 27, 2012 Good morning all and thank you to all that have responded to my queries, Inow can understand what SEAFISH is trying to achieve, and if allowed could possibly double or triple its quota [if allowed to fish] legally,it should therefore be that those who do not want their quota should only be allowed to sell or give it back [which ever applies] to the governing body who set the quotas in the first place thereby ensuring a greater survival rate of the species and preventing boats like these supertrawlers from exploiting any natural resources of other countries.Regards Khombi Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted October 29, 2012 Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 Hello khombi i think tacklebags answered the questions you had so i wont elaborate except to say to the best of my knowledge the nets are very similar with subtle differences to gear and differences to technique. Any question is a good question mate so feel free to fire away. I'll try to answer them or source the answer if i'm unsure. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
khombi 10 Posted October 29, 2012 Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 Hi Grazz, thanks for the imfo mate, i now have a better understanding of how things work,at my age it takes a little while to get through. Appreciate your time Regards Khombi Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted October 29, 2012 Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 Hi Grazz' date=' thanks for the imfo mate, i now have a better understanding of how things work,at my age it takes a little while to get through. Appreciate your time Regards Khombi [/quote']lol same here mate so your not alone there. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tacklebags 404 Posted October 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 Newbery having a rant on the super trawler!http://www.fishingworld.com.au/news/opinion-super-trawler-saga-it-s-only-baitTB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tacklebags 404 Posted November 6, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2012 By the sounds of it the trawler could be fishing within 3 weeks?http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/super-trawler-science-further-discredited/show_commentsTB archerfish 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kon 300 Posted November 19, 2012 Report Share Posted November 19, 2012 The Federal Government has announced a two-year ban on super trawlers in Australia. Hey, what about this though - would it still be okay if we use a slightly smaller ship???http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-20/super-trawler-company-seeking-smaller-boat/4381204Mr Geen says he has been unable to find out if his company can fish its quota using a smaller factory freezer trawler of at least 90 metres. :whistle: "We need to fish our quota, we are a fishing company but we are not going to bring a vessel halfway around the world again without some concrete guidance."Would that be the Seafish Tasmania quota, or the Seafish Tasmania Pelagic (aka Van Der Plas/Parlevliet) quota transferred from Seafish Tasmania via a "joint venture" arrangement?The quota having been increased just prior to the formation of Seafish Tasmania Pelagic?The quota that presumably would have thus made bringing over the Abel Margiris a viable financial proposition? :evil: Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted November 20, 2012 Report Share Posted November 20, 2012 Received a letter and the Hansard covering the debate from Leon Bignell yesterday, long story short the Private Members bill he wanted introduced to stop the trawler fishing in SA waters was passed. Interestingly the Liberals apposed it but the motion was still passed regardless.Bravo Mr Bignell and thank you. urhookedfish 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kon 300 Posted November 20, 2012 Report Share Posted November 20, 2012 http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/facts-about-trawler/story-fn558imw-1226476027673"Planning for the venture was under way not for seven years but closer to seven months. The Dutch operating company, Seafish Tasmania Pelagics, was registered on April 21, about a month after AFMA (wrongly) doubled the jack mackerel quota to economically justify the venture." alexczarn 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Grazz64 0 Posted November 20, 2012 Report Share Posted November 20, 2012 Mr Geen, You keep harping about the Government stopping you from fishing with Super Trawlers in Australian waters when in fact its the people of this country that have stood up and said "No Way". I'm proud to have a Government turn around and say we made a mistake and the people have told us they don't want this ship in Australian waters and they've acted accordingly on our behalf. If your loosing millions this lays at your feet as you never obtained a license to do so, i fail to see how you can sue but if you do and are successful let the Government repay your costs that doesn't bother me. You and your partners Van Der Plas cannot be trusted, your attempts to hide video footage of your so called net mods that don't work in which you were assisted by AFMA (Who is no longer Trusted) in trying to suppress this footage is one reason, another is that where ever these ships go they decimate fishing stocks including European stocks and West African stocks and fisheries decimated to the point of collapse and were booted out by the West African Government. Your out trying to buy up other quotas to increase your own and your reluctance to speak of this was also a concern for Rec Fishers. Colin Buxton claiming you are only going to take 7.5% down from 10% is just as alarming when the data is ten years old and you and he have no idea what 7.5% equates to in numbers as you don't know what numbers are there in the 1st place, this is laughable. Why does AFMA allow you a doubling of the quota with no scientific data to suggest whether this is safe to do so or not. All of this is very suspicious to Rec Fishers. You say you wont sit in one area and decimate large schools when in fact that's exactly what they do everywhere they go because of the freezer capacity and their ability to stay out there longer and do so. Your all about making money, you and your partners don't give a stuff about that damage you may cause and to save a buck you will sit in one area until its raped and you know it and so do we i feel, i fear that you see smaller trawlers as not making you enough money fast enough, and are looking to cash in and make more money without any concern of what damage may be done to our stocks, i fear you and your partners will just rape and pillage as much as you can get and then once its totally stuffed sell up and move on to something else. What else is disgusting is the renaming of the ship to Abel Tasman in order to appease the flack you knew was coming, you should change the name back immediately if you have any respect for the name Abel Tasman, this bloke would be turning in his grave seeing how you have abused his name for your own financial benefit. You continue to attempt to fish even though in your own state Tasmania the people have overwhelmingly said no we don't want this, Private members bills are being passed in different states to add volume to that "We don't want you to do this" but you don't give a stuff about us so why should we give a stuff about you, you can go broke and go home for all we care mate. You cannot be trusted, you've been caught out on a few issues Ive mentioned above, you are a deceptive character and i feel you will say and do whatever in order to succeed. Your Captain Wilfred Van Duyn says he has never caught a seal or dolphin in his nets is just ridiculous, i feel this is just another bare faced lie in order to gain access to our waters and appease the worry the population has for these species, this man is a liar i have no doubts he has caught seals and dolphins, who was captain of the ship when the footage of your net mods was taken that you and AFMA attempted to suppress. You and your partners are deceptive characters whose only concern is money money money. You choose to use scientists that support your case and ignore those that say this is a destructive and unsustainable way to fish. The rich are a greedy lot and only care about getting richer seen it before and will no doubt see it again. Well Mr Geen over our dead bodies will the people of this country allow you and those that have ruined their own stocks in Europe and everywhere they go to do it here, give up as it isnt going to happen as long as there is a pulse in our veins. If the science isnt there to allow you to fish here which it isnt then you and your deceptive partners fund it, dont ask the Australian people to fund something we dont want and in closing can i just say suck it mate you got what you deserve and i hope you continue to get it to the point you are driven out of this country as your kind of money grabbing types make the rest of us sick to our stomachs. Bugger off the Australian people own whats in our waters and we intend to keep it from you and your unsustainable ways.Graham WilsonAcopy of what i sent to Mr Geen Just Me and Boyington214 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kon 300 Posted November 20, 2012 Report Share Posted November 20, 2012 Whilst taking this website with a pinch of salt (and possibly some of the details being over-emphasised for effect), 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 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.