tonyb

I note with extreme interest the amount of anglers, who for reasons totally unknown to them and also to me, have assumed an almost mythical status for this Mobil Jetty as a massive fish hang out and an iconic feeding spot for native fish including Snapper! This seems to be almost entirely founded on the basis that no-one has had access to whatever fish are in there, so, there must be masses of them as in the "grass is always greener on the other side" Think of the States Reservoirs which have been a mouth wateringly enticing carrot of masses of hungry big fish of all species just waiting to jump on any anglers hook, audacious enough to either trespass, or in my case, "DARE TO DREAM" we might all have legal access as our Interstate cousins have enjoyed for more that two decades due to a forward thinking Government!How have these mythical tales of 100 lb Kingfish and line smashing 35 lb Snapper, among super-sized KGW and so forth come about? The reality is we have a rock wall harbour (Sully's Harbour) a few hundred metres south of Mobil's Jetty of supposedly fishing nirvana, which in actual fact, boasts a sprinkling of tommies, Gar, Mullet, a few bream and I've even heard of a rare pinky snapper or two when conditions are perfect. I personally refuse to believe, until some "expert" who has done the work on surveying the fish populations tells us otherwise, that the fish here are indeed of gigantic proportions and that we should make a Sanctuary of the Jetty.Should this be the case and we do have a go ahead for a Sanctuary, and make no mistake if funding is provided, the Government will be committed to an EIS (Environmental Impact Statement), the problem will then be to lift people out of their apathy and get them to fight for what they want instead of, as one poster wrote, "Let it all slide under the sea"

Once again thanks to all who have voted and also to those who have commented!It is very interesting to hear what SA fishers think about this issue..One thing I would say is please dont sell yourselves short, Recreational anglers make up a HUGE sector of the community. We also contribute in a big way to the local economy, (think) tax revenue. Together this means that if there is a 'Majority' or 'Popular' view/demmand held by anglers then it IS POLITICALLY SIGNIFICANT and we do contribute to the economy sufficiantly to argue for our demmands to be met.. This idea is not about redirecting all government resources to angling, its far more realistic and is about claiming the recognition we deserve based upon our demographic and ecomonic significance.Im not here to discuss or lament the failings of South Australian anglers to organise in the past.. its just to sad, and we could fill pages.But there are people who help the causes of recreational fisheres and this can only be improved upon. What I am here to do is to try gauge a sense of the future we want as a group...Then we'll see where we go. . this is the first step, this poll WILL accomplish something - it will help shape the next step, its not something I'll be Hotlinking to Pollies offices, we must conduct ourselves in a smarter, more coherent and professional manner than that!I also MAKE NO APOLOGY - this is not the only forum we are asking this question to and forums will not be the only place we ask for peoples opinion. But I ask STRIKE & HOOK because its is a brilliant comminuty of South Australian fisher folk who deserve to be heard.Please keep your votes and opinions comming,Im off for a fish!regards,Dave

Keep in mind that Mobil are required to restore the site, jetty dismantling and removal would have to be in the seven figure sum area. I have read figures of between 7 and 10 mil being mentioned.In lieu of going through the dismantling process, the money is paid to the gummint, thus "seeding" costs spoken for?Bricks suggested a "user pays" scenario, for argument`s sake call it a few bucks per head. Just one possible initial outcome - toilets (and possibly a kiosk ultimately) halfway along, jetty (initially at least) open daylight hours only (night-time bogan vandal factor spoken for), if there is an "in only" gate the "out only" gate has a fisheries officer in attendance during hours of opening inspecting all outbound containers (fish pillager factor spoken for).Self funding on a user-pays cost-recovery basis.Many ways to skin a cat.Talking years rather than months, I believe that area ultimately is slated for a complete "clean sweep" redevelopment, thus the jetty could certainly be a drawcard bonus.
Apart from the self-funding financials mentioned above, "We" don`t seem to have problems finding mega millions for a footbridge to save a slightly bigger "minority" a 300-400 metre walk...and if anyone replies that is part of the overall city redevelopment package looking to the future (Convention Centre, Oval, etc) then exactly the same principle is applicable to the Stanvac area.Different scale, same concept.I reiterate - not a high personal priority for me, but at the very least all options should be considered while they are available as possible options.General recreational/tourist facility, potential scuba platform - jetty recfishing a bonus of course!

I'm not familiar with LB fishing down south, and the outcome won't make much difference to me either way, but that won't prevent me from getting involved in an issue that relates to rec fishing in SA.One of the big problems with rec fishing representation in SA is finding out what the 'locals' think about any issue, and what they would want to be done about it. In this case I think it's up to the 'locals' (southerners) to put their thoughts forward so that their local knowledge can be taken into account along with the views of the wider rec fishing community. This forum and this poll is one good way of getting a feel for both local and overall opinion about what should happen to the Stanvac jetty. Good work YackAttack. I'd urge everyone to get some fire in your belly and get stuck in (as some are already doing). Doesn't matter what your thoughts are - please just make sure that you express them, because that's how consensus is finally achieved.Once there a commonly held view, action can be taken. Without a common view, we are a rabble.I believe that it's way past time for all of us to get more involved and make some noise on a wide range of rec fishing issues. The Stanvac jetty is very definitely one of those issues, and this forum is an excellent way of gathering opinions. A win here would do wonders for the downtrodden rec fishers of SA; who have been down so long that they seem to have forgotten what up looks like.another 2 cents...Cheers,RJ

I have to say I'm all for the jetty being open to fishing. It should be open, for anyone who can respect it for what it is.Leave it closed to boats indefinitely.The best way to manage the bogan factor would be to run a pay per user system the same as sullies or west beach boat ramps.This sort of "fishing park" idea goes great guns in other areas, and is a great attraction overseas in USA, Britain and many SE Asian cities where it works really well.It sounds like a fair kick in the guts to effectively privatise the access to Aussie coast, but in reality it's the only proven way to ensure a place gets looked after. If it was privatised, the manager could set their own catch and size limits, they could set up trout farm style rates to charge people for the fish that they take home.If the jetty was managed effectively and with a business mindset it could become the premiere land based fishing location in the state. School groups could access the area during the day, providing education and good fishing values to the next generation of knot twisters for a decent profit aswell.I for one would be more than happy to pay each time I visit, I'd pay upto $50 bucks a day for a decently facilitated fishing park. For that sort of money I'd want bins, a kiosk with small tackle and accessories, well maintained WC's and fish cleaning facilities among other items. It could charge as little as $5 per person, but I'm reasonably sure the minimum of facilities would cost more than that to maintain.

Just a little up-date chaps, SARFAC wrote to the CEO of Mobil in Australia 21/2 years ago and as far as I know a reply has never been received. Maybe an indication of their interest ?The letter asked if Mobil would be interested in the development of the jetty for recreational use, including angling.Personally, I don't feel that development would lead to a catastrophy as some of you are suggesting. It should be remembered that a large proportion of anglers in SA don't have a boat, or cannot afford one and a jetty properly set up with toilets ( on shore),etc would create a forum for families to get together and enjoy angling with their kids. Often a jetty is where children first learn to fish. Apart from Rapid Bay jetty, this government has done very little in this area, and it was only from intense lobbying that got the new Rapid Bay jetty built. The money was originally allocated to other projects and it took some doing to change Pat Conlon's mind.Thus proving my many earlier points that for anglers, the only way to get things done is to make a lot of noise consistently, that's how the green zealots work the system.

As kon said, I don't think I'd ever fish from the Stanvac jetty either.But maybe it's worth looking at this from a long term perspective?1. I can't imagine any future circumstance that would ever result in the construction of another public accessible jetty along the metro coast. As the conservationists are so keen on saying, perhaps we too have a duty to look out for future generations of Adelaide rec fishers?2. At the moment there seems to be (I haven't personally experienced it since I'm a boatie) a lot of people who are very willing to break the law with regard to size & bag limits from jetties etc. Perhaps we should be taking steps to persuade the Govt to more effectively police the laws that they themselves have implemented?3. If the Stanvac jetty is demolished - that's it. No chance of changing our minds later even if the rogue elements are brought under control and fish stocks are more effectively protected.Perhaps this is a step too far, but I'd like to suggest that both of these issues need to be resolved in the best interests of the marine environment and rec fishers. Right now, we have the opportunity to help the Govt to make a decision about the Stanvac jetty that will be in the best interests of all. This is a one-shot irreversible decision, and our kids and grand-kids might live to regret that we didn't fight hard enough to retain this facility for the future rec fishers in the Adelaide metro area.A strategy that might meet everyone's goals might be to retain the jetty, but to ban any form of rec fishing from it until more effective(and measurable)enforcement has been put in place by the Govt. I personally believe that this is actually achievable if we are able to apply the right pressure in the right places.2 more cents...Cheers,RJ

I've had a fair bit of input with this issue as I have been lobbied by my local polly Amanda Rishworth and have had verbal input on her blog site and must confess that I have plumped very heavily on the yes side, more especially because there is a very strong argument that the millions of dollars that Mobil will need to demolish this huge Jetty could be put into a fund to make this jetty a tourist, rec fishing, scuba diving, dog walking, environmental education tool etc. rather than the dismaying option of it being demolished and lost forever to all South Australians!!Talk of a cafe/kiosk, shelters, iconic art works with the added proviso of safety railings and maybe even toilets and BBQ areas with an associated FREE car parking area at the base of the Jetty sounds incredibly appealing to me and make no mistake, Noarlunga Council is showing awesome leadership in getting this project off the ground so I am more than a little amazed that we have so many naysayer's and it brings me around once again to the perception by other States that we in Adelaide are the sleepy old backwater of Australia.The power of the people and the power of positive thoughts and deeds are what is needed here and I for one heartily applaud yakattacks brilliant initiative Cheers, tonyb.

I've had a fair bit of input with this issue as I have been lobbied by my local polly Amanda Rishworth and have had verbal input on her blog site and must confess that I have plumped very heavily on the yes side, more especially because there is a very strong argument that the millions of dollars that Mobil will need to demolish this huge Jetty could be put into a fund to make this jetty a tourist, rec fishing, scuba diving, dog walking, environmental education tool etc. rather than the dismaying option of it being demolished and lost forever to all South Australians!!Talk of a cafe/kiosk, shelters, iconic art works with the added proviso of safety railings and maybe even toilets and BBQ areas with an associated FREE car parking area at the base of the Jetty sounds incredibly appealing to me and make no mistake, Noarlunga Council is showing awesome leadership in getting this project off the ground so I am more than a little amazed that we have so many naysayer's and it brings me around once again to the perception by other States that we in Adelaide are the sleepy old backwater of Australia.The power of the people and the power of positive thoughts and deeds are what is needed here and I for one heartily applaud yakattacks brilliant initiative Cheers, tonyb.

I have read all the posts here, now maybe the upper reaches are a bit worse for wear with poo ponds /lagoons ect but as tony has said things are getting better ,how metro meats were allowed to blaitantly pollute the system i have no idea but there gone now anyway ,if we look at the original post this guy wants to know if catching fish near the mouth is ok i say yes ,if the river was that polluted near the mouth dont you think the greenies would be up in arms ,my god there is a major reef not more than 300 m of shore from it ,mate i would eat fish caught near the mouth of the river as the winter gets upon us ill be chasing the salmon trout down there an also swinging the alvey on the beach for the big brothers.

It's Victorian! They all look wierd. Probably on swimming enhancing steriods too.

Until the 22nd October everyone has an opportunity to ask for the PT Stanvac jetty to be retained as a rec fishing/eco facility.Right now, the Govt is considering it's future and the possibility of it being retained. I believe that we'll get a sympathetic hearing if we make submissions to the Marine Parks (MPA) consultation process.At the MFA meeting on Thursday, this issue was raised with DEWNR (Chris Thomas, Jon Emmett) as a possible rec fishing "offset" (compensation for giving up areas to Sanctuary Zones) and we were told that it would be looked at by the Govt in that context.It was suggested by the MFA that the end of the jetty be established as a sancturary zone (same as Pt Noarlunga). In that way a submission to retain the jetty would have benefits to rec fishers, to eco-tourists and for the fish populations themselves. (Less chance of objections and more chance of support if there's something in it for everyone)Suggest that everyone who would like to be able to fish from the Pt Stanvac jetty in the future should write a Marine Park submission to DEWNR. DEWNR seem to recognise that rec fishing has been taking a fair old belting, and there's an inclination to try to get back on-side with rec fishers in SA. The Pt Stanvac jetty is a perfect opportunity for them to prove it.Nothing will happen unless the Govt hears from us, and given the tight finances it's probably a safe bet that the Govt will pass up on taking over the Pt Stanvac jetty without a lot of input from us.Want it? Now's the time to do something.Cheers,RJ

Not to mention the Divers have already pulled " The Leafy Seadragon " pity card. They havnt been able to dive the area , ever, but they are sure the cute little blighters everybody loves are under there by the tonne load, along with the 60kg Kings and 20Kg Snapper we all have wetty's over.Reminds me a bit of the Hobart, they wanted a wreck for themselves to harbour all the wildlife us bad fishos are raping, so they get a big arse wreck sunk for them exclusivly, in prime fish haven territory, but in their wisdom they've put it in a place that makes diving on it really hard and only accesible by the most experienced divers and only during slack water, to top it off, only by a handfull of licensed operators. What happens to the rest of their fellow Divers?In addition, if Mobil are made to get rid of the jetty, they've made it clear it will be the entire infrastructure including what we cant see under water in regards to pipelines and footings. Does that mean that Spot X will also get ripped up? What about those big concrete platforms next to the jetty?Super expensive to do, not to mention the government bat on about Marine parks, yet they will allow for a structure and area that is suspected of creating a marine park itself be demolished.Its a super messy one, and even I can tell that the rec fishing community is very divided on it, be an intresting united voice thats for sureEDIT:I must say tho, we as rec fishos should try and have a say, be pretty crap to not be involved in the discussion or included at all, just not sure what the united view should be. If we seem divided , it will appear weak and be less effective

Rotare,You've raised some very good points.During the MPA debate, there was talk of providing some form of compensation to rec fishers via artificial reefs, breakwater capping etc, but that seems to have gone pretty quiet.Considering the loss of landbased access throughout the Port River system and Outer Harbour over the past decades, and the fact that the blueline has retreated far from most of the Metro waters during that same period due to the death of huge areas of seagrass - with the obvious impact to jetty and shore based rec fishing - a case could probably be made that the Port Stanvac jetty be retained and used to offset some of these negative effects on metro rec fishing. These problems were not created by rec fishing, but through the Govt's own policies over many years. Perhaps this would be a good opportunity for rec fishers to ask for some form of compensation.I've got no clue about the financial situation re Mobil/Govt/Local councils, but itch to see if we can't get more support for rec fishing in SA from our Govt.Perhaps this idea would cause the environment around the wharf to be heavily fished, but maybe there's an answer to that along the lines of the Pt Noarlunga jetty where fishing could be prohibited at the seaward end (ntz) and reserved for the use of divers and eco related activities.Can the Govt (taxpayers) afford it? I don't know.2 cents.Cheers,RJ

Hi Tony,What specifically are you trying to achieve by campaigning? Are you trying to raise funds so the jetty can be brought for public use, or are you hoping that the campaign will inspire the local council or state government to buy the jetty and make it available for fishing?Firstly, Mobil own the jetty, so no idea whether they they would want cash for it, or would simply transfer ownership. If they wanted cash, then I have no idea what a jetty sells for, but I reckon it wouldn't be cheap. Even if it is simply handed over, thousands, if not millions of dollars would need to be spent making it safe and complying to allow public access. Also considering Mobil decommisioned it sometime in 2003, I'd suggest there has been 9 years of limited maintenance of the jetty in that time. Anyone know the condition of the jetty below the waterline? If it needs fixing, where's the money coming from to fix it?Onkaparinga council have considered taking ownership of it, but clearly don't want it. Probably because of the costs described above, plus the ongoing maintenance cost. The council has no money anyway and probably view the jetty as just another expense for limited return (ROI). Will Onkaparinga council residents be in support of an increase in their council rates to cover the purchase and ongoing cost of the jetty.....? I know plenty of people who live in that council, and know their response before even asking.The state government has no money, considering the budget for SA this year is looking at a deficit of $1 billion dollars. The fiasco with the marine parks shows the government aren't really interested in the considerations of rec fisherman. As fisherman we've also been complaining that the desal plan right next door to the Stanvac jetty will kill everything in the near vicinity - but we will now be pleading to them to keep the Stanvac jetty for public use because it will be an awesome place to fish..... kinda contradictory.No doubt the jetty would be an awesome place to fish - for the first 6 months. Im sure it wouldn't take too much time for every fish within in a 500m radius of the jetty to be caught, and all the stories of monster fish haunting the depths below will be just that, stories. After 6 months of the Stanvac jetty being opened and fished hard 24/7 it will no doubt be a popular place to catch a bag of rock cod.And what about the competing interests of other groups, such as the divers and nature lovers, who themselves have petioned the state government and councils wanting the jetty and the surrounding areas for themselves, and have specifically suggested to keep rec fishers out of the area?Sorry for sounding cynical, and maybe I'm slightly naive on the subject. However it would a great idea I guess and all sounds good in theory if, as a community we could afford it, and all interested parties could agree to share it. Unfortunately this is not the case as I understand it. I'm sure others will disagree with me on this

Hi Guys,Just finished reading an article in the "Tiser" about all the proposed actions that are being bandied around about the "Stanvac" site, now that the Petroleum Company is committed to and has commenced, the rehabilitation of the site!Onkaparinga Council has been negotiating with various stakeholders and the thing that made me sit up was that the Jetty, which would be a massive fishing plus for the State's recreational anglers, is planned to be demolished, UNLESS, funding can be provided to make it into a viable asset to the Community??What do we think about mounting a campaign through the Forum and other media connections??Regards, tonyb.

Hi Guys,Just finished reading an article in the "Tiser" about all the proposed actions that are being bandied around about the "Stanvac" site, now that the Petroleum Company is committed to and has commenced, the rehabilitation of the site!Onkaparinga Council has been negotiating with various stakeholders and the thing that made me sit up was that the Jetty, which would be a massive fishing plus for the State's recreational anglers, is planned to be demolished, UNLESS, funding can be provided to make it into a viable asset to the Community??What do we think about mounting a campaign through the Forum and other media connections??Regards, tonyb.

Tony, judging by your avatar you might be interested in this.I just got back from a Reddie Flick and With a fish each between me and my mate a 41cm and 43cm speciemen were landed. It's been amazing really that so far in our redfin season (starts at the end of footy season) We have landed 4 fish one 36cm one 41cm one 43cm and one 42cm.

Honestly fellas, you would be bored rigid if you could guarantee hammering heaps of fish out wherever you went, no matter what the situation, or weather or your mood was on the day!!This thread reminds me of the story of the trout fly fishing addict who had spent his whole life devoted to his passion and was Internationally famous. When he died he rocked up at the pearly gates and the Boss asked him what would be his dearest wish and it would be granted him? The guy said that he'd never ever caught a 20 lb trout on a Fly and he would love to do that. So, the Boss takes him by the hand and leads him to the most magnificent English chalk stream, crystal clear, full of aquatic weed with prolific mayfly hatches going on as he approached it. Now said the Boss, you can only choose one fly and you can choose the very best quality tackle that you need. As they are talking a magnificent trout rises out of the water and sips a mayfly down before resuming its station behind a weed covered rock. The guy is quivering with excitement, his dream 20lb fish now well within his final grasp. He thanks the Boss for his kindness and hurriedly takes his leave, rushes down to the gently rippling river in the late afternoon summer sunshine and executes the most perfect cast he has ever done, it hits the huge trout right on the nose and the fight is on!The angler's heart is in his mouth, his excitement levels have never been as high, the trout leaps into the air, thrashes about in the weed vainly trying to shed the hook, the angler can't contain himself but slowly and surely the 20lb dream trout comes closer and closer until he slips the net under it and thanks his lucky stars that he has died and come to Heaven to achieve his lifetimes dream.The next day the Boss comes to see how he's getting on and the deflated angler tells him that he was so excited about catching his dream trout at first but then he found that another 20lb trout had taken up residence immediately behind the weed covered rock so he caught that one too, then another trout turned up until he was finding it a tad boring after a while. The boss was unconcerned when the angler asked if he could try another spot on the river and catch some different trout with different Flies? You see the angler hadn't come to heaven, he'd come to HELL

A further count of little penguins on Granite Island at Victor Harbor has confirmed a colony of just 26.http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-22/little-penguins-count-confirms-bleak-outlook/4214446"We cannot really manage the predation that is occurring at sea..."Can`t - replace with "won`t" - assuming it is our place to play God with species distribution/conservation in the first instance, unless there are actual/potential environmental threats which generate an imperative to do something?"...but what we can manage are the things that are happening on land, and that's where to date at a local level we've been concentrating our efforts."Obviously either not working too well, or they are trying to "manage" the wrong aspect?"We've put together an action plan with the penguin ecologists..."Better be a bloody good one, with only a couple of dozen of the beasties remaining...although as Kingsley pragmatically said a few posts back - "let nature take its course".A valid point - if it`s not blatantly anthropogenically caused, is it up to us to interfere to keep "things" the way they "are"?

Sorry to say but I think the EPA is rubbish.I'm trained in marine biology and after noticing continual murky water / silting going on for a month near Brighton (when there was no storm run off) I contacted them.They replied..."well we think it might be this...or we think it might be that....useless ,I asked them if their mandate was to "think" of possibilites or to actually investigate...no response. From my studies I know that it doesnt take long at all to lose a sea grass bed to silting (oh,and by the way...they said the sand pipeline digging going on around the area had nothing to do with it...well,have you checked...no response...lol)Useless beaurocrats with a lot of "thinking and postulating" to do as the sea grasses die!Monkey

The alternative, of no regulation at all, is impossible to comprehend Damien :ohmy: :ohmy: :ohmy:

I dont wanna shoot anyone down!I was just looking for some answers to clarify things for myself, as I was also in contact with Penrice some time ago to discuss the issues of the silt and the dredging, as I had my own concerns in regards to the health and maintenance of the port river system.Following my own discussions, I was of the belief that the issue was now under control and no longer of concern.Just for the record, I dont believe for a moment that Penrice voluntarily decided to start spending money on a massive clean-up. I would instead suggest, that the EPA was on their tail, and Penrice made the decision to act BEFORE it was forced upon them, and in a manner that may well have cost far more in the long run.You now inform me that the waste water treatment plants have also cleaned up their act. Something I'm also aware of in regards to the Bolivar Treatment Plant, as a friend employed there as a microbiologist regularly discusses with me the ongoing water testing and monitoring they perform in the general northern metro environs.So from this discussion, I am now of the understanding that the "largest" current threat to our inshore environment is stormwater run-off and the associated pollutants, or are there still other concerns?I just wanna see our efforts directed to the true areas of largest concern, rather than us just complaining about pollutants and industry ruining our environment......coz if we start heading down that path we'll just start to sound like extreme greens who want EVERYTHING shut down for the benefit of the environment, and that will get us nowhere. I recon as fishermen and locals, we need to be a bit more realistic and sensible, by addressing areas of concern, noting the need for balance between industry, population and the environment, and then coming up with more realistic compromise to achieve overall balance and benefit.Is that a fair call?

OK. Shoot me if I get this wrong as I'm going from memory of Wednesday night & have left the handouts with the facts on them at home!The 2 culprits are Nitrogen and fine sediment. Penrice ONCE had the largest Nitrogen discharge as well as one of the highest sediment discharges. They have significantly cleaned up their act and are on their way to being the lowest producer of Nitrogen and are working toward significantly removing the fine sediment. Same Same the waste water treatment plants leaving stormater runoff as the major significant problem as it's managed by so many different bodies who as is common in dear old Adelaide seem unwilling to work together toward a common goal.Wahoo