Top 10 Lies About Marine Parks

<< Back to Main Myths Page

The battle for the Marine Parks is on! The National Parks Association and their cohorts the Nature Conservation Council and the Wilderness Society are taking up the fight on behalf of the NSW Government. Just as the preference deal for the 2007 election was part of the deal so was this. These “conservation” groups while receiving only a pittance from their paltry membership are funded by the NSW government to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year which they do not even have to account for! They are now using this money, your money, to con you into supporting the Marine Parks!

Below are the Top Ten Lies about Marine Parks and no take zones. I suggest you cut this out and put it up on your wall for reference! If you want to read about the science behind these claims go to the Marine Parks Science page <<here>>.

Claim 1: Fish stocks are threatened.

Fact They lie! Not one single inshore recreationally targeted fish species is even under stress let alone threatened.

Claim 2: Your favourite fishing spot will be protected

Fact They lie! The Minister has made it very clear that the Cape Byron Marine Park is the model on which all other marine parks will be based. In that Marine Park all that is left for the fishermen are the marine equivalents of "flat sandy deserts", all the "oases and reefs" have been incorporated into no take zones.

Claim 3: You can put a submission in and we will listen to it

Fact They Lie! In the Cape Byron Marine Park example 6,325 locals put in submissions against the marine park and suggesting alternatives as opposed to a few hundred supporting the proposition. The complete and overwhelming majority of the local population were completely ignored and the zoning went ahead with no changes.

Claim 4: There is good scientific evidence supporting no take zones.

Fact They lie! The overwhelming bulk of the scientific evidence (including our own CSIRO and extensive US research) indicate that recreational no take zones served no purpose whatsoever in conservation of fish stocks. There is not the slightest bit of scientific evidence supporting the concept of "spillover". And claims concerning protecting fish nurseries are generally false for the simple fact that for most species of ocean fish are migratory and we simply don't know where their “nurseries” are.

Claim 5: There will be no effect on tourism

Fact The biggest lie! Winning awards does not replace income and jobs! The NSW government's own studies indicate that towns like Byron Bay, Port Stephens, Seal Rocks, Narooma, Batemans Bay, Moruya, Bermagui, Shoalhaven receive HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars per year from recreational fishing. Several extensive accounting inquiries have revealed that each kilogram of recreational fish brings between $85 and $135 to the local community. Studies in Queensland have indicated as many as 40% of people gave up fishing when the marine parks were implemented and there is now a class action suit against the government to recover those losses. Tourism and your towns will be decimated by these fishing bans!

Claim 6: The conservation movement will not pursue broadscale fishing bans

Fact They lie! Just as they have with the land-based national parks this will be the death of a thousand cuts. Increased fishing licence fees, diving fees, increasingly complicated bag and size limits, increasingly complicated zoning and large complicated no take zones, increasingly restricted access to coastal and beach areas through national parks and nature reserves. ALL of these will be used in a progressive fashion to eliminate recreational fishing as either a sport or a food source. In the same way that no national park or wilderness area has ever been decreased in size only increased so too will access, fees and charges, rules and regulations, marine parks and no take zones.

Claim 7: We don't know where the no take zones will be in the marine park.

Fact They lie! The deal for Green preferences in the 2007 election has already been done. This government only consults with and funds the extremist conservation movement and they have already planned where ALL of the no take zones will be. They are hidden in the back rooms of Macquarie Street to be progressively implemented over a 10-15 year period.

Claim 8: No take zones protect grey nurse sharks.

Fact They lie! The main dangers to grey nurse sharks are drop line and longline fishing not recreational hook and line. Grey nurse sharks migrate hundreds of kilometres up and down the coast and up to 15km each day to chase schools of fish. They do not have a map of the no take zones with them while they swim up and down the coast. No take zones are about an ideological agenda not good science.

Claim 9: There will be a Marine Park advisory committee to represent your view.

Fact They lie! Whether it be the land-based National Park advisory committees or their equivalent Marine Park advisory committees it doesn't make any difference. These committees are appointed by the Minister and stacked in such a way that the extremist conservation movement always has a winning number of votes. Your views will be ignored!

Claim 10: Valid science will form the basis of the marine park strategy.

Fact They lie! As it has been with the grey nurse shark issue the government has hidden much of the scientific research within NSW fisheries, it has banned its scientists from speaking in public, staff and bureaucrats are banned from speaking out and it has deliberately not undertaken scientific research which they know may provide evidence against the ideologically driven stand of the extremist conservation movement