2012/12: Is Australia's proposed network of marine parks desirable?
What they said...
'Closing areas to fish extraction is a compelling tool to restore depleted fish stocks'
Professor Carlos Duarte, the Director of the University of Western Australia's Oceans Institute
'What's offensive is that fishing has not been proven to be an irreversible threat to the marine environment anywhere in Australia'
Dean Logan, the chief executive officer of the Australian Marine Alliance
The issue at a glance
On June 14, 2012, the federal government announced that Australia would create the world's largest network of marine parks.
The network is to be comprised of five main zones in offshore waters surrounding every state and territory. The marine reserves will cover 3.1 million sq km of ocean. The Government proposes to pay up to $100 million in compensation to commercial fishers who will be locked out of some of the new marine parks.
The proposed network places limits on oil and gas exploration off Western Australia and extends reef protection in the Coral Sea. The network of marine reserves will also include the Great Barrier Reef, a Unesco World Heritage site. The plan will see the numbers of marine reserves off the Australian coast increased from 27 to 60.
Australia has timed its announcement to coincide with the run-up to the Rio+20 Earth Summit - a global gathering of leaders from more than 130 nations to discuss protecting key parts of the environment, including the ocean.
Though some have welcomed the plan as a vital advance in the protection of marine environment, it has been criticised by commercial and recreational fishers, who say it goes too far, and by the Greens, who say it does not go far enough. Environmental groups, while broadly supportive of the overall goal of sheltering delicate marine ecosystems from exploitation, also complained that it did not do sufficient to safeguard areas rich in oil and natural gas reserves or under pressure from industrial fishing.
Background
(Much of the following material comes from the Wikipedia entry 'Protected areas of Australia. The full text can be accessed at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_areas_of_Australia)
Protected areas of Australia
Protected areas of Australia include Commonwealth and off-shore protected areas managed by the Australian government, as well as protected areas within each of the six states of Australia and the two self-governing territories (Northern Territory and Australian Capital Territory), which are managed by the eight state and territory governments.
Commonwealth and off-shore protected areas in the Australian Capital Territory, the Northern Territory, the Christmas Island Territory, the Cocos (Keeling) Islands Territory, the Norfolk Island Territory and the Australian Antarctic Territory are managed by Parks Australia, a division of the Department of the Environment and Water Resources, with the exception of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, which is managed by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, a separate body within the department.
Protected areas cover 895,288 kmę of Australia's land area, or about 11.5% of the total land area. The Australian Capital Territory has the highest level of protection at nearly 55% of its territory, followed by Tasmania with nearly 40% and South Australia with 25%. Lowest level of protection is in Queensland and the Northern Territory with less than 6%. Of all protected areas, two-thirds are considered strictly protected (IUCN categories I to IV), and the rest is mostly managed resources protected area (IUCN category VI). Over 80% of the protected area in Australia is publicly owned and managed by the Australian government or state and territory governments. The second largest component of protected areas are the Indigenous Protected Areas while only 0.3% are privately owned.
Marine Reserves or Parks
The Australian Government manages an estate of marine protected areas (MPA) that are Commonwealth reserves under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act).
Marine Parks
Great Australian Bight
Great Barrier Reef
Lord Howe Island
Ningaloo
Rowley Shoals
Shark Bay
Solitary Islands
Australian Whale Sanctuary
Marine National Nature Reserves
Ashmore Reef
Cod Grounds Commonwealth Marine Reserve
Coringa-Herald (Coral Sea and Island territory)
Elizabeth and Middleton Reefs (Coral Sea and Island territory)
Heard Island and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve
Lihou Reef (Coral Sea and Island territory)
Mermaid Reef
South-east Commonwealth Marine Reserve Network
Marine Reserves
Cartier Island
Tasmanian Seamounts
Australia's new marine reserves
1. The Coral Sea Region
Covers an area of more than half the size of Queensland; supports critical nesting sites for the green turtle and is renowned for its diversity of big predatory fish and sharks. Includes protection for all reefs in the Coral Sea with the final proposal adding iconic reefs such as Osprey Reef, Marion Reef, Bougainville Reef, Vema Reef and Shark Reef included as marine national parks.
2. The South West Marine Region
Extends from the eastern end of Kangaroo Island in South Australia to Shark Bay in Western Australia. Area of global significance as a breeding and feeding ground for a number of protected marine species such as southern right whales, blue whales and the Australian Sea Lion. Includes the Perth Canyon - an underwater area bigger than the Grand Canyon and the Diamantina Fracture Zone - a large underwater mountain chain which includes Australia's deepest water.
3. The Temperate East Marine Region
Runs from the southern boundary of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park to Bermagui in southern NSW, and includes the waters surrounding Lord Howe and Norfolk Islands. Home to the critically-endangered east coast population of grey nurse shark, the vulnerable white shark. Contains important offshore reef habitat at Elizabeth and Middleton Reefs and Lord Howe Island that support the threatened black cod.
4. The North Marine Region
Commonwealth waters of the Gulf of Carpentaria, Arafura Sea and the Timor Sea extending as far west as the Northern Territory-Western Australian border. Protects globally-important nesting and resting areas for threatened marine turtle species including flatback, hawksbill, green and olive ridley turtles will be protected. Also important foraging areas for breeding colonies of migratory seabirds and large aggregations of dugongs.
5. The North West Marine Region
Stretches from the WA-Northern Territory border through to Kalbarri, south of Shark Bay. Home to the whale shark which is the world's largest fish and provides protection to the world's largest population of humpback whales that migrate annually from Antarctica to give birth in the water off the Kimberley.
Internet information
On November 26, 2011, the online academic opinion site, The Conversation, published a comment by David Booth, Professor of Marine Ecology at the University of Technology, Sydney. The piece is titled 'Does the Coral Sea marine park proposal provide enough protection?'
The article criticises the new marine reserves for not offering sufficient protection to marine life. The full text of the article can be found at http://theconversation.edu.au/does-the-coral-sea-marine-park-proposal-provide-enough-protection-4474
On June 9, 2012, the ABC News carried a report in which a number of representatives of the fishing industry criticised the new marine reserves network proposal. The piece is titled 'Fishermen say marine reserves a nightmare'.
The full text of the report can be found at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-14/marine-reserves-a-nightmare-for-fishing-industry/4071366
On June 15, 2012, The Sydney Morning Herald published a background piece titled 'Stormy waters for marine park plan'. The piece is written by the newspaper's environment correspondent, David Wroe.
The piece can be accessed at http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/stormy-waters-for-marine-park-plan-20120614-20d3v.html
On June 15, 2012, the online academic opinion site, The Conversation, published a comment by Colin Hunt, Honorary Fellow in Economics at University of Queensland. The piece is titled 'A solid marine parks compensation package will be good for fish and fishers'. The article argues for extending the no-take areas further and offering greater compensation.
The full text of the article can be found at http://theconversation.edu.au/a-solid-marine-parks-compensation-package-will-be-good-for-fish-and-fishers-7696
On June 17, 2012, the online academic opinion site, The Conversation, published a comment by Professor Carlos Duarte, Director, Oceans Institute at University of Western Australia. The piece is titled 'Marine parks a buffer for marine species and the fishing industry'.
The article explains the advantages that marine parks with 'no-take' provisions have the capacity to boost fish stocks in a way that advantages the marine ecology and the fishing industry.
The full text of the article can be found at http://theconversation.edu.au/marine-parks-a-buffer-for-marine-species-and-the-fishing-industry-7708
On June 25, 2012, The Age Education Resource Centre published a collection of background information and views on the new marine reserve network. The collection is titled 'A country girt by sea'. It can be accessed at http://education.theage.com.au/cmspage.php?intid=135&intversion=390
On July 9, 2012, the ABC News carried a report titled 'Fishers urge marine park zones rethink'. The report gives the view of some fisheries spokespeople that the Government has not responded sufficiently to industry views and that some of the areas where fishing is to be prohibited are of great commercial importance.
The full text of this report can be found at http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-07-09/fishers-urge-marine-park-zones-rethink/4117976
The Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities has a section of its Internet site which gives a detailed account of the proposed marine reserves.
This can be accessed at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mbp/reserves/index.html
The same site also gives details of the levels of use that will be allowed in different reserves. This can be accessed at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mbp/reserves/activities.html
The scientific justification for the decisions taken can be found at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mbp/reserves/science.html
The economic and social research which lies behind the decisions can be found at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mbp/reserves/assessments.html
The compensation to be offered to affected industries can be found at http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mbp/reserves/faap.html
Arguments in favour of Australia's proposed network of marine parks
1. Fish stocks are dangerously depleted and marine biodiversity is at risk
Overfishing is believed to be devastating the world's oceans.
Jack mackerel stocks have dropped from an estimated 30 million tonnes to less than a tenth of that in two decades. The world's largest trawlers, after depleting other oceans, now head south towards the edge of Antarctica to compete for what is left.
An eight-country investigation of the fishing industry in the southern Pacific by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists has suggested that the fate of the jack mackerel may be predictive of the progressive collapse of fish stocks in all oceans.
Within Australian oceans, among the 74 species that are Commonwealth-managed, the number of stocks that are overfished has increased in the last 12 years. The highly migratory Southern Bluefin Tuna is considered to be overfished. At least some of the additional 40 species for which status is uncertain are likely to be overfished. In 2008, 18 of the 98 fish stocks (18%) surveyed in Australian government-managed fisheries were overfished, or subject to overfishing. It is probable that similar trends are present in non-Commonwealth-managed areas.
Recreational fishing also places significant pressure on fish populations, particularly for the onshore and near shore resources. In the 12 months prior to 2000, recreational fishers were estimated to catch approximately 136 million aquatic animals.
While many recreational fisheries are managed through size and bag limits for individual fishers, this often does not limit the total catch in the fishery or adequately link the catch to a level that can be sustained by the fish population.
Biodiversity, or biological diversity, is a term used to describe the variety of living things in the natural environment: the different plants, animals and micro-organisms; the genes they contain; and the ecosystems in which they occur.
Australia's diverse marine ecosystems are home to 11 per cent of the world's known marine species. They support over 5000 species of fish - one of the world's most diverse fish faunas - and about 30 per cent of the world's sharks and rays. The southern Australian coastline alone is home to one of the most diverse collections of crustaceans, sea squirts, sea mats and sea mosses in the world as well as the highest known diversity of red and brown algae - more than 1150 species.
It is clear; however, that biodiversity in a number of Australian marine and coastal areas is in decline. For example, the Great Barrier Reef is experiencing significant damage from a number of factors, including agricultural runoff and rapid changes in climate. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has warned that the Great Barrier Reef faces 'functional extinction' within decades.
2. Marine conservation reserves will protect the biodiversity of Australia's coastal waters
A range of studies have demonstrated that marine parks conserve biodiversity.
Michelle Grady, spokesperson for Save Our Marine Life, has stated, 'There is now overwhelming evidence across Australia and overseas that sanctuary or "no-take" areas within marine parks increase fish populations.'
In 2011, the University of Adelaide published a report outlining 63 science-based studies that provide evidence that the healthier environments found in marine sanctuaries led to an increase in fish numbers and a decrease in marine predators, such as the Crown of Thorns Starfish.
The University of Adelaide analysis includes evidence from studies conducted in Tasmania, the Great Barrier Reef and Rottnest Island in Western Australia, and from marine sanctuaries in New Zealand, the Philippines, the Caribbean and Chile.
In New South Wales, the Batemans Bay Marine Park has been in place since 2005. The manager of the marine park has confirmed that fish populations have increased by 210 per cent, including the popular snapper.
In February 2010 a research paper titled 'Adaptive Management of the Great Barrier Reef: a globally significant demonstration of the benefits of a network of marine reserves' noted, 'With 32% of Great Barrier Reef area in "no-take" reefs, and fish densities about two times greater on those reefs, fish populations across the ecosystem have increased considerably...the reserve network is also helping the plight of threatened species like dugongs and marine turtles.'
In 2008, the Australian Marine Science Association issued the following position statement, 'A figure of 10% under "no-take" protection would slow but not prevent loss of biodiversity: the current "no-take" level in the GBRMP of 33% is more likely to achieve substantial and sustained biodiversity benefits... Rare and vulnerable ecosystems or communities should be provided with greater protection - up to 100% where an isolated ecosystem or habitat type is endangered.'
Professor Carlos Duarte, the Director of the UWA Oceans Institute, has given numerous instances of the manner in which halting fishing can replenish fish numbers.
The two great wars in the 20th Century, when fishing almost stopped over large areas of the European seas, provided ample evidence that a moratorium in fisheries lead to rapid rebuilding of robust fish stocks
The Atlantic Cod stock in Georges Bank, one of the largest fish stocks in the ocean, collapsed in the late 1980s. Twenty years after the 1993 "no-take" moratorium was established, there are now, for the first time, encouraging signs of recovery of the Canadian cod stock.
Professor Duarte concluded, 'Closing areas to fish extraction is a compelling tool to restore depleted fish stocks.'
3. Commercial fishermen will gain long-term advantage from the marine parks
New research into the effects of 'no take' zones suggests that the federal government's marine park network could benefit rather than harm the fishing industry.
Research undertaken by James Cook University tropical biology expert, Professor Geoff Jones, has found that coral trout numbers within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park's green zones were greatly increased.
The study, which used genetic testing to track intergenerational fish movements, also found that nearby fishing areas experienced increased numbers of trout.
Professor Jones said the research showed the conservation zones, established in 2004, had not only maintained but had greatly increased the number of coral trout in the surveyed region and that this benefited the fisheries operating outside the conservation zones.
Professor Jones stated, 'We found a lot of coral trout within the Great Keppel Island area, and of course a lot more were turning up within the blue (fishing) zones. So the idea that reserves are good for conservation as well as for the fishing industry has been supported.'
Minister Ludwig said the marine parks are a win-win for fishermen and the environment, rejecting claims that the marine parks will lock out commercial fishing and devastate the industry.
The Greens have also argued, 'The health of Australia's fishing industries is dependent on adequate conservation and sustainable management measures that ensure the replenishment of fishing stocks.'
4. Commercial fishermen will be given immediate compensation
Fisheries Minister Joe Ludwig said assistance would begin to flow before the reserves were activated. This would include transitional assistance to support changes to fishing business operations; assistance for employees; investment in research and monitoring; possible purchases of fishing entitlements; and targeted assistance to vertically integrated fishing businesses.
The package will be designed to meet the case-by-case needs of these fishers and businesses, and the Government has offered assurances it will work further with industry to develop appropriate assistance measures.
Minister Ludwig has stated, 'Those impacted who want to change where they fish, how they fish, and what they fish, will be helped to do so. Those who can change their business model, or who opt to leave the industry, will get the assistance they require.
There will be specialised assistance on a case by case basis for vertically integrated businesses that are especially impacted.'
The Minister noted in addition, 'Importantly, as a Labor Government, we will make sure impacted workers receive the help they need.'
The Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Tony Burke, has claimed that throughout the process the Government has worked to minimise the impact on fishing of all kinds.
Mr McKenzie has stated, 'Reserves had been designed to minimise the impacts wherever possible. The reserves are estimated to displace approximately one to two per cent of the annual value of wild catch fisheries production in Australia.' The Government believes that its efforts to reduce the impact on fisheries will make the level of compensation it is offering appropriate.
5. Oil and gas exploration will be able to continue under appropriate provisions
The creation of 44 marine parks across Australia will make about one-third of Australian waters off-limits to oil and gas exploration.
Although oil and gas exploration and production are prohibited in some of the declared reserves, the oil industry has won some concessions, with exploration allowed off part of southwest Western Australia and around the Rowley Shoals in the Kimberley where Woodside and Shell have recently been awarded exploration permits.
The marine reserves have different levels of protection - from an outright prohibition of mining and fishing to multiple-use zones that would permit some activities.
Mining activities - including petroleum exploration and development - would not be allowed in Marine National Park (IUCN II) zones or anywhere in the Coral Sea proposed reserve or in the Special Purpose (Oil and Gas Exclusion) zone proposed in the final South-west Marine Reserves Network proposal. Most mining activities would not be allowed in Habitat Protection (IUCN IV) zones.
Mining operations would be allowed within Multiple Use (IUCN VI) zones and some Special Purpose (IUCN VI) zones in the proposed marine reserves networks. A permit or approval by the Director of National Parks would be required for mining activities, some of which would also be subject to the assessment and approval provisions of the EPBC Act.
The transit of vessels though all areas of the proposed marine reserves network, including through proposed Marine National Park (IUCN II) zones, would be permitted. While ballast water exchange is managed under national arrangements, restrictions may apply in sensitive areas. Any such restrictions would be considered in the development of management plans.
Activities associated with port development activities, including maintenance dredging and the dumping of spoil, would be permitted in Multiple Use (IUCN VI) zones, but may be subject to assessment and approval under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act). These activities would not be permitted in Marine National Park (IUCN II) zones and Habitat Protection (IUCN IV) zones.
6. Australia's tourist industry will be enhanced by the marine reserves
It has been claimed that the announcement of these new marine reserves will promote Australia's marine environment overseas. It has been suggested these reserves will be particularly attractive to eco-tourists who are a lucrative section of the tourism market.
Mr Col McKenzie, a Cairns dive operator and the spokesman for the Association of Marine Park Tourism Operators, claimed the announcement would have a positive effect on the north Queensland tourism market.
The Australian Conservation Foundation has stated, 'Marine reserves are proven to boost tourism and encourage boating.'
A Foundation spokesperson elaborated, 'The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park generates more than $5 billion through tourism every year. Boat sales and registrations have increased in towns near the Barrier Reef Marine Park.
In fact, these reserves will benefit recreational fishers because they allow fish to breed without the threat of damaging commercial fishing methods like bottom trawling.'
As early as 2003, a federal report on the benefits of marine reserves stated, 'Marine protected areas with education centres ... play an important role in tourism through providing training and support for local people involved in the tourist industry. The centres themselves often provide an attraction for tourist visitors seeking local knowledge of the area.'
The Western Australian Department of Environment and Conservation has stated, 'Our coastal waters are valued by Western Australians. The wide range of ecological, cultural, commercial and recreational values they offer generate employment and revenue and provide people with a source of pleasure and recreation.'
The Department continued, 'Marine recreation and tourism are very important in this state. However, the capacity of our marine areas to continue to provide these benefits depends upon them remaining healthy.'
The federal Department of Sustainability and the Environment has noted that in 2009 the nature-based tourism sector contributed over $33 billion to the Australian economy, with more than 28 million visitors taking part in nature-based activities.
In regional Australia, tourism accounts for 9.6 per cent of total employment and more than 200,000 jobs. For many regional economies, tourism brings much needed jobs and a new cash flow to local businesses.
The federal government believes that the newly-established marine reserves will further boost nature-based tourism in all Australian states.
Arguments against Australia's proposed network of marine parks
1. These conservation zones will seriously damage Australia's commercial fishing industry
The federal government's proposed network of marine reserves has met with opposition from the Australian fishing industry. The industry claims that the marine park network is an over-reaction and that the damage fisheries are supposed to do to fish stocks has never been proven.
The chief executive officer of the Australian Marine Alliance, Dean Logan, has argued, 'What's offensive is that fishing has not been proven to be an irreversible threat to the marine environment anywhere in Australia and not one species of fish has ever been fished to extinction.'
Mr Logan argued that to the extent that fish stocks were under threat, the principal culprits were not the fishing industry. Mr Logan stated, 'The marine environment is being damaged by inappropriate land based development, pollution from agricultural runoff, urban runoff and sewage as well as introduced pests from bilge water and ships' hulls.'
Mr Logan went on to claim, 'The effect [of reduced fishing access] on communities will be devastating and estimated to be in-excess of $4.35BN - fish wholesalers, retailers, boat manufacturers, dealers, marina operators and developers, refrigeration companies, local councils, recreational anglers, transport, marine tourism operators, sports clubs, and professional service providers are just a few[of those who will feel the impact].'.
Mr Logan concluded, 'At a time when we are encouraged by celebrity chefs and nutritionists to eat more quality seafood Minister Burke slashes approximately 70 sustainable fishing trawlers.'
The fishing and seafood industry has claimed that the extended marine reserves would push up the price of seafood, damage coastal communities and imperil Australia's food security.
Guy Leyland, of the Western Australian Fishing Industry Council, has claimed, 'The big winners out of this will be the importers. The Australian consumer who wants to eat domestic fish will be faced with higher prices.'
2. The marine reserves are likely to impede oil and gas development and production
The Western Australian government is critical of the new marine reserves. The State's Mines and Petroleum Minister Norman Moore has described the proposal as a 'dog's breakfast' that will curtail the state's oil and gas industry.
Mr Moore added that it would impinge on current and future exploration and production activities as well as having the potential to impact on the security of domestic gas and LNG export supplies.
Moore claims the plan is overly complex and fails to recognise arrangements already in place to manage Western Australia's fishing, petroleum and marine resources. He has also claimed it will curtail the Western Australia's oil and gas industry and restrict port and shipping access for the iron ore industry in the Kimberley and Pilbara.
The minister said it was unclear at this stage how the proposal would affect the rights already granted for all exploration within the new protected and surrounding areas.
The Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association (APPEA) has claimed that it is not necessary to debar petroleum producers from most of the areas listed among the new reserves.
APPEA has stated, 'The Australian oil and gas industry has a long history of supporting and investing in environmental research. Over the past decades the industry has taken a strategic approach to understanding and managing its effects on the environment.'
To ensure a high standard of industry operations within our unique environments, the APPEA claims its members have produced an Environmental Code of Practice, containing substantial detail on all aspects of industry operations.
The APPEA has further stated, 'The industry supports the use of conservation systems that define the significant conservation values of a particular ecosystem or biological community. However, blanket bans and prohibitions are inappropriate and simplistic management mechanisms that fail to recognise the ability for the Australian oil and gas industry to operate without impact in sensitive environments.'
3. The ban will result in more foreign fishing operators fishing illegally in Australian waters
Concern has been expressed that when Australian fishing vessels leave the no-fishing zones, these territories will be left wide open for the commercial exploitation of foreign fishing vessels.
The Federal Coalition says there will be an increase in illegal fishing and boat arrivals in Australia's northern waters with the expansion of marine parks.
More than three million square kilometres are to be included in the Commonwealth's marine reserves, with various restrictions on commercial and recreational fishing.
In response to this proposal, the Opposition's Northern Territory Senator Nigel Scullion has claimed that the only people who can monitor areas like the Coral Sea are Australian fishing vessels.
Senator Scullion has stated, 'It abuts international waters where there are significant foreign fishing vessels, and without compliance we know what happens.
There'll be an increase in foreign fishing effort in our waters and there just doesn't seem to have been too much thought put into exactly what the consequences of the rollout of these parks will be.'
Mr Greg Hunt, the Opposition's Environment spokesman, has similarly claimed that the new network of marine parks could be vulnerable to illegal commercial fishing operations.
Mr Hunt has stated, 'Who will monitor the coral sea if the Australian fishing vessels are gone?
Who will be there to report whether or not there are foreign fishing vessels that don't stand by Australian rules, regulations, standards and environmental practices, which could do enormous environmental damage?'
The same point has been made by Judy Lynne, the chief executive of Sunfish Queensland. Ms Lynne has argued that that the ban on commercial use will result in more foreigners fishing illegally.
Again, the Department of Sustainability and the Environment has further stated, 'The usefulness of marine protected areas as reference sites is limited when illegal activities continue undetected, or external influences such as pollution or climate change affect the environment within the marine protected area.'
4. The compensation offered Australia's commercial fishermen is inadequate
The federal government has estimated that some $100 million will be required to compensate fishermen who need to change their fishing methods or leave the industry. However, a range of industry spokespeople has indicated that the compensation being offered is seriously inadequate.
Brian Jeffries, of the Commonwealth Fisheries Association, said the government 'were kidding themselves' if it thought that was enough.
Mr Jeffries said the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park - a relatively small area compared with that announced for the marine park network - had cost $250 million and rising in adjustment assistance.
Mr Jeffries has also objected to the Government not yet supplying all the details of its compensation package. He has stated, 'This is like a government resuming your house for a new super highway but only telling you 12 to 18 months later whether you'll be able to pay out the mortgage you had on that house.'
Mr Geoff Tilton, the president of the Queensland Seafood Industry Association has claimed that affected businesses would demand full compensation.
Mr Tilton has stated, 'If they exclude commercial fishermen and fishing businesses from the new marine park, they ought to have a big deep pocket full of dollars to pay compensation, I would say.'
There are also those who are distressed that having been compensated to relocate by the Howard government after it established the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park will now have to apply for compensation to relocate again.
Rob Lowden, the managing director of Seafresh Australia, which catches coral trout and sea cucumbers for seafood, said his company received marine park assistance five years ago and would 'absolutely' apply for funding under the new package.
Mr Lowden stated, 'Burke might say the community wants this. Well, if they want it, they've got to pay for it. They can't expect us to bear the burden for the rest of the community. The industry is doubtful that we will be fairly compensated.'
5. Recreational fishing bans will damage Australia's tourist industry
As part of the 33 new reserves, recreational fishing will be banned in new marine national parks in the Coral Sea, in sections of the Great Australian Bight, the Gulf of Carpentaria and the north-west of Western Australia. It has been claimed that the mere announcement of the bans within these marine reserve zones has already had a negative impact on fishing tourism.
Mr Peter Sayre, the director of a Port Douglas charter fishing company Bianca Charters has stated that the release of the final blueprint for the world's biggest marine park has resulted in 30 cancellations.
Mr Sayre said the customers withdrew their business because he could not guarantee they would be able to fish at the best spots in the Coral Sea later this year.
Mr Sayre stated, 'They're concerned that if they get here they won't be able to get to our best locations. People don't want to go to the second-best locations. We've lost about 30 days of business. That's equating to about $120,000. It hurts.'
Mr Jonathan Brooks, a recreational fisherman from the United Kingdom, has stated, 'If charter boats are excluded, guess NZ will be getting my 20,000 pounds now.'
Recreational fishing groups have pledged to punish the federal government at the next election if they are restricted by these new marine protection zones.
Mr Allan Hansard, the chief executive of the Australian Fishing Trade Association has stated, 'This is one issue about the rights of Australians and recreational fishers [where we] have a very strongly felt view that we should not have those rights taken away from us.
There are five million of us. We are a fairly big voting base and we have exercised our electoral muscle before. If this issue is around at the federal election we will consider how we get our issues well and truly heard and understood by parties.'
Mr Tony Abbott, the leader of the federal Opposition, has stated, 'We have a very strong record when it comes to marine protection but this government has a record of complete bungling ... a record of complete failure to consult before making announcements, and I have to say that I am instinctively against anything that damages the rights of recreational fishing.
I am instinctively cautious about anything that could further damage the commercial fishing industry and the tourism industry.'
6. Oil and gas exploration and production has been favoured over the marine environment
Although they welcomed the new marine reserves, conservation groups have said the move does not go far enough. The Wilderness Society has claimed, 'We will continue to campaign for increased protection for areas like the spectacular Rowley Shoals in Western Australia, and for Limmen Bight (internationally significant for dugongs) in the Gulf of Carpentaria, among others.'
The Australian Marine Conservation Society noted, 'Oil and gas exploration remain a major threat to precious marine areas like Ningaloo and the Rowley Shoals off the Western Australian coast.'
The coal industry plans to boost coal exports from Queensland, with 10,000 ships a year soon expected to travel through the Great Barrier Reef and Coral Sea. Environmental groups and the United Nations have warned this could destroy the reef. But the government's marine plan puts no restrictions on coal or gas shipping.
Areas off Western Australia's south-west coast, some parts off the Kimberley coast and areas near Cape York and Arnhem Land have also been declared marine parks or habitat protection zones. Alongside these marine parks, many of the newly created marine reserves fall in 'multiple use zones'. In these zones, some types of commercial fishing are banned, such as bottom trawling and longline fishing, but mining and oil and gas exploration are allowed. There is deep concern that oil and gas exploration and extraction in these 'multiple use zones' will contaminate adjoining waters and jeopardise fish stock.
Most of the area off the Kimberley coast will either not be covered by a marine reserve or will be deemed a 'multiple use zone'. The plan will have no impact on the proposed liquefied natural gas plant at the Kimberley's James Price Point.
Fossil fuel interests are pushing to expand offshore infrastructure, such as ports and rigs. They plan to increase shipping and pollution in sensitive areas. Concerned conservationists have claimed that this poses a serious threat to Australia's sensitive marine areas. However, these groups argue, the new marine reserves plan does nothing to reign in the fossil fuel industry's infrastructure development.
Michelle Grady, from the Pew Environment Group, has stated, 'Some key areas remain unprotected from oil and gas [exploration and production] and Kangaroo Island is absolutely at the top of that list.
It is a disappointment ... that the Kangaroo Island [sea] canyons, which are a feeding area for blue whales, will not be protected from oil and gas and neither will the Kangaroo Island community and their very important tourism icon and fishing industry.
This is unfinished business.'
Further implications
The federal Opposition has not supported the Government's new marine reserves network. The Opposition has criticised the Government's current proposals as based on inadequate consultation and for being too extreme.
The Opposition has pledged that if it is elected to government it will immediately put on hold the Marine Bioregional Planning process to allow for its restructure. The Marine Bioregional Planning Process would, the Opposition has been claimed 'be immediately restructured in order to address community and industry concerns about the Labor Government's mismanagement of the process for declaring Marine Protected Areas.'
The Opposition's objections to the Gillard Government's marine reserves plan seems largely politically based; however, it seems likely that if it is elected it will repeal the regulations determining the newly extended reserves. It will re-open the consultative process and redraw the reserve boundaries in response to public consultation.
It seems likely that the result of this process would be a significantly restricted network of marine reserves and/or many more multi-use zones.
If the conservation lobby is correct and if the health of Australia's marine life depends on greatly extended marine reserves then this would be regrettable.
It would appear that additional research and a wide-ranging public education campaign is needed to gain community acceptance of whatever measures are needed to protect Australia's marine life.
Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline
AUST, June 14, 2012, page 1, news item by Graham Lloyd, `ALP sets boundary for ocean park row'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/alp-sets-boundary-for-ocean-park-row/story-fn59niix-1226394942445
AGE, June 14, 2012, page 10, news item by David Wroe, `Plan to extend marine reserves'.
http://www.theage.com.au/environment/conservation/plan-to-expand-marine-reserves-20120613-20agi.html
AUST, June 12, 2012, page 2, news item by Denholm and Elks, `Hawke backs Burke on marine reserves'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/hawke-backs-burke-on-marine-reserves/story-fn59niix-1226391666737
AUST, June 12, 2012, page 2, comment by Graham Lloyd, `Preserve fairness, avoid political expediency'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/preserve-fairness-avoid-political-expediency/story-e6frgd0x-1226391641249
AGE, June 12, 2012, page 3, news item (map) by David Wroe, `Fishermen cry foul on marine reserve carve-up'.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/fishermen-cry-foul-on-marine-reserve-carveup-20120611-20608.html
AGE, June 20, 2012, page 7, news item by David Wroe, `Fishermen face more buyouts'.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/fishermen-face-more-buyouts-20120619-20m4w.html
AUST, June 19, 2012, page 7, news item by Graham Lloyd, `Sea Shepherd offer to guard marine parks'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/sea-shepherd-prepared-to-protect-marine-parks-from-poaching-over-fishing/story-e6frg8y6-1226399202166
AUST, June 15, 2012, page 13, editorial, `Marine plan must balance stakeholders' demands'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/marine-plan-must-balance-stakeholders-demands/story-e6frg71x-1226395989196
AUST, June 15, 2012, page 7, news item by Graham Lloyd, `Fisheries compo bid "to match MDB war"'.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/fisheries-compo-bid-to-match-mdb-war/story-fn59niix-1226396025895
AGE, June 15, 2012, page 10, editorial, `Marine reserves are a benefit to all'. (Online version: scroll down to second editorial)
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/editorial/economic-forum-puts-focus-on-gaps-in-reform-20120614-20ctn.html?skin=text-only
AGE, June 15, 2012, page 5, news item by David Wroe, `Stormy waters for marine park plan'.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/stormy-waters-for-marine-park-plan-20120614-20d3v.html