X2 

Dont get me wrong its a great result and a win for all australians but what a f++k up he is

quote "Burke said there was too much uncertainty surrounding the environmental impact of the 142 metre (466 foot) trawler"

what research has been conducted between when it was announced to now? Jack S++t yet now he says there is too much uncertainty and a few weeks back the science supports it??

Hes made the right decision but for exactly the same reasons as the Marine Parks fiasco-cos people with loud voices (us this time) told it was the right thing to do, not because of a scientific reason.

This government must be terrified of what is going to happen next election, and it wont be healthy for Aus to have a devestating majority of any party with complete free rein, maybe worse than a minority.

thanks to all who helped keep this vessel out, every little signiture worked i guess

PEOPLE POWER!!

Marine parks and the super trawler are two different issues and the recent contradictions by the pollies has put them in a very vulnerable position. Blocking the super trawler doesn't fix the other issue of banning rec fishing in areas around Australia, it just acts as a smoke screen. The whole thing is a Fu@#ing mess! It doesn't matter who you vote for, they will use political issues to make decisions on how this country is run.

Drive it back to the dutch!

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/super-trawler-banned-from-fishing-in-australian-waters-20120911-25po8.html#ixzz268S30URg Good article on it.

 LIKE!!

Good News, At least one decision by this government that makes sense.

 Our kids kids will get to fish a little bit longer... This was a good win!

 I really dont think this was ever really going to affect us one little bit, But it does show what we can as a voice if we speak out. The pollys will listen ....But dont kid yourslelves... Because next time Greenpeace will be batting for the other side...... They are not one of us. Ask them about the Marine Parks !!!  

 Fair point indeed!

Finally something to be happy about

Greenpeace had stuff all to do with it. They can pat themselves on the back as much as they want. Rec anglers drove this.

Not everyone is so happy though, check out this press release:

The Australian Marine Alliance (AMA) questioned the efficacy of Senator Ludwig and Minister Burke’s
explanations regarding process, legal jurisdiction, their knowledge and scientific integrity of the so-called
‘super trawler’. These questions go to the heart of Ministerial integrity and a valid argument to place the
proclamation of the marine reserve network on hold. More immediately, the draconian bill hastily drafted by
Minister Burke to take the heat off his own incompetence, will decimate an already struggling recreational
and professional fishing industry in this country to a point of no return.
Chief Executive of the AMA Dean Logan commented, “The explanations given by Ministers’ Ludwig and
Burke throughout a range of media interviews, over their knowledge and handling of the so called ‘super
trawler’, have been watched closely by all involved.
“The majority of comments raise very serious concerns about whether both Ministers, especially Minister
Burke, have actually misled the Australian community. Perhaps more on this will be exposed via FOI
requests and almost certain court action.
“The more immediate concern is the bill to be debated in Parliament today that has been hastily drafted by
Minister Burke and that will give the Minister for Environment and his department almost un-feted authority
over all forms of fishing.
“We make no excuses for arguing that if this bill passes we will see dozens if not hundreds of businesses exit
the industry.
“In our view the answer is NOT to give the department of environment in Canberra greater control over
fisheries management, but rather for the fisheries portfolio to secure a competent Minister who can
effectively fulfill their duties as Minister for Fisheries.
“As an example, if this bill passes it will give the Department of Environment in Canberra the authority to
stop recreational anglers, all the way down the east coast, from fishing for blue fin tuna in commonwealth
waters.
“Blue fin tuna have been earmarked by environmental NGO’s as a target species that they believe to be
‘threatened’ and funnily enough Minister Burke could deliver the knock out blow to anglers with this bill.
“In summary, skeptics could see this as an insidious ploy to achieve a pre-determined Green outcome with a
massive decoy. Regardless of the hypothesis recreational and professional fishermen do not deserve to be
punished any more due to Ministerial incompetence.
“The answer is to address fisheries management processes and policy frameworks that prevent Minister’s
from either being incompetent in the first place or manipulating departments for political agendas.
“This is bad policy making and bad legislative drafting.
“This is a perfect example of plugging a single hole in a dam wall only to find 12 more open up. The solution
is a competent Fisheries Minister and a stronger more confident fisheries management authority, not more
bureaucrats telling us we can’t catch fish based on USA NGO funded science,” ended Mr Logan.

 great result. whemi firrst heard abut this thing i was thinking if this was allowed to fish in our waters it would stuff it up big time. ok they are only targeting certain fish but what about all the by catch that is killed in the mean time.

its good to see the govt has some common sense

here's some great comments from an old associate of mine - a Fisheries scientist:

The super trawler decision is a farce. The issue has never been about the vessel. Those that think they have some type of victory in this decision are frankly delusional. What is stopping the same company now getting four smaller boats to catch the same quota allocation ?.

This scenario will lead to increased fishing pressure closer to the coast line which means localized depletion with greater impact on the recreational sector that were concerned about it. It also means more fossil fuels burned so the green sector have actually encouraged an energy inefficiency and the product quality of the end fish product will be lower and hence less valuable on the market, so there is also an economic inefficiency.

Fisheries science is a specialized field. Leave it to the specialists to manage the resource to maximum benefit of ALL the community not just the sector that yell loudest.

Enjoy your hollow, ill informed victory.

one of the few times Rob Oakshot has spoken some common sense !!

- Imagine the powers this will give Tony Burke if this bill is passed - allowed to make decisions outside of scientific recommendation (LIKE MARINE PARKS !!) if he decides it has a 'social impact' - PEW/Greenpeace/PETA will be jumping with glee !! - all with the support of the rec fishing lobby trying to block a fishing trawler that was fishing for allocated quota !

Dan, that appears to be what the AMA is worried about...Another article, this one from Crikey...Burke’s supertrawler call more politics than preservation

One of the tragic things about environmental policy is that it tends to follow the principle of factor sparsity, or what is more generally known as the 80-20 rule — 80% is for show, 20% for go. Put another way, 80% of policy is designed to do nothing more than send political signals to the electorate or make voters feel better about themselves. The remaining 20% is actually intended to change environmental outcomes.

There is no better example of the 80% in action than the government’s treatment of the Abel Tasman supertrawler issue.

Since the early 1990s, Commonwealth fisheries policy has largely been based on three simple principles. First, overfishing is addressed by placing caps (or quotas) on how many fish can be taken in each fishery. Second, government policy should encourage the caps to be filled at least cost — that is, the fish should be caught in the cheapest way possible to free up resources for other uses. Third, the use of fishing gear is regulated in order to reduce by-catch, or the unintentional capture of non-commercial species.

Sitting above the fisheries regime are environmental protection laws. Under federal environmental law, all Commonwealth-managed fisheries are strategically assessed on a rolling basis. These assessments look at the environmental impacts of the management arrangements for each fishery and determine whether they are sustainable. After the completion of the assessment, if the environment minister is satisfied with the arrangements, the fishery is approved for the purpose of export and an exemption is granted to ensure individual fishers do not have to comply with project-based environmental approval requirements.

Despite the noise in the media, the proposed operations of the Abel Tasman tick all the boxes of the fisheries and environmental regime. The fishing will occur within the quota set for the Small Pelagic Fishery. The fisheries management arrangements for this fishery have been strategically assessed by the Environment Department on four occasions: 2003, 2007, 2009 and 2012. Moreover, the introduction of the larger vessel is in keeping with the desire to improve efficiency as it will lower unit costs, and Environment Minister Tony Burke had set stringent bycatch conditions on the operation of the vessel.

This is not to say that the general management arrangements for the Small Pelagics Fishery or any other Commonwealth-managed fishery are sustainable. Several of them are overfished and subject to serious bycatch and environmental degradation issues (noting that the Small Pelagics Fishery is probably among the better-managed Commonwealth fisheries). However, the operator of the Abel Tasman, Seafish, has done everything according to the book. Its only crime was to run into a government in a tight political spot that is looking to attract votes on the back of a populist environmental campaign.

As if to highlight the absurdity of the situation, the government is rushing through legislation today in order to give it the power to stop the Abel Tasman from fishing pending an environmental assessment, even though it already possesses this power. There are provisions in the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act that allow Burke to call in the Abel Tasman’s proposed activities and subject them to the project-based environmental assessment and approval process. It is unclear why the government thinks it needs to duplicate these existing powers.

Given the way the process has unfolded, at the very least, Seafish should be offered compensation for its treatment. If it isn’t, the company is justified in asking why its losses are any different from those incurred by the fossil-fuel generators and other emissions-intensive polluters, which have been so grossly overcompensated for the effects of the carbon pricing scheme.

Beyond that, this incident shines a light toward more serious policy questions, particularly the sustainability of the current fisheries management arrangements and efficacy of the Commonwealth’s strategic assessment process.

To date, there has been only one independent analysis of the fisheries strategic assessment process. It found that the strategic assessments rarely led to material changes in fisheries practices and that its environmental achievements were modest. If there is a need for change, it is in the way these assessments are conducted and the level of transparency in environmental and fisheries regulation.

As Seafish has pleaded today, fishers need certainty in the regulatory environment in which they operate. Equally, the community is entitled to ask that its marine resources are effectively and sustainably managed, and that it is provided with the data to make these judgments

Pollies aren't the only ones terrified of what might happen at the next election.  I am myself. 

Plenty of people don't want to vote for labour because of all the cockups but many of them don't want to vote 4 libs or abbott either - personally i'm scared the greens will possibly end up with even more power and look at the mess we are already in due to a hung parliment green vote.

Keep this in mind next election

Cheers

Paul

Spot on Scotty - and all the time the marine Parks issue has been swept under the rug ! - must be music to PEW's ears !!

Yep and Burke hits out at misinformation being peddeled about by greens regarding the super trawler.  Yep they certainly peddled plenty of misinformation about the Margris but hey Burke what about the crap they have peddled about marine parks that you seem to accept as gospel....... Can't have it both ways

Its another knee jerk decision by this Govt for sure.I reckon ban all nets on all boats end of story,it will never happen tho hate nets.

Another comment piece from the Keep Australia Fishing website:

that we as rec fishers have been conned by politics. Rec Fishing Bans in areas which we are against. Supership made out to be an evil threatening destroyer of our fisheries and we all jump on the wagon and try and ban it.

The way is the Policy the Government has on the table, but if it gets through it potentially gives the government the tools it needs to block any area from fishing due to social, scientific or environmental threats. AND WE AS REC FISHER'S SUPPORT THIS? Purely to block the Supership. The fishery is out there, is regulated and there is a quota. Supership or not, the fishing will happen and the quota will be taken.

What have we achieved, Nothing! We blocked one big ship, via a potential policy that can threaten our own backyard fishing spot.

Sunset clause apparently. Will run out. Heard it on 702AM so it must be true

If you look at the big picture, they still had a quota that was scientifically issued. The only issue I see with taking enough fish to fill a massive freezer capacity is that they have the opportunity to take an entire biomass in one trip, whereas smaller vessels have to go to port to offload then head back out, potentially giving the school a chance to move on and mix. Just a thought.

I'm pretty sure that it's only fishing where 'ex Pro' and 'Rapist' means the same thing.

http://www.news.com.au/national/super-trawler-banned-from-fishing-in-australian-waters-by-federal-government/story-fndo4eg9-1226473643263

FFS. Again I use the word "laughable" when it comes to politics. So now we hear that legal advice says the "science" is flawed and our quota system is potentially mismanaged. And we have the best marine protection system in the world??? So let's go back a bit and look at the credibility of the scientific information which has led to the closing of so much of our recreational fishing spots. Do we re-open that decision at the political level? I doubt it...... Again, I am confused. I need a scotch and a panadol.