At the moment theres no fishing from shore in the sanctuary zones so it will affect us. DBCA (cockheads) will look at 200m setbacks if enough quality submissions are received to justify so its not a given. I've been trying along with a few other locals to lessen the impact of these SZs over the last 18 months but DBCA don't want to listen and the whole proceess has been a shambles to say the least. Recfishwest and Western Angler have been awesome and provided some great guidance and been in our corner 100%

It would be good to see the DBCA use scientific based data combined with locals input for zoning instead just using a lock out approach. Our South Coast is so understressed by lack of population and adverse weather conditions that its mind boggling that it actually needs this Marine Park with 25% sanctuary zones. No other Marine Park has even 10% SZs. Don't get me wrong I love how SZs work, look at Rotto, Ningaloo etc but do you think we're going to see similar numbers of people snorkelling beaches in Esperance? Most ironic thing is all the best dive/snorkel spots arent even in the SZs!

 Yes Scott Coglan has written a great expose' on how the process has reached this point.

Trying to find it on the Western Angler page but basically DBCA's cherry picked committee even disowned it, and it turned out PEW were actually pulling the strings.

Protecting fish stocks is not really their aim it seems. For most sanctuary zones they talk about protecting a 'diverse range of species and habitats then lists a range of birds, leafy sea dragons, macro algae, sea lions' etc and also the protection of cultural heritage. For most of this coast, fishing is limited due to its remoteness and prevailing conditions. Therefore it's impossible to imagine how the minimal amount of recreational shore based fishing targeting salmon, herring etc would impact this environment and the species listed to any measurable extent (and no direct evidence is presented to the contrary). In fact if fishing was indeed having such a significant impact, to the extent that it needs to be banned, the diverse range of species and habitats wouldn't exist in this location. In addition to this, the permitted activities (boating, swimming, snorkelling) are arguably more impactful than line fishing from shore, consider damage to reefs and seabed, disturbing sea lions etc. There is little/no science or even just basic logic applied in justifying any of the zones I have read about so far. This is such a weak proposal. Strongly encourage people to download the documents and read up. There are very clear and strong arguments against these proposed sanctuary zones.

Bloody ridiculous.  I watched that episode  of gido,s and thaught it a big joke. Just gotta look at the fish he gets and no one else for miles.

 Heres one article on what has been happening, written by WAFIC.
Its a long read, but lays it all out whats happened behind the scenes and PEWS involvement. 

Facebook

 Doing exactly the same down south as they did in the kimberley. Design it with a select few groups, then put it out there for the public, then ignore the feedback and push it through anyway. This government aren't listening to the people anymore on a wide range of issues. Hopefully the opposition gets their shit together and roll these muppets at the next election.

 Considering the very specific criteria for determining if anyones say will impact the proposal, does anyone know if there is a qualty response doing the rounds which can be copied and submitted?

It seems they have created their own set of rules for the 'Have your say'... i.e. We won't listen if it doesnt match our criteria.

 last week I had a long chat with my local member about these issues (firearms, demersal, marine parks etc)

She said (and I believe her) that their people sift thru the responses and generally bypass the stock form responses rightly or wrongly.

Of course they are far better than nothing and certainly make up the numbers bringing an issue up.

I took that to mean you won't get a personal response if you don't send a personal email.

She also quite candidly said that while Punch was quite responsive to their colleagues input from constituents, Papalia (Police Minister) is a brick wall and absolutely determined to get his Firearms bills thru.

And rarely even responds to their concerns from constituents.

 Does anyone know any indiginous groups that could send through a well written request NOT to ban fishing within these areas from shore or near shore?

I'm sure the indiginous fished this area for thousands of years and their weight no doubt would carry some weight.

Thanks for putting the report up Rob, some eye opening but not suprising reading there!

 This would have been designed with a lot more imput from local indigenous groups than any other group hence why you see all the inlets are locked out as cultural areas and no go zones.

 Locked out for all or locked out for non indigenous?

Fuck this state is out of control!!

People need to push back ala European Farmers!!

How the fuck did the Libs get themselves in such a shit show that now labour can totally fuck us at every move...

 With horizontal falls tours to be banned in 4 years you are now seeing what power has been given to a single organisation during the marine parks process in the Kimberley. A multi million dollar business trashed to the detriment of the tourist industry. This government need to be put back in their box.

If the current government is pushed out and I hope the $&@( they do , does anyone know if the current legislation / rules / proposals can be overturned and previous laws be reinstated?? Or is it a case of going through the whole process again and becomes too hard or they don't want to upset the apple cart so to speak ?? 

 I'M guessing once they are in you are stuck with them.