House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Grievance Debate Marine Parks MARINE PARKS Mr TRELOAR House of Assembly Flinders Mr TRELOAR (Flinders) (15:45): I would like to support the words of the member for Finniss who recently spoke on the marine park process and the latest draft release from the government. I felt it was a very timely opportunity for the government to address some of the anxiety and uncertainty that has been pervading much of the South Australian coastline, and much of our seafood industry, for the last number of years but, unfortunately, it has not happened on this particular occasion. One of the very first constituents who came to see me when I first was elected in March 2010 was a recreational fisher who ran a tackle shop in Port Lincoln. He was concerned about the impact that sanctuary zones would have on his business and the broader recreational fishing population. Unfortunately, at no time during this process, and despite a lot of work and goodwill from the LAG groups, it seems to me that the government has taken very little notice of the efforts or concerns of these people. Unfortunately, at this very point in time the LAG groups have been disbanded. In my mind, it is a great pity that they have seen fit to do that because, as the government has released this sanctuary zone proposal, it would have been a marvellous opportunity for those land groups that were already in place, that had already done so much work, and that had had so much experience and input, to once again review the sanctuary zones that have been put forward. To my mind, one of the extraordinary things about this—the most extraordinary thing of all, in fact—is that last year this parliament, in the other place, set up a select committee to examine the marine park process, and to have hearings and listen to witnesses on the impacts, impost and management of marine parks. That committee has not yet handed its findings into the parliament. This government has seen fit to release a proposal such as this without even having the good manners and consideration to hear what the select committee has found in their report. I find that that is arrogance in the extreme. Obviously, there are still grave concerns around the coastal communities of the Eyre Peninsula. Looking at the map before me, it is ill-defined, it is a large map, in no way can you tell exactly where the boundaries are, and they are broad boundaries, probably drawn in lead pencil on a large map. Some of the work done by the LAG groups isolated and pointed out boundaries down to GPS points. I doubt that the government has reached that point with this proposal. There are grave concerns from fishing industries, and I will highlight a few but by no means will I cover them all: rock lobster, abalone, sardines, and, of course, recreational fishermen I have spoken about. The Northern Zone Rock Lobster Fishery has a quota of some 310 tonnes, and most of that is caught along the West Coast and southern Eyre Peninsula. It has been estimated by that industry that the impact of these proposed sanctuary zones will be as much as 55 tonnes on that quota, so you can see that it is a significant percentage. It could mean as much as 8 to 10 vessels out of 45 being removed from that fishing industry, so a significant impact on rock lobster, and also abalone, and sardines as well. Sardines fish right through the gulf, out along the West Coast, and, of course, feed into the not insignificant tuna industry in Port Lincoln. Everybody has heard of Port Lincoln and its tuna industry. The sardine fishery obviously provides foodstuff for that fishery. If the government wants to shut down fishing in this state, they should come out and say so, rather than going about it through death by a thousand cuts, as the member for Finniss insinuated. There has been no consideration of the social and economic impacts as far as I can tell. There has been no regional impact statement done with regard to these proposals. Nor does there seem to be any consideration or costing of the management and policing of these zones. It seems to me that it is becoming blatantly obvious that, in the second decade of the 21^st century, shut the gate conservation is a thing of the past, whether it be on land or sea, and I think we need to progress from that mentality and approach.