News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Angler anger over fake reef 

Angler anger over fake reef

05 Jan, 2011 03:00 AM
The NSW Government has snubbed the region in deciding to deploy an artificial fishing reef off the wealthy Sydney suburb of Vaucluse.

Reefs were planned off the coasts of Swansea, Sydney and Wollongong to improve recreational fishing.

But the government will build the first reef off The Gap near Vaucluse and delay a planned reef off Swansea for at least three years.

Liberal candidate for Swansea Garry Edwards said the decision would disappoint fishers, who were looking forward to the reef.

‘‘This is another example of the Labor government’s Sydney-centric attitude,’’ Cr Edwards said.

Valentine resident Andrew Foote, who made a submission to the government about the plan, said the Swansea reef should be the first reef.

‘‘Sydney already has plenty of reefs,’’ Mr Foote said.

The Swansea plan included four 12metre high reefs made of steel on the seabed at a depth of 28metres, 3.6kilometres off Swansea Channel.

The NSW Department of Industry and Investment, which proposed the reefs, said the Sydney location had been selected for the first reef.

Reefs at Wollongong and Newcastle would be ‘‘dependent on the success of the Sydney reef,’’ a department report said.

The Sydney reef, to be deployed 1.2 kilometres off The Gap, would be tested for three years.

An analysis was done to determine which of the three locations would be selected for the first reef.

The report said the Sydney location was considered to be ‘‘the most suitable site’’.

The Sydney location ranked highest when considering ‘‘accessibility, fishing participation, number of anglers, logistics (construction, transport and deployment), habitat limitations and conflict with commercial fishing’’.

A submission from the Nature Conservation Council said artificial reefs could lead to over-fishing and posed risks to threatened and protected species from marine debris and pollution.

The Department of Planning is completing its assessment of the reef plan.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
why make them out of steel, would not waste conrete do the same thing ?
Posted by just a thought, 5/01/2011 5:46:57 AM, on The Herald
3yrs? Wont be any fish left by then.
Posted by Ramjet, 5/01/2011 6:19:01 AM, on The Herald
Don't put one off Port Stehpens or Newcastle as the Greens will turn it into a marine reserve and you want be able to as fish there any way.
Posted by BJ, 5/01/2011 7:34:41 AM, on The Herald
there are many more people, both residents and tourists in sydney - thus money more deserved there. How about the people of Newcastle get a grip on reality and realise it's a town with a low-density population.

This wont change until you stop sprawling the population out to cessnock, and start encouraging high density appartments etc. Then the 'city' will actually have residents and warrant a spend.

Until then, perhaps start with something realistic and useful to the whole community - not a million dollar hunk of metal that only a minority would ever use

Posted by mat, 5/01/2011 9:54:12 AM, on The Herald
There is absolutely no sense paying good money to construct a metal monstrosity to polute an area like this. Financial, enviroment, green house effect etc etc etc just waste. If you are going to polute and dump rubbish in the ocean. then put the people who thought this idea up. Many years ago[about 40] if you wanted to attract fish to an area that was "dead" you roped together rubber tyres that could not be recycled. solved polution problem and the one we built [which cost the fuel to take the tyres out to the site] had marine growth and fish after three months.Don't we have anyone left in australia that has that rare character trait called common sense?
Posted by scorpion, 5/01/2011 11:06:36 AM, on The Herald
Nearly a mile east of the Gap is still Vaucluse? Sounds like a total waste of money to me where ever it's sited.
Posted by libraryhound, 5/01/2011 11:29:50 AM, on The Herald
Good coment mat, sad but true.
Posted by intouch, 5/01/2011 11:58:11 AM, on The Herald
speak for yourself mat. i dont want it built here and i would oppose it. dont meddle with nature.
Posted by judgedredd, 5/01/2011 12:42:11 PM, on The Herald
@ scorpian. did you see the size of the structure? it's on a slightly bigger scale than roping some tyres together.
Posted by whizzz, 5/01/2011 12:48:13 PM, on The Herald
Just read a blog about "financial, environment, greenhouse effect etcetcetc just waste" and polluting the sea bottom with rubbish. I don't see how creating a new habitat for countless marine species out of steel (ie. iron, vital to all forms of life) is any of the above negatives. As for reefs comprising old car tyres, have you forgotten that one of the chief ingredients of rubber is OIL! I felt here I had to respond to a rare character with reservations about common sense.
Posted by Seven of eight, 5/01/2011 2:29:44 PM, on The Herald
1 | 2  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
ANNOYANCE: A reef unit, made of steel, will be built in Vaucluse.
ANNOYANCE: A reef unit, made of steel, will be built in Vaucluse.

Most popular articles


 
 
 


Newcastle Herald







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...