DRAFT REGULATIONS BY GOVERNMENT re MPA

Ben REINERS

Sealiner
Staff member
Good day SL’s,
PSY posted a discussion wrt the TSITSIKAMA MPA , under  CONSERVATION - MARINE, COASTAL  & RIVERINE  (Conservation, Education, Ecology & Biology general discussion.)
I added comment towards the end wrt more MPA to be confirmed which was gazetted in a Draft Regulation ;
https://www.environment.gov.za/sites/default/files/gazetted_notices/nempaa57of2003_draftregulations_newproposedmarineprotectedarea1_gg39646.pdf
It is one long document which need close study , to understand the “do’s & donts ” intentions etc , perfectly & by the sounds of things it has "good" intentions , but my take is its targeting some wrongly identified areas........
See link
http://www.sealine.co.za/view_topic.php?id=101338&forum_id=8    Page 1 & 2


RESPONSE BY CRAM

“The draft legislation (Regulation Gazette No. 10553) will have a huge impact on all deep sea recreational anglers as well as other forms of angling facets, those businesses associated with these sports, like boat building, tackle shops etc. will also be severely impacted.
Take the section included for KZN under "Isimangaliso", all restricted zones indicate that fishing in these areas is prohibited, that means any fishing further than the controlled Pelagic zone (3NM distance) will be prohibited.
As much as I'm for MPA's and controlled zones, these regulations don’t provide for the recreational deep sea angler or other deep-sea angling facets at all, there is no distinction between recreational or commercial fisherman, the definitions relate to all "fishing" in the 3 part legislation.
If this legislation is ratified the consequences for the recreational fisherman will be dire.
Ben, I think the panic will soon set in, I believe there was a meeting between various parties in Sodwana earlier this week with Isimangaliso, and then today’s meeting in St Lucia, it would be good to get some report back from those meetings.
Maybe this New Legislation issue should be in another thread instead of the Tstsikama Stretch MPA thread, more people will notice it then.
I'm sure most of the businesses involved with the angling industry are oblivious on how this will affect their businesses.”


Is there anyone out there who has seen/read these Draft regulations & or could give us more insight & or feedback from some of the intended meetings ?
It concerns the whole fishing fraternity......or do we not need to be concerned.

 
 

abriedem

New member
Hi All

I posted the same concerns about 3 weeks ago. This topic is currently discussed by SADSA and several ski boat clubs that I know off in the Gauteng.

If any body gets some more clarity on the skiboat fishing please post it on the forum. I would like to keep our skiboat club members informed.

What is the view of the coastal clubs concerning this. Surely some of their lively hood will be effected by this decision.
Thx
abrie Dempers
 

abriedem

New member
Gents
This will mean the end of the recreational deep sea fishing industry in South Africa. There are a lot of people that made huge investments in coastal properties all along our coast.

If you add the costs of boats and tackle and the loss of income for the tackle shop owners it will come to billions lost.

What our government must realize is that the taxes lost because of the loss of revenue will also be substantial.
Competition fees for the parks board. Launching fees and harbor fees for the harbors will all be lost.

I think it will be an interesting read to see what this
will cost the economy annually. We must just remember the suffering of people loosing their lively hood cannot be quantified in money.

I agree there are place for MPA's, but when you start threatening the existence and self worth of people it becomes a problem.
 

Marthin

Sealiner
abriedem wrote:
Gents
This will mean the end of the recreational deep sea fishing industry in South Africa. There are a lot of people that made huge investments in coastal properties all along our coast.

If you add the costs of boats and tackle and the loss of income for the tackle shop owners it will come to billions lost.

What our government must realize is that the taxes lost because of the loss of revenue will also be substantial.
Competition fees for the parks board. Launching fees and harbor fees for the harbors will all be lost.

I think it will be an interesting read to see what this
will cost the economy annually. We must just remember the suffering of people loosing their lively hood cannot be quantified in money.

I agree there are place for MPA's, but when you start threatening the existence and self worth of people it becomes a problem.
Exactly the argument the local substinance fishers had when they wanted tsitsikama opened....
 

SimonSays

New member
I'm no expert in this matter nor do I have the time to study the attached draft bills in detail...
But something that did catch my eye though is that many of the proposed MPA's are 70 to 100 miles offshore and those that are inshore only make up a small percentage of our coastline. If I am correct in this then the proposals sound like a good idea.
 

abriedem

New member
Fellow SL members and SimonSays

It is not entirely wrong. The MPA does start on the coast as you said but the new proposal as published and read by most off shore fisherman is that the majority of the South African coast will be an MPA from the 3NM line up to the 58NM line. This will mean that we will not be able to fish for Marlin, big Tuna,Wahoo, and various other pelagic species witch you find in the deeper waters off our coast. This will also mean that the big bill fish competitions and the biggest earner of funds for clubs will be taken away effectively bankrupting them.Not to mention the sponsorship involved in these comps

I agree with you that it is not a bad idea if you prevent the long liners and netters from decimating our fish stocks. My believe is that most of the ski boat fisherman practice some degree of catch and release. It is definitely practiced in competitions.

I think the other BIG question is who is going to police this.There is no purpose in doing this if you are not going to force it down. This will create a opportunity for poaching without being detected.

Abrie
 

IWyk

Sealiner
abriedem wrote:
Fellow SL members and SimonSays

It is not entirely wrong. The MPA does start on the coast as you said but the new proposal as published and read by most off shore fisherman is that the majority of the South African coast will be an MPA from the 3NM line up to the 58NM line. This will mean that we will not be able to fish for Marlin, big Tuna,Wahoo, and various other pelagic species witch you find in the deeper waters off our coast. This will also mean that the big bill fish competitions and the biggest earner of funds for clubs will be taken away effectively bankrupting them.Not to mention the sponsorship involved in these comps

I agree with you that it is not a bad idea if you prevent the long liners and netters from decimating our fish stocks. My believe is that most of the ski boat fisherman practice some degree of catch and release. It is definitely practiced in competitions.

I think the other BIG question is who is going to police this.There is no purpose in doing this if you are not going to force it down. This will create a opportunity for poaching without being detected.

Abrie
Not so sure about that. I am now on page 80 and still working my way through.

Many of these areas are way off-shore and don't affect recreational fisherman. 34 to 143 Nautical miles off-shore.

For new Protea banks MPA and Ethukela MPA here is the list of fish you may catch.

(Note: This is a list of game and bait fish species that MAY be caught in the Controlled-Pelagic Zone inside the PCPZ of the Protea Marine Protected Area. Family names are given as all species in these families may be caught)
Pelagic gamefish species: Carangidae – kingfish, garrick, yellowtail, queenfish, etc. Coryphaenidae – Dorado/dolphin fish Istiophoridae – Sailfish and marlin Pomatomidae – Shad/elf Rachycentridae – Prodigal son/Cobia Scombridae – Tunas, mackerels, wahoo, etc. Sphyraenidae – Barracudas Xiphiidae – Swordfish/broadbill
Pelagic baitfish species (includes carangids and scombrids as indicated above): Atherinidae – silversides Belonidae – garfish Chirocentridae – wolf herring/slimy Clupeidae – red-eyes, sardines, etc. Engraulidae – anchovies, glass-noses/bonies, etc. Exocoetidae - flyingfishes Hemiramphidae – halfbeaks Scomberesocidae - sauries

I DON’T SEE ANY BOTTOM FISH ON THE LIST. THE NEW PROPOSED AREA IS MUCH BIGGER THAN THE OLD WITH STRICT RULES WITH REGARDS TO FISHING ETC.
BASICALLY NO FISHING OR DIVING WITHOUT A PERMIT AND MUCH TIGHTER RULES.

Also no fishing between 06h00 and 17h00 which obviously sucks! for R&S


(2) No person shall fish, or attempt to fish, from a vessel in the PCPZ or PCZ unless:
(3) (a) they are in possession of a valid fishing permit in the line fish commercial fishing sector issued in terms of the Marine Living Resources Act and such permit authorises fishing within the PCPZ or PCZ of the Marine Protected Area; or
(4) (b) they are in possession of a valid recreational fishing permit issued in terms of the Marine Living Resources Act.

No person shall undertake recreational fishing in the PCPZ or PCZ in the period between 17h00 in the evening and 06h00 of the following day.

No person may operate or attempt to operate a SCUBA diving business in the Marine Protected Area without a permit.

As mentioned I am still on page 80 of 336.

The main areas of concern for recreational anglers are the Isimangaliso, eThukela and Protea banks proposed MPA and regulations around them.
 

abriedem

New member
Thank you IvWyk
This is good news that I was not aware of. I will circulate your comment to our club members if you don't mind.

Our main concern is Isimangaliso who manages the whole of northern Natal. This is where most of the comps for bill fish takes place.

It could be that we are panicking unnecessary. But rather be prepared than caught with your pants on you knees
Please keep on posting anything that you think we need to know in the document.
It will be highly appreciated

LETTER SENT TO SKI BOAT CLUBS FROM SADSA

. We are again facing proposed legislation that could have a drastic effect on where we will be allowed to fish in the future. As an example of the severity, iSimangaliso Marine Protected Area, they are proposing to move the boundaries from the SA-Mozambique Border in the North to the Cape St. Lucia Lighthouse in the South, extending from the shoreline to 34 nautical miles seawards in the North to 58 nautical miles seawards in the South. We have an open window of 90 days that expires on 03/05/2016 at 16h00 to lodge all representations and/or comments in connection with the proposed declarations. As each of the affected MPA’s falls within a specific geographical area it is nigh impossible for our SADSAA Environmental Officer to comment on each one without input from Provinces that their Members and others might feel will be effected by these proposals. Because of the time constraints and the possible severe effect that it might have on some Provinces, I must implore you to take this very seriously and study the respective areas that might have a severe effect on you. For Mark to make a meaningful input on behalf of SADSAA, he will require some time to co-ordinate and consolidate the input material received from each of the Provinces and for this reason I must set the return deadline for submission to Mark by the latest on the 26/02/2016. This should allow him some time to prepare a discussion paper to be dealt with at our meeting of 04/03/2016.

Thanks & kind regards
Geoff

Thank you again
Abrie
 

IWyk

Sealiner
Eish! Well the further you read the document the worse it gets! There are so many proposed MPA and each consisting of Restricted Zones(no fishing), Controlled Pelagric Zone(only certain pelagrics) and Controlled zones, that it will be a nightmare trying to figure out where you can and cannot do what!

Offshore moving around will also be an issue as you cannot just cross a Restricted area to go fish on the other side there are strict rules and regulations with regard to storage of fishing gear when doing so.

THERE ARE REALY HEFTY FINES IN PLACE FOR OFFENDERS!

Not sure about what the fishing regulations are for ISIMANGALISO the list I gave is for Ethukela and Protea banks.
 

IWyk

Sealiner
This is aparantly the long term goal/plan, from Marine Conservation Institute:

**Proposed Expansion as an MPA in Feb 2016.

Draft regulations to declare network of marine protected areas (9 Feb 2016) TimesLIVE.co.za

The new MPAs were identified through Operation Phakisa‚ a presidential project to fast-track the development of South Africa’s Ocean Economy.

“Many of these new MPAs aim to protect offshore ecosystems and species‚ ranging from deep areas along the Namibian border to a more than tenfold expansion of iSimangaliso Wetland Park in the KwaZulu-Natal Province."

The new MPAs will secure protection of marine habitats like reefs‚ mangroves and coastal wetlands which are required to help protect coastal communities from the results of storm surges‚ rising sea-levels and extreme weather. Offshore‚ these MPAs will protect vulnerable habitats and secure spawning grounds for various marine species‚ therefore helping to sustain fisheries and ensure long-term benefits important to food and job security.

From UNESCO World Heritage website:

"The iSimangaliso Wetland Park is one of the outstanding natural wetland and coastal sites of Africa. Covering an area of 239,566 ha, it includes a wide range of pristine marine, coastal, wetland, estuarine, and terrestrial environments which are scenically beautiful and basically unmodified by people. These include coral reefs, long sandy beaches, coastal dunes, lake systems, swamps, and extensive reed and papyrus wetlands, providing critical habitat for a wide range of species from Africa's seas, wetlands and savannahs. The interaction of these environments with major floods and coastal storms in the Park’s transitional location has resulted in continuing speciation and exceptional species diversity. Its vivid natural spectacles include nesting turtles and large aggregations of flamingos and other waterfowl."

The park is due to be integrated into a transfrontier park, the Ponta do Ouro-Kosi Bay Transfrontier Conservation Area, straddling South Africa, Mozambique, and Swaziland. This is in turn planned to become a part of the greater Greater Lubombo Transfrontier Conservation Area.
 

IWyk

Sealiner
This from the Minister of Environmental Affairs Edna Molewa has published draft notices and regulations in the Government Gazette to declare a network of 22 new proposed Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) as part of the Operation Phakisa Initiative.

“The declaration of these new MPAs aims to create approximately 70‚000km2 of marine protected areas‚ bringing our ocean protection within the South African Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) to more than 5%‚” Molewa said on Tuesday.

The following are proposed for declaration as marine protected areas:

iSimangaliso Wetland Park‚
Aliwal Shoal‚ Agulhas Front‚
Cape Canyon‚
Childs Bank‚
Protea Banks‚
Browns Bank Complex‚
Benguela Bank‚
Browns Bank Corals‚ Namaqua Fossil Forest‚
Namaqua National Park‚
Robben Island‚
Agulhas Bank Complex‚
Agulhas Muds‚
Amathole Offshore‚
Benguela Muds‚
Port Elizabeth Corals‚
Addo Elephant Park‚
Southeast Atlantic Seamount‚
Southwest Indian Seamount‚
uThukela Banks and
Orange Shelf Edge.
The new MPAs were identified through Operation Phakisa‚ a presidential project to fast-track the development of South Africa’s Ocean Economy.

“Many of these new MPAs aim to protect offshore ecosystems and species‚ ranging from deep areas along the Namibian border to a more than tenfold expansion of iSimangaliso Wetland Park in the KwaZulu-Natal Province.

“They include charismatic features‚ such as‚ fossilised yellow wood forest at a depth of 120m off Port Nolloth‚ a deep cold-water coral reef standing 30m high off the seabed near Port Elizabeth and a world famous diving destination where seven shark species aggregate‚ at Protea Banks in KwaZulu-Natal. These MPAs also include undersea mountains‚ canyons‚ sandy plains‚ deep and shallow muds and diverse gravel habitats with unique fauna.”

The new MPAs will secure protection of marine habitats like reefs‚ mangroves and coastal wetlands which are required to help protect coastal communities from the results of storm surges‚ rising sea-levels and extreme weather. Offshore‚ these MPAs will protect vulnerable habitats and secure spawning grounds for various marine species‚ therefore helping to sustain fisheries and ensure long-term benefits important to food and job security.
 

IWyk

Sealiner
http://isimangaliso.com/newsflash/fishing-isimangaliso/

This is an informative link regarding Isimangaliso. Seems they will allow fishing but tag and release.
 

IWyk

Sealiner
abriedem wrote:
Thank you IvWyk
This is good news that I was not aware of. I will circulate your comment to our club members if you don't mind.

I am no expert on this matter and this is just what I read and interpret myself. Best would be to get professional or legal input before circulating any thoughts which are expressed by individuals.

This may lead to confusion or incorrect assumptions.
 

cram

New member
One needs to go through the full document to realize the enormity of this proposed legislation, once done, you will see that each region / area along our coast line will have its own potential concerns. These proposed legislations don’t only affect one facet of angling; all facets of sea fishing are affected in one way or another.
Public consultation meetings on the draft legislation notice have been scheduled, the last one was held at St Lucia this week, others are Cape Town (11[sup]th[/sup] March), East London (16[sup]th[/sup] March), Port Elizabeth (17[sup]th[/sup] March), Springbok (31[sup]st[/sup] March), Port Shepstone (5[sup]th[/sup] April), and Zinkwazi (6[sup]th[/sup] April). Some meetings still need to be confirmed as per the notice from “Environmental Affairs” ministry.
It is my understanding that some unions have had legal opinion on the proposed legislation and appointed attorneys to represent them, they have also been in consultation with the various Scientific organizations and people regarding these proposed legislations. No doubt should some sort of compromise come about with regard to this new legislation, there will be change in recreational angling along our coast line, the days of boating various species of fish will be numbered…
The coordination of efforts between us, our clubs and respective Unions is of prime importance, to ensure if necessary, that we, the angling fraternity, are in a position to submit a legitimate and factual submission to the “Minister”. Unfortunately, time is against us here and hopefully additional information is disseminated as a result of these meetings.
 
IWyk, thanks for that newsflash link, but it is about 2 years old….
 

Ben REINERS

Sealiner
Staff member
Is there anyone who has or will be attending of of the proposed meetings to give us some feedback/update ?

It will be interesting to know guys pse ??!!
 

dp2

New member
It may be worthwhile for those wishing to comment on this matter to become familiar with the draft legislation before creating hysteria by making comments such as ‘This will mean the end of the recreational deep sea fishing industry in South Africa’ and ‘the majority of the South African coast will be an MPA’. This is simply not true. I understand there is an enormous amount of information in this gazette, but you can simply focus on the area/proposed MPA which may affect you.

This gazette is the result of years of work, where all stakeholders (oil & gas, mining, recreational and commercial fishing) were considered. Conflict was minimised where possible (many MPAs are zoned and still allow restricted fishing), while still maintaining the overriding need to conserve marine biodiversity. Unfortunately, you cannot please everyone all of the time when it comes to restricted access sites. There will undoubtedly be groups who feel they are being unfairly discriminated and they are welcome to put their concerns in writing or attend one of the consultation meetings which were previously listed in this thread. That said, the large majority of these MPAs are offshore and will have little effect of recreational angling. There are, of course, areas of concern e.g Amathole, Protea banks and Isimangaliso.

All I ask is that those who claim to be negatively affected by the MPAs read the document to ensure that is actually the case, as opposed to the knee-jerk anti-MPA reaction we see so often. And bear in mind that these new MPAs are to be introduced as part of Operation Phakisa (‘unlocking’ the ocean economy) in an attempt to maintain marine ecosystem integrity given the proposed industrial marine activities we will see in the future. They have not been proclaimed to ‘punish’ recreational fishers.
 

cram

New member
dp2 wrote:
It may be worthwhile for those wishing to comment on this matter to become familiar with the draft legislation before creating hysteria by making comments such as ‘This will mean the end of the recreational deep sea fishing industry in South Africa’ and ‘the majority of the South African coast will be an MPA’. This is simply not true. I understand there is an enormous amount of information in this gazette, but you can simply focus on the area/proposed MPA which may affect you.

This gazette is the result of years of work, where all stakeholders (oil & gas, mining, recreational and commercial fishing) were considered. Conflict was minimised where possible (many MPAs are zoned and still allow restricted fishing), while still maintaining the overriding need to conserve marine biodiversity. Unfortunately, you cannot please everyone all of the time when it comes to restricted access sites. There will undoubtedly be groups who feel they are being unfairly discriminated and they are welcome to put their concerns in writing or attend one of the consultation meetings which were previously listed in this thread. That said, the large majority of these MPAs are offshore and will have little effect of recreational angling. There are, of course, areas of concern e.g Amathole, Protea banks and Isimangaliso.

All I ask is that those who claim to be negatively affected by the MPAs read the document to ensure that is actually the case, as opposed to the knee-jerk anti-MPA reaction we see so often. And bear in mind that these new MPAs are to be introduced as part of Operation Phakisa (‘unlocking’ the ocean economy) in an attempt to maintain marine ecosystem integrity given the proposed industrial marine activities we will see in the future. They have not been proclaimed to ‘punish’ recreational fishers.
Great Comment, I believe the thread was started by Ben REINERS to inform all anglers that New Draft Regulations regarding MPA's, have been published and that those concerned with it had 90 days from inception to submit their representations and comments.

 
 

Ben REINERS

Sealiner
Staff member
cram wrote:
dp2 wrote:
It may be worthwhile for those wishing to comment on this matter to become familiar with the draft legislation before creating hysteria by making comments such as ‘This will mean the end of the recreational deep sea fishing industry in South Africa’ and ‘the majority of the South African coast will be an MPA’. This is simply not true. I understand there is an enormous amount of information in this gazette, but you can simply focus on the area/proposed MPA which may affect you.

This gazette is the result of years of work, where all stakeholders (oil & gas, mining, recreational and commercial fishing) were considered. Conflict was minimised where possible (many MPAs are zoned and still allow restricted fishing), while still maintaining the overriding need to conserve marine biodiversity. Unfortunately, you cannot please everyone all of the time when it comes to restricted access sites. There will undoubtedly be groups who feel they are being unfairly discriminated and they are welcome to put their concerns in writing or attend one of the consultation meetings which were previously listed in this thread. That said, the large majority of these MPAs are offshore and will have little effect of recreational angling. There are, of course, areas of concern e.g Amathole, Protea banks and Isimangaliso.

All I ask is that those who claim to be negatively affected by the MPAs read the document to ensure that is actually the case, as opposed to the knee-jerk anti-MPA reaction we see so often. And bear in mind that these new MPAs are to be introduced as part of Operation Phakisa (‘unlocking’ the ocean economy) in an attempt to maintain marine ecosystem integrity given the proposed industrial marine activities we will see in the future. They have not been proclaimed to ‘punish’ recreational fishers.
Great Comment, I believe the thread was started by Ben REINERS to inform all anglers that New Draft Regulations regarding MPA's, have been published and that those concerned with it had 90 days from inception to submit their representations and comments.

 
Very true cram.....it was posted for info purposes to our angling fraternity .......& not to psych up anglers. There are hundreds & if not thousands of anglers who are not aware of the Draft regulations, & once implemented & enforced at sea & or from the shore they might find it as a "new thing" & it might bring about a roar of outcry & or resistance.

What  dp2 must understand that there is no better way of spreading news / info than social media. How people are affected & or going to act is not in our hands but we have to make the best of a bad situation should it does affect yr areas / times / species etc.

We have always managed to follow rules , so there's gonna be no difference, but anglers has a right to know whats happening out there.
 

dp2

New member
I totally agree with you Ben, I am all for threads such as this which distribute information. Social media has a big role to play. I was merely urging people to read the document before making uninformed comments on the thread.
 
Top