Disadvantages of marine protected areas

29 02 2016




Stop wasting time

Stop wasting time



3 responses

29 02 2016

Not a disadvantage necessarily, but in my opinion the question of what a marine protected area actually protects against is worth asking.

In at least three state government managed marine parks in South Australia, industrial activities have been allowed to expand within their boundaries, each with known pollution problems. These include discharges of liquid and solid wastes, seabed disturbance and acoustic pollution.

The activities I’m refering to are specifically iron ore transport and ship-loading (facilitated within Franklin Harbor and Upper Spencer Gulf marine parks) and the establishment last year of an aquaculture pilot lease within a Habitat Protection Zone in the Encounter Marine Park.

I’d like to see these parks take a more holistic approach to protecting habitats from activities other than fishing.


7 03 2016
Gary Schoer

Agree with holistic approach. Bigger, well managed, long term, fully protected sanctuaries do work in medium to longer term to enormously improve biodiversity and biomass…lots of science behind that. And it produces fish for all ultimately…rec fishers, commercial fishers but biggest plus is overall biodiversity improvements. Some opponents of marine parks say the MAIN need is pollution control. You have pointed out a case study where you clearly need both…not one or the other.


29 02 2016
Garry Jolley-Rogers

very good


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: