On Wednesday, December 10, 2003 1:43 AM, Ray Jones wrote:

> Sir, I got this letter forwarded to me from one of the members in my dive
> club. I thought you would like to read it (if you haven't already) and get
your
> comments. It says in the report that your tourism is at 2.8 million per
year. I
> would have thought it would be alot more than that.

It is.  Tourism in Queensland alone - and most of this takes place north of
the Tropic of Capricorn on the Great Barrier Reef - is conservatively
estimated at:

All Marine-related tourism:    $2 billion per year.
Dive-related tourism: $700 million per year
All Tourism in GBR Catchment area: $4.3 billion per year. (80% estimated as
diving related - snorkelling, diving, resort dives)

In his actual announcement, the Minister didn't mention a tourism-related
figure so I assume that tye figure of 2.8 million actually relates to
visitor days spent on the reef.  As Bob, pointed out, the Australian
population is only 20-million people - a figure that was officially reached
last Thursday! :-)

Also remember that the Great Barrier Reef protection programmes have been in
place for many, many years - and have formed the basis for programmes
subsequently adopted in other parts of the world.  What is now being
proposed is a major extension of those programmes to include an area
slightly smaller than a large part of Europe and that still only accounts
for a small part of the GBR's total area.

It's also intended to include land-based activities that affect the reef,
like the use of super-phosphates as fertiliser for the sugar cane fields
that ultimately washes on to the reef and destroys corals, as well as a
number of fishing activities that were previously permitted in certain
zones.

> But there have been concerns in recent years that overfishing is
> depleting the colorful marine life that swims around the reef -- that
> ranges from sharks and turtles to tiny orange and white striped clown
> fish such as the animated star of movie blockbuster "Finding Nemo."

Fish collecting has, for a long while, been a licenced activity on the GBR
and despite the suggestion in the "Finding Nemo" movie that the demand to
keep anemone and clown fish as pets has led to them being harvested tends to
relate to other parts of the region, or areas of the GBR outside Australia's
territorial restrictions.


> Although some of the damage to the reef is blamed on fishing,
> environmentalists also say global warming
> and soil swept down rivers from farms after heavy rain also is having a
> devastating effect on the coral.
(snip)
> Environmental group Greenpeace welcomed the move but said it did not go
> far enough by protecting only one third of the reef.

As a resource, the GBR is, in a sense, no different to other parts of the
ocean.  In that regard, environmentalists and conservationists tend to
approach the subject somewhat differently.  While one group seeks total
protection, the other adopts a more pragmatic approach that allows for
proper harvesting. :-)

(snip)

> Kemp said the plan was drafted over two years of talking to communities
> and industry groups along the Queensland coast and would turn the Great
> Barrier Reef into the largest network of protected marine parks in the
> world.

It already is!  :-))

Strike