Lagoon Of Islands

[Shane]

I've been told and had it confirmed that the Lagoon Of Islands is to
have the dam knocked down, and the lagoon let go and the Ripple Creek
diverted to Woods Lake. Just wondering if the alliance has anything to
say about it. It's a crying shame, when the water quality is improved
the Lagoon Of Islands and it's fish make a very fast recovery as was
shaown in the early 90's with many magnificient browns and rainbows
caught. Ripple Creek diversion was also a large factor in the water
quality problems starting in the mid 80's, what is it's effect going
to be on Woods? I know at one stage the IFS had the recovery af the
Lagoon Of Islands as a priority because of it's trophy water value,
not so now.

Regards
Shane

[AC]

G'day Shane,

This news is astonishing to me. As recently as January, 2007 Hydro
Tasmania published a Nutrient management Strategy for the Lagoon Of
Islands, aimed at long term improvement of water quality. the purpose
of the plan, as stated was:

• achieve long term environmentally sustainable operation of the
lagoon;
• deliver water of acceptable quality for riparian and irrigation use
from the lagoon to downstream water users; and
• comply with Hydro Tasmania’s Environment and Sustainability
Policies.

There certainly wasn't any hint of a plan to simply destroy the
lagoon!

It is interesting to note that the Hydro Tasmania 'logo' as published
with that report indicates their status as "Hydro Tasmania ... The
renewble Energy Business". It seems to me that the new Darling of
Hydro's client list is not electricity consumers, but rather
agricultural irrigators. That being the case, we are now seeing new
initiatives like the irrigation scheme for the Midlands, being made
possible by Hydro water from Arthurs Lake. I expect that, as time
goes on, we will see a steady shift in focus by Hydro tasmania towards
water delivery, rather than electricity. There will probably be a
major new business angle for them to play, when the mainland starts
buying our water resources.

This is bad news for the angling community, who will find that
agriculture's demand for water will be without limit. And the
environment will get its usual lipservice in the process but no real
consideration at all. As long as it all results in cash in the
coffers of whatever government is in power here, I wouldn't expect any
sideline issue (like recreational angling) to get any kind of
consideration whatsoever.

All this is only my opinion, of course but it seems to me,
recreational freshwater angling in this state has been on a slippery
slope for many years now. I wonder if it isn't being killed off by
stealth! It seems to me, that finacial provision for the Inland
Fisheries Service has been seriously eroded in recent times, due to
the 'user pays' self-funding strategy that seems to pervade the
provision of most government services.

The IFS's main revenue source is recreational angling licences. As
the angling population ages (I read the average age of Tasmanian
licenced anglers is 55 years) and the quality of the fishery declines,
licence revenues will inevitably fall steadily, resulting in less
services being provided by IFS ... a declining fishery and less
licence sales etc etc in a vicious circle. I fear that the IFS might
be like that bird that flies in ever dininishing circles, ultimately
disappearing up its own backside!

It is unrealistic to imagine that, in the current dollar-driven,
economy-worshipping society that we find ourselves, the IFS (or anyone
else) can be expected to have any clout with Government. IFS
presumably doesn't provide royalties to the government! I can't
imagine that any other organisation, including Anglers Alliance will
be able to influence a Government that seemingly has little regard for
recreational angling as a potential income source.

I think we had better enjoy what fishing we have, while it lasts. Who
needs to worry about toursim and quality of life for ordinary
Tasmanians. We have trees and water to sell aplenty!!

:End of rant:

Cheers,

AC