Fish For All

01/09/2026

Great write up on history of the Soulos family- Nick represents the southwest/shark fishery on the Fish For All board.

29/08/2026

So it’s not just the fishing industry that reckon the current government is on the nose.

We’re “party agnostic” at Fish For All- rolling back a couple of months the Liberals, Nationals, One Nation, Australian Christians and Legalise Cannabis all supported the disallowance motion in the upper house and we wholeheartedly thank all of them for supporting us, our members, and the wider fishing community and families.

Labor, the Greens and the Animal Justice Party didn’t and used their majority to vote it down.

Currently it looks as if Labor have lost Secret Harbour with just under 40% of the vote counted and results in from pretty much all of the polling places.

Morning update- it’s all over 75% counted.

Well done to One Nation- it’s a historic victory, and a very strong message from the people.

That’s what happens when you don’t respect the humans you work for…

28/08/2026

It now appears that DPIRD won’t respond to emails chasing up Freedom of Information requests that are already months late. What’s going on Jackie Jarvis MLC Roger Cook? Have you gagged the department? What is there to hide? Kirrilee Warr MLABasil ZempilasHon. Rod Caddies MLC StayN Afloat Ocean & FishingSouthwestern Fresh FishFishing Around Western AustraliaABC News

26/08/2026

All that ocean and we import how much seafood? And we’ll be importing more as the politicians continue to bend over to green groups.

23/08/2026

07/08/2026

𝐈𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐌𝐀𝐑𝐈𝐍𝐄 𝐏𝐀𝐑𝐊 𝐓𝐀𝐑𝐆𝐄𝐓 𝐒𝐈𝐍𝐆𝐔𝐋𝐀𝐑𝐈𝐓𝐘?

If you haven’t been following Australia’s marine park debate, here’s the issue in three numbers:

𝐖𝐖𝐅: “𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝟕% 𝐭𝐨 𝐠𝐨.”

𝐃𝐂𝐂𝐄𝐄𝐖: 𝟓𝟐𝟑,𝟗𝟖𝟎 𝐤𝐦² more highly protected ocean needed to achieve the target.

𝐃𝐂𝐂𝐄𝐄𝐖 𝐧𝐨𝐰: proposing another 𝟔𝟕𝟎,𝟎𝟎𝟎 𝐤𝐦² of high-level protection around Norfolk Island and Lord Howe Island.

That raises a pretty obvious question:

𝐈𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐞𝐝, 𝐢𝐬 𝐀𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐚’𝐬 𝟑𝟎×𝟑𝟎 𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐦𝐞𝐭?

Because I think we may finally have reached the point where WWF-Australia and the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water need to 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐝.

For months WWF has been telling Australians:

“𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝟕% 𝐭𝐨 𝐠𝐨.”

DCCEEW was even more specific:

“𝐓𝐨 𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐭, 𝐰𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐝𝐝 𝐚𝐭 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝟓𝟐𝟑,𝟗𝟖𝟎 𝐤𝐦² 𝐨𝐟 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐥𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝟐.𝟐 𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐤𝐦².”

Pretty clear.

Now DCCEEW is proposing expanded marine sanctuaries around Lord Howe and Norfolk Islands that would provide high-level protection to 𝐚𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝟔𝟕𝟎,𝟎𝟎𝟎 𝐤𝐦² 𝐨𝐟 𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐚𝐧.

𝐒𝐨, 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞.

𝐑𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐠𝐚𝐩: 𝟓𝟐𝟑,𝟗𝟖𝟎 𝐤𝐦².

𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡-𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐚 𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐝: 𝟔𝟕𝟎,𝟎𝟎𝟎 𝐤𝐦².

That is 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐠𝐚𝐩.

And there is another reason WWF and DCCEEW should be able to give Australians a straight answer.

Australia’s 30×30 commitments were negotiated with WWF and DCCEEW working together under the self-styled “𝐓𝐞𝐚𝐦 𝐀𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐚” collaboration.

So if anyone should know exactly what target Australia signed up to — and when that target has been achieved — 𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐲𝐨𝐮.

So have we reached 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐰𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧?

If these proposals proceed, 𝐢𝐬 𝟑𝟎×𝟑𝟎 𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐝?

If the answer is yes — excellent.

𝐒𝐀𝐘 𝐒𝐎.

But if the answer is no, then Australians deserve an explanation.

WWF, what exactly did “𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝟕% 𝐭𝐨 𝐠𝐨” mean?

DCCEEW, what exactly did 𝟓𝟐𝟑,𝟗𝟖𝟎 𝐤𝐦² “to achieve the target” mean?

And if neither represents the finish line:

𝐖𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐈𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐀𝐂𝐓𝐔𝐀𝐋 𝐅𝐈𝐍𝐈𝐒𝐇 𝐋𝐈𝐍𝐄?

Is there another target sitting 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐞-𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 that Australians have not yet been shown?

And one final point.

We seem to have reached a strange place where many stakeholders are unwilling, for whatever reason, to ask these questions publicly.

That makes asking them 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐭 — 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬.

I am not asking for confidential information.

I am not arguing here about whether 30×30 is good or bad.

I am asking WWF and DCCEEW to reconcile 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬.

If you believe there is something unreasonable about asking that question, say so.

But perhaps Australians should then ask:

𝐖𝐇𝐘 𝐖𝐎𝐔𝐋𝐃 𝐀𝐍𝐘𝐎𝐍𝐄 𝐁𝐄 𝐔𝐍𝐂𝐎𝐌𝐅𝐎𝐑𝐓𝐀𝐁𝐋𝐄 𝐖𝐈𝐓𝐇 𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐒 𝐐𝐔𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐁𝐄𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐀𝐒𝐊𝐄𝐃?

It really is very simple:

𝟓𝟐𝟑,𝟗𝟖𝟎 𝐤𝐦² was said to be required.

𝟔𝟕𝟎,𝟎𝟎𝟎 𝐤𝐦² is now proposed.

𝐈𝐒 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐓𝐀𝐑𝐆𝐄𝐓 𝐌𝐄𝐓 — 𝐎𝐑 𝐈𝐒𝐍’𝐓 𝐈𝐓?

WWF and DCCEEW:

𝐂𝐀𝐋𝐋. 𝐑𝐀𝐈𝐒𝐄. 𝐎𝐑 𝐅𝐎𝐋𝐃.

Either way, it is time to 𝐒𝐇𝐎𝐖 𝐘𝐎𝐔𝐑 𝐇𝐀𝐍𝐃.

02/08/2026

Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse- on Friday Murray Watt- yes the same guy that traded our sheep industry for preference votes from the Animal Justice Party in Victoria announced a massive proposed increase to area and major zones changes to the Norfolk and Lord Howe Islands marine parks.

What’s it got to do with WA?

Hidden behind his presser with the former head scientist of one of the NGO’s, is a review of 44 other marine parks including the South West.

Link in the description to the papers.

The independent evaluation of the South-west Marine Parks Network is out, and it’s a masterclass in bureaucratic "frameworks." 📑💸

The report praises "positive progress," yet admits that:

❌ Monitoring for invasive species was "not commenced."

❌ Visitation tracking? "Not commenced."

❌ Management of remote parks remains "challenging" due to lack of resources.

With the environment already healthy before these "paper parks" were drawn on a map, are we seeing actual biological improvement, or just a lot of expensive "Sea Country" rhetoric and counting fish that were already there? 🧐🌊

01/08/2026

We’ve been a little quiet lately but there’s a lot going on behind the scenes- parliament has been on break for many weeks and although Captain Jackie Jarvis MLC hasn’t said much about fishing recently we can guarantee it will be front and centre again once the politicians are back at work.
Description in the comments regarding our submission to the Parliamentary Inquiry.