Snapper Update

[Greg P]

Received this today as I am sure others have;


Help protect Queensland snapper

Issue #1, 30 July 2010
DEEDI websi -

Hi Greg

Welcome to the first 'help protect Queensland snapper' update. This update provides background information on the current status of the Rocky Reef Fishery. So you can provide feedback on future changes, it also explains how you can register your interest to receive further information about the fishery.
Help protect Queensland snapper

Queensland’s snapper stock is considered overfished. As such, we need to make changes to fishing rules and practices to rebuild the snapper stock to a sustainable level. Later this year, Fisheries Queensland will release a consultation document seeking feedback on potential changes to the Rocky Reef Fin Fish Fishery (particularly snapper). Your feedback will help create a sustainable fishery for the future.

What is the Rocky Reef Fin Fish Fishery?

The Rocky Reef Fin Fish Fishery is a significant recreational and commercial fishery. More than 35 000 private recreational fishing vessels are capable of accessing this fishery. In addition to recreational fishers, approximately 200 charter vessels and 500 commercial fishing vessels have accessed the fishery in the past.

As well as snapper, key species in this fishery include pearl perch and teraglin—both of which are subject to ongoing monitoring to ensure that harvest levels remain sustainable. Other species typically taken include amberjack, cobia, grass emperor, mahi mahi, samsonfish and yellowtail kingfish. The majority of the key species in this fishery are landed in waters from Bundaberg to the New South Wales border;however, snapper are regularly caught in the cooler winter months as far north as Mackay.

Why is the fishery under review?
In 2006, Fisheries Queensland undertook the first quantitative assessment of Queensland’s snapper stock. This assessment indicated that the stock was likely overfished and identified that further data, such as annual data on the size and age of recreationally and commercially caught snapper, was needed to confirm the stock status.

In late 2008, a second scientifically rigorous stock assessment was completed, which also showed that the snapper stock is overfished. This stock assessment wasindependently reviewed, and the outcomes of the stockassessment are supported by the reviewer.

The results of these assessments indicate that the snapper stock is less than 35% of its unfished levels. It is internationally recognised that fish stocks at 40% (or less) of their ‘unfished levels’ are classed as ‘overfished’. This means snapper in Queensland is being harvested at unsustainable levels.

We expect Queensland’s snapper stock will continue to decline if no action is taken to reduce current levels of fishing effort. It is unlikely that snapper will be fished to the point where the stock collapses, but significant ecological, economic and social impacts are likely if overfishing continues.

Snapper vs other fish stocks

The majority of the world’s fish stocks are intensively exploited,with approximately 25% either overfished or depleted.

By contrast Queensland’s fish stocks are in a relatively healthy position. This is due to the ongoing monitoring programs and rigorous management reviews undertaken regularly across the state. By world standards, Queensland is recognised as having well-managed, sustainable fisheries. In fact, only one (snapper) of Queensland’s 62 assessed stocks is classified as overfished. This healthy position is the result of a strong history of monitoring Queensland fish stocks and fisheries management reform.

Queensland is not the only place where snapper stocks are declining. In Western Australia, snapper is overfished and closures up to several months, as well as limits on total annual take in some areas, have been put in place. In New South Wales, a recovery strategy is being developed to address the overfished status of the snapper stock.

What has the government done to protect snapper?

Concerns for the sustainability of snapper have been expressed by stakeholders, managers and scientists during the past 30 years. Over the years, the government has implemented a range of measures to try to protect the snapper stock.

These include introducing and maintaining a minimum legal size—a size limit of 11 inches can be traced back as far as 1957, limiting licensing of commercial fishing boats (1984), restricting recreational fishers from selling their surplus fish (1990), increasing the minimum legal size limit of snapper from 25 cm to 30 cm and introducing a bag limit of 30 (1993), increasing the minimum legal size limit for snapper from 30 cm to 35 cm and decreasing the bag limit from 30 to 5 fish per person (2003).

Despite these management measures, fishing pressure has continued to increase.

Follow us on Twitter and FacebookLatest updates are also available via Twitter or Facebook.

[tunaticer]

If they want to further protect this species I would support the same bag limit but the min legal length taken out to 45cm fork length. That size is a decent size to take for the table as the yeild is reasonable and bag limit of 5 will certainly supply a decent amount of fillets between trips. The current size limit is a joke as the yeild is lousy, most of the weight of the fish is in the frame and gut.

Also, I would really like to see fork length measurements adopted as the correct way to measure a fish. Pushing a tail tip down to make it reach the mark is a lousy practice that results in harvesting large numbers of immature fish that never get the chance to breed and deliver terrible yeilds.
You guys can argue backward and forwards that tip measuring is the true length of the fish, but for me that way of measuring is rife with rorting. We do not accept rorting in our governments, why should we accept it in our boats?

[PinHead]

and how tall are you..measured at your crotch??
total length is total length.

[Jeremy]

So what is the 'update'? Reads more like a history lesson to me?

[danners]

I would agree with the fork length over total length- tip length is so variable, both with measuring error and differences in fin length, whereas fork length is a more accurate measure of the age/maturity of the fish which is the relevant factor here

cheers
Dan

[FNQCairns]

From memory only....but was not the amount overfished originally the equivalent in fishy individuals to 2 snapper farms output per year???

Without going all the way through it again, the original snapper stock assessment walked like a duck and quacked like a duck...from the cherrypicked years considered to the program/algorithm with i dare say paid operator (job lot) that was hired, to the marine clime and species the algorithm was designed only to suit/calibrate and now i read a 3rd party is somewhere in the mix...pray tell who and how much$$$$ and what relationship to the operator or fishery's 'friends'.

'Adjusted' junk used as data input into the algorithm always means nothing higher than junk out...what's the bet that yet again as in grey nurse sharks etc that time will show the snapper stock assessment was no higher in peer reviewed uncorrupted science than simple 'educated' opinion.

Hurry up our next QLD change of government!!!

[Luc]

Have to agree with you FNQ, the assessment was flawed from the start.

Snapper Qld and NSW are the same genetic stock yet when NSW fisheries recently released their assessment they declared no problems with their snapper stocks. Snappers NSW are fished much more heavily than in QLD.

Luc

[Lovey80]

What a load of utter garbage this is! Rubbish data all the way just to force more restrictions. They have already admitted that Snapper Recruitment is fine yet they bang together some computer model that shows they are in decline....... what a crock of shit this all is. If recruitment is fine then surely we are doing something right.

Do you think once they have raised the stock to the desired levels they will get rid of these restrictions that are coming? I don think so!

Just raise the bloody minimum size to 40 cm and be done with it.

[indy]

Here we go again soon you will have to ask yourself is it really worth having a boat, can see the writing on the wall now like others have said bring up the size 35 is a joke take it to 50cm for all i care but i can guarntee you one thing if they drop the limit to say 2 fish per person or something like that how many people will be upgrading there small fish to make it worth while for there expenses for the trip.

[PinHead]

Here we go again soon you will have to ask yourself is it really worth having a boat, can see the writing on the wall now like others have said bring up the size 35 is a joke take it to 50cm for all i care but i can guarntee you one thing if they drop the limit to say 2 fish per person or something like that how many people will be upgrading there small fish to make it worth while for there expenses for the trip.

IMO anyone that compares the fish cost as an offset to the cost of owning and running a boat should sell the boat now.

[TimiBoy]

IMO anyone that compares the fish cost as an offset to the cost of owning and running a boat should sell the boat now.

True Greg, but the upgrading is still an issue. Hope plays such a large part in "value". At least if you have a hope of 5 Snapper, you'll think you get value from a trip, but if you can only take 2?

A reduction of bag will result in a lot of dead fish as folks continue to fish after their bag in order to upsize; of course this happens now, but the increase in such activity would be marked.

I'll never forget a conversation I heard over the VHF last year: "Yeah we're over on Snapper." Mate replied, "Oh cool, we've got too many Pearlies, let's meet at the usual spot and do a swap."

The money spent on this regulation rubbish, if only it was spent on Policing...

Tim

[indy]

IMO anyone that compares the fish cost as an offset to the cost of owning and running a boat should sell the boat now.

Its not that i dont love going out in the boat it is by far my favourite thing to do, but when i spend about two hundred a fishing trip i do like to come home with a good feed of fish.

I am not saying that people should upgrade by throwing back dead fish but its just a fact that its going to happen, but i feel that if it is to remain at five people would think twice about doing such things, so increase the size to 50cm quite a good size fish then, five at fifty centimetres or bigger you would have to be a bit of a tosser to upgrade then.

It can be quite alot of time between trips for me and alot of other people so to put a few fillets in the freezer between say a month or some times longer i dont think is a crime.

[Scott Mitchell]

Team - I believe this topic MUST be treated seriously or we are going to end up with more restrictions & possibly closed seasons ALL BASED ON DUBIOUS/ QUESTIONABLE DATA !

Fisheries ARE NOT LISTENING to those who have been consulted on this issue - So why ask any more questions ?

Extract from Sunfish submission to the Rocky Reef finfish review:-

"Sunfish has major concerns about the type of stock assessment used in this case for the following reasons: -

1. The actual model is complex and impossible for most people to understand. As a result recreational fishers cannot support the outcomes of the modelling because they simply cannot understand it.
2. The data applied to the model is very limited and not reliable. For example the charter data is a small subset from the Gold Coast and not the complete charter logbook data set. The recreational data is very limited in terms of the numbers of annual surveys, and these surveys have differing methodologies and should not be directly compared. Some of the scientific data is very limited and its accuracy is questionable.
3. The resulting extrapolations by the model both forward and backward in time are dubious and cannot be supported by recreational fishers.
4. The use of a biomass-type model using the concept of MSY (maximum sustainable yield) is questioned because MSY is more suited to commercial fisheries where total production (tonnage) from the fishery is important. MSY is not of prime importance to recreational fisheries where maximising the total catch is much less important than achieving other outcomes.
5. The model used in this case does not directly relate to the usual approaches to fishery management in Queensland whereby stocks are managed and sustainability achieved through minimum sizes to enable most/all fish to spawn at least once before capture, bag limits are set to restrict catches, areas are closed to protect parts of the stock (juveniles, spawning adults, or unfished elements of the total population), catch limits and gear restrictions are placed on commercial fishing operations.
6. The latest snapper stock assessment report referred to by QDPIF in the public meetings is not available to any stakeholders for reading.
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif']7. The overall result of the above points is that recreational fishers are not convinced that the entire snapper stock needs to be “rebuilt”. Based on available information, Sunfish believes that the snapper stock in Queensland is relatively healthy and does not need “rebuilding”.

It is accepted that it is not a “virgin stock” but the current protective measures (min size, bag limit of 5, huge closure green zones) ensure that the stock is in good shape. Sunfish does accept that there may be an area on the Gold Coast where localised reductions in catches have occurred. However it is not clear whether this is due to increasing fishing activity, changes to fishing patterns, habitat changes, or a combination of these, or some other factors."

I "suggest" We give Fisheries NO FURTHER SUPPORT ON THIS ISSUE - It's not as though they're listening in any case !

Regards Scotto

[Angryant]

I heard a "whisper" that there will be a closed season for about 6 weeks each year. I wouldn't mind betting it will commence around February 2011.

[dayoo]

I heard a "whisper" that there will be a closed season for about 6 weeks each year. I wouldn't mind betting it will commence around February 2011.

Myself and Bill Corten are on the snapper working group representing recreational anglers and we both feel very frustated as to how this has been handled by Queensland Fisheries. We feel that, despite reasonable recommendations to Fisheries on how to manage the snapper fishery, our recommendations on monitoring the TAC will require funding that Fisheries are not prepared to meet.

It looks like Fisheries have started a media campaign to soften everyone up to accepting a 4 month snapper closure and maybe reduction in the bag limit to two (as has happened in Western Australia). This will give Fisheries what they want without any monitoring and with minimal extra enforcement.

My concern is that Commercial snapper fishing will continue at a tonnage close to the average over the last couple of years while the recreational angler will face heavy restrictions.

As I understand there will be this media campaign, followed by Port meetings, a Regulatory Impact Statement and then the Minister will bring in new regulations. I believe that the new regulations will not come into effect until at least July 2011 or 2012.

Cheers
Barry