Snapper RIS. Please explain ?

[rando]

Big Deez
Sorry, I interpreted your remarks incorrectly, and threw in a bit of "get square".again, apologies.

If Fisheries believe that there is high mortality in the juvenile sizes, then breed as i said "billions" and release them when they are small white bait size. No expensive grow out stage required.
if they are subject to predation we are still increasing overall biomass.
But dont just stop at snapper , load the systems with Tailor, dart, trevally, mackeral, mullet ,whiting, jacks all at a couple of centremetres.

Given that most marine fish are prolific egg layers ,achieving large scales of reprodution should be relatively easy.This after-all is the survival stategy of many of these fish,,,millions of eggs, a few hundred survive with motality decreasing with age.

Many of the eggs layed by wild fish probably dont even get fertilized, so we can control that for a start then keep them just long enough to get past the first most critical stages of growth.

Again these are my thoughts based entirely on general knowledge acquired through informal channels.

I recognise there are flaws in my theory, but other than accepting that our fisheries will continue to decline and our access to them will continue to decline I can not see any evidence to support the current management paradigm.

The only fish to have been successfully managed as far as i can see is flathead,everything else is going backwards.

[honda900]

When you are accused of a crime the accuser must have evidence, in this case the accuser has published the fact that their evidence has been falsified, altered if you like, to make the accusations.
They have not considered environmental factor s(floods, weather) or the implementation of green zones , quite frankly the models are a joke, the scientists should be sacked..
Alternatives simple. Catch cards are useless in the rec sector, people won’t fill them out and policing and enforcement is a JOKE. The vast majority won’t use them, why, quite simply really, you give DPI data they will use it against you. This is a proven fact .

Here is a simple answer that has been spoken about before.. All sectors, increased size limits, (double If necessary, and reduced bag limit, simple really.. While barotrauma occurs, this can be solved.. there are effective measures to address this problem.

We the public / tax payer pay these people (dpi) to develop and manage the fisheries, these so called “smart People” apparently because they have a uni degree, are unable to come up with a factual based method to determine the fish biomass, so they use “phone polls” and formulas that have been adjusted because the “scientist was vexed that the figures didn’t add up”.

You guys who that think you can negotiate with the DPI, have been shown how they operate, and are unfortunately, you are “naive” in the ways and workings of politics, truly while your heart is in the right place, militancy and publicity is the only action that will force them into a position to “justify their decisions and ultimately there existence.

Egypt is a shining example of what can be accomplished..

Regards
honda.

[honda900]

Rando,

Big Deez works for fisheries, dont bother,

he has played the "I am not smart card" but turns up with legislation quotes..

Regards
HOnda.

[finding_time]

As I said Ian, the snapper stock assessment would be the same no matter what government is in power.

If you have some time, you may want to read the documents on this page. They outline the methods used to assess the snapper fishery.

http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/28_19696.htm





I!

Big Deez

So you truely dont believe that this has anything to do with politics?????????? That the conservatives would be doing exactally the same??? Then i guess you believe that all the effort of Barry and Phill will be listened to and the final solution to this problem will be born out of this consultation process!!!! Really!!!

Dees

Mate there are so many people with interests in this problem ,all of which will be pushing there own barrow that the final solution will be totally political and have nothing to do with the long term health of the snapper!!! And as evidence of this you only have to look at the up comming closure!!!!!!!!!!!! Feb 15 to March 31.... WTF!!!! Gee that closure is going to do heaps for snapper stocks isn't it!!! It will do sweet f... all!! But at least the charter operators will be able chase pelagics whilst the closure is on. Now i would have taken this whole process more seriously if they had said ...." Snapper are in real trouble and to save them we have to close the fishery from April 15 to May 30! Now that would have ment they are serious and that Snapper are really in trouble and it also would have had a effect on stocks!!.. And it would show they were prepared to make a REAL decision, not the bullshit one they did make which as i said before was done to appear to do something to gain preferances!!

You dont think this is politics??? Pull your head of of the burley bucket mate and have a good look around, Governments only do things because of politics!

Ian

Ps.
read the entire artical, i wonder what that study cost?? Not 1/8 of what a proper study should have i'll bet!

[rando]

So Big Deez is a public servant.!!!
So what part of that title dont you understand .
In the face of a huge amount of disquiet about the basis for, and direction of the mooted changes , you continue to pander to your political masters.
Where is your integrity ?you are supposed to work for us. !
Get of your backside and do what you are paid for.

And while Im at it.I dont need to be a scienist or an aqua culture expert to know and understand the processes involved.

And again I will say it, make a positive contribution or piss off.

You blokes are saying there is a problem but cant prove it .

If you fair dinkum believe the problem is there, then put some more fish back in the system for five years and see what happens.

Your own research tells you recruitment is consistant.Give it a boost instead of further restrictions.
Less social impact, Less administration, less cost I suspect.

[Lucky_Phill]

..
.
><> ><> ><>

Thanks to everyone for their input into this thread. It sure aroused the passion of the rec fisho, which is what needs to be done.

Some of us believed we can work with the powers to help our fellow fishos, some say stuff ‘em, some don’t care and some offer insight, but at the end of the day, we are going to get some sort of imposition on our Snapper fishing habits.

I think this whole saga has many facets in so much as pressure from Green groups, like PEW, DPI&F staff wanting to do something to address a problem that they see and more.

I actually think that not only are we being taken for a ride, but perhaps FQ and the public are. I hear first hand reports of Snapper not as good as they once were and next day, best ever season in recent years…. hard to get a handle on it !!!

I do know for sure that weather / climate data was not used in any modeling by Alex and Co. This would account for the assumptions by every model outcome, that was done over the last 10 years… ( maybe not far back, think it was 2003 ) that Snapper were overfished, because of the seasonal attributes, being drought. ( El Nino ) was NOT used. . Guys, everyone agrees that the data from the recreational anglers is at best, a guess, but the fact remains, it is all they have.

Yes, they needed to acquire better data, and as I said earlier, maybe should have started several years ago, but you cannot buy the Champagne with Beer budgets. ( the government of the day sets the budget, just in case anyone forgets that )

To address some questioning over the data that goes into the modeling, try this on for size.

The Boss…. Says “ I need to appease my supporters to let’s review XYZ fishery and start an effort reduction “. The FQ chief says ‘ OK “, we need $5,000,000 to do the study and collect the data… The Boss knows if that is the case, the “ answers “ may not suit the agenda “, so she says………. “ here’s 1/5th of that, go hard ! “. She knows that is insufficient to do anything of value and the FQ chief tells his staff to “ do your best “. What comes out is a “ home brand “ product aimed to accommodate a Penthouse Situation, if ya get my drift ?

Guys, are the DPI&F staff the messenger in this fiasco ? If so, who do we shoot ?

Sunfish Qld have offered their proposal to Fisheries. ECOfishers have stated their position. The Working Group Rec Reps have made their suggestions. The general populous of recs have made their voices heard.

Maybe a question that needs to asked at the next RIS Meet, is “ precisely who commissioned this review in the first place and why “ ?

I have the backing of many people to call for a protest of mammoth proportions to once and for all tell the Government, DPI&F and the Public that we will not accept being given a choice of 4 options that none of us want. We demand good science, good data. We demand that the people that utilize the fishery have a REAL say in how it is managed. I will say again, Recreational Fishing pours hundreds of millions of dollars into our economy and we are getting treated like second class citizens for the privilege of paying through the nose and getting nothing in return.

To keep flogging the recreational angler the way they have been over the last several years is un-Queenslander ( is that a word ? ). I love this state and all it has to offer and will defend it and its people from dictatorial merchants.

Angling is not a “ primary industry “ and should NOT be run by that department. It is a lifestyle, it is a social and well being activity, its health benefits are immeasurable and its attributable economic input places it in a class of its own.

Think about this guys. The Mission Statement for DPI&F reads in part:-

DPI&F’s vision is “ Profitable primary industries for Queensland “. To achieve this vision, DPI&F has adopted a mission to “ Maximise the economic potential of Queensland’s primary industries on a sustainable basis “.

Does that say to you, “ screw the recs and let's have the commercial sector flourishing without a viable rec sector to manage “ ???????

I feel I am wrestling with myself at times over this matter. Maybe I am just confused.

Thanks again to everyone for having a say, it’s all good and hope to catch up and have a beer with anyone who wants to. I'll see some of you at Vikky Point on Monday night.


All, in my opinion, only.


Regards Phill
.
.
.
.
.

[brisbane_boy]

There is noway big deez is a public servant

commenting on a fishing site would take far to much effort lmao

it isnt office hrs atm

[Big Deez]

Rando,

Big Deez works for fisheries, dont bother,

he has played the "I am not smart card" but turns up with legislation quotes..

Regards
HOnda.

G'day Honda long time no hear. You don't have to be smart to quote legislation! See you Monday mate, looking forward to a chat.

[Luc]

Get hold of the SNAPPER post card and send them in to your state politician.

SUNFISH is giving them out at the Snapper meetings.

Tackle shops, fishing clubs and organisations are asking & getting for them.

Luc

[Lovey80]

Firstly, FQ were asked if restrictions would be eased if the biennial review showed that the stocks were improving and the answer was yes. Second, the performance indicator was the 40% virgin biomass estimate. Third, the biennial review would allow total catch to be estimated via the submitted catch records (for options 1 & 2).

Hopefully you'll be at one of the meetings so you can call the FQ people clowns to their faces!!

Yes Big Deez I understand that but how will they know they have hit the 40%? throwing the data into a model similar to the one that got us here? Or will improved catch rates/effort simply be considered hypersensitive again and they find a different model to justify the bans?

You see Big Deez the stock assessment has proved to anyone that has read it that that FQ scientists can manipulate the data to where they want it. Call me paranoid or sceptical but why should we trust them not to do it again in order to maintain the restrictions?

Cheers

Chris

[johnlikes2fish]

Fuel guage analogy:
If the fuel guage on your car is broken do you drive and hope or do you stop and re-fill the tank as it wont do any harm in the long run.
Fish stocks are the same i would rather some caution now and have more than i need later rather than none at all.
Seems amazingly simple

[finding_time]

Fuel guage analogy:
If the fuel guage on your car is broken do you drive and hope or do you stop and re-fill the tank as it wont do any harm in the long run.
Fish stocks are the same i would rather some caution now and have more than i need later rather than none at all.
Seems amazingly simple

Fuel gauge analogy mk11

Your driving the company car for the first time and you notice that the fuel gauge is near empty , so you ask the regular driver of the vehicle were to fill it up... His reply is that the gauge is very dodgy and the tank is well over half full and once you have actually driven the vehicle abit you'll gain a understanding of this and not panic about it! Do you then stop and fill up or trust the advice of those who know better??Seams amazingly simple!!!

[johnlikes2fish]

If he knew anything he'd get the gauge fixed rather than guessing whats going on

[STUIE63]

I have a question when the catch cards come back with a real take on how many fish are caught . and 2 years later more fish are caught does that mean that there is a healthier fishery or an unhealthier fishery
or if the catch is down does that mean we have a healthier or unhealthier fishery ?

[Lovey80]

I have a question when the catch cards come back with a real take on how many fish are caught . and 2 years later more fish are caught does that mean that there is a healthier fishery or an unhealthier fishery
or if the catch is down does that mean we have a healthier or unhealthier fishery ?

That's exactly my point. If we're not catching many = fishery in decline = more bans. If were catching a lot they bung them into a model that magically knows how many we started with and we have reduced the biomass even further = more bans.