So what you are saying Bruce is using this idea of by-catch over the last 9 years or so has caused a majority of the issue in snapper numbers and using primary industry ideologies such as 'harvest' etc have been detrimental to the balance in the fishery.
Obviously the trawler guys have have obliged and followed the laws given to them but there still has been contribution to the snapper issue by the government themselves.
Cheers,
Chris
There is no doubt that fishery's and the commercial sector have worked on reducing the by-catch, and the trawlers are working in within the regulations. BUT any by-catch of a popular species will have an effect. If the by-catch was catfish no one would care as most people don't fish for them.
Don't quote me on this have I have not checked the facts, but I am led to believe that trawlers are banned in certain areas of South Aust gulf waters that are known nurseries for snapper.
Maturity is not when we start speaking BIG things,it is when we start understanding small things
Sorry fellas, went to the last round meeting at vic pt.......just could not see the point of wasting my breath, and rasing my blood preasure this time...same old $h#T, bigger bag.
Ahh so......it is as I thaught it was........fisheries got no money for nuthin'......they will be barly scraping enough together to make the periodic reports they are required to by federal law.
I wonder how much all these meetings and all this "CON Sultation" cost..what do ya recon $1000-2000 a meeting, pluss all the office work and full colour printng.
Yeh but federal law states thay have to do consultation.
You can bet that there is one bloke behind all this and it is "Andrew Fraser" the current state treasurer......I have seen this bloke close up.....I did sound for a function he attended a while ago.......the condecentive attitude of this bloke is breath taking.... but isn't that current QLD labour all over....this bloke is scroge incarnate.
Nup no money for fisheries........
But unfortunatley, wars and natural disasters always favour the incumbent government unless they stuff it up realy badly.........you could see that Anna Bligh could see salvation comming in every drop of rain......how many times did she say the word "protect".
There is still more rain to come before this lot is over..more floodsmore storms guaranteed... more Anna saving the day.
Sorry fellas I recon this whole thing is buggered, 4 more years of QLD labour.
cheers
Its the details, those little details, that make the difference.
Jim / Bridget, (not sure on the spelling Sorry),
Any link to the promised break down of the fee?
Regards
Honda.
I can assure you the two arms are talking to each other (they hardly can avoid it; they are in adjoining offices).Originally Posted by Moonlighter
The southern expansion in the stout whiting fishery last year was subject to close observation by the Fisheries Observer Program. That Program suggests that, in 2010, the snapper bycatch from the fishery was a lot less than one tonne and negligible (one fish was observed!) in the southern expansion area of the fishery. Over 90% of shots caught no snapper at all.
Jim Groves
MD
Fisheries Qld
Jim
Some clarification please.
Does that mean there was an observer on every boat fishing for Stout Whiting?
If not.!
On what portion of the total Stout Whiting fishing effort,was there an observer.?
How many Whiting shots were observed and reported on. ?
Over what period was the close observation conducted.?
What was the total number of Whiting shots . ?
How were these figures collected?
What mechanism is in place to verify the data fisheries recieves.?
Thanks in advance for your reply
rando
Thanks Jim. That is some level of assurance about snapper by-catch.
Given that Fisheries has "coupled" snapper with Pearl Perch, can you also advise about the extent of the pearl perch bycatch in those trials as well, particularly juveniles? And Trag?
Thanks
Grant
Note to self: Don't argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience....
I'm not sure how this helps, but anyway ...
All three boats were observed but not all of their fishing effort. However, observer coverage did reflect relative commercial effort with respect to the days achieved in the different grids.
472 shots were observed. This is 24% of the 1997 total shots in the fishery - a more than adequate representation for the purposes required.
This refers to 2010 as a whole.
The figures on observed shots are from the Fisheries Observer Program. The Observers are Fisheries Queensland employees - no further verification is required. The total number of shots is based on commercial logbook data, which is checked for anomalies. With only three operators in this fishery we have a high degree of confidence in the data.
Jim Groves
MD
Fisheries Queensland
Thanks Jim
In reply to your comment regarding how the trawl observer data helps.
I can only say this,and I believe I speak for many.
There is a great deal of mistrust towards the fisheries department,and I know I for one, will not take at face value any information they department publishes, until the department proves it is working in the interests of the fishery's stakeholders and not to some political agenda.
I am sure you will have noted this in your recent dealings with recreational fishers
472 shots were observed. This is 24% of the 1997 total shots in the fishery - a more than adequate representation for the purposes required.
This refers to 2010 as a whole.
The figures on observed shots are from the Fisheries Observer Program. The Observers are Fisheries Queensland employees - no further verification is required. The total number of shots is based on commercial logbook data, which is checked for anomalies. With only three operators in this fishery we have a high degree of confidence in the data.
Jim Groves
MD
Fisheries Queensland
I think we are missing the point here folks, and Jim is quite happy to let us.
The stout whiting fishery is a tiny trawl fishery that was actually set up with SOME controls. Jim is happy for you to talk about it all day because they can justify their position.
But start to ask questions on the fishery as a whole and see the lack of answers that they give you.
For instance
1. How many trawlers are currently licenced to work in Qld waters in total, including commonwealth waters adjacent to Qld waters where you might find snapper?
2. What observer/bycatch rates were done on the whole Qld trawl fishery?
3. What is the total estimated bycatch take of snapper AND all other important/regulated fish species in Qld? Please list individually.
4. What checks are done to ensure that observer/bycatch recordings are done over the same ground and in the same conditions as trawlers normally work?
You could ask lots more questions but it is the detail and the extent of the questions that is important, and the magnitude and honesty of the answers. I am sure we will not see the truth in replies to these.
As an example, I have knowledge of a previous minister many years ago actually having a look at a commercial [stake] netting operation where one observer said "Is this really what you do? You don't really sort in the water and release everything alive do you?" The fisher stated "Oh yes.'' To which his not-so-bright offsider replied "No **** you know we let it go dry and smash the crabs." Of course stake netting continues.
Many of you are already aware that the normal trawl catch of juvenile snapper is still frightening, even after all the supposed bycatch reduction devices etc. The figure of 1/2 to 1 million juvenile snapper in southern Moreton Bay alone is a recent scary statistic. What about the total for Qld?
Hopefully Jim Groves will post on here with that value as well as answers to the previous questions.
I hold my breath. :-(
the underestimation of bycatch is a well known contentious issue.
As is the behaviour and practices if commercial fishermen involved in all forms of netting.
Think about this.......how many people would drive differently if thay had a uniformed police officer in the car.....even the best of us would pay closer attention to the regulations.
Commercial fishermen are well and truly aware how they need to be presenting their operations when under observation by the department.
There have been sufficient people who have been in the commercial industry and who are prepared to speak with candor, to more than put a cloud over the claimed low bycatch rates on any operation.
and lets no forget that the, release mortality on discards, in practice from all forms of commercial netting is very very high.
cheers
Its the details, those little details, that make the difference.
If we had observers on our boats we never shot away on any grounds where we knew we would winch up a net full of baby snapper,jews or pearlies.
I could tow along the 8 fathom line and see not many snapper or jews but move inshore 100 to 200 metres into 7 fathom and every shot would have lots of baby fish.
Unfortunately not many would survive as they were all crushed or suffocated from the hundreds of red spot whiting in the nets.
I would imagine the trawl guys in Moreton Bay are just as aware of this and would not fish in any known areas holding large amounts of juvenile snapper while having any government officials or observers on board their vessels.
What a surprise. No response from Jim Groves with some REAL facts and data that might just disclose the hidden dark truth.
Just as predicted.
Bad analogy - the observers have no compliance role. A better analogy might be how you would drive if you had a Department of Transport researcher in the car researching driver behaviour. I suspect we would all think about it a little more, but not drive much differently.
Jim Groves
MD
Fisheries Queensland
This has been answered before, with an estimate that the trawl bycatch now would be the equivalent of, from memory, about 5 tonnes of adult fish per annum. At 1.6 kg each, (the actual calculation was much more sophisticated than this) that's about 3000 fish. A big difference.
Jim Groves
MD
Fisheries Queensland
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote