POLL - Fishery Survey - Help Them or Not

[gunna]

Seems to me ,you have got caught up in the hyped up way the "NO" was phrased ......
"No we don't trust them with the information"

You know I struggled a bit to coin an adequate phrase for what I thought people were thinking. I was not real comfortable with that option - but the results have been interesting. Perhaps I should have said - "No - and why?? "

Peter

[Beast1965]

Gazza I agree with you 5/35 is great, but to ensure that we have some sort of equity and to ensure that the correct data is being given to those in power and for them to make informed decisions not those based on speculation is paramount. As I have said on other post on this website I am standing at the next state election as an independent and I want any decision I make based on real information and not what is assumed. So in order for me to help you I want the truth and not what some scientist puports to be the truth. I love my fishing and I love my community but I want to do right by them both. If I don't get the information from all sides then the decision I make may not be the right one because people have witheld vital information in these surveys.

[finga]

I honestly don't know what I'd do.
I'm caught between giving the information that is very much needed so an informed decision may be made.
But in giving that information will I bite myself in the posteria??
I'm buggered if I know really but if I don't give the information then there could be another scape goat to give the angler a bad name.

So in short....I'll be buggered if I do (maybe) and I'll be buggered if I don't (possibly).

[Gazza]

Gazza I agree with you 5/35 is great, but to ensure that we have some sort of equity and to ensure that the correct data is being given to those in power and for them to make informed decisions not those based on speculation is paramount. As I have said on other post on this website I am standing at the next state election as an independent and I want any decision I make based on real information and not what is assumed. So in order for me to help you I want the truth and not what some scientist puports to be the truth. I love my fishing and I love my community but I want to do right by them both. If I don't get the information from all sides then the decision I make may not be the right one because people have witheld vital information in these surveys.

Beast..thankyou for your also welcome pov
..but please DON'T hang your hat on , a computer "model" BS.....or YOU will be replaced by a computer

p.s. beast i do respect your pov ,just don't entirely agree

[johncar]

It seems pretty simple to me.
If everyone tells them that they are bagging out every time, the message should be that there are good fish stocks, no need to panic.

I we tell them we caught nothing, they have every reason to be concerned and start looking at closures and bans.

I don't seem to have any problem catching my 5 x Snapper in a short time so I find it hard to see any reason for this panicing but I can still see a problem with the bycatch kill and habitat damage by prawn trawlers and other netting activities. Young snapper and others have definitely declined in Moreton Bay which needs to be seriously addressed by Fisheries and the Commercial Ops.
Rec fishers all need to be aware of this and keep pressure on it.

[finga]

I honestly don't know what I'd do.
I'm caught between giving the information that is very much needed so an informed decision may be made.

I've had a think about this and in the end I would give the information asked.
Why?? I'm just a nice, courteous yobbo who finds it hard to tell a porky pie.

[Lovey80]

It seems pretty simple to me.
If everyone tells them that they are bagging out every time, the message should be that there are good fish stocks, no need to panic.

I we tell them we caught nothing, they have every reason to be concerned and start looking at closures and bans.

I don't seem to have any problem catching my 5 x Snapper in a short time so I find it hard to see any reason for this panicing but I can still see a problem with the bycatch kill and habitat damage by prawn trawlers and other netting activities. Young snapper and others have definitely declined in Moreton Bay which needs to be seriously addressed by Fisheries and the Commercial Ops.
Rec fishers all need to be aware of this and keep pressure on it.

You would think this would be the case John but of course it can be a double edged sword.

For example, if these large catches are extrapolated like they are then it simply shows that our "take" is too large. Remember that this whole Snapper issue is because the Snapper "Biomass" was deemed to be too low compared to the "Virgin" Biomass and thats why we are in the shit. Going back a few years and SEQ Snapper were deemed well managed and they still say that Snapper is not in danger of collapse. Remember the things like an average 4% increase in boats sales over a certain size meant an automatic extrapolation of the "data" they did have to ensure that the "Rec Take" was increasing by 4% or similar..... Just because the catches are good doesn't mean that fisheries wont want to put further restrictions on it.

I say NO don't give them the data unless it is a wide scale comprehensive data set such as a compulsory catch card. If the "data' is wide scale and comprehensive it leaves a mathematician working for Fisheries with far less freedom of movement when they want to make BS assumptions on the info they don't have.

So for me I will simply say " Yep I caught some fish and no you cant measure them".

[Jim Groves]

If I might comment on some of the general comments in this thread.

It is encouraging to see that the majority of you would take part in our boat ramps surveys. Having read through the various postings, it seems that we all share a common desire, even those that voted 'no'. We all want healthy fish stocks so that our future generations can continue to fish recreationally and enjoy all the benefits it provides. Good decisions need good data and the best way to reduce uncertainty in any of our fisheries information is to get honest and accurate data from fishers.

Fortunately the majority of fishers at ramps do answer our questions and allow us to measure their catch. It is a similar picture in our other types of recreational fishing surveys. This is in part because we do try to design our surveys to minimise concerns fishers may have. The overwhelming majority of fishers do help us out and we need this ongoing support to manage our fisheries sustainably.

Jim Groves
MD
Fisheries Queensland

[Jono_SS]

You would think this would be the case John but of course it can be a double edged sword.

For example, if these large catches are extrapolated like they are then it simply shows that our "take" is too large. Remember that this whole Snapper issue is because the Snapper "Biomass" was deemed to be too low compared to the "Virgin" Biomass and thats why we are in the shit. Going back a few years and SEQ Snapper were deemed well managed and they still say that Snapper is not in danger of collapse. Remember the things like an average 4% increase in boats sales over a certain size meant an automatic extrapolation of the "data" they did have to ensure that the "Rec Take" was increasing by 4% or similar..... Just because the catches are good doesn't mean that fisheries wont want to put further restrictions on it.

I say NO don't give them the data unless it is a wide scale comprehensive data set such as a compulsory catch card. If the "data' is wide scale and comprehensive it leaves a mathematician working for Fisheries with far less freedom of movement when they want to make BS assumptions on the info they don't have.

So for me I will simply say " Yep I caught some fish and no you cant measure them".

It's not just about how many fish get caught. It's equally important how big/small and old/young the fish that get caught are, which collectively adds up to estimating the relative abundance of different age groups in the population each year (age structure). Like all of the datasets, a time series of this sort of information is valuable for monitoring the stocks - a lot more valuable than a single year on it's own.

If you say "Yes i caught some fish but you can't measure them", then nothing is recorded by the guys who are there to measure fish.

Jonathan.

[gunna]

If I might comment on some of the general comments in this thread.

It is encouraging to see that the majority of you would take part in our boat ramps surveys. Having read through the various postings, it seems that we all share a common desire, even those that voted 'no'. We all want healthy fish stocks so that our future generations can continue to fish recreationally and enjoy all the benefits it provides. Good decisions need good data and the best way to reduce uncertainty in any of our fisheries information is to get honest and accurate data from fishers.

Fortunately the majority of fishers at ramps do answer our questions and allow us to measure their catch. It is a similar picture in our other types of recreational fishing surveys. This is in part because we do try to design our surveys to minimise concerns fishers may have. The overwhelming majority of fishers do help us out and we need this ongoing support to manage our fisheries sustainably.

Jim Groves
MD
Fisheries Queensland

Thanks for that Jim. I must say that the one thing that concerned me on the day was when the guy asked how many times a year I fished. Answer was 20 - 40. I had 11 fish. I would hate to think you guys then calculate that I bring in 11 fish each of the 20 - 40 trips. Thats my worry. You need to factor in the zero fish trips as well.

[STUIE63]

If I might comment on some of the general comments in this thread.

It is encouraging to see that the majority of you would take part in our boat ramps surveys. Having read through the various postings, it seems that we all share a common desire, even those that voted 'no'. We all want healthy fish stocks so that our future generations can continue to fish recreationally and enjoy all the benefits it provides. Good decisions need good data and the best way to reduce uncertainty in any of our fisheries information is to get honest and accurate data from fishers.

Fortunately the majority of fishers at ramps do answer our questions and allow us to measure their catch. It is a similar picture in our other types of recreational fishing surveys. This is in part because we do try to design our surveys to minimise concerns fishers may have. The overwhelming majority of fishers do help us out and we need this ongoing support to manage our fisheries sustainably.

Jim Groves
MD
Fisheries Queensland

Rather than congratulating yourself on 63% of the replies saying they would respond to a survey , I would have thought that 37% not replying or trusting should be a worrying number . to me it seems your dept have an image and trust problem Jim
Stuie

[Lovey80]

It's not just about how many fish get caught. It's equally important how big/small and old/young the fish that get caught are, which collectively adds up to estimating the relative abundance of different age groups in the population each year (age structure). Like all of the datasets, a time series of this sort of information is valuable for monitoring the stocks - a lot more valuable than a single year on it's own.

If you say "Yes i caught some fish but you can't measure them", then nothing is recorded by the guys who are there to measure fish.

Jonathan.

John, take that into context of what I had said above. I totally agree with what you are saying. I just am not happy how they are taking this TINY amount of information and extrapolating it out with most likely huge errors in it. I want that time series data sets but I want it on huge amounts of data not piddly little boat ramp surveys and phone surveys........ Get a catch card, make it mandatory so these errors can be taken out of it!

[red rock cod]

no. re the last snapper closure. have been fishing redcliffe for 30 years. during the last 3 years i have seen more baby squire caught every year