Snapper Ban and Associated issues. merged threads

[Lovey80]

Tim I reckon you are on track with that one. Cleaning up the inflow into Moreton bay would do a lot more than the Green Zones have. This is the direction true conservationists should be pushing

I think we all agree on this one. But I fear that this one will be given the least attention as the cost involved in doing this properly is enormous.

[Bill_Corten]

The snapper review identified a number of significant issues that urgently needed addressing with better management arrangements. Sadly all that has come out of three years of hard slog and pulling teeth for balanced change is a reduction by one with the bag limit and slot size limitation of one fish over 70cm and none of the real issues affecting the recreational, commercial and charter sectors addressed at all. Barry Day and myself were surprised to read about the changes in the newspaper and not even get the courtesy of a heads up given the three years of solid constructive input we gave to the process despite the slurs, niggles and contempt we frequently received from some of the other sector reps. Many of you would be surprised at who dumped hard on the rec sector or didn't support us as we negotiated for fair and transparent outcomes.
Personally I think the 4 fish and one over 70cm outcome is liveable for those who fish the reefs south of Caloundra given the stock depletion over time and the pressure from rec and charter fishers and the ultra part time yellow and black symbols holders exceeding bag limits through the back door, although some people will want to debate the necessity of it for their own selfish reasons. Don't take this as a slur on the genuine commercial fishers as they deserve more recognition by their own peers.
For those who fish the Barwons, Hards and north from there, the new arrangement hits hardest, is unfair and unrealistic. It was the Southport SNWG meeting where Fisheries own marine biologists said the reduced bag limit and slot size was insufficient to make the necessary difference. A suite of other actions across all sectors was required to noticeably halt stock decline. The questions of how to deal with the big issues relating to snapper and the other sectors has been left in the too hard basket and does not resolve the sustainability questions with snapper. What I now see is increased potential to put excessive fishing pressure on the close inshore grounds and Bay areas because people won't travel far with the new arrangements. One has to question why the final Sunfish proposal of a 5 bag limit and slot size of 2 fish over 70 cm was not acceptable.
Fisheries Qld are the culprits to blame for this debacle and I strongly believe if they had run with the options the working groups developed in good faith we would have got good sustainable outcomes and transparent management. Instead they changed the options to suit their own agenda, clearly upset the masses with what and how they consulted with and in the end didn't get any say on the partially delivered outcomes after one Ministers head rolled because of the public outrage. The culprits in Fisheries should be ashamed of themselves, trying to manipulate outcomes the way they did. They haven't won any accolades across the board and we are no better off now with the next review due in 2014. After this who would trust them and put in the hard work to see it all dissolve the way this review has.

[NAGG]

Chris I call Bull on that reply. You know Mark was not trying to claim it was an LNP policy with respect to the size and bag changes but simply the "management with out bans" not once did he reference the actual size and bags directly. Yet you were trying to goat him into replying and alleging this is what he was claiming. Stop the rot mate!



That is a lot of assuming there mate! All I remember Mark promising was sound scientific research and proper consultation on all fisheries matters and (management without bans with respect to Snapper). While I am also a big proponent of Size and Bag limits being the best management tool over lock outs and green zones. Your idealogical assumption that bags and sizes need to be restricted further is based on nothing more than your moral ideology as seen by your posts for years now. Your posts previously have shown that you believe bags should be reduced because on some species "no one needs that much fish" as opposed to the current regulation being sustainable or not..

Cut the rot. Mark on face value is a far better option as a fisheries minister than we have had in many years and our feedback needs to be constructive and engaging because guaranteed if he keeps his seat he is the guy that will be in the box seat.

I cant ignore the heading ....... particularly & adopts LNP policy
The Government did back down on snapper bans but they also changed bag limits & introduced a slot limit.
So where is the LNPs sustainable fishing policy ? -
As far as I know .... The only way you can make the snapper fishing sustainable is by increasing fish stocks , reducing the take or bans .

Chris

[dayoo]

Some very good points there horse! This will no doubt have a positive affect on the biomass.

Mark my words though. Once Fisheries start getting even close to reliable catch data the above guarantees that CPUE will look horrible for Rec Anglers and you will have Fisheries Scientists shouting from the rafters "See our modeling was right! Snapper stocks are in decline and we need more restrictions" .

The fact that the commercial sector has got away from this Scott Free should send alarm bells ringing to ALL of you that we were and even now ARE being set up for a fall for the benefit of the commercial sector.

We got away with being able to scream blue murder this time because it was dodgy and now they are putting in a situation where the data will be lose lose for us. It will be like shooting fish in a barrel for them next time...... Because next time they will see guaranteed drops in CPUE for Rec Anglers AND our own data to use to shoot us with.

If we had of got a 5 bag with 2x over 70cm (again its just me but i am happy with a 40cm MLS) AND the original TAC for the commercial sector and a review after say 10 years then we could be reasonably happy...........

Barry, Bill, Phill et al are you ready to start the fight again in 3 years time because you can put your house on the line that it is coming? Maybe time to start training some apprentices for the future.

I won't be wasting my time in future in participating in stakeholder meetings or filling out catch cards that will be manipulated to produce further reductions for the recreational anglers while the Commercial operators continue to fish without contributing to the sustainability issue.
I doubt that Bill Corten will want to go through this charade again.

Cheers
Barry

[Lovey80]

Well said Barry,

And again I'll say it as unpopular as it may be. As soon as you put in a slot it is always going to put extra pressure on the closer in and bay areas. Hence why i wanted a 40cm MLS. It would take less than a year for the 35cm fish to reach 40cm and based on the take charts of one of the other threads we worked out that fish in the 35/40cm range made up about 13% of the annual take. By protecting them you effectively protect the same amount (relatively) as a 6 week ban (same percentage as a ratio of fishing days). Except they are protected all year round AND with a move of pressure to inshore reefs barrotrauma is negated.

I know the deep water Snapper Anglers are pissed and I can understand their argument. And while I still maintain the data is dodgy and there is a lot more fish out there ( disregarding the Gold Coast) than what they say. The point of getting more larger specimens into the Biomass is achievable this way.

We still haven't got a comment from Sunfish on their involvement in the final decision or why the commercial sector got off Scott free? IMO the Sunfish submission was the best thing they have done in Years. Did they roll over on us like they did with the MBMP zoning?

Sunfish Rep? Mr Groves? Care to comment or are we too afraid of what the response may be?

[PinHead]

I won't be wasting my time in future in participating in stakeholder meetings or filling out catch cards that will be manipulated to produce further reductions for the recreational anglers while the Commercial operators continue to fish without contributing to the sustainability issue.
I doubt that Bill Corten will want to go through this charade again.

Cheers
Barry

see Barry..told ya a while back just to slam your fist on the desk and tell em to get stuffed. Would probably have saved a bit of the stress.

[Lovey80]

No one ignored the heading mate. Even I thought as I opened "LNP has a policy? Surely ALP wouldn't have adopted the oppositions policy it would be a field day". Of course on reading you get the play on words like every Polly does. But you weren't looking for an explanation you were looking to antagonize for the sake of it.

[NAGG]

No one ignored the heading mate. Even I thought as I opened "LNP has a policy? Surely ALP wouldn't have adopted the oppositions policy it would be a field day". Of course on reading you get the play on words like every Polly does. But you weren't looking for an explanation you were looking to antagonize for the sake of it.

Antagonize ! .... me , surely not .
Much prefer to see some constructive comments coming from Mark than using this forum for his brand of spin.

The question should be asked of Mark each time he wants to have a shot at the government without offering an explanation of how the LNP will do better.

Right now ..... Labour have retracted the ban ( a good thing) & reduced the bag limit ....... then there is the slot limit - both measures should help with sustainability - ( It wont hurt )

Chris

[Lucky_Phill]

I have crunched some numbers.

According to a Queensland Government document titled. “ Survey of Marine Boat-Based Recreational fishing in SEQ “. 2007-2008.


By James Webley, Stephen Taylor, David Mayer, Kara Dew, Len Olyott

Others involved were:- Malcolm Dunning, Terry Healy, Jim Higgs (DERM), Kirrily McInnes, Ross Quinn, Neil Sumner (WA Fisheries) and Wayne Sumpton.

This rec survey was conducted at boat ramps in SEQ, that is from just north of Noosa Heads, south to the TweedRiver border.

In that survey it was revealed that recreational fishers released about 77% of Snapper they caught, mainly due to undersize. A total number of fish kept was 37,299 and at 1.9kgs ( govt average size ) the tonnage would be 70.868 tons for the SEQ area annually. Most catches came from Tweed , BrisbaneRiver, Mooloolaba and Noosa boat ramps.

Now, in the Snapper RIS undertaken recently, the recreational take of Snapper was put at 400 tons for the RRFF area, being Mackay to Tweed Heads. By that rationale , 330 tons of Snapper are caught from RainbowBeach, north to Mackay each year by recreational fishers.

That is absurd.

30/06/2011


LP>
.

[dayoo]

Antagonize ! .... me , surely not .
Much prefer to see some constructive comments coming from Mark than using this forum for his brand of spin.

The question should be asked of Mark each time he wants to have a shot at the government without offering an explanation of how the LNP will do better.

Right now ..... Labour have retracted the ban ( a good thing) & reduced the bag limit ....... then there is the slot limit - both measures should help with sustainability - ( It wont hurt )

Chris

Chris,

Sure it will help with sustainbility but only in the deeper offshore reefs.
(a) There will less recreational anglers on the offshore reefs fishing for snapper so the commercial operators will have less pesky recs to compete with.
(b) the inshore close reefs and Moreton Bay will come under more intense fishing pressure which will compound the sustainability of snapper in these areas.

Cheers
Barry

[Matt_Campbell]

A quote from the paper - "It underestimates total recreational fishing activity in the region because it surveyed a subset of recreational fishers (i.e. those returning to public boat ramps between the hours of 7 am and 6 pm). It did not survey shore-based fishers, people fishing at night, or boats returning to private access points such as marinas and private jetties."

[Lucky_Phill]

70 tons..... ----- ..... 400 tons

maybe the rec take is somewhere in between.

Thing is, a Government Document stated that the Rec take is 70 tons for SEQ. The error rate for the calculations is put at 0.042.

If these Documents are going to be published, then they must be credible !

If they are not accurate or credible, why do the research, why state the figures and why bother ?

Let's say we do something silly and DOUBLE ( that's + 100% ) the figures that this document provides.... that is still only 140 ton for SEQ which is around 95% of the Fishery, catch rate wise.

Still leaves a big difference between that and 400 ton.


LP

[NAGG]

Chris,

Sure it will help with sustainbility but only in the deeper offshore reefs.
(a) There will less recreational anglers on the offshore reefs fishing for snapper so the commercial operators will have less pesky recs to compete with.
(b) the inshore close reefs and Moreton Bay will come under more intense fishing pressure which will compound the sustainability of snapper in these areas.

Cheers
Barry

Hi Barry

I can appreciate your sentiments / opinions ....... but we just dont really know , do we ?.
The assumption is that fishoes that target the deeper reefs only target snapper ....... The reality is that they (99%) target whatever they land ( catches usually consist of a mixed bag) . Those with a suitable boat will continue to travel far and wide to fish ..... its in their nature & its why most own these kind of boats. ....... A bloke with a 6M offshore rig is not going to pull up at Mud Is if they can & usually fish a place like deep tempest ...... weather will be the determining factor
My concern is for those fish that exceed the slot limit & need to be released ....... but lets face it - right now it would not be uncommon for fish to be discarded once better fish have been landed ....... no shock and horror here & I will defy anyone that says it does not happen. ....... sadly these fish are usually not kept in a live well and get chucked overboard dead!!!.
I just hope that those who fish deep learn the correct method and carry the correct tools to release fish in deep water.

Chris

[Lucky_Phill]

To Barry, Bill and Ray, once again a big thank you from myself and the Ausfish Family and indeed the Queensland Snapper fishing public.

I must now offer an apology on behalf of the Government for completely wasting 18 months of your time and effort. Let’s face it, they won’t say sorry.

Does this Government really think Qld Rec fishos are &^%$heads ?

When the offer to have rec fishos be a part of the SNWG, I really believed it was the start of a genuine consultation period for this Government. I have long held the views that as recreational fishers, we have a great deal to offer in the way of management and participation of our fishery.

Please don’t knock down those that have taken the hits for us. no, I told you so’s !!!

One thing I have learnt coming out of this process, is that playing in the political game, the only position you will hold is…… the ball….. you’ll get punted around until someone, somehow scores some points from you.


LP.


\

.
.
..

[Lucky_Phill]

Judy,

Just to help us all out- Did Sunfish sign off on this Snapper Management Plan with Wally? Is this a compromise agreed to between BP & Wally?

Ths Sunfish submission was based on a consensus of views made by the Sunfish membership and by many unaffiliated rec fishers (eg those rec fishers who attended the two public consultation rounds in 2008 and 2011, the 2000+ who signed the Parliamentary petition, and the hundreds of rec fishers who visited the Sunfish stands at recent boat and tackle shows).
The Sunfish submission also addresses the need for sustainability of Qld Snapper stocks. It can be viewed on the Sunfish website.
In summary the Sunfish submission on Snapper includes a bag of 5 of which only 2 may be over 70cm, a min size of 35cm, NO seasonal closures, NO compulsory permits and NO permit fees. It also proposes status quo for the bag limits and min sizes of pearl perch and teraglin.
In contrast, four options put forward by Fisheries Queensland(FQ) - the first two included 6 week seasonal closures and Snapper permits with fees of $90 or $70. Due to the huge reaction by rec fishers these two options were withdrawn by the Minister. The remaining two FQ options were a bag limit of 2 with a two month seasonal closure, and a bag of 5 with a 4 month closure.
Last Sunday the Qld Government announced its decision of no seasonal closures, no permits or fees, a min size of 35cm, bag of 4 of which only one can be over 70cm - and status quo for pearl perch and teraglin.
The Sunfish reaction was that this Government decision could be "lived with" because it is reasonably close to the Sunfish submission - in comparison with the original 4 options in the FQ discussion paper.
On Snapper stock sustainability: Snapper is unusual in being a long-lived species in Qld. When fishing pressure is increasingly applied to such fish stocks the first impact is "growth overfishing". This is a reduction in the relative abundance of the larger/older age classes. Growth overfishing of Snapper is severe in NSW (see NSW Fisheries Website/ Snapper assessments). It is also appearing in Qld in the more heavily fished sections of our coast. The normal management response is to limit the take of large fish - which is now the case. Of course there is an immediate impact especially on those who target the large fish. Unfortunately this cannot be avoided if we are serious about looking after our Snapper stocks.
The more severe form of overfishing is "recruitment overfishing". This is where the take of adult spawners is so high that subsequent production of eggs and small fish into the stock is reduced. At this time there is no evidence of recruitment overfishing of Qld Snapper stocks. However FQ has been monitoring the abundance of small snapper in the Moreton Bay juvenile habitat areas for 5 years and we expect that information on Snapper recruitment patterns will be available over the next couple of years. In the meantime the min size of 35cm means that Snapper spawn for about 2 years before they can be kept. The limitation on the take of large fish over 70cm is another means of preventing the possibility of recruitment overfishing.
Dr Barry Pollock Chairman Sunfish Queensland


posted with permission from the author, Dr Barry Pollock.

Phill