Snapper Ban and Associated issues. merged threads

[dayoo]

I attended the Sunfish meeting with the Minister three month ago at Hervey Bay and heard the Minister undertake to consult with Sunfish to give an indication of his direction prior to the final decision being made. It is now obvious that he did not honour this undertaking.

In hindsite it would have been prudent for any Sunfish press release congratulating the Minister to highlight the fact that the Commercial sector have not been asked to contribute to snapper sustainability and to acknowledge that Sunfish's preference was for the bag limit to remain at 5 with 2 over 70cm until more accurate catch data was gathered.

Just my humble opinion.

Cheers
Barry

[TimiBoy]

I attended the Sunfish meeting with the Minister three month ago at Hervey Bay and heard the Minister undertake to consult with Sunfish to give an indication of his direction prior to the final decision being made. It is now obvious that he did not honour this undertaking.

In hindsite it would have been prudent for any Sunfish press release congratulating the Minister to highlight the fact that the Commercial sector have not been asked to contribute to snapper sustainability and to acknowledge that Sunfish's preference was for the bag limit to remain at 5 with 2 over 70cm until more accurate catch data was gathered.

Just my humble opinion.

Cheers
Barry

Thanks Baz,

I was about to make the same point. I note with UTTER DISGUST that neither Charter nor Pro Anglers have been asked to contribute ANYTHING to the new Management Regime.

God I hate this Government. I really, really hate them.

Tim

[Mark Robinson MP]

IMHO, there are many lessons from the sudden backflip on Sunday and the lack of consultation with rec fishers prior to the decision on Sunday.
THE BIG LESSON IS THIS: THIS GOVT CANNOT BE TRUSTED - THEY WILL DO AND SAY ANYTHING, AND USE ANYONE, TO HOLD ONTO POWER.
IF THEY ARE RE-ELECTED WITH THE SUPPORT OF REC FISHERS, THEY WILL CONTINUE THE SNAPPER BANS THEY INTRODUCED THIS YEAR.
THE GOVT SAID THE SCIENCE DICTATED BANS AND THAT BAG/SIZE LIMITS WOULD DO NOTHING.
THE GOVT MPs ALL VOTED FOR THE SNAPPER BAN IN A PARLIAMENT MOTION IN MARCH. THE LNP VOTED AGAINST LABOR'S BANS.
THE GREENS WILL NOT ALLOW THEIR LABOR PARTNERS TO PERFORM THIS BACKFLIP ONCE THE ELECTION IS OUT OF THE WAY.
DONT BE FOOLED.

[wags on the water]

How many rec fishers on AUSFISH really believe that this govt after the Qld election will honour this commitment to not repeat their 2011 snapper ban sometime in 2012? Do you believe the Bligh govt to keep their word? Anyone?

Mark, I personally don't think ANY politition will ever keep their word. It really doesn't matter what side you're on - you say what people want to hear - promises - then when elected it all turns to shit.

[Luc]

From: Barry Pollock
Sent: Friday, 1 July 2011 11:49
To: Ecofisher Qld; Chris Ryan; Barry Day; Bill Corten
Subject: Re: Qld Snapper review outcomes

Ausfish folks,
I must respond to some of the incorrect comments today about myself and Sunfish
For example finga says "They're(Sunfish members) supposed to represent us so they should be doing their job. They're paid for it so they should be doing it."

1. I am a retiree and receive ABSOLUTELY no money or remunerations for the work I do for Sunfish and the recreational fishing sector. I also pay for all my telephone and computer costs associated with Sunfish business - and I pay for the use of my vehicle on Sunfish business. I personally spend more than 40 hours per week on Sunfish business. Sunfish is a voluntary organisation. The annual grants it receives (from the private vessel levy) go mainly to angler education, particularly junior fishing promotions, communications (magazines, brochures, website), and the six-monthly general meetings of the Sunfish membership. The work done by Sunfish reps on Government fisheries advisory committees is done on a VOLUNTARY basis - no remuneration. The Chairman Sunfish position is subject to an annual election by members. The membership of Sunfish determines its policies and contents of all submissions. Sunfish has many dedicated members throughout the State who are committed to getting good outcomes for the recreational fishing sector, ensuring sustainability of our fisheries resources, and encouraging responsible fishing practices.
2. In the Snapper review Sunfish went to extreme lengths to represent all recreational fishers. For example I and others in Sunfish attended ALL the public consultation meetings in 2008 and 2011 and recorded all comments made (Summaries are posted on the Sunfish website). Sunfish initiated a Parliamentary protest petition which was signed by 2000+ persons most of whom are not directly affiliated with Sunfish.
3. I was not consulted, advised or had any prior knowledge of the details of the Government decision, announced last Sunday morning by the Acting Premier, Paul Lucas MP (bag limit of 4 with one only over 70cm, etc.). I was however invited to the Government media release function by an advisory phone call on Saturday night which was taken by my wife.

Dr Barry Pollock, Chairman Sunfish Queensland
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--- On Thu, 30/6/11, Barry Pollock wrote:

From: Barry Pollock
Subject: Qld Snapper review outcomes
To: "Ecofisher Qld" , "Chris Ryan" , "Barry Day", "Bill Corten"
All,
I have noted with interest the comments on the Ausfish site about the outcomes of the Qld Snapper/Rocky Reef fishery review.
I would like to offer some brief explanations which could be posted on Ausfish if you so wish.

The 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

[Gazza]

I tend to believe.....Pro's/Charter may have their respective TAC'S adjusted +/- in the future.

...jmo...

[Gazza]

Before I posted my reply I phoned Fisheries and was advised that the 40cm only applied to fillets from Coral Reef Species. You need to be careful filleting RRFSpecies as the fillet should be at least the minimum size of the species and in respect of snapper I now suggest no longer than 50cm because of the slot size of 70cm

Cheers
Barry

Not your "style" Barry imo , R U recommending "flouting" the LAW *sad*

...jmo...

[finga]

So your not paid top do a job. I offer an apology to that point.

So the state government has used Sunfishes name in a media statement that Sunfish had no knowledge about.
Does this sound a bit odd that Sunfish is not upset?

Sunfish is a voluntary organisation. The annual grants it receives (from the private vessel levy) go mainly to angler education, particularly junior fishing promotions, communications (magazines, brochures, website), and the six-monthly general meetings of the Sunfish membership.

Here is a link to Sunfish. Click on the Angler Education page. What do you see??
http://www.sunfishqld.com.au/
You'd think an organisation that is so focused towards education and seemingly spend a great deal of their allowance on education would have some information about Angler Education on their own Angler Education page.
Actually a few pages are still under construction.
Home page...yep, a bit of information there.
About Us page...SUNFISH QLD has established the most efficient and effective fisheries information network in Queensland. Yeah, we'll see about that.
Sunfish Events....blank...under construction
Shop....well bugger me. There's stuff there to buy that costs a motza. Stuff that should be downloadable and FREE
Statements...made a few statements over the years.
Media Releases ...yeah, made a few
Submissions...yeah, made a few
Members...bloody hell. Sunfish has 6 member organisations
Branches...six branches as well. Very popular
Angler Education....blank


Money well spent? It seems that a couple of things Sunfish say they spend a lot of money on have nothing happening ie education and events
So has SUNFISH QLD ... established the most efficient and effective fisheries information network in Queensland.??
They have not even got a direct link to current fishing regulations in QLD. All that's offered are generic links to DPI and EPA etc.

Where can we see a break-down of what money Sunfish has been allocated and what they've spent their money on? ie annual financial report or do we have to spend $50 to see it?

How much does it cost to be a member of Sunfish?
Does it cost me another $50 for Sunfish to listen to me?

Wasn't there a bit of a Sunfish meeting held in Brisbane and cost a motza to attend?
Yep, it was http://ausfish.com.au/vforum/showthr...hlight=Sunfish
Was the end report ever available on-line? For free??

Yep. I'm a sceptic it seems

[Gazza]

Finga , R U saying "Sunfish" should be shutdown ??

...jmo...

[dayoo]

Not your "style" Barry imo , R U recommending "flouting" the LAW *sad*

...jmo...

What the hell are you talking about. I never fillet my fish until the next day.
I was just warning that those who want to fillet RRFF species to be careful as Fisheries will nab you for a fillet considered to be off an undersized fish and could also do the same if you are in possession of more than two snapper fillets considered taken off a snapper over 70cm.

Give yourself an uppercut.

Cheers
Barry

[finga]

Finga , R U saying "Sunfish" should be shutdown ??

...jmo...

If your saying...Finga, are you saying "sunfish" should be shutdown??
If so then I don't know. But it seems they do not do much...They don't even say anything when they've been included in something they haven't been. They also say 'close enough is good enough' it seems in regards to the new snapper limitations.

What's a jmo???

[finga]

Mark, I personally don't think ANY politition will ever keep their word. It really doesn't matter what side you're on - you say what people want to hear - promises - then when elected it all turns to shit.

Gazza, mate. You did not like this post. Why??
Name one politician who has made promises during an election campaign and then kept all of them once elected.

Has your mob got any policies yet Mark?

[Captain Incredible]

Thanks for clearing that up for us all Barry, through Bill's angst.

Forget the bullshit that the umpire has delivered the decision, accept it, etc, etc and do nothing for the next three years. Wally could have said six months closure, two Snapper in total, or all boating is banned in SE QLD until 2017. Each of these results could have eventuated given that there was no process to base Wally's final decision on.

No wonder we are treated like fools by the Government.

The reality is that Fisheries through the SNWG delivered no outcomes, nor Sunfish either in this Snapper management process. There is no PROCESS to have faith in to support any future (or this) decision making.

Therefore Wally, the Fisheries Minister decided the outcome all by himself without any reference to the process which had gone before or without input from Fisheries or stakeholders.

I believe that as stakeholders we should be pushing for a transparent, ongoing conversation between Fisheries & stakeholders. As information comes to hand through stock assessments, etc then stakeholders will respond to discuss the need for further assessment or collection of data through targetted mechanisms, as well as discuss the implications of these status reports and collectively decide on appropriate management regimes which recognise the triple bottom line of resource sustainability, social responsibility & economic common sense.

And as stakeholders we should be involved in public forums where we democratically elect our representatives to speak to Fisheries on our behalf, report back on these conversations & then represent the common & majority view back to Fisheries Managers. And that those representatives are adequately funded to be able to have these two-way conversations on behalf of all fishers. On an ongoing basis.

To do nothing proactive in the interim but then turn up as a "selected" representative by Fisheries and then crow about the non achievements you have supposedly battled for without actually involving or asking the opinions of the wider fishing community is just utter bullshit. I would love the luxury of not having to advocate for my business needs for the next three years. But that WOULD be bullshit.

We as stakeholders need to be requesting/ driving a process where the management of our access to our resource is done though a cooperative & informed process. And this is to be an ongoing, continuous conversation on behalf of fishermen by fishermen with Fisheries Managers. This will minimise the likelihood of such unilateral (luckily benign in this case) intervention by politicians in what should be a social, economic & sustainability discussion which is ongoing and seamless.

Obviously it is be easy to shoot the messenger in my case. In fact I requested that I be allowed to represent my cohort on the SNWG as charter had no genuine representation. This was acceded to.

But as a committed recreational angler I believe we should be looking at constructing a good, defensible & politician proof process for the benefit of fish, fishermen & the broader community. We should NOT, as Bill suggests, simply wait for the next invitation for the select few (selected by Fisheries, not fishermen) to unrepresent the broader majority in a process where the parameters have already been set.

And to really put the cat among the unrepresentatives, NOT ONE of the northside tackle shops which I deal with on a weekly basis received any communication from tackle reps on the SNWG who were "selected" to provide the tackle shop perspective.

Also, NOT ONE of the Moreton Bay charter operators which I talk to weekly received any communication from the "selected" charter reps.

And to top it off, apart from Ausfish posts & comunications for the Ausfish community by Dayoo, how were the wider rec community "informed" by the "selected" recreational reps and then "formally" able to deliver feedback to these reps for inclusion in discussions in SNWG meetings?

I bet the answer is:" WE WERE NOT, AND WE COULD NOT....."

No, just don't shoot me as the messenger.

I want to know how you and I get our voices heard in future Fisheries management processes. The Snapper Management Plan has just told us that the Minister made the decision & that the rest of us had no say.

This is completely unsatisfactory. I am not prepared to wait until 2014. I want a say in designing any future process NOW. What say you???????????????????????

Regards,

Keith

[Gazza]

Gazza, mate. You did not like this post. Why??
Name one politician who has made promises during an election campaign and then kept all of them once elected.

Has your mob got any policies yet Mark?

no i didn't like your post finga (but i do like you)

no I won't vote for "Mark" as i don't live there , but I'll 1/2 give him b.of.the.d. to show us "he's has balls"

[Gazza]

Q. What's a jmo???


A. Trumps an imo *wink*

Enjoy your Fishing