Queensland Snapper review.

[Mad one.]

Some very interesting views from a small abstract of a report and a journal article from 2001...

The below link (free download) is for the National Fish Stock Status Report 2014, If you review p. 486-496 it gives some pretty interesting facts on Snapper stocks, I also found the Red Emperor review worthwhile.
(East coast biological stocks for QLD)

http://fish.gov.au/Pages/default.aspx

Cheers, MO

[Noelm]

You bastards are just trying to troll me!!!!! I wont bite, I wont bite.....

burley trail set, lines out.....

[Lucky_Phill]

IN regard to the review that this thread is about and the assumptions it has made.

Here a snippet of the " official " data on Snapper from the FRDC 2014 Status report.

[Lucky_Phill]

Shouldn't this be in the political section?

No. I don't think so.

This report is about two things really. ( well 3 actually )

1. Ruths Thesis

2. An assumption that Snapper stocks can be assessed by Historical Newspaper articles on recreational Catches.

3. That anecdotal evidence from recreational anglers should be taken seriously when undertaking research into fish stocks.

2 of the above 3 are worthwhile, and one is off the mark.

LP

[The Black Unicorn]

No. I don't think so.

This report is about two things really. ( well 3 actually )

1. Ruths Thesis

2. An assumption that Snapper stocks can be assessed by Historical Newspaper articles on recreational Catches.

3. That anecdotal evidence from recreational anglers should be taken seriously when undertaking research into fish stocks.

2 of the above 3 are worthwhile, and one is off the mark.

LP

Tongue firmly planted in my cheek Phill. The ausfish politicians seemed to be running away with it.

[Lovey80]

I will clarify something. The review basically makes a statement that the Fishery is not what it used to be " based on historical recreational catch rates ".

Please excuse my sarcasm, but I am sure that is a really great use of funding, resources and a single persons time. No doubt if you threw a dart at group of people from each stakeholder group then asked the people hit in each group to vote if we all agree that the fishery is not what it used to be then I am almost certain the answer would be unanimous.

have gone over this in other threads, but there is no way on earth that assumption can be made. You simply cannot make a statement on the bio-mass of a fishery based on historical and current recreational catch rates.

Absolutely, to do so on past or virgin biomass is full of mathematical bumpkin using complete rubbish assumptions like the last review.

What we need is a starting point of.........now, to collect decent data from all sectors. Use the first three years or so of data as a baseline and work out if we are declining and or improving catch rates/tonnage over time. There is plenty of hard data available to us these days that we can input into the models (like fishable days due to weather) to tell us if we are in decline or not.

We know an American cod fisheries style collapse is not a risk. So it's not too late to get this right and simply build the fishery going forward.

In reality no one should give a shit what the virgin biomass was. It is a fairy tale number that is essentially meaningless unless you are trying to justify your job because you want to see if it meets some European standard of endangerment (which has multiple actors playing for the same resources) and you need to find evidence to force closures etc to justify your job.

[Lucky_Phill]

This is Sunfish's Response.... published with permission.

5th December 2014

QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY SNAPPER-CATCH STUDY – VERY FISHY CATCH RATES!

The recent University of Queensland study (reference below), based on old newspaper reports of catches by recreational fishers in southeast Queensland from 1871 to 1939 does not make sense. Newspaper reports back then of the catches of recreational anglers on chartered vessels off Moreton and Stradbroke Islands appear to be exaggerations. The Queensland University researchers did not examine critically these old reports on which their study is based.

For example the snapper catches reported back then on chartered vessels fishing in oceanic waters in southeast Queensland were commonly reported to average 10 to 40 fish per angler per hour for all anglers participating on a given trip. With 10 anglers on board for a 6 hour fish the total would be 600 to 2400 fish which is bordering on fantasy.

The Chairman of Sunfish Queensland, Mr. David Bateman AM said that such high average catch rates by recreational anglers have never been recorded for any species since accurate records were kept by recreational fishing associations and clubs from the 1930s to the present time. Given the range of angling skills and methods in use back then, it would not be possible to achieve such high average catch rates for snapper on a chartered vessel fishing in oceanic waters.

The early catches of anglers on chartered vessels, 1871-1939, were not accurately recorded, and the subsequent reports in newspapers of the day appear to be subject to “media or angler “exaggerations.

Mr. Bateman said that recreational fishing associations in southeast Queensland commenced keeping accurate records of individual angler-catches in the late 1930s, and this procedure is still used today. (See attached photo). Officials record all details of the catch of each individual angler and such records are kept for many years.
As mentioned earlier, accurate records like this were not taken on the early chartered vessels, 1871-1939, so the subsequent newspaper reports are largely guesswork with anglers prone to exaggerating their catch.

Mr. Bateman advised researchers to be very careful in interpreting reports of angler-catches, especially from early newspaper reports. Such reports could be considered to be inaccurate exaggerations or prone to recall bias in some instances.

Photograph: Accurate details recorded of an angler’s catch, Southport, 2011. The catch is carefully examined by officials, each species counted, and catch weighed. A written record is being taken by club and association secretaries. Accurate records were not taken of catches on early charter vessels.

Reference: Nineteenth century narratives reveal historic catch rates for Australian snapper (Pagrus auratus) Ruth H Thurstan, Alexander B Campbell & John M Pandolfi. Fish and Fisheries. (In press).

[TheRealAndy]

No. I don't think so.

2. An assumption that Snapper stocks can be assessed by Historical Newspaper articles on recreational Catches.


LP

Except thats not the way it was done.

[Lucky_Phill]

Except thats not the way it was done.

Actually in this instance Andy, it was. This is not the official review, it is a Paper ( Thesis ) by Ruth Thurston and was undertaken a couple of years ago when she was at Uni.

Her assessment of the stocks is based on Historical recreational catches and also she submits that recreational anecdotal evidence should be taken into account when doing the " Official " Review.,

cheers