New bag and size limits as of today

[scottar]

While I don't disagree with you, how do you know they are not there to help? that's the biggest talking point here, unknown rec take, there is no other/better method that I can think of.

Bring in mandatory catch reporting for any species that is of interest much the way they did for pro fishers. Simple enough in the modern era of mobile phones. Of course it would then mean that figures couldn't be fudged which may or may not be what is wanted by other parties if it didn't fit their agenda. Bit like the recreational fishing license in Queensland. Don't get me wrong - the government would love to take our money - what they aren't keen on is then having to answer to recreational fishers on a couple of accounts - namely "Where has the money gone?" and "Now we are financial stakeholders, what do we get for our dollar?".

[Lovey80]

While I don't disagree with you, how do you know they are not there to help? that's the biggest talking point here, unknown rec take, there is no other/better method that I can think of.

scottar is on the money below. It was what the rec sector asked for last time around as it was obvious to all to see that the rec catch data was complete bumkin that was extrapolated out.

Bring in mandatory catch reporting for any species that is of interest much the way they did for pro fishers. Simple enough in the modern era of mobile phones. Of course it would then mean that figures couldn't be fudged which may or may not be what is wanted by other parties if it didn't fit their agenda. Bit like the recreational fishing license in Queensland. Don't get me wrong - the government would love to take our money - what they aren't keen on is then having to answer to recreational fishers on a couple of accounts - namely "Where has the money gone?" and "Now we are financial stakeholders, what do we get for our dollar?".

A catch card is a must at this point and we should be rejecting all of these so called biomass assessments until we get one. That way they don’t get to extrapolate data from a phone pol and some boat ramp surveys to come up with fanciful figures.

[Noelm]

While some sort of catch recording would be good, how do you get people to do it? it has been said here plenty of times that most would/did tell data collectors to get lost, how do you enforce accurate catch records? fishing licenses are another issue altogether, we (in NSW) have had them for ages now, and "mostly" the money raised has been used to buy out pros, upgrade ramps and install artificial reef structures, I am pretty sure a big lump would have been used for "administration" and a fair old amount used for non fishing use, but in the main it's kind of traceable.

[ShaneC]

Sat here reading some of this and cannot sit on the sidelines any longer.

As said earlier this WAS a pre determined result. If you work for DAFF and need an explanation of this this it goes as follows... 'this is what we want to do, this is what we have drafted. Go out and justify our position, ignore anything that doesn't swing with our narrative so that we don't even have to pull out the liquid paper when we release the legislation'. Got it Matt? Yep... but you already knew that.

Research gaps everywhere, sectors with unknown take, industry that has shown absolutely zero decline in catch records, industry attrition not taken into account etc etc etc. I could go on forever. But it makes no difference, DAFF has been infiltrated by people with historical environmental advocacy, and the 'precautionary principle' they spruik is utter shit. This is regulation for regulation's sake. Nothing more, nothing less. Be seen to do something at the cost of an industry. They ought to be ashamed of themselves.

And yes, for what it's worth I stand in a position as a stakeholder with a large financial interest to lose due to this reform. It's only fair to be open about that.

I could go on forever, but it is interesting that the State Ombudsman is investigating DAFF over this reform, it has been done dishonestly, with prejudice, and very very sneakily.

Final question.... maybe Matt can answer this. Since biomass is based solely on commercial catch.... I come across some massive shows of fish from time to time. Snapper and pearlies, 20m high, 50m long and 50m wide. Dropped a pilly in and not gotten a bite. How do you count those fish??

[scottar]

While some sort of catch recording would be good, how do you get people to do it? it has been said here plenty of times that most would/did tell data collectors to get lost, how do you enforce accurate catch records? fishing licenses are another issue altogether, we (in NSW) have had them for ages now, and "mostly" the money raised has been used to buy out pros, upgrade ramps and install artificial reef structures, I am pretty sure a big lump would have been used for "administration" and a fair old amount used for non fishing use, but in the main it's kind of traceable.

Pro fishers have to report their catch prior to hitting the ramp or wharf. No prior report they get fined. Shane may be able to elaborate further but that's my understanding. Pretty straight forward with a text message.

[Noelm]

Sat here reading some of this and cannot sit on the sidelines any longer.

As said earlier this WAS a pre determined result. If you work for DAFF and need an explanation of this this it goes as follows... 'this is what we want to do, this is what we have drafted. Go out and justify our position, ignore anything that doesn't swing with our narrative so that we don't even have to pull out the liquid paper when we release the legislation'. Got it Matt? Yep... but you already knew that.

Research gaps everywhere, sectors with unknown take, industry that has shown absolutely zero decline in catch records, industry attrition not taken into account etc etc etc. I could go on forever. But it makes no difference, DAFF has been infiltrated by people with historical environmental advocacy, and the 'precautionary principle' they spruik is utter shit. This is regulation for regulation's sake. Nothing more, nothing less. Be seen to do something at the cost of an industry. They ought to be ashamed of themselves.

And yes, for what it's worth I stand in a position as a stakeholder with a large financial interest to lose due to this reform. It's only fair to be open about that.

I could go on forever, but it is interesting that the State Ombudsman is investigating DAFF over this reform, it has been done dishonestly, with prejudice, and very very sneakily.

Final question.... maybe Matt can answer this. Since biomass is based solely on commercial catch.... I come across some massive shows of fish from time to time. Snapper and pearlies, 20m high, 50m long and 50m wide. Dropped a pilly in and not gotten a bite. How do you count those fish??

I don't think counting a "show" on a sounder would benefit anything, there is no way (short of diving) to be 100% sure what species they are, the same school could be counted a dozen times by different people.

[ShaneC]

Well a large show of fish that dont bite is uncounted biomass by their reckoning is it not?

In my game if you cannot tell what species you are looking at on your sounder it's time to rethink your career aspirations Noel.

[copie]

Totally agree with lovely 80 and the rest caught will be floating dead............what a waste recreational boats should not have boat limits only catch limits.

[chris69]

Well a large show of fish that dont bite is uncounted biomass by their reckoning is it not?

In my game if you cannot tell what species you are looking at on your sounder it's time to rethink your career aspirations Noel.

If I dropped a pilly on 50ton of snapper and pearlies and did not catch one I'd be rethinking my carreer too..

[billfisher]

Well a large show of fish that dont bite is uncounted biomass by their reckoning is it not?

In my game if you cannot tell what species you are looking at on your sounder it's time to rethink your career aspirations Noel.

The stock assessments don't rely on counting every fish. They use catch rates compared to effort and age and size data, plus a lot of mathematical models. There is a fairly wide error range due to all the uncertainties, but it looks like something needs to be done. Or would you rather a continued downward decline leading to something like the situation in SA where they are contemplating a ban on snapper fishing?

[BigE]

Looks like were back to the below:

The point of sustainability at which bag limits will increase, I have no problem with the boffins showing evidence that indicates that there is a need for the resource pressure to be reduced so that the stock is sustainable ,,,,,,But that would also mean that there would be a point at which the stock would be able to sustain an increase in resource utilisation ( an increase in bag limits ) without a balance in the equation then it is just a social engineering exercise to restrict the access to a resource of Joe Average and nothing whatsoever to do with protecting the resource.


BigE

[billfisher]

Looks like were back to the below:

The point of sustainability at which bag limits will increase, I have no problem with the boffins showing evidence that indicates that there is a need for the resource pressure to be reduced so that the stock is sustainable ,,,,,,But that would also mean that there would be a point at which the stock would be able to sustain an increase in resource utilisation ( an increase in bag limits ) without a balance in the equation then it is just a social engineering exercise to restrict the access to a resource of Joe Average and nothing whatsoever to do with protecting the resource.


BigE

We are hardly 'back to that'. When stocks are rebuilt enough to contemplate more fishing the we can consider it - and we are a long way off that. And considering recreational fishing is open entry with no quotas the rec catch can go up even if the bag limit stays the same.

[castlemaine]

What's your point? We are relying on Fisheries Scientists here. They don't have any vested interest that I can see in calling for more restrictions, and bear in mind they are on salaries and don't rely on grants. And all the Greens are interested in is more marine parks.

I think you'd be surprised that government workers may not be as independent as you think, just like any job. the company has a plan either you're in or you're out, in a government job 'sidelined'. They may not agree with the flow but they salaries and promotions depend on it.

[billfisher]

I think you'd be surprised that government workers may not be as independent as you think, just like any job. the company has a plan either you're in or you're out, in a government job 'sidelined'. They may not agree with the flow but they salaries and promotions depend on it.

Our fisheries scientists are usually criticised for being too close to the fishing industry and too slow to act with more restrictions. It took political pressure to get kingfish traps banned in NSW, snapper stocks are so low in SA they are now contemplated a complete ban, etc. What evidence do you have that the converse is true?

[scottar]

Had a meeting with Matthew this afternoon. Thanks again Matt for taking the time out of your weekend to sit down, explain and run through a few things with me. Rest assured there is a lot more goes into the stock assessment process and a lot more factors taken into account than I thought. Matt is obviously very passionate about what he does. He took me to task on a few things and pointed out a few things that I hadn't either picked up from my attempts to read the documentation or hadn't even thought to consider. Turns out, some of the information I was basing my questioning of the science on were blatantly incorrect too. If you are happy to approach the process with an open mind, take Matthew up on his offer of a chat.