New bag and size limits as of today

[Lovey80]

Like I said earlier Scott. The models essentially ensure that with increasing boat registrations and recreationals assumed to be taking the lions share based on shit data, extrapolated out then reverse engineered to show numbers relative to 1880 the model was always going to show a decline.

More BS measures just so another bureaucratic nightmare of a government organisation can be seen to be doing something to justify their jobs.

I still ill haven’t seen any of these so called “scholarly” articles claiming they know many fish are caught by the Rec Sector even talk about things like rain fall, drought, fishable days in a calendar year. Most of us can barely manage to get out every 2-3months due to weather and work commitments alone.

[Noelm]

Do you think the rec sector catches the "lions share"? I can't see any other way to estimate rec catches other than guesses, there is no hard data available, attempts have been made to gather info, but we rec fishers are so paranoid that we either lie or don't participate in data gathering.

[billfisher]

Not what I was trying to convey - How is it that when data sets from two adjoining states utilising the same biomass end up with such vastly different outcomes given the acknowledgement that the line fisheries aren't really understood.

"This high relative harvest in New South Wales, in combination with the limited movement of East Coast Snapper [Harasti et al. 2015, Sumpton et al. 2003], indicates that the indices of relative abundance derived from the New South Wales trap fishery are more likely to represent the New South Wales stock than indices from the relatively small and less well understood line fishing sectors."

"The annual age-structured model partitioned the fishery into four sectors: New South Wales trap; New South Wales commercial line and charter; Queensland commercial line and charter, and, New South Wales and Queensland recreational. Model outputs for all line-fishing sectors estimated biomass to be below 20 per cent. In contrast, model scenarios using standardized New South Wales trap catch rates ranged between 20 per cent and 45 per cent of unfished levels, with the majority of estimates being above 30 per cent. "

So with the NSW and Qld line fishing giving similar numbers, but the extra trap data being the deciding factor that made NSW sustainable - why didn't FQ look further before implementing further restrictions - especially given the "Research Gaps" raised at the working groups? I won't bother reiterating my opinion.

My reading is that NSW stocks were declared sustainable because the size, age structure and catch per effort were all positive and therefore showing stocks are on the way up under current management. I thought I made that clear. Ie even if the stock estimates are the same (note with a huge range) the difference is NSW stocks show strong signs of increasing when looking at the catch data.

[bluefin59]

I personally don’t understand how they gather catch rates other than that for pro fishermen because in all the years iv been fishing I personally have only ever had my catch measured and checked ONCE and that was at HERVEY Bay , and I have been out hundreds of times offshore and inshore . I know the charter boats that I use fill in a log every time to collect catch data but out in my own boat only ever once , wouldn’t a better scientific way to work out who is taking what and where to get info from all the major boat ramps for say a period of one year . I guess that would be to simplistic and expensive but gee isn’t it all only a guess other than that . I personally don’t care what they make the take numbers for snapper or pearlies or any other fish for that matter but I just want to make sure I don’t take more than I am allowed . Scientists of every persuasion are prone to make statistics suit the agenda of those they work for , I don’t think it’s worth getting in a tizzy over it unless my ability to go fishing is affected. Matt

[col]

I struggle with the current regulations let alone change it with little announcement.
Anyone smell an election date coming up,
Kissing up to the Greens, with this one, and Anastasia Palache visiting North Queensland.

I agree. The regs are probably needed if we want a good fishery for the next generation but you can be sure this is a promise to the greens for there preferences. Just wish nsw would get serious with their limits.



Sent from my iPhone using Ausfish mobile app

[billfisher]

I agree. The regs are probably needed if we want a good fishery for the next generation but you can be sure this is a promise to the greens for there preferences. Just wish nsw would get serious with their limits.



Sent from my iPhone using Ausfish mobile app

NSW snapper stocks appear to be increasing under the current reptrictions.

[Noelm]

I posted this once before, but it's kind of relevant, a couple of years ago, there was a heap of volunteers at just about every ramp within miles of me, they were there every weekend over quite a long period, they simply asked how many fishing on the boat, how many of selected species were caught (Snapper, Flathead and a few others, then a mixed category) most fishos told them to p1ss off, but some just gave them the details, how this was used, or how it was intended to be used, I don't know, but, it's probably the only semi reliable data available, whether something like this has been used and some simple formula was added to determine stocks is anyone's guess.

[Noelm]

NSW snapper stocks appear to be increasing under the current reptrictions.

I am pretty sure they are not increasing in my area, but Ocean Flathead certainly are, maybe because of the big Trawler buy outs a few years ago?

[billfisher]

I am pretty sure they are not increasing in my area, but Ocean Flathead certainly are, maybe because of the big Trawler buy outs a few years ago?

What area is that? They seem to be increasing off Sydney. And there have been excellent catches (and large sizes) off Port Stevens.

[Lovey80]

My anecdotal evidence sees that for the Sunshine Coast Snapper numbers are increasing over the last decade.

[Noelm]

What area is that? They seem to be increasing off Sydney. And there have been excellent catches (and large sizes) off Port Stevens.

Not far from there really, around the Illawarra region, I can assure you, it's pretty hard going to get a couple, you might get one legal one here and there, and maybe even snag a 3KG one, but the chances of anywhere near a bag limit are slim at best.

[Matthew Campbell]

If anyone is interested in discussing the data used in the stock assessment or any other aspect, feel free to contact me on matthew.campbell@daf.qld.gov.au. The stock assessment document is located here http://era.daf.qld.gov.au/id/eprint/...ment2018V3.pdf.

[scottar]

My reading is that NSW stocks were declared sustainable because the size, age structure and catch per effort were all positive and therefore showing stocks are on the way up under current management. I thought I made that clear. Ie even if the stock estimates are the same (note with a huge range) the difference is NSW stocks show strong signs of increasing when looking at the catch data.

That's right - but they ignored the line fishing data as it gave vastly different results to the trap data. Much the same way FQ has ignored the fact there was a vast difference by not further questioning their own results given the presence of the NSW trap data. Every line fishing data model showed biomass at under 20% and yet the traps - show up to 45 with the majority above 30. If you purely go off NSW line data, they are more or less in the same boat as us. So given the variance - why hasn't someone gone "ok, lets look into this further - there has to be another underlying reason". Does it mean that if we had commercial trapping and the subsequent data as well, we would have "sustainable" snapper fishing or does it mean that NSW fisheries has cocked up.

At the end of the day, I have no issue with fisheries management based on real world figures sourced correctly. If they don't have rec data - bring in compulsory reporting the same way they did for the pros. Unless they or the pro lobby don't want it I guess because it might well show what has really been going on I suppose. My issue is with using mathematical models that are based on numbers that may be flawed to begin with - NSW fisheries obviously though so in the face of the additional data they had.

Edit. There were 72 different models generated - 3 of which showed the higher biomass which NSW fisheries decided to run with. Take from that what you will. The trap data was taken into consideration with the model generation.

[Noelm]

I think the NSW trap fishery has just about fizzled out, very few operators compared to years ago, and even less commercial linefishing for Snapper taking place, it's a hard figure to guess or scientifically estimate how much rec catches are currently.

[billfisher]

That's right - but they ignored the line fishing data as it gave vastly different results to the trap data. Much the same way FQ has ignored the fact there was a vast difference by not further questioning their own results given the presence of the NSW trap data. Every line fishing data model showed biomass at under 20% and yet the traps - show up to 45 with the majority above 30. If you purely go off NSW line data, they are more or less in the same boat as us. So given the variance - why hasn't someone gone "ok, lets look into this further - there has to be another underlying reason". Does it mean that if we had commercial trapping and the subsequent data as well, we would have "sustainable" snapper fishing or does it mean that NSW fisheries has cocked up.

At the end of the day, I have no issue with fisheries management based on real world figures sourced correctly. If they don't have rec data - bring in compulsory reporting the same way they did for the pros. Unless they or the pro lobby don't want it I guess because it might well show what has really been going on I suppose. My issue is with using mathematical models that are based on numbers that may be flawed to begin with - NSW fisheries obviously though so in the face of the additional data they had.

The size and age structure of the NSW catch is going up, as well as catch per effort. It's a good sign that the snapper no's are increasing under current management.

That's why they are classed as sustainable. They also point out the line fishery is small and less understood so put more weight on the trap data.

Whereas the Qld snapper stocks are regarded as not likely to improve under current management - how this is worked is not clear - your reference just quotes 'modelling'. Presumably they factor in trends, in age, size and catch per effort also. Ie it don't thinks it's all based on an absolute estimate of the stock.

Why don't you ask Mathew Campbell about it?