Qld Spanish Mackerel season and limits

[Lucky_Phill]

Here in Qld we have seasonal closures, bag limits, boat limits and " in possession limits ".

Really tough measures and IMO way overboard.

Compare this to our friends just over the border and you'll see no parity.

Qld..... 1 per person or boat limit of 2 and 1 per person " in possession ".

NSW... 5 per person and NO in possession. Really means you can put 3 people in a boat, each get 5 Spanish....... next day, do the same and so on.

There is a thin blue line between Qld and NSW Spanish fishery and you can't tell me there is a Spanish Mackerel problem ? NSW don't see any, but somehow the Qld fishery is that dire, over the top restrictions are in place.

Yes, there are 2 areas of closure in Qld.. Northern and Southern... with the southern boundary at the NSW border.

So we have a problem and 5 meters away, no problem ? Either Qld has gone too far or NSW are not seeing a problem ???

This is how bad the laws are.... you can launch your boat at Tweed Heads.............. motor to Qld waters border and catch 5 each, return to tweed ramp, all legal.... but you can't drive back over the border into Qld or you're done.

Similarly, launch at Currumbin , motor to NSW waters and catch 5 each.... all legal... but once you motor a few meters back into Qld waters... you're done.

The gap in Spanish Mackerel limits between NSW and Qld is simply BS.

let's not forget Spanish Mackerel are migratory, following the warmer currents south, so all we are doing is allowing many more fish to get to NSW and hence THEIR fishery looks in great shape, because Qld is subsidising it.


LP

[Lovey80]

Maybe once NSW switches over to the same model that told QLD fisheries that their previous stock assessments were full of shit. Then NSW will be forced to drop their bag limits too.

[Dignity]

Maybe once NSW switches over to the same model that told QLD fisheries that their previous stock assessments were full of shit. Then NSW will be forced to drop their bag limits too.

Only happen when daylight savings is brought into qld. The states will never talk to each other, just have a look at Pearl Perch size and possession limits between Qld and NSW. Huge discrepancy.

[chris69]

So where do the NSW spanish mackerel come from for them to have a bigger bag limit, i suppose its far we get to catch there stocked jew fish because there traveling north and there aloud to catch our spanish mackerel that travel souht over the boarder are the qld fisheries that silly,so queenslanders get the reduced catch limit and NSW can catch more yep that says it all about the state of our fishery.

[Noelm]

I guess to look at it logically, there has to be a line/boundary somewhere, whether that be a state border (that only affects fishers right at that location) or some landmark/GPS co ordinate, it has to be “somewhere” lots of laws are like that, one side of a line is fine, the other side illegal. It happens in Trout fishing all the time, some places the “line” is a sign post on the river bank, you could stand beside the sign and fish legally, or a wayward cast, and it’s illegal.

[Noelm]

Only happen when daylight savings is brought into qld. The states will never talk to each other, just have a look at Pearl Perch size and possession limits between Qld and NSW. Huge discrepancy.

Because with all these things, there is a “no size fits all” solution, right or wrong, it’s just how it is, no different to crab trap laws and take regulations, NSW you can take female muddies, does that make it wrong?

[Dignity]

Because with all these things, there is a “no size fits all” solution, right or wrong, it’s just how it is, no different to crab trap laws and take regulations, NSW you can take female muddies, does that make it wrong?

The waters get very muddied here, undersized fish sold in shops as imported from across the border is one instance. Also the physiology of fish mskes things difficult e.g. south of the qld border duskies mature earlier, had a report somewhere and was posted here in the past. No doubt same happens with lots of other fish. Spanish mackerel though the discrepency is quite large as mentioned earlier. As I mentioned Pearl Perch, 30 cm in NSW, 38 cm in Qld. Now a 30cm PP is bloody small regardless and interestingly the land border is one thing but the water border between Qld and NSW doesn't head East from land but in the durection it was heading from the land. So us Q'lders could be easily pulled up by NSW fisheries while offshore and be legal if fishing south of the imaginary line but as mentioned in an earlier post if you return to the boat ramp in Qld your dust.
The issue is too many fingers in the pie in each state and none of thrm want to interact.
The issue of female crabs is an entire new discussion piece, I've seen what happens in the NT where the suze limit was smaller and frmales were taken. The number of crabbers were limited so they took to crabbing across the border in the gulf and running back to the NT.
The solution is not an easy one and until it becomes a federal issue will never be resolved.

[Lovey80]

You’ve all seen my “extremist” posts in the political section In the past and probably fobbed me off as a nut bag. But while my political stance is of a very reduced government in the sense of what we have now. What’s more important is the division of responsibilities.

in my opinion we’ve got it all wrong. The feds have outsourced their responsibilities in some areas and taken far too much on in others. Can we all agree that when it comes to the environment, that the air, land , water (above and below ground), the oceans including everything in them. None of that recognises man made state boundaries?

So why do we have state based EPA? State based fisheries? State based water bodies that also allow taking water in QLD from an under water basin that crosses the border into NSW. There should be one body for all of this.

its fcking mental that a fish species that is migratory across two states has vastly different management strategies in each state. That goes for Spanish, snapper, pearlies and anything else that is regulated and migratory. I can take different management approaches across across different geographic boundaries. Snapper is a perfect example. But to have different regulatory bodies over the same species of fish is so dumb it isn’t funny.

[Noelm]

Looking at Snapper, it’s a real strange setup, WA, SA, VIC, NSW and QLD all have stocks and rec and pro fisheries, all states have and (in my opinion) require local “control” no Federal law can cover all states, the species, methods and stocks vary considerably, so size, bag limits and closed seasons have to be done on a state by state basis.

[Dignity]

Looking at Snapper, it’s a real strange setup, WA, SA, VIC, NSW and QLD all have stocks and rec and pro fisheries, all states have and (in my opinion) require local “control” no Federal law can cover all states, the species, methods and stocks vary considerably, so size, bag limits and closed seasons have to be done on a state by state basis.

It can be done but requires agreement between states to relinquish some of their powers. Here's an example I think might make it clearer.
I was watching the weather reports on fire dangers around the states a few days ago and how the western area of Victoria was in the Catastrophic zone but as soon as you crossed the border to SA it was only Extreme, a niceclean cut line. Now if I was living that close to the border I'd move across that imaginary line until it eased from Catastrophic. That sounds logical to me.

[Noelm]

I don’t disagree, but, sometimes lines need to be drawn, the SA Snapper fishery is vastly different to Vic, which is way different to NSW as so it goes, sure there is a “line” that doesn’t make sense, a straight line that fish or fires don’t cross…….which is impossible, but, just like (say) a speed limit sign on the highway, one side might be 100kph, just past it is 60, the sign has to be placed somewhere.

[Dignity]

I don’t disagree, but, sometimes lines need to be drawn, the SA Snapper fishery is vastly different to Vic, which is way different to NSW as so it goes, sure there is a “line” that doesn’t make sense, a straight line that fish or fires don’t cross…….which is impossible, but, just like (say) a speed limit sign on the highway, one side might be 100kph, just past it is 60, the sign has to be placed somewhere.

Know what you mean, Republic of Ireland, speed signs in kph, Northern Ireland signs in Mph, often, just a tiny sign saying you've moved from one to the other and they both look the same.
My argument and Lovely's still stand

[Noelm]

As I said, I don’t disagree, I just offer a possible scenario on how/why its like it is. Let’s say the Federal Government introduced a nationwide fisheries management body, there would (in my opinion) still be “boundaries” where different laws would overlap for the same species and methods. Almost all of these areas require kind of local management. One very extreme and almost stupid example would be Barramundi size and bag limits in Tasmania……there is no single body that could manage the entire nation, even if there was, it would be split up into some kind of zones and end up really no different than it is now. For things like (say) water and car registrations road rules, electricity and so on, sure, there easily could be a single governing body, but would QLDers go for annual car inspections like most other states? I am not trying to say it shouldn’t be so, it’s just not so easy when similar things require very different governance area to area.

[Lovey80]

I could be wrong and I’ll stand corrected if somebody knows better, but I believe that the feds already delegate their responsibility with respect to off shore fisheries management to the states. There would always have to be regional approaches and to fisheries management that’s for sure but if they were all part of a national body, you wouldn’t have stupid shit where the Gold Coast guy can have 1 fish but the Tweed guy can have 5 for the same stock.

on the flip side. Where you have less movement of species and more localised stocks. I’ve always been in favour of more localised approaches where species get hit much harder.

[Noelm]

I could be wrong and I’ll stand corrected if somebody knows better, but I believe that the feds already delegate their responsibility with respect to off shore fisheries management to the states. There would always have to be regional approaches and to fisheries management that’s for sure but if they were all part of a national body, you wouldn’t have stupid shit where the Gold Coast guy can have 1 fish but the Tweed guy can have 5 for the same stock.

on the flip side. Where you have less movement of species and more localised stocks. I’ve always been in favour of more localised approaches where species get hit much harder.

I think you would still have the Tweed/Gold Coast thing, simply because there has to be “lines” you can just “fade” a zone in, it’s either this side or that side of a point/line/border. I know it’s not technically right, but reality is, this kind of thing will always exist regardless of who is in charge.