Science behind the proposed closures

[Gazza]

Gazza: As for "tailor" ....STOP COMMERCIAL NETTING...problem solved
OR should we close 50% of the beaches...and make surfrods HALFsize

Lefty: To suggest that rec fishing doesn't contribute to the reduction in tailor numbers (more precisely larger tailor) is just naive.

Mate ,RecFishos eat Tailor , tailor breed and grow RAPIDLY.

IF the size is increased to 35cm or even an unrealistic 40cms , and the bag is or isn't reduced to say 15 or 12 ....the BIOMASS issue is SOLVED.

IF Commercial netting in Qld is reduced/banned/compensated....the BIOMASS issue is SOLVED.

The only thing that should be "locked-up" , is the ranting, raving looney left ......jmo

[lefty_green]

IF Commercial netting in Qld is reduced/banned/compensated....the BIOMASS issue is SOLVED.
Its not enough that they have been banned from Fraser? You're kidding yourself if you think the netters are to blame for tailor

[Adamy]

[color=#ff3300]
To suggest that rec fishing doesn't contribute to the reduction in tailor numbers (more precisely larger tailor) is just naive.

To suggest that greenies arent just a raving bunch of vegans intent on destroying fishing as a pastime and want to turn us all into vegatarians using emotive arguments such as protection of dugong and other seacreatures is just naive.

[Gazza]

Gazza: IF Commercial netting in Qld is reduced/banned/compensated....the BIOMASS issue is SOLVED.
Left-nut: Its not enough that they have been banned from Fraser? You're kidding yourself if you think the netters are to blame for tailor

IF your right-lefty......lobby to bring back the Commercial Netters that ARE banned in NSW.....

Same fish Dude , psst Fraser WAS a significant and obvious spawning aggregation.......PROBLEM SOLVED ,no further action required ...too easy!!

[jim_farrell]

Lefty, when asked what evidence you have that fish stocks are under threat. You come up with this gem.......

"It is not a theory, they are."

Is that the best you can do??????

If so, stop wasting everyones time and play your little inconsequential games elsewhere. You obviously have no worthy imput on this debate in any way.

We all admit that fishing of any type has an effect. If you take 1 fish from a fishery that houses 1000000, you have decreased their number. Nobody is denying that.
The argument is, does rec fishing in the bay have a negative effect on fish stocks.
If you can answer that question with evidence, somebody may be interested in your comment. If not, the majority of us shall continue to laugh at your responses.
Jim

[scaly]

Lefty, when asked what evidence you have that fish stocks are under threat. You come up with this gem.......

"It is not a theory, they are."

I'm waiting for the "I know you are, but what am I?" retort from Lefty.

[littlejim]

LG demonstrates from the above posts that he doesn't understand when you are making a point, and thinks that arguing a case is done by making unsupported assertions, "... ridiculous" without explaining why it is ridiculous. I think most genuine greens are reasonably intelligent and capable of rational debate, unfortunately LG does not fit these parameters from what I have read of his posts. I'm quite happy to leave him here blabbing away about estimating the number of fish caught by counting trailers in carparks, and measuring the number of flathead caught by the bag limits authorities impose on them. trying to argue with him is just a waste of typing finger.

Most of the fishos I read on this board are 'green'. They don't want to jigger up the supply of the fish they catch. They support Marine Parks if they are based on genuinely allowing fish to breed. they haven't got time to be hauling out huge numbers of fish day after day, they go out intermittently and don't always bag out.

But the Marine Parks are a political decision as well as/rather than a conservation decision and other agendas get mixed in, in addition to preserving fish. I would like to see some more experimentation with artificial reefs to see whether that is a worthwhile addition/alternative way to increase fish stocks as well.

the recent trip to the States made me realise that the small number of Aussie recreational fishermen, in comparison to the number in the US, are being credited with an exaggerated effect on reducing Australian fish numbers. I would like to see actual numbers of fish caught by rec fishermen put up rather than WAGs based on an extrapolation from number of fishing licences, number of boats or , heaven forbid, number of trailers in the carpark.(WAG=wild *rsed guess)

[lefty_green]

Flick
Any 1st year fish biol student can tell you that if a the majority of the fish caught are small then that population is overfished. Unfortunately, most populations of fish nowadays are being harvested beyond maximum sustainable yeild. In my estimation that means that stocks are overfished (ie under threat) which means they are in trouble. Tailor is a classic example - most fish caught are 1yo. They ARE overfished. No question. I dont see these points as being inconsequential. If fish stocks aren't declining, why do people on this site continue to call for the removal of commercial fishers? If fish stocks are ok, then the present level of effort (both commercial and rec) in Moreton Bay is acceptable then? Why do netters need to be removed if stocks aren't overfished?

intelligent and capable of rational debate jim - i see myself as intelligent and capable of debate. A 3 year marine science degree has given me enough of a background to make points I see as being relevant and I'd back myself in any discussion.

[billfisher]

Flick
Unfortunately, most populations of fish nowadays are being harvested beyond maximum sustainable yeild.

[and I'd back myself in any discussion.

Lefty_Green,

Well try and back that statement up. I know more about NSW waters. Here only two species are recognised as recruitment overfished. Both of them are found in deep water and are rarely targeted by amateurs. One is the gemfish. Note that they will not be protected by the marine parks. A recovery plan is being formulated by fisheries.

In the case of tailor they would be a good candidate to be declared a rec only species. They are poor value and poor eating when marketed but are of enormous value to amateurs. They would be of more economic value to the state as a rec species as well and the stocks would benifit too. Once again as a highly mobile species they would not likely benifit from a marine park.

[seatime]

lefty_green

out of interest, how many field trips would the average marine biologist graduate have taken throughout their 3 yr degree studies?

what duration are the field trips?

where are field trips conducted?

has Moreton Bay or Great Sandy Straits or Fraser Island beaches and reefs been a part of studies conducted by students undertaking marine biology?
or is the Great Barrier Reef the only study site used?

I've seen lots of facts and figures for catch rates in areas I have not personally visited, and so I'm hesitant to give opinions unless I'm certain of the facts. This doesn't seem to be the disposition of narrow minded conservationists like yourself and others however.

can't see you being successful in your chosen field, not if you blindly believe everything your lecturers preach.

it looks to me like the ideology behind being GREEN appeals to you more than the actual subject matter.

regards

[scaly]

Flick
Any 1st year fish biol student can tell you that if a the majority of the fish caught are small then that population is overfished.

You might need to go back and do a 1st year refresher course. Your statement is a blatantly false presumption. Please show your data set that indicates over exploitation.

[jim_farrell]

Lefty, can you list which species in the bay are overfished and which would benifit from closures.

If you are so learned, can you outline the areas you would mark for closure and on what basis of study.

[Gazza]

If fish stocks are ok, then the present level of effort (both commercial and rec) in Moreton Bay is acceptable then? Why do netters need to be removed if stocks aren't overfished?

Lefty , forever going in ever diminishing circles....where will it end!!

Mate, you have NO solution(s) ,bar lock-it-up ....which is a shame

Netters CAN catch a-n-y-t-h-i-n-g that swims ,targeted or not licenced to sell, that includes many,many undersize and juvenile fish ,which UNLIKE RecFishos , can't be released straight away.

Sure........ IF netters had larger "square-hooks" this undersize mortality would be reduced ,and assist their cause. IF they take most of the larger fish in a school ,of course ,there will tend to be mainly smaller fish left.

and YES , I do agree, the Comm/Rec take in Moreton Bay is sustainable. Any minor tweaks of Bag & size limits, deemed to be necessary, or TAC limits on Comms. , with management by Fisheries , would be scrutinised ,but acceptable medicine!!!

Catching small fish , INDICATES breeding has occurred, and it is these "small fish" that grow & breed as BIGGER ones.

i.e. RELEASED (undersize) by RecFishos , and 'eventually' by Comms.

[Gorilla_in_Manila]

Tailor is a classic example - most fish caught are 1yo. They ARE overfished. No question.

Where do you get this from, or is it because you don't know much about catching tailor?

Having caught tailor for more than 25 years in Northern NSW, and my old man doing it for around 50 years, we both say that the size and quality of tailor has been getting better over the last 5 years or so. A weekly fishing report from down Port Maquarie way has mentioned that this year is the best tailor season since 10 years ago. And salmon are just everywhere, including for the first time I can remember in my lifetime, being caught up near Byron Bay.

Seems to me they are coming back, not declining.

Might have something to do with stopping commercial netting, but you could hardly claim rec fisho's are devestating the stocks when size and catch's seem to be steadily improving.

Cheers
Jeff

[littlejim]

Lg,

my last post on this section of the forum.
I just thought I'd point out that when I graduated, a long time ago, the faculty pointed out that half of what they taught us was wrong and they couldn't tell us which half.

as time passed it became obvious they were right.

Your degree is the beginning of your learning not the end. You've also got to have an open mind not a closed one otherwise all the new knowledge can't get in.