could an increase in bycatch indicate the the communities in these areas are actually flourishing???
if you catch more fish doesnt that mean more are there to be caught???
could an increase in bycatch indicate the the communities in these areas are actually flourishing???
if you catch more fish doesnt that mean more are there to be caught???
something for us to think about
A few years ago I was able to get out on trawler belonging to a friend of the family.
This trawler worked out of Southport. I went out maybe a dozen times over a few months.
I am sorry now I didn't have the sense to take along a camera. The amount of by-catch was appalling.
This was just one boat of dozens working out of Southport.
At that time of year they were probably doing 3-4 shots a night, which could go up to 5, I think it depended on how close in they worked.
I would'nt be able to give an accurate ratio of prawns to by-catch, but I would have to say it was well into double figures, and not much survives the cod end of those nets.
I've rarely bought prawns since then, I also find the use of the word 'harvesting' odd, when it's used in the same sentence with trawlers.
Harvesting suggests to me, something was cultivated to begin with.
Not so in the case of trawlers.
GO THE CRUISER UTES!
....OH WHAT A FEELING!
tanx to al the open minded folks that are able to see past the recco/green hype. yes we all want a slice of the same resource pie. profishers are working on our sustainability issues [ did u know that teds turtle excluder devices have been used since the the early 90s in the bay prob not] what i hear a lot of on these web sites is trawlers are killing the fishstocks. seems strange coming from an industry that cannot define its actual effort at all. when u guys can thru log books and licensing tell us exactly what ur effect on fish stocks is when u guys can account for the increase in the recreational industrys effort thru 50 thou people per year moving to se qld to enjoy seachange thru the increasingly affordability of gps plotters sounders and all other 'professional gear' thru web sites and mobile fones directing effort then maybe ill listen . were working on our issues wot r u gus doing ..... noithing that i can see other than playing the blame the pros game. ive had plenty of folk thro the 60 fishers on a wharf ask how many caught a fish .........yeah well 60 hooks day in day out in a relatively closed ecosystem ..........who killed the fish there...........i didnt trawl there.
Waldo
1.Rec fishing is not an industry, its an activity pursued by individuals
2. Rec fishing activity has negligable bycatch by comparison to commercial operations
3. Just because there are 60 fishers at a location does not mean that even one fish was caught.In fact in heavily fished locations its harder to catch the fish as they become educated.
4. Is it your belief that only pro fishers should have access to electronics aids.
5. 50 thousand people a week may move here, how many have boats??? when i was in the advertising industry 5 years ago , targeting boaties was a waste of time, as the percentage of the general population was too low.
6 Once again you are trying to turn the spotlight elsewhere than what commercial fishers have done, and are still doing to the environment.
Time to take a long hard look at your self personally and say yes/no I am personally prepared to damage the environment for profit. Because that is the question this debate hinges on.
By the way I am not a greeny or politically aligned in any way I just have strong personal views on this matter.
Last week on Sunday evening at about 8.00pm I crossed from Mud Island to the river mouth and had to avoid 3 trawlers in that short distace and could see another 3 in the same vicinity all trawling. Some friends counted 11 trawlers anchored at Mud during last week
In the five hrs we fished we accounted for 10 fish, 0 juveniles were killed nor were any non target species destroyed. I wonder how many one of those trawlers killed.
mate if the recco industry was not so how do u account for the bfc phenomenom [ the bunnings of the fishing tackle world].
recco fishing accounts for 3/4s of the bream harvest in qld and 2/3 of the whiting harvest mmmmmmm wot no effect.
60 hooks educating fish.....mate come on.
it is not my belief that only pros shud have access to electronics but the profishing sector has accounted for the subsequent increase in effort from the use of such devices. ur industry cannot even empirically account for ur tru effort let alone effort creep.
wmb oceanics surveys of where trawlers work in the bay cites minimal effect on the environement....
to claim that the recreational industry has no effect on the enviroment is ludicris. profishers are always refered to within the frame work of not actual effort but maximum allowable effort.
apply this principal to the recco industry and see where the numbers end up......880,000 fishers multiplied by any bag limit multiplied by average weight of fish.........go on work it out.......i dare u.
and finally i work for an honest living providing equitable access to the entire community to the health giving benefits of seafood. yes i expect to make a profit but i also strive continously to minimize my impacts on the enviroment, which is reflected in the 2004 fisheries discussion paper which states ' that whilst primarily driven by such abiotic factors as rainfall ' that moreton bay is primarily a sustainable resource.
mate try opening both eyes.
Rando,
What Waldo and others do is LEGAL, and is deemed to be so by the government.
It is also managed by the government.
Perhaps your comments would be better directed toward lobby groups and the political arena?
You seem to exonerate yourself and rec fishers from having any effect at all? A magnificent effort in the absence of fact.
However what's being served up here wouldn't carry too much weight with the abovementioned groups.
"Time to take a long hard look at your self personally and say yes/no I am personally prepared to damage the environment for profit. Because that is the question this debate hinges on."
Do you live in a house, in a city, drive a car, participate in the same consumerist society as the rest of us? And then wish to fish the 'pristine' waters of Mud island on a saturday with everybody else?
I reckon you live in the same glass house as the rest of us, and trying to blame an affiliated part of the same small picture - no matter what your personal views - is a retrograde move and can only harm what others work so hard to achieve.
Bay water quality issues will, in a couple of years be of much more concern than pro fishing ever was. Then - maybe you'll look to the same guys you're blaming to supply data to substantiate that the bay is dying from something much more sinister than over fishing.......
C.J.
nil carborundum illegitimi
thanx gbc well said
GBC/Waldo.
Ill try again.
There is NO recreational fishing industry.
There are retail industries that sell fishing products such as rods and reels. There are manufacturing industries that make rods and reels etc etc But there is no such thing as a recreational fishing industry.
Qouting the figures you use with regard to bag limit X by the number of rec fishers is pure bullshit and I suspect you know it.
I have NEVER reached a bag limit on ANY species.
In fact most times I go fishing I return with "0 " fish multiply that by 880000, I
DARE YOU!!!!.
You Live in a city , in a house ,drive a car the same as me and therefore have the same day to day impact as I do.
The difference lies in your fishing activity.
What you do to the environment in your fishing day has a thousand times more effect than what I do when I fish.
And while the impact i have on your activity is so small that it barely rates consideration, the impact you have on my fishing is huge and is the major contributing factor to the outcome.
I think it is YOU that has a problem with vision
And forgive me if Im cynical about your stated desire to provide for the masses.
Most people work because they have to have an income.
Dont ask me to believe that you are driven by altruism, if it were so, you could not reconcile your trawling's effect on the environment, with the communities greater good.
In answer to your comments about my personal effect on the environment I stand by them. The only times I get to fish anywhere other than land based is the occasional invite onto someone elses boat.
I gather my own bait.
I never leave litter and usually pick up any rubbish in the areas I fish.
If I am cast netting I wash down any jetty or pontoon before leaving.
I observe all bag and size limits and in fact wont take legal bream as they are way too small to kill.
More than 90 % of my fishing excursions end with not one fish being taken and zero bycatch . Can you say the same!!!???
rando
I stated on a previous thread that amateurs had a larger impact on barra stocks in the N.T. than pros - it ruffled some feathers but I backed it up with facts......not by swearing and then believing my own crap. It ain't bullshit and I suspect if I sent you the links you may be able to do the maths.
Again you are trying to say that 'blokes going fishing is not an industry' - agreed. What they are called is not what I'm concerned about. It is however a given that amateurs (me included and by the way I generally catch fish if not bag out
By your own ratio - your front garden is O.K., but cotton farming should stop? By the way I'm not a huge fan of cotton farming methods. However because I am a gardener who has much less impact than a farmer does that then somehow make me more riteous?
Take a look around your suburb and check out the gardening going on and it will add up to a lot of phosphates entering the storm water system. Each joe average only buys a kilo a year - but the cumulative effect is not dissimilar to a farm runoff.
I would apply a similar yardstick to me-you and all the other amateurs out there - together we have an impact.
I have also stated in the past that I believe that this impact is sustainable.
This assumes however that existing parameters don't change and that the bay isn't poisoned by 2 million 'I didn't do it' joe average gardeners.
nil carborundum illegitimi
I am not trying to be more righteous , but pro fishers cannot justify the damage they do by saying that others also do damage. When you have got the environmental problems your activity creates minimized so as to have little or no affect on others then you can start calling out for others to change.
The simple truth is if tomorrow all trawling stopped in Moreton bay and its estuaries the bay would recover far more ( and more quickly) than if all rec fishing stopped because the cumulative negative effects of all trawling is greater than the cumulative negative effect of all rec fishing.
You demand quantification(an impossable task) that what rec fishers say is supportable.
Well for years we said the professionals were damaging mackeral stocks, and surprise surprise when the pros stopped netting the mackeral made a magnificent comeback.
Most people I speak to now believe that the major problem the bay faces is too much trawling.I believe that the "COMMON sence " of this will be bourne- out, just as it was for the mackeral.
Dont worry too much about the phosphates mate,
worry about all the seagrass that has been destroyed( it would have soaked up phosphates/nitrates)
and turbidity created by dragging the bottom night after night that also damages seagrass regrowth.
rando
rando u hate trawler w/ a passion as is ur wont. but please dont try and tell me that the recco sector is not an industry.....god look at all the sponship on this website for gods sake.
and mate if u cant catch a fish cos ur a poor fisherman well thats not my fault.
wmb oceanics surveys states that most trawling occurs on mud/silt bottoms and that our impacts are minimal as this mud and silt is laid dow year after year by the natural effect of rivers.
try opening ur eyes dude cos they seem wide shut to me
If rec fishing is an industry who gets the profit?
Thats what an industry is old chum enterprise for profit .
Mate if you put me beside a gunfisherman where there are fish to catch I hold my own .
Its pretty hard to catch fish shore based when blokes like you kill a couple of hundred kilos of fish per shot and call it bycatch.
My eyes are wide open pal and no amount of "spin" from you will change what I can see.
I spent 10 years in one of australias biggest advertising organisations and I can spot 'spin' at a glance,not one of your arguments holds water, and you refuse to acknowledge that your activity does damage and affects other peoples life styles.
Ive said all I want to say on this matter.
You no doubt will continue what you do and Im sure tomorrow and every day another couple of hundred kilos of fish kill will get chucked off YOUR boat.
another few tons of sediment will be stirred up into the water column by YOUR net .
but somehow the life and environment of the bay will be affected by someone else, not you, it couldnt be you,
rando
rando
Gentlemen
This is getting to personal. Debate the facts but please stop trading personal insults.
Regards
Derek
I thought I was on that (favoured transvestite panty hose) forum for a while until Derek's post reminded me of where I was/am.
Any fishing is good fishing(should probably say Any fishing is...probably going to be illegal soon)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote