PDA

View Full Version : Paradise Dam stocking?



mylestom
09-02-2009, 05:58 AM
Paradise Dam is up to 68% it is a pity that more is not being done for the stocking of this impoundment.

It would take a lot of pressure of some of the other dams and is in a good location.

Yes it keeps the Skiers away from the others, but it seems too good a resource not to be stocked.


Regards


Trev

chewy01
09-02-2009, 06:43 AM
Hi trev, i dont hink it will ever be stocked.Something about the lungfish i think. Someone may be able to shed more light.
chewy

Steve B
09-02-2009, 08:55 AM
Hi trev, i dont hink it will ever be stocked.Something about the lungfish i think. Someone may be able to shed more light.
chewy

and the ar se breathing turtle:D Not sure whats going on. Its not actually a fully 'locked' impoundment anymore, as the fish ladder has begun working. I think its something to do with that as well. Barra that are stocked by the Gayndah fish stocking in their weir swim down anyway when it overflows!!

mylestom
10-02-2009, 05:41 AM
and the ar se breathing turtle:D Not sure whats going on. Its not actually a fully 'locked' impoundment anymore, as the fish ladder has begun working. I think its something to do with that as well. Barra that are stocked by the Gayndah fish stocking in their weir swim down anyway when it overflows!!

Steve,

Well really it would be a great addition to the SIP Impoundments, seems strange to go to the effort of installing a fish ladder.

Suppose they think that the Gayndah fish won't get there. They probably think the fish ladder will provide enough natural stocking. But with stocked fished above and natural fish below and fish ladder, wonder what will happen.

Think that with the facilities that they provided with the dam, that someone has gotten into the powers that be ears and had it "locked".

Discussion and bringing it up on sites like this can only be helpful to future use of such impoundments.


Regards

Trev

Mike Delisser
10-02-2009, 08:18 PM
One of the funniest things I've ever heard of came from a public meeting of anglers interested in stocking Paradise Dam with Barra, Bass & Yellows. The Qld Conservation Council was putting up arguments against saying that stocking the dam would have an adverse effect on the resident Lungfish population and had brought along the worlds foremost expert on the lungfish species (a female professor).
After she stated her case on how the Lungfish would be wiped out if the anglers went ahead with their plans and stocked the dam, one well known Mundubberra angler stood up and told the meeting that the professor didn't know what she was talking about. When this statement was scoffed at by the lady professor our Mundubberra angler told her that he knew one thing about the endangered Lungfish she wouldn't have a clue about. The head of the Conservation Council replyed "I find that hard to believe, the good professor is the world's leading Lungfish expert", then our angler proudly proclaimed "I know what they taste like" ;D ;D ;D you should have seen their faces, true story.

Cheers

Luc
10-02-2009, 09:30 PM
I beleive that the shires around the dam are quite keen to get it stocked.

As for the 'learned' professor IMO she doesn't know her subject matter too well.

Lungfish are thriving in Somerset, Wivenhoe and North Pine dams and those dams are pretty well stocked.

As for turtles, they also seem to find dams a very congenial place to thrive.

Just more BS from the green zone

Luc

shayned
11-02-2009, 05:07 PM
The really funny thing is that the fish that Luc is talking about are actually stocked fish as well. Only difference being that it was done in the early 1900's.:D ::)

Luc
11-02-2009, 07:24 PM
Makes you wonder about the scientific open mind!!

Maybe next time the flood gates on NPD are opened, we should take the learned professor for a visit to the bottom of the dam after the gates are closed.

She'll get to see how many endangered lungfish are there and us disgusting rape & pillage fishers lifting as many as possible back into the dam.

Luc

mylestom
12-02-2009, 07:06 PM
Their seems to be a variance in a lot of the research, probably it changes with the dam they are talking about, seems like the research below by Anne Kemps, was aimed at the Traverston Dam being built, or am I just a doubting Thomas.



Quote of her web site


The current situation for lungfish
Lungfish live a long time, and spawn every year. It is a normal strategy that very few of these eggs grow into adult lungfish, or there would be nothing but lungfish in the river.
There is a difference between the production of eggs and the recruitment of juveniles to the adult population.
Recruitment of a small number of young fish to the population every year is normal. However, this depends on an undisturbed environment. A damaged environment means no protection for young fish, and no juveniles survive.
This means that lungfish are in trouble, partly because of the current drought, and partly because of changes to the rivers where they live.
Weirs and dams created to supply water for towns and farms have fluctuating water levels, particularly in spring, so refuges for young do not get established.
There are no water plants for the eggs, and small lungfish have nowhere to hide, and no food. The eggs and young die, and there are no new adults.
Paradise Weir, the latest to be built across the Burnett River has floating islands, for lungfish to spawn on, and fish ladders.
Lungfish do not apparently use the fish ladders to scale the weir. It is also unlikely that the islands are successful as spawning sites for the lungfish behind the weir.
Artificial islands in the middle of a deep lake will not be the first choice for adults when they are spawning.
Lungfish seem to prefer shallow water for spawning, and the islands are not in an area that they have used before.
Floating mops of artificial material, an idea borrowed from commercial aquarists, do work, in my experience, if they are placed near a known spawning site, and in flowing water.
Lungfish are not choosy about where they lay their eggs - natural water plants or floating islands are fine by them. But they come to the same area to spawn, and like flowing shallow water.
Lungfish will not thrive in a large reservoir with fluctuating water levels in spring.
In addition, poor quality water suppresses successful spawning. Water quality in weirs and reservoirs is poor.


Unquote


Seems to contradict the evidence of Somerset, Wivenhoe and NPD.
All to much to this poor mortal to work out.


This would not have been the expert at that meeting now?




Regards




Trev

chewy01
12-02-2009, 07:47 PM
What a load of bollocks,there are stacks of lungfish below lenthalls,and the water level changes there are greater than any waterway iv fished,depending on usage..geez..

Jim_Tait
13-02-2009, 09:56 AM
The primary concern for lungfish with regard to barra stocking is teh predation pressure it would present for juvenile fish. Although barra are native to the Burnett they never occurreed in very large numbers historically in its upper reaches. Barra populations established by stocking are unatuarlly high because unlike natural recruitment that depends on annual rainfall events, availability of nursery swamps and connecting flows etc artifical stocking see's 1000's go in per annum regardless of natures variability - a top heavy population of big predators in the burnett is not what the lungfish need given that their recruitment is already being impacted by impoundment of suitable spawning habitat (~70% now under impounded / backed up waters), fish passage barriers, weed infestation (hyacinth, hymenachne causing dissolved oxygen collapses in spawing areas) and potentially exotic fish predation of eggs (tilapia now recorded from the upper burnett catchment). Lungfish live to a very old age and people tend to nominate the fact that they see 'heaps' as indicvating that they're doing fine - the problem is first observed 50 -100 yrs down the road when the failed recruitment becomes apparent as a population crash. There are barra in Paradise that have got there from the upstream stocking (big >1m fellas, I was there couple of days ago and the DPI boys had rolled a couple with the electroshocker boat but there is a lot of water in between them and they are unlikely to present a risk to small lungfish unless the density builds up in the absence of no downstream movement.

In the environment versus development debate debate we always hear a lot about a the need to be sensible about having 'some balance' usually from the anti greenie brigade. If you consider the availability of stocked barra waters in the Burnett region I think that in consideration of maintaining some 'balance' for environmental outcomes we don't need to stock Paradise Dam with barra.

BTW the guy that skited about eating lungfish - I hope his chooks grow up to be emus and kick his shithouse down (and he choked on the bones)! - Jim

Mike Delisser
13-02-2009, 04:49 PM
Jim can you pass on any info about hatchery bred Lungfish? I heard some one around Childers or Gin Gin had made some sort of a break-through and was even exporting the overseas, can you verify?

I wouldn't say he was skiting about it Jim, the group was listening to the expert among other things telling them about the total disappearance of the Lungfish from one large section of the Burnett because of barra stocking over the years. Many of those present were farmer/anglers who live on that section of the river and knew for a fact there was (and still is) a large population of Lungfish there but she refused to acknowledge their observations and stuck with her line, I guess he had a gut full, esp when Pat Comben (chair) back her up over the locals.

Also it was bloody long time ago during a very hard time on the land when food was short, white sauce and onions I believe was the old bush recipe.

Jim_Tait
14-02-2009, 09:29 AM
Not sure about hatchery production but given their breeding behaviour I'd imagine it wouldn't be too hard to do.

Fair cop about eating them..I would of too if I was in same situation, I also know plenty of locals (my folks live on the Burnett) who have at times eaten them - it must happen a bit because some of the radio tagged fish tags have ended up beside fish cleaning areas in camping grounds and with such low recruitment levels it doesn't take too much 'take' to set them up for a fall in latter years.

This is also a key point for the lungfish expert giving the stocking boys a serve, while she may have legitimate concerns about barra predation on young the liklihood that existing barra stocking (a decade or so old) has already made a dent in the number of adult lungfish observed (they live 50-100+? years) sounds a bit like BS to me so maybe she should of been a bit more humble in appreciating local expertise.

Regards - Jim

Obi _ Wan
14-02-2009, 01:10 PM
[quote=M62;970531]Jim can you pass on any info about hatchery bred Lungfish? I heard some one around Childers or Gin Gin had made some sort of a break-through and was even exporting the overseas, can you verify?

quote]

There was a storey in the Courier Mail, around half a page, sometime in the last six to twelve months if i can remember correctly.

The lung fish breeder is located at Howard i believe and exports live fingerling lung fish for around $1,500 each.

A point on predation, if barra are a problem to the lungfish, then why don't bass predate on the lungfish as well?

I have fished NPD extensively and i can assure that there is a massive population of lunfish, in sizes from (that i have seen) 300mm to massive fish at approx. 1.800 meters long and well in excess of 25kg's. This lake has been in existence for over thirty years now and yet we have 300 millimeter lungfish coexisting with bass up to 60cm's.

IMHO the theory of predation is just utter crap, of course a few will meet their end as with everything on this earth.

Cheers,
John.

Jim_Tait
14-02-2009, 02:12 PM
Bass stocking hasn't been around long enough to make too much of a dent in the adult lung fish population in NPD as for the 300mm versions there are SFA there and the population structure is characterised by a distinct lack of smaller size classes (as are all stocked impoundment populations BTW) - as per 'the theory of predation' being utter crap I don't know on what basis you can say that other than optimisim that 'barra ain't going to be a problem maa.....te...." - if FFSA are so convinced its not a problem let them as the proponents get some SIIP $ committed to independent objective research assessing what barra at Monduran / Awonga type densities and size classes do to <400mm lung fish in a typical impoundment environment - if it comes up trumps then beauty, I'll go with the umpires decision - I like barra fishing as much as the next fella but without that information I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss it as 'utter crap' and will lean toward the precautionary principle.

mylestom
14-02-2009, 04:05 PM
The question also would be do lungfish coexist with barra in some of our river systems. If the weir above has been established and stocked, what is the proof that the barra and not other predators do have an impact, if any, on the lungfish and other species.

Their would be numerous predators other than barra for that smaller size fish, but in particular to brand one species/animal/bird the culprit seems to be not really great scientific evidence. Also by the available scientific evidence the dam itself, would have a bigger effect. But this does not seem to be the case in various other dams.

Why would the government allow the species to be breed and exported if the need was greater in this country, if there is such a great need here.

To expect funding from limited resources to prove it one way or other would be in the hand of the government. But I would expect that the science would be biased in a certain way.

Obviously we can all pick anything we do development,highways,pollution and just general human intervention will have some impact. But to say a particular species will be impacted by another particular species without evidence seems to me to be a bit on the nose.

Just my viewpoint, of which we are all entitled to.


My belief is that the dam should be stocked, balanced stocking with species that currently co-exist in that system which would include Barra, Lungfish etc.


Regards


Trev

shayned
14-02-2009, 08:21 PM
Hey Jim,
Before you take a big shot at me too, let me just say I LLLOOOVVVVEEEE Lungfish.

For enjoyment I trawl the net and read what ever scientific literature is available on this species. My question is are you being totally forthcoming in your opinions??

:-/
That said, the poor buggers have the same recruitment strategy as cod, be long lived and have more chances at breeding. Allowing for the long periods of poor breeding conditions and low recruitment levels. Personally I would be a lot happier if we consistently found small lung fish in our dams. But as you know Jim there is problems in how this data can be collected and we really cant be sure whether recruitment is happening. Although I agree the anecdotal " I see plenty of them." isn't really an argument that is good enough right now and being careful isn't a bad approach for the moment.

I actually put up a link to a sunwater paper on this issue in an earlier post but its gone????

Jim_Tait
15-02-2009, 09:14 PM
Trev below is attempt to respond to queries you raised


The question also would be do lungfish coexist with barra in some of our river systems. Lungfish only naturally occurred in the Burnett and Mary Rivers - although barra are natural to these systems the anecdotal evidence is that they never got to high densities in upper freshwater reaches - certainly not to the sort of densities seen in stocked impoundments.
If the weir above has been established and stocked, what is the proof that the barra and not other predators do have an impact, if any, on the lungfish and other species.

There is currently little evidence that I'm aware of other than indications that populations structures indicate recruitment of young fish is particularly poor and this could have numerous causes - that's why research is needed or in the absence of research prudent precautionary managment.


Their would be numerous predators other than barra for that smaller size fish, but in particular to brand one species/animal/bird the culprit seems to be not really great scientific evidence. Agree, but again that is why research is needed. However, we know that lungfish are very cryptic in the early years of their life and appear not to venture from cover until several years old and 300- 400 mm in length, above that size they become fairly bullet proof to the range of predators that naturally occur in these river systems - fork tailed caties probably being the most serious threat and even large bass probably not too much of a threat to juveniles of this size, however large barra particularly at high densities, one could quite legitimately suggest would be a different proposition - in the natural context fork tail catties and barra are temperature limited in terms of there upstream distribution, Mary River cod would have been natural predators in that system, and traditional hunters would have probaly been prominant in reducing adult lungfish numbers - there is some suggestion based on early reports that Lungfish may occur at greater densities today than they did historically - but if we allow recruitment to die in the arse the 'big?' populations we currently enjoy may check out within a generation, and building a breeding population back up could be hard particularly where we already have so many environmental pressures working against them as we do in the Burnett.

Also by the available scientific evidence the dam itself, would have a bigger effect. But this does not seem to be the case in various other dams. Dams do have a big effect in degrading suitable spawning habitat - adults can do fine and grow as fat as mud in dams but they look for riverine reaches for suitable breeding sites (note there is some evidence of successful dam breeding i.e. in North Pine but its sub optimal)- hence dams crowd the adult lunfish into remaining breeding reaches at spawning time and limit the overall recruitment capacity of the population - its against this reduced recruitment capacity of lungfish that we need to be careful in introducing any additional pressures.


Why would the government allow the species to be breed and exported if the need was greater in this country, if there is such a great need here. artifical stocking is a poor replacement for natural recruitment, its more expensive, has genetic and ecological vigour issues and should only be a last resort - a position we're not yet in with lungfish and should actively working to not get into


To expect funding from limited resources to prove it one way or other would be in the hand of the government. But I would expect that the science would be biased in a certain way. I can assure you that the resources spent on threatened fish species in Qld pales in comparison to that spent on rec fisheries as l;imited as that may seem as well - excuse me if I say that "expecting the science to be biased" sounds a bit like saying "if we don't get the answer we like we're not going to wear it" rember the science could also go the other way e.g. the density of bonies and other prey species in an impoundment situation could concievably mean that juvenile lungies arn't high on the dietry agenda of barra...maybe?


Obviously we can all pick anything we do development,highways,pollution and just general human intervention will have some impact. But to say a particular species will be impacted by another particular species without evidence seems to me to be a bit on the nose. I agree acting without supporting evidence is on the nose, just like saying barra arn't going to be a problem and stocking into a lungfish population already under pressure without some supporting evidence to show that it is sustainable!


Just my viewpoint, of which we are all entitled to.


My belief is that the dam should be stocked, balanced stocking with species that currently co-exist in that system which would include Barra, Lungfish etc. and conservationists are entitled to their viewpoints as well, andteh government doesn't always listed to them either, otherwise teh Paradise Dam would not have been built on one of Qlds most overregulated rivers in the first place - still if we do the science and it turns out that lungfish conservation can co-exist with barra stocking - you might end up with that balanced fishery your after!

Regards - Jim


Regards


Trev[/quote]

mylestom
16-02-2009, 05:40 AM
Jim,

Thanks for the response its always good to get various other viewpoints.

Respect what you have to say, having read a lot of your posts overtime.


We can always say that doing anything will have some effect elsewhere, but not doing anything can also have an effect.

We have a dam, it has both species stocked or otherwise, surely the discussion, could/should be on the level of stocking. If not the level of other fish that natural breed in the system ie catfish, may have that effect on the lungfish or other stock as well.

Fred Haigh dam and its early catfish population could be an example.

What I don't understand is why barra have been singled out as the main problem with another single species lungfish, doesn't seem to be based on any factual evidence.

Thanks

Trev

Jim_Tait
16-02-2009, 08:56 AM
Trev,

heres a fact for you, there is no catfish in the Burnett river that has got a gob as big as that barra you're holding in your signature photo!

mylestom
16-02-2009, 10:43 AM
Trev,

heres a fact for you, there is no catfish in the Burnett river that has got a gob as big as that barra you're holding in your signature photo!

Jim,

Respect what you are saying and not having a go, just trying to get evidence of why the barra is being painted as the bad guy.

Just because it big and has a large mouth, doesn't prove that it actually targets lungfish over other bait species.. (Photo is just a fish caught in a different location.)

Has anyone evidence of stomach contents of barra with lungfish in them? That would be hard evidence. Firstly hard to find dead fish with any contents and secondly most people do catch n release.

Still believe that the dam should be stocked, as to species etc, its up to locals who live there and put in the effort, the local stocking group.

The original question was to see why the stocking hasn't gone ahead. Haven't heard or read any solid evidence that it should not be so.

Guess I'll just have to wait to see what eventually happens with the dam.

Have a nice day.

Regards

Trev

Mike Delisser
16-02-2009, 10:00 PM
Jim, I don't see eye to eye with you on some things but I always value your input on this web site, power to you.

Mylestom said "The original question was to see why the stocking hasn't gone ahead. Haven't heard or read any solid evidence that it should not be so."
Perheps some one from the area could let us know whats happening in that department.
Cheers
mike

Luc
17-02-2009, 08:34 PM
I would suggest contacting the shires in that area.

Luc

Tropicaltrout
17-02-2009, 08:57 PM
[quote=mylestom;

The original question was to see why the stocking hasn't gone ahead. Haven't heard or read any solid evidence that it should not be so.

Guess I'll just have to wait to see what eventually happens with the dam.

Have a nice day.

Regards

Trev[/quote]

Good topic Trev very interesting reading.. but yep time will tell, hopefully you will get the outboard before then;D


Nath

Mike Delisser
18-02-2009, 06:27 PM
I found the Bigginden Fishing Club web site
Some info here
http://www.bafc.org.au/fish%20stocking.html
Cheers
Mike

Magella
19-02-2009, 12:17 PM
Think outside the Square, Don't stock it just let us catch Lungfish release only bag limit 0 after all there is millions of them.

Serious was talking to DPI Fisheries Reseach person the other day and he says they have not a problem with stocking paradise it is the EPA and there bum breathing turtles that stopping it at the monent.
Cheers Foxie

Jim_Tait
19-02-2009, 03:44 PM
Estimated 10,000 in all actually (Lungfish) and there are legitimate concerns re: predatory interactions of stocked predators with Lungfish behind stocking permit restrictions - Jim