Power of a fish research inspector

[hakuna]

Came in off the Goldie this morning and a fish research inspector wanted to go through my fish
What power does he have, he measured every one of them
Was targeting trag, snapper and perlies.
Also how many you threw back and where you got them, thought that one was funny, in the water of course.
Seemed sus to me
Cheers

[tangles21]

I have been pulled up by these guys before.I told them to stick there research where it fits and that if i tell them what i caught and where i got it low and behold next time i go it will prob be a green zone.Well i don,t think he liked that as he preceded to tell me it was narrow minded people like me that got the green zones put in in the first place.So we agreed to disagree.I don,t know if he had the power to look in my esky all i know is i wasn,t going to let him.
Cheers Leigh

[rosco1974]

have had it happin down the goldie as well.i normally just tell them what i have caught and always just say i caught them in close
cheers rosco

[bondy99]

Gee guys you must be a paranoid

The person is a Marine Biologist / Researcher and not an Inspector per say.

The information \ data that are obtained from fishos such as myself aswell as charter ops is for statistical purposes and also to have some type of idea of what sea conditons are, water temp, current and how many throwbacks.

Nothing unusual or sinister about it.

The bloke you are refering to is about late 50's, white caucasion, fair skin and carries a large wooden official fish measuring device issued by Qld Boating and Fisheries Service and has clipboard where he writes up measurements etc.

Hope that clears the air for ya.

[charlie09]

Tangles21 I think that answers the question. If he had the power to search your vessel or esky in this case, he would have quoted the part of the act that gives him the power. Seeing that he did not force the issue or threaten you with further legal action it leads me to believe that they have no real power to do the research.

Cheers

[bondy99]

Charlie09,

Mate, Only a Fisheries Inspector or now called Field Officer and Qld Police have the power to search anything they desire and dont need to quote the official Act unless the vessel owner is non cooperative or there is a reasonable suspicion an unlawful act was committed.

Fisheries Researcher is completely different ball game and different kettle of fish...dont get the two mixed. Oils anit Oils.

[Jono_SS]

Hakuna.

the fellow could have been part of Fisheries Queensland's monitoring program, details of which are found on the following page: http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/28_12885.htm
How the data are collected

The recreational fishing sector voluntarily participates in species-specific monitoring programs in a number of ways. For example:

recreational fishers allow fish they have caught to be measured at boat ramps, popular land-based fishing locations (e.g. Fraser Island and the Gold Coast) and at fishing tournaments
recreational fishers donate fish frames as part of the Keen Angler Program (http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/28_10450.htm)
charter boat operators measure fish caught and retained by their customers
cheers.

Jono.

[wayno60]

have no real power to do the research.

I dont think it got to do with the power to do research its more to do with if they have the power to search your esky...so does this guy just wonder up and ask or does he flash some sort of ID first??
either way i dont see a major biggy with it so id happily show him.

[Apollo]

Had one yesterday at tin can bay ramp. Had a chat to him and showed him a goldie that was kept. We discussed what was out there and that they are a heap of just under tailor caught (and released). He told me, he has seen a few earlier that day where people had kept undersized tailor (old 30cm not new 35cm). Nice bloke and said that fishing seemed very consistent since he had been doing this job which is good re a measure of fish numbers.

[netmaker]

these people are doing a job that is necessary for all of us. whilst we may not like green zones or the way they were "sold" to us (sorry forced upon us), unless we continually pool our information together, by the time we decide that a species is in danger it may be too late to recover it. i was quite cranky along with many others at the introduction of the zones but i have mellowed in my opinions. whilst holidaying in townsville in april this year i was talking to a local fisho who was quite supportive of the zones. they have been in place for a few years up there and he was quite adamant that his personal fishing results had definately improved as a direct result of the green zones. i think that the biggest problem with the zones is the boundaries. whilst a few of them are "square" and relatively easy to plot into a gps, zones like peel island (which were not changed) look like they were drawn by a bloke who had a half case of bundy under his belt. because of the "less than 2m at the lowest tide of the year" boundary on peel it can be contentious as to whether or not one is inside the zone. i would of thought that the introduction of the zones would have been an excellent opportunity to redraw the lines at peel so as they could be input into a gps to clear up any doubts. at the end of the day as far as monitoring is concerned we are damned if we do and damned if we dont. in addition tho, if youve got a good fish in the box and no one else to show it off to, hey, a fisheries bloke will do!!

davo

[Tickleish]

I dont think it got to do with the power to do research its more to do with if they have the power to search your esky...so does this guy just wonder up and ask or does he flash some sort of ID first??
either way i dont see a major biggy with it so id happily show him.

Hey Wayno, is that you in your avatar and if so do you want to go for a fish some time?

[hakuna]

thanks,
Bondy99, you must be or know the person, your description fits the person.
He was a nice enough bloke and didn't force anything, he introduced himself and asked the questions and made sure it was ok to enter my boat.
I had no problems with that. The fisheries and their attitude, that's another story.

cheers

[bondy99]

No worries Hakuna,

Yeah I know the bloke you're talking about. I've known him for over 10 years, he is always a polite fella.

Many times he has met charter boats coming back from their fishing trips just to measure and record...at some times of the year he will ask skippers / deckies of charter boats to keep roe of certain fish when they are gilled and gutted so he can check for stages of development.

Cheers, Bondy

[honda900]

So we came across a pair of researchers at manly southern side ramp, they asked us to measure the fish check the catch, I proceed to tell them(truthfully) that we were running a bit late for them to jump on board and get the specifics, however I offered the information off the top of my head, we had x amount of perlies around this size range, x amount of snapper around this size, x amount of tuskies around this size, and then he interjects, " sorry mate we are not interested in any other fish other than snapper and pearl pearch", I say What???, turns out his research is commissioned by DPI, and they wanted the info for the RRFF although he obviously did not (could not) reply to my direct question.

So this research is skewed by DPI's data gathering. h up until this point a few months ago I would have happily given these guys all the data, thinking the research may have been usefull, now I will think twice, ask some pointed questions before handing over the info.

Maybe not so paranoid after all.

Regards
HOnda.

[Matt_Campbell]

So we came across a pair of researchers at manly southern side ramp, they asked us to measure the fish check the catch, I proceed to tell them(truthfully) that we were running a bit late for them to jump on board and get the specifics, however I offered the information off the top of my head, we had x amount of perlies around this size range, x amount of snapper around this size, x amount of tuskies around this size, and then he interjects, " sorry mate we are not interested in any other fish other than snapper and pearl pearch", I say What???, turns out his research is commissioned by DPI, and they wanted the info for the RRFF although he obviously did not (could not) reply to my direct question.

So this research is skewed by DPI's data gathering. h up until this point a few months ago I would have happily given these guys all the data, thinking the research may have been usefull, now I will think twice, ask some pointed questions before handing over the info.

Maybe not so paranoid after all.

Regards
HOnda.

How is it skewed by DPI's data gathering?

[PinHead]

we whinge when they put closures in place and we whinge when they are trying to collect data. beats me!!!

[honda900]

Thats, not a whinge, just fact.

Regards
Honda.

[honda900]

How is it skewed by DPI's data gathering?

The opening statement to me was "we are collecting recreational fishing data"

Regards
Honda.

[Matt_Campbell]

The opening statement to me was "we are collecting recreational fishing data"

Regards
Honda.

And what's wrong with that Honda?

[honda900]

Matt do you work for fisheries, are you in anyway associated with DPI, in the past or present?

I guess I answered my own question..

Further information on the extension project can be obtained from:
Denis Ballam – Queensland SeaNet Officer, Cairns. Phone: (07) 4032 2234
Matthew Campbell or Tony Courtney, Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries. Phone: (07) 3817 9591 or (07) 3817 9582
Email: Matthew.Campbell@dpi.qld.gov.au or Tony.Courtney@dpi.qld.gov.au


why wouldnt you want all the information I had to provide?

Regards
Honda.

[Matt_Campbell]

Absolutely I am Honda. Have been for 15 years or more. Back to the question how is the data collected skewed? Here is a post from another thread:




The data they got to estimate the fish that rec fishos take was based on 2 phone polls. Quite a lot of people on this site know that fact.


Ref: http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/showthread.php?t=166217&page=2&highlight=survey


The whole science was based on those survey results. WHAT A JOKE.



Why should we cop it at all?? their scientific figures are complete and utter rubbish..


I am with the millitant vote..


Regards
HOnda.



Why not provide more info so that the stock assessment scientists are able to use more data so that the results aren't, in your words, a joke?

[bondy99]

Honda900

Mate,
SeaNet Extension is an NGO working with Commerical, Recreational and Govt agencies again is a different organisation and has nothing to do with the Gold Coast scenario and again completely different. There is no need to tar everything with the one brush as being one and all the same.

[bondy99]

Pinhead,

You been out fishing lately, I hear there a lot of tailor around.

[TimD]

I'm with Honda, i wouldnt let a research inspector check my fish either. The government doesnt give a shit about the research done, all they care about is keeping the Greens happy.


cheers tim :)

[Lovey80]

My issue is that these surveys while providing much better info than a bloody phone poll are again just a tiny tiny snapshot of the fishery. A mathematician is then going to come along and make a bucket load of assumptions and attempt to extrapolate that into a model. Unless a mandatory catch card is brought in it's all going to be a waste of time and money.

[PinHead]

Pinhead,

You been out fishing lately, I hear there a lot of tailor around.

Have been fishing at least once a week for the past couple of months. Never fish for tailor..hate the things.

[hakuna]

[QUOTE=Matt_Campbell;1303384]Absolutely I am Honda. Have been for 15 years or more. Back to the question how is the data collected skewed? Here is a post from another thread:


Matt,

Please educate me and probably many others, you took the info on my tub of fish, what happends from there?

[bondy99]

TimD and Honda

Are you both anarchists or have you got something to hide ;D

If it wasn't for a lot of fisho contributions both rec and pro then no one would be fishing.

In order to have fish the fish need to recruit and multiply...it's not rocket science. Hence data.

[bondy99]

[QUOTE=Matt_Campbell;1303384]Absolutely I am Honda. Have been for 15 years or more. Back to the question how is the data collected skewed? Here is a post from another thread:


Matt,

Please educate me and probably many others, you took the info on my tub of fish, what happends from there?

Hakuna, Info from one capture and one person means very little...it will probably be added and compiled into a local database for the area fished. This needs to be taken from many people and over a long period of time to have any real significance.

I would think Matt would be in agreeance to this statement

[hakuna]

yes, so you collect data from many people over a period of time, so what happends from from there?

There are arguments sent both ways in this post but I am yet to understand what happens with the data and where and how is it used.

You want us to believe that the data is used for the good of all fishos then how and why?

Simple request I thought.

[honda900]

So Matt,

back to the question;

why wouldnt you want all the information I had to provide?


Regards
Honda.

[TimD]

TimD and Honda

Are you both anarchists or have you got something to hide ;D

If it wasn't for a lot of fisho contributions both rec and pro then no one would be fishing.

In order to have fish the fish need to recruit and multiply...it's not rocket science. Hence data.


Bondy what would i have to hide ???

I dont even eat fish so why would i risk a hefty fine for keeping an undersize fish. Every fish i keep is always well over the min size limit and i have never kept a fish i cant identify.

I don't trust the government or anyones research on fish stocks.

cheers tim :)

[Matt_Campbell]

So Matt,

back to the question;

why wouldnt you want all the information I had to provide?


Regards
Honda.
Honda I'm not sure about your question. The people collecting info at the boat ramp that you spoke to sound as though they are targeting snapper and pearlies. Are you saying that because they didn't collect the information on the other species then this somehow skews some data set? What rocky reef fish did you have?

[honda900]

Matt,

to coin a phrase from a movie, That is the Right question "What rocky reef fish did you have"

So the people at the boat ramp, unofficially advised me that their research had been commissioned by DPI to only take snapper and pearl pearch information. Yes I had other RRFF fish and CRFF fish, but they would not take the information.

Now the timing of this event correlated to the post RRFF meetings, So it was quite blatently obvious that someone was looking to cover their ass for the BS Phone poll information that was used to justify the closure and formed the basis of the RRFF documents, as the pollies now had a view of the situation and were listening to their constituants.

Now as for skewed data, there are numerous species of fish listed on the RRFF paper, So the RRFF statement "Claims that DPI want to manage the fishery" but when you only look at one species of fish in a fishery, you perspective is blinded and that inturn skews the view of what is really happening.

The RRFF document lists a number of fish species With very little or no justification as to why they are there, although we both know once legislation is passed DPI will be able to enact any rule it so chooses without any input or public interference.

Now at the end of the whole RRFF debarcle, I stand by my statement that the data collection methods are a joke and I think a whole lot more people agree with me on that point.

Regards
HOnda.

[champion]

TimD and Honda

Are you both anarchists or have you got something to hide ;D

If it wasn't for a lot of fisho contributions both rec and pro then no one would be fishing.

In order to have fish the fish need to recruit and multiply...it's not rocket science. Hence data.


BONDY99

If you understand what Tim & Honda are saying then why would you ask the question "have you got something to hide"?
Go and read some of there post and threads and you will see that they & 95% of people on this site wouldn"t do the wrong thing !!!

As for the rest of your point .... well im sorry i dont understand, so can you please explain.?

[Jono_SS]

Honda and others

The boat ramp surveys that Fisheries Queensland (=DPI Fisheries) is running at the moment have been happening routinely since early 2007. Their primary goal is to collect data on the length of certain species being caught. Lots of other boat ramp surveys have happened over time, with different goals, and they haven't always been run by Fisheries (=DPI Fisheries).

There is an overview about the overall program, of which boat ramp surveys are a subset, on the following web page
http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/28_12885.htm

It has some information about which species are measured at the boat ramp. There is a general statement about how the data are used, but if you want more info then here is some more reading:

http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/28_16916.htm (biological data (especially age of fish being caught) are considered during the workshops)
http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/28_11062.htm (the data are used in periodic stock assessments)

Jonathan.

[bondy99]

BONDY99

If you understand what Tim & Honda are saying then why would you ask the question "have you got something to hide"?
Go and read some of there post and threads and you will see that they & 95% of people on this site wouldn"t do the wrong thing !!!

As for the rest of your point .... well im sorry i dont understand, so can you please explain.?

Champion, Honda and TimD....obviously you missed the point. If you have something in the esky and don't want to show it, it does seem on prima facia there must be something to hide.....otherwise you would show and no I'm not going to elaborate further, if you want more specific and direct rationale, how about you go into DPI House Directly, it's in Brisbane...you'll get the answer you seek.

[bondy99]

Honda and others

The boat ramp surveys that Fisheries Queensland (=DPI Fisheries) is running at the moment have been happening routinely since early 2007. Their primary goal is to collect data on the length of certain species being caught. Lots of other boat ramp surveys have happened over time, with different goals, and they haven't always been run by Fisheries (=DPI Fisheries).

There is an overview about the overall program, of which boat ramp surveys are a subset, on the following web page
http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/28_12885.htm

It has some information about which species are measured at the boat ramp. There is a general statement about how the data are used, but if you want more info then here is some more reading:

http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/28_16916.htm (biological data (especially age of fish being caught) are considered during the workshops)
http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/28_11062.htm (the data are used in periodic stock assessments)

Jonathan.

Jonathan,
Mate you would think they would have checked this themselves if they were serious enough to find out about the answer to thier questions, power of google

[timddo]

Champion, Honda and TimD....obviously you missed the point. If you have something in the esky and don't want to show it, it does seem on prima facia there must be something to hide.....otherwise you would show and no I'm not going to elaborate further, if you want more specific and direct rationale, how about you go into DPI House Directly, it's in Brisbane...you'll get the answer you seek.


It's a Voluntary Survey - If you don't want to participate, so be it. -- Implying someone has something to hide is rediculous, it just shows your character. If it's mandatory - they will show you the legislation that says that. Remember Surveys only take a sample of data and manipulate it.

Personally, all Telemarketers who calls my house when i get home after wok, gets the rude hang up signal. - I don't care if they are from. >>>>> Government department. It's My Time, My Choice and it's bloody dinner time.>:(

[no_worries]

I would not cooperate with any research or fisheries.
What is the point as any data collected will not make bag limit gains only more reductions till snapper are a no take species.
The policy is purely political with no scientific input.
Every fisho i know feels the same though some are reluctant to say anything for fear of being howled down as brutal fish slayers.

[bondy99]

Well timddo, honda and no_worries maybe and TimD

I'm not talking about volunteer fish surveys, I'm talking about police that work covertly as they are also Fisheries Inspectors. Are you saying you would also tell cops to take a hike when they want to look at your esky.

[timddo]

ARe you for real bondy, we are talking about Fishing research people , not fisheries or police.

IT's a no brainer that you don't really have a choice not to let them go through your esky. But you don't need to disclose any other information to them etc. Where you caugh the fish, time and type of bait.

What people are trying to say it's. IF they don't want to, they don't need too. It might be time for me to have a few bottles of wine.

[hakuna]

Jonathan,
Mate you would think they would have checked this themselves if they were serious enough to find out about the answer to thier questions, power of google

Well Bondy99,

I must be one of the idiots you are talking about as I started the post.

Jono_ss, thanks for telling me where to find the info,

Bondy99, you have changed my attitude, don't bother asking to get in my boat again, I will explain to the researches what a bunch of intelegent beings they must be so they need to call you and Matt_Campbell

[Si]

Came in off the Goldie this morning and a fish research inspector wanted to go through my fish
What power does he have, he measured every one of them
Was targeting trag, snapper and perlies.
Also how many you threw back and where you got them, thought that one was funny, in the water of course.
Seemed sus to me
Cheers

hey mate. its not suss. he wasnt measuring them for the purpose of making sure they were legal or anything like that. He has no power in that. He was measuring them for stock assessment purposes. numbers of individuals in each size classes being caught, etc etc. its for scientific purposes. Some people think this approach is not good enough but assessing fish stocks is not easy so they use what tools they have available. sometimes this person will collect otiliths and gonads as well so more information is available on age, length and maturity of fish. all this is helpful in fish ecology and biology and incorporate this info into fisheries management tools. I dont understand why anyone would not want to provide this info especially seeing as you are taking from the fishery.

[honda900]

Hakuna,

apologies for hijackning the thread, but it looks like the guys you ran into were comissioned in the same fashion as the guys I ran into, which is not good for anyone.

Regards
Honda.

[TimD]

Bondy99, you have changed my attitude, don't bother asking to get in my boat again


I don't think anyone wants to take him fishing, poor guy hahahaha ;D


cheers tim :)

[Matt_Campbell]

Honda, hakuna

Your cynicism regarding data collection and research by DEEDI is obvious so I would like to invite you, and whoever else would be interested, to come in to the Ecosciences Precinct at Dutton Park. I'd be happy to show you some results from research I am currently undertaking on pearl perch. Some of this research relies on data collected by the Long Term Monitoring Program. I could organise to show you some lab work, where otoliths are extracted and show you the ageing facilities and show you how the fish are aged. If you are interested I could probably organise some quick presentations where you could ask questions of the relevant researchers. Just give me a call on 3255 4229 or email matthew.campbell@deedi.qld.gov.au tomorrow to organise it. The offer is open to anyone.

Matt

[Si]

Hakuna,

apologies for hijackning the thread, but it looks like the guys you ran into were comissioned in the same fashion as the guys I ran into, which is not good for anyone.

Regards
Honda.

Gday Honda, I think they are different. The guy on the gold coast has been collecting data from rec and charter rrf catches for at least two decades and does it quite regulary. He doesnt just collect data on trag, pp and snaps but other species as well. I dont believe he has been commissioned by the gov although his consultation is sought from time to time I believe. I think he has more baseline data than most gov agencies put together. How is more knowledge about rrf not good for anyone?

[ShaneC]

Matt, I have something I would like clarified. As for this instance, I was not there, second hand info from a mate that rang me after the event.

He was approached recently by a researcher, who, as someone has said earlier only wanted to record the sizes, numbers and catch locations of Pearl Perch and Snapper. He offerred to show some other fish he had caught and they were not interested in them.

Now..... the information gathered would have to be somewhat skewed would it not?? Let's say they do the same thing with 50 boats, at the end of the day it would seem that the ONLY fish targeted and caught on that given day was snapper and pearlys based on their research. If a mathematician sanctioned by the government was then to work some magic with the collated info, it would be fair to assume that because only snapper and pearlys are caught, they might well be overfished, and might just need some protection in the form of mass closures.

I am not having a crack mate, I just think that if people choose to voluntarily give info for research, all taken fish should be recorded so the information reflects an accurate depiction of their catch for the day. I can understand why people would be a bit suss due to this.....

I hope I have put this point to you in a way that makes sense, I am no literary giant. No need for you to throw your 2 cents in on this bondy, I never have a clue what you are on about.

Cheers.

[Matt_Campbell]

Matt, I have something I would like clarified. As for this instance, I was not there, second hand info from a mate that rang me after the event.

He was approached recently by a researcher, who, as someone has said earlier only wanted to record the sizes, numbers and catch locations of Pearl Perch and Snapper. He offerred to show some other fish he had caught and they were not interested in them.

Now..... the information gathered would have to be somewhat skewed would it not?? Let's say they do the same thing with 50 boats, at the end of the day it would seem that the ONLY fish targeted and caught on that given day was snapper and pearlys based on their research. If a mathematician sanctioned by the government was then to work some magic with the collated info, it would be fair to assume that because only snapper and pearlys are caught, they might well be overfished, and might just need some protection in the form of mass closures.

I am not having a crack mate, I just think that if people choose to voluntarily give info for research, all taken fish should be recorded so the information reflects an accurate depiction of their catch for the day. I can understand why people would be a bit suss due to this.....

I hope I have put this point to you in a way that makes sense, I am no literary giant. No need for you to throw your 2 cents in on this bondy, I never have a clue what you are on about.

Cheers.

Shane I would think that this would be due to the fact that snapper and pearlies are the two primary species caught and retained by rec fishers in the rocky reef fishery. This is especially the case at this time of year.

[Si]

Matt, I have something I would like clarified. As for this instance, I was not there, second hand info from a mate that rang me after the event.

He was approached recently by a researcher, who, as someone has said earlier only wanted to record the sizes, numbers and catch locations of Pearl Perch and Snapper. He offerred to show some other fish he had caught and they were not interested in them.

Now..... the information gathered would have to be somewhat skewed would it not?? Let's say they do the same thing with 50 boats, at the end of the day it would seem that the ONLY fish targeted and caught on that given day was snapper and pearlys based on their research. If a mathematician sanctioned by the government was then to work some magic with the collated info, it would be fair to assume that because only snapper and pearlys are caught, they might well be overfished, and might just need some protection in the form of mass closures.

I am not having a crack mate, I just think that if people choose to voluntarily give info for research, all taken fish should be recorded so the information reflects an accurate depiction of their catch for the day. I can understand why people would be a bit suss due to this.....

I hope I have put this point to you in a way that makes sense, I am no literary giant. No need for you to throw your 2 cents in on this bondy, I never have a clue what you are on about.

Cheers.

gday Shane, sorry i know you asked matt but i would like to comment if you dont mind. i dont think they are looking for a 'accurate depiction of their catch of the day' as in numbers of species in comparison to numbers of other species. That doesnt really tell you that much really. They are looking for specie specific data. To be honest someone would have to be really stupid to go out and collect just trag, pp and snap data and then write a report and then make an assumption that these species are over exploited 'because only snapper and pearlys are caught, they might well be overfished and might need some protection in the form of mass closures. Thats the biggest paranoid, unfounded, impossible, stupid theory i have ever heard to be honest.

[Raw Prawn]

Honda & others
I can sympathise with your concerns, one might say we’re being negative, however, anyone in an “influential position” can paint a very negative picture of what’s being presented to them.
Example 1 - Boat caught no fish, because,

fished wrong spot
wrong bait
wrong time of day
wrong time of tide
wrong time of lunar month
wrong winds, barometer, water temperature
wrong time of year
sharks in plague proportions taking all fish
hopeless fisherman
missed the hot bite period
Example 2 - Boat caught bag limit because,

planets aligned
bait, tide, wind, barometer, time of day all produced a feeding frenzy
We’ve all experienced days when no matter what you do or try, the fish are just not in the mood and you cannot raise a scale. This doesn’t mean there’s none there.
Then there are days when blind Freddy could catch his bag limit.
From the factual statistics of these 2 examples, let’s see how those who have a biased hidden agenda, can report this.
Example 1 – The ocean is a marine desert. Recommend immediate ban on all fishing.
Example 2 – The fish stocks are being plundered. Recommend immediate ban on all fishing.
Really, it doesn’t matter what gets recorded, if the person in power wants their way, they’ll slant the findings to suit their cause.
I’ve heard of data collectors only recording information if no snapper were caught and didn’t want to know if you had a good catch.
Again, reinforcing the bias of their agenda.
Therefore, it all depends on the motivation of the individual / organisation and which side of the fence they are sitting, as to how any data will be used or misused.
RP.

[seawind8]

my worry is that this year is a good Snapper and Pearly season so they record a lot of fish caught, what happens if we get no rain and it is a poor snapper/pearly season next year and they say fish stock is on the decline, so lets but more restrictions on. we as fishos know that some years are good some arn't so good but we can't prove it.
Cheers
Lester

[seawind8]

What worries me about the information they collect is that this year snapper/pearlies are in good numpers and not hard to catch your bag limit, so the researcher records good numbers of fish. If next year we have a bad year (no rain to flush river systems etc) and fish catches are down they will be able to say fish numbers down (records prove it) lets put more restrictions in place ie more closures less bag limits who knows what else. We fishos know you can have a good season then a bad season but we have no data to prove it. It just make you think.
Cheers
Lester

[seawind8]

didn't think my first reply worked
got to say it twice LOL
cheers

[bondy99]

I don't think anyone wants to take him fishing, poor guy hahahaha ;D


cheers tim :)

TimD, never have mate and never will, you need to take your glasses off to see the broader picture , You did say you dont trust anyone, hey!! 8-)

Cheers, Bondy :) ;D

[bondy99]

ARe you for real bondy, we are talking about Fishing research people , not fisheries or police.

IT's a no brainer that you don't really have a choice not to let them go through your esky. But you don't need to disclose any other information to them etc. Where you caugh the fish, time and type of bait.

What people are trying to say it's. IF they don't want to, they don't need too. It might be time for me to have a few bottles of wine.

Timddo

I agreed many moons ago about researchers as you said . However , I was talking about Queensland Police in covert stints, completely different to Volunteer Fish Researchers, something which no one picked up on and then hammer me as if I was still talking about bloody researchers, I've moved on from researchers long time ago

[bondy99]

Well Bondy99,

I must be one of the idiots you are talking about as I started the post.

Jono_ss, thanks for telling me where to find the info,

Bondy99, you have changed my attitude, don't bother asking to get in my boat again, I will explain to the researches what a bunch of intelegent beings they must be so they need to call you and Matt_Campbell

Hakuna, I never had asked you nor have I been in your boat and have no intention to ask you so dont know where you grabbed that from. I was making a general comment and not targetted to anyone particular. Happy fishing

[bondy99]

Honda, hakuna

Your cynicism regarding data collection and research by DEEDI is obvious so I would like to invite you, and whoever else would be interested, to come in to the Ecosciences Precinct at Dutton Park. I'd be happy to show you some results from research I am currently undertaking on pearl perch. Some of this research relies on data collected by the Long Term Monitoring Program. I could organise to show you some lab work, where otoliths are extracted and show you the ageing facilities and show you how the fish are aged. If you are interested I could probably organise some quick presentations where you could ask questions of the relevant researchers. Just give me a call on 3255 4229 or email matthew.campbell@deedi.qld.gov.au tomorrow to organise it. The offer is open to anyone.

Matt

Matt are you still at CSIRO?

[TimD]

Bondy i dunno if it's just me but i never really understand what your going on about, are you drunk every time you log on ?


cheers tim :)

[fishfeeder]

Why NOT collect all data of all fish caught while its right there in front of you, How much can it cost to put a few extra lines on there research pages ??? Wouldn't it also mean you have there data aswell for the future !!!
But that's right NO ONE CATCHES anything else but Snapper and Pearlie's. Typical blind research to keep over paid knobs in jobs !!!

I am off home for a nice cold beer and roast a nice snapper for dinner !!!

Cheers

[death_ship]

size and number of fish and where they r caught is recorded, this is rec fishermens catches being recorded and look where the research results are taking us,green zones, smaller bags and smaller fish. if theres a problem then we must be solving it? if not were being screwed by bob brown? either way i leave mine in the ice and show em nothing

[bondy99]

Snapper is overrated, the same as pearlies and barra gets very boring and mundane after awhile

I wont lose sleep over it

[PinHead]

Snapper is overrated, the same as pearlies and barra gets very boring and mundane after awhile

I wont lose sleep over it

and tailor and leatherjackets rate where ??

[death_ship]

whats in ya top 10?

Snapper is overrated, the same as pearlies and barra gets very boring and mundane after awhile

I wont lose sleep over it

[Sillaginid]

Guys

I think many people are confused about the Green Zones. As far as I am aware they were established and are run by DERM (i.e. Parks and Wildlife), not Fisheries. They were supposedly implemented to 'protect examples of different habitats' and not to control fishing pressure. Now I don't really believe that. They were not developed or put in place by the guys at Fisheries so don't blame them. It seems to me that they were put in place by the greenies at DERM in an attempt at regulating fisheries management by undermining the Fisheries Department.

Personally I don't mind letting the fisheries researchers measure my catch. So many anglers winge about there being no, incorrect, biased or unrealistic data on which decisions are based. Yet these same people also refuse to supply the information they say is lacking which also seems a little hypocritical to me. From what I've read these surveys are voluntary so if you don't want to participate that is fine, don't. However do not go whining to everyone that the information is biased when by not participating you are in a way only biasing the results. There seems to be conspiracy that the Fisheries department is trying to ban people from catching fish or want to limit them to taking only one or two. It doesn't make sense to me because what does the department gain? If anything it would probably lead to a reduction in the number of people it employs and can you really see these guys recommending themselves out of a job.

Anyway, sorry for the rant. I will hop off my soap-box

[bondy99]

Ok fellas at this moment I have other things happening which are more important than rating fish,or a slanginh. human life is more important than bloody fish.

I just had the ambulance take an 82 year old fella to hospital, he was on the dunny, fI heard a bang and shouted to him if hwe was ok, aparently he was not, he fainted and cracked his skull in three places and lost heaps of blood.

So if you don't mind I'm having a break. Good luck to you all. You only live once so enjoy whatever it is that you like the most.

[Bobpen]

Regarding catch records: Some time ago I was involved in prawn research in The Gulf. The Weipa commercial Banana Prawn catch reduced progressively over several years. Someone published a paper on a classic collapse of the fishery where the area fished was reduced year by year like Canadian Cod. However: at the same time the commercial catch was collapsing to less than 40 tonnes the fishery independent surveys showed good recruitment to the fishery each year.
As a result of some conversations at industry meetings rumour suggested there really were prawns at Weipa that were being missed due to the decreasing fishing effort. Next season a large number of boats fished Weipa and caught $400 tonnes of prawns.
I don't know how anyone could do a meaningful survey of the stock size of Snapper without spending a million dollars (the real cost of meaningful surveys as spent by the commercial fisherman in the Gulf Prawn Fishery). If you want that you would need to have licences to pay for it.
How about we settle for a process that simply looks a the size of fish being landed and have a simple decision rule that if there are no big fish being caught we should have bag and size limits to allow more fish to escape. This would mean they might live long enough to spawn a few times before they die or get caught.
Regards BobPen

[ShaneC]

gday Shane, sorry i know you asked matt but i would like to comment if you dont mind. i dont think they are looking for a 'accurate depiction of their catch of the day' as in numbers of species in comparison to numbers of other species. That doesnt really tell you that much really. They are looking for specie specific data. To be honest someone would have to be really stupid to go out and collect just trag, pp and snap data and then write a report and then make an assumption that these species are over exploited 'because only snapper and pearlys are caught, they might well be overfished and might need some protection in the form of mass closures. Thats the biggest paranoid, unfounded, impossible, stupid theory i have ever heard to be honest.


No worries mate, that's your point of view and you are entitled to it. I will continue to live in my paranoid, impossible, stupid world until the researchers are prepared to take down all the details in order to get accurate info. The guy I am referring to had a good box of fish, quality fish but as they were not snaps or pearlys, they didnt give a rats arse. I find this suss to be honest, fair enough they might be after specific info, but ain't it challenging to the mind to see that the species that have been subjected to closures in the past are the only numbers they are after??? The data collected contains no descriminative variables, my mate was not even included in the research because he hadn't targeted the species they were after.... WTF?? Quantative research demands all variables are taken into account, and that just aint happening. And if the fact that I think this government will do whatever it takes to keep tree hugging lefts happy makes me paranoid..... well mate, call me Paranoid Shane!! As for me, I dont have to show them my fish, they cant make me show them my fish, so I haven't, I don't and I won't.

Cheers,

PS

[Jono_SS]

PS.

Not knowing exactly who did the survey you are referring to makes it difficult to know exactly what the story was in his situation. However, the team in which I work carries out regular surveys at boat ramps to help estimate the length of fish being caught and retained by recreational fishers. The boat ramp surveys are only a small part of the total work carried out to collect biological data (length and age) for a range of species (see links posted previously if you are interested). Therefore, if you haven't caught any of the fish "on the list" (e.g. snapper, pearl perch, teraglin, yellowtail kinfish, cobia, amberjack, bream, whiting, flathead, tailor, Spanish mackerel, spotted mackerel, grey mackerel, barramundi) then your catch can't contribute length data for those particular species. Some have suggested that this is biasing or skewing the data collection. I am not sure how - it isn't skewing the length data for the monitored species (none were caught/measured), and it isn't biasing the length data for the other species that aren't monitored in this way.

Of course it is a different story if the surveys were aiming to collect data on the relative proportion of different species being caught. But they're not.

I hope that helps with that misunderstanding.

Jonathan.

[ShaneC]

Fair enough,

Thanks Jono

[Si]

No worries mate, that's your point of view and you are entitled to it. I will continue to live in my paranoid, impossible, stupid world until the researchers are prepared to take down all the details in order to get accurate info. The guy I am referring to had a good box of fish, quality fish but as they were not snaps or pearlys, they didnt give a rats arse. I find this suss to be honest, fair enough they might be after specific info, but ain't it challenging to the mind to see that the species that have been subjected to closures in the past are the only numbers they are after??? The data collected contains no descriminative variables, my mate was not even included in the research because he hadn't targeted the species they were after.... WTF?? Quantative research demands all variables are taken into account, and that just aint happening. And if the fact that I think this government will do whatever it takes to keep tree hugging lefts happy makes me paranoid..... well mate, call me Paranoid Shane!! As for me, I dont have to show them my fish, they cant make me show them my fish, so I haven't, I don't and I won't.

Cheers,

PS

fair enough mate. I do agree with you in that they should at least go the extra mile and collect additional specie data. but the more specie data the more work they have to do. its one thing to collect the data, thats the easy part, but then you have to collate, analyse, interpret, do stat tests etc which creates more work and considering all the public interest in the three rrf at the moment i think they are streamlining the process and trying to get a report out. i personally dont think its a conspiracy but each to their own.

[Lovey80]

I have had some fairly extensive private correspondence with Matty Campbell about the RRFF review and my objections to the system that was used to determine RRFF and in particular Snapper numbers. While there remains several points that we disagree on in regards to this process, it is my opinion he is a genuine dude doing things as honestly he can with the tools he has available.

My biggest sticking point with all of this is that as far a Recreational catches are concerned we have very little data of the whole fishery. Therefore a number of "educated" guesses need to be made on how to extrapolate that to give a wider view of the fishery. This is where Matt and I will always bash heads. Things like assuming that Rec Snapper catches have gone up at a rate of 6% because the number of boats over a certain size has gone up at a rate of 6% does my head in. Another is Recreational Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE). IMO Fisheries are a little blinkered with this tool as for Pro and Charter Data this is a pretty useful guide. However as a number of others have pointed out, just because old mate heads out and doesn't catch a Snapper or Pearly or Trag, IMO does not give one ounce of evidence of the relative numbers of these fish down there.

As you may have read in previous posts I was a big supporter of the mandatory catch card options within the RRFF review process. That looks like now that it wont happen. I was also vocal about having a total catch card (not just RRFF) as as some have pointed out why not get ALL the data available at the same time.

Right now the size v length or numbers etc may not be needed for review on other species but what happens when a minority group in the stake holders starts crying foul about Tuskies or Parrot or Mahi Mahi etc. We then have to do a whole new "modelling" process where the Rec sector again is assumed to be the largest taker of the species but is again the poorest data provider?????

There is only one other option I can see in this and that is to lobby the QLD state government to use dole bludgers to sit at every single boat ramp on a work for the dole scheme for as many hours a day as it is deemed necessary and collect the length and numbers of EVERY fish that comes in every year. We know we have enough of the bastards to be able to do 4 hour shifts round the clock at every boat ramp from the border to Bundaberg and still only have them do 3 or 4 shifts a week. It may even motivate them to get into the industry. Make the inspections mandatory for all boaties. Problems solved.

[honda900]

Matt,
to bring you back to an earlier statement;

"Shane I would think that this would be due to the fact that snapper and pearlies are the two primary species caught and retained by rec fishers in the rocky reef fishery. This is especially the case at this time of year."

The assumption you make is that you know what the most predominately caught species of fish is by the rec angler, when in fact that may simply not be the case, by limiting the information you gather at the boat ramp you simply blind yourself to reality. Yes, you may be correct in assuming that people are targeting those fish at this time of year, however as we all well know, that does not necessarily translate into targeted fish. By capturing the data of all species that I had returned with your RRFF data would have captured the fact that I had more of another species of RRFF fish and not your target band.

So Cynic; Yes, armed with the ammunition that fisheries has and continues to provide, over the last 5-10 years through bad management and wasted money. There is a distinct lack of trust and rapport with rec anglers and waterways management as a direct result of what has occurred with both the RRFF and the implementation of the green zones (EPA), in both cases the information we provided has literally been used against us, with little truth and quite frankly not in the best interest of the fishery.

Fisheries reputation has suffered immeasurable damage with the whole RRFF debacle together with the EPA's implementation of the green zones; this is something that you guys are going to need to work extensively on to recover.

Onsite visit Offer;
I personally think that is a good idea as a first step in trying to rebuild some of the bridges that have been burned, however I think your target audience is too small, I would suggest you have an open day on a weekend , something along those lines where the public is invited to see what it is that you do. (and advertise it properly).

Regards
Honda.

[Matt_Campbell]

Honda
I won't tread on Jono_SS's toes but as know the Assessment and Monitoring team monitor bream, whiting, flathead, spanish mackerel, spotted mackerel, grey mackerel, tailor, barra and the rocky reef fish, primarily (but not limited to) pearlies, snapper and teraglin. These are the main recreational targets in Queensland south of Mackay.

One of the reasons I can see that A&M have targeted snapper, pearlies and trag at boat ramps is that they are targeted most by rec anglers. Snapper and pearlies are far and away the most caught, by number, RRFF species by rec anglers. Boat ramp surveys in the past have shown that rec anglers leaving boat ramps target these species most. Charter fishing records show that snapper, trag and pearlies far outweigh the catch of all of the other rocky reef fish put together (99t for snapper, pearlies and trag compared to 34.8t for the remaining RRFF in 2009). Snapper and pearlies also represent about half of all RRFF caught by commercial line fishers in southern QLD.

Secondly, the logistics of gathering data at a boat ramp - you didn't have time to let the Fisheries guys measure your snapper, pearlies and trag, let alone the other species. Isn't it a bit hypocritical of you to say this:

"By capturing the data of all species that I had returned with your RRFF data would have captured the fact that I had more of another species of RRFF fish and not your target band."

and not even let the guys measure the snapper and pearlies you had? If the Fisheries guys are at the ramp, they don't want to hold you up all day, especially a fisher of your capabilities who catches alot of fish. Isn't it better to get excellent data for some species rather than get sketchy data under pressure from the fisher to get home and clean his/her catch, boat, equipment, etc?

Thirdly, A&M not only sample the rec catch but they also gather samples from the charter and commcerial sectors as well. All this from a team of about 10 individuals in southern Queensland. Biological samples are processed in the labs at the Ecosciences Precinct, where length information is recorded and otoliths extracted. These data are then checked and analysed. Otoliths are blocked, sectioned, mounted on a slide, then read by the team under strict protocols. This process takes time.

Again, I ask isn't it better to do a good job on those species that are the most heavily fished, rather than collect information on everything and do a so-so job?

As for your suggestion for an open day. Well how about you get a group of Ausfishers together and come through the Precinct? I have not had a single call or email regarding my earlier invitation. Not one. Again I ask you to give me a call or email (32554229 and matthew.campbell@deedi.qld.gov.au) and organise a time. We have absolutely nothing to hide. I have all sorts of information that will help you get a better grasp of what we do with the information collected by Assessment and Monitoring. I'm sure Jono_SS would also be happy to have a chat to you regarding A&M. Again, the invitation is open to everyone, especially to the people who are obviously cynical about the data collected.

Matt

[honda900]

Matt,

You have assumed I didnt know the size and quantity of fish that was on my boat.

"cynical about the data collected"

Data collection, that has been the focus of this disussion or the lack of data to be precise, you guys are making to many assumptions without enough fact.

Until the data collection is fixed, in a way that is open/transparent and is true and accruate, fisheries as an organisation will continue to be percieved as ineffective and untrustworthy.

I am not suprised about the lack of responses, fisheries have proven themselves untrustworthy (not you in particular). I will not be attempting to organise a group, as I am not the one who has put fisheries in this postion, it is fisheries that needs to take it upon themselves to change public opinion.

Regards
Honda.

[Captain Incredible]

Data collection, that has been the focus of this disussion or the lack of data to be precise, you guys are making to many assumptions without enough fact.

Until the data collection is fixed, in a way that is open/transparent and is true and accurate, fisheries as an organisation will continue to be percieved as ineffective and untrustworthy. (Honda 900)

Good point HONDA. And to get on to a recurring bandwagon which has NOT been picked up positively or even at all by Ausfishers, wouldn't the responsibility to ensure that recreational catches were adequately & accurately recorded be a joint responsibility of a rec sector "peak body"? Especially if this "peak body" which is paid $150,000 plus by Goverment, & collects an unpublished amount from fees from alligned rec fishing groups? And has the capacity to influence who will govern us after the next election?

In the end you can blame "Government". But if the same "Government" has funded a rec fishing body to help it gather data, to dispel myths & to ensure that rec anglers are adequately represented, then why are you not throwing rocks at this organisation as well? The corollary is that if this funding for a rec "peak body" is not delivering measurable outcomes then take their funding off them & put it where it might do some good.

This theory of "you can't count what we catch so you can't do anything to us" is just absolute dinosaur shit. And bashing the pros is yesterday's strategy, especially in Fisheries like Snapper when the major slayer is rec anglers.

We need to be in partnership with Fisheries Mangement to ensure that our fisheries (please note the ownership) are managed sensibly, sustainably & transparently as a co-managed shared responsibility. But then I still believe in the Tooth Fairy also.........................

I don't believe that Matt et al have got the science right yet. But fully understanding that "garbage in is garbage out" the recreational charter recreational recreational stakeholders of the recreational fishery as recreational anglers under current legislation are ensuring that recreational charter recreationals are providing regular & accurate data to the LTMP. (AS RECREATIONAL DATA)

Hopefully the scientists will be more fully informed the next time around.

[PinHead]

I do not believe there is any accurate way of data collection other than someone at every ramp for every minute and it is mandatory to show them your catch. Plus..they would also need records of fish returned.Other than that...forget it. The data will only ba a very small indication and then probablilites etc will have to take over. Catch cards are not the answer as most will not fill them in or return them. I do not know what the answer is...and a supposed rec body representing all rec anglers is a good idea but the majority of rec anglers would not have even heard of Sunfish or any other rec body that may be started. Most rec anglers go fishing for purely that..recreation. They have enough regualtions in their normal lives to not want to be burdened with more when they want to escape and relax.

[Lucky_Phill]

From a personal point of view.

No matter what amount of catch rate / data we can or cannot provide, the modeling that is used to determine any management regime' is flawed. IMO. The modeling depends on a virgin bio-mass being a known quantity. I have sat down with a few in FQ including Alex and I am still no where near convinced of a known virgin bio-mass.

I am not saying they are wrong or right, all I am saying is to the layman ( rec fisho ), a data set that is a known must be quantified.

Other non-entered data sets into current modeling ( last 10 years ) is climate... NOT Climate change or whatever the freaking flash term is for a new tax, I am talking about the last 10 years or so we were held under the El Nino effect and this year and probably next year will see the La Nina return and with that weather pattern, an increase in fish stocks, even taking into account the increase in effort etc.


I am a firm believer in this and when the weather effects are not taking into account, the situation can look grim. Funny thing is, catch rates / data only tells the story of the catch rate, it does not........ IMO...... reflect accurately the status of the stock. By far the most accurate quantifiying of a fish stock is the commercial records.

Just this year, Spanish Mack pro's have stated that it's been the best year for the last 10 or more. Thing is, does this directly relate to the bio-mass or recruitment, or the shift in spatial activities ( ocean temp / current ) associated with weather ? ( El Nino v La Nina ).

Anectodal evidence does account for something in my mind. How many times have we heard boat loads of fishos gettin SWA, but a couple of guys bagging out. Is that a reflection on the territory, bait, bio-mass, angler skill or what. Boat ramp survey finds 20 boats caught FA and 1 bagged............. what does the model say about that situation ? Way too many variables to contemplate.

I also believe that FQ researchers and scientists are doing their very best for the fishery and the fishing community with the funding they have, the terms of reference they have, the infrastructure they have and the data at their disposal. IMO........... it is not enough to quantify the status of any fishery.... unfortunately.

I'll pop in one day... Matt and Co. I do like the work you do and am always open to information sharing.

Regards

Phill
.
.
.

[PinHead]

Honda
I won't tread on Jono_SS's toes but as know the Assessment and Monitoring team monitor bream, whiting, flathead, spanish mackerel, spotted mackerel, grey mackerel, tailor, barra and the rocky reef fish, primarily (but not limited to) pearlies, snapper and teraglin. These are the main recreational targets in Queensland south of Mackay.

One of the reasons I can see that A&M have targeted snapper, pearlies and trag at boat ramps is that they are targeted most by rec anglers. Snapper and pearlies are far and away the most caught, by number, RRFF species by rec anglers. Boat ramp surveys in the past have shown that rec anglers leaving boat ramps target these species most. Charter fishing records show that snapper, trag and pearlies far outweigh the catch of all of the other rocky reef fish put together (99t for snapper, pearlies and trag compared to 34.8t for the remaining RRFF in 2009). Snapper and pearlies also represent about half of all RRFF caught by commercial line fishers in southern QLD.

Secondly, the logistics of gathering data at a boat ramp - you didn't have time to let the Fisheries guys measure your snapper, pearlies and trag, let alone the other species. Isn't it a bit hypocritical of you to say this:

"By capturing the data of all species that I had returned with your RRFF data would have captured the fact that I had more of another species of RRFF fish and not your target band."

and not even let the guys measure the snapper and pearlies you had? If the Fisheries guys are at the ramp, they don't want to hold you up all day, especially a fisher of your capabilities who catches alot of fish. Isn't it better to get excellent data for some species rather than get sketchy data under pressure from the fisher to get home and clean his/her catch, boat, equipment, etc?

Thirdly, A&M not only sample the rec catch but they also gather samples from the charter and commcerial sectors as well. All this from a team of about 10 individuals in southern Queensland. Biological samples are processed in the labs at the Ecosciences Precinct, where length information is recorded and otoliths extracted. These data are then checked and analysed. Otoliths are blocked, sectioned, mounted on a slide, then read by the team under strict protocols. This process takes time.

Again, I ask isn't it better to do a good job on those species that are the most heavily fished, rather than collect information on everything and do a so-so job?

As for your suggestion for an open day. Well how about you get a group of Ausfishers together and come through the Precinct? I have not had a single call or email regarding my earlier invitation. Not one. Again I ask you to give me a call or email (32554229 and matthew.campbell@deedi.qld.gov.au) and organise a time. We have absolutely nothing to hide. I have all sorts of information that will help you get a better grasp of what we do with the information collected by Assessment and Monitoring. I'm sure Jono_SS would also be happy to have a chat to you regarding A&M. Again, the invitation is open to everyone, especially to the people who are obviously cynical about the data collected.

Matt

Matt..I would love to visit sometime ..probably way over my head but I reckon it would be interesting to actually have a look and listen..probably broaden my outlook.

[honda900]

Captain Incredible, Pinhead and Phill,

you all have some valid points.

Sunfish, who are they?? basically they are collecting money for nothing, certainly dont seem to be supporting the rec sector, case in point "scotto".

at the end of the day, fisheries dont really have a true baseline in to start from.

Truthfully I dont think anyone has an exact answer, things change seasonally.

Regards
Honda.

[netmaker]

hi all,
i have found this thread quite interesting, so figured id put in my two bob. i can see valid arguments for and against and have to conclude government policy is to blame. researchers, fisheries and the cops all have what at times would be quite undesirable jobs to do. most of these people are hardworking and honest simply performing their jobs. it is government policy that is flawed. research could be collected in a more thorough method. to me it would make sense to monitor a selected number of ramps around the clock over the full and new moon periods of winter year after year in which case you would have a reasonable baseline simply by comparing the literal numbers caught from those ramps - forget biomass assumptions etc. even simply recording the numbers of other species caught (ignoring extra processing, aging etc) could help identify a species in decline. it is definately in our interests as fishos to look after our stocks for the future so it is also in our interests to help increase the knowledge base of those stocks. whilst we may conclude that the research performed may not be comprehensive enough for our liking you have to agree we cant send these blokes down in the drink to count snapper either.:-? i reckon that flawed data is still probably better than no data. i also have no problems with fisheries blokes or cops either. these guys stop greedy people and idiots from raping the stocks and killing people and themselves. there should be more of em.
said my bit
davo