Tailor Stocks Hanging by a Thread

[Slider]

Long term monitoring of tailor populations in the Fraser Island and Cooloola region reveal that this once abundant and iconic species has declined to dangerously low levels. Commercial yields since 1988 have gradually reduced to unprecedented lows for the years 2011 and 2012 with no indications that 2013 will see any improvement. Recreational catches along the entire eastern seaboard of Australia replicate commercial yields and the impacts to tourism of this may be felt for many years to come and particularly in Queensland.

Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries & Forestry, John McVeigh, stated in 2012 that tailor populations are recovering with more mature fish now prevelant in the system and that the species is being sustainably fished. Mr McVeigh also says that annual monitoring of species of commercial or recreational importance ensures the future sustainability of Queensland's fisheries.

Recreational fishing advocate and marine conservationist Lindsay Dines believes that Mr McVeigh is being fed incorrect information by Fisheries Queensland and that there is no evidence whatsoever that tailor are being sustainably fished or their population recovering. "On the contrary" said Mr Dines, "all the evidence points towards a species in serious trouble and managers who either do not know what they are doing or have agendas that enable a continuation of commercial fishing for tailor and other species when this is clearly not sustainable".

Mr Dines supported his claims with graphs of commercial tailor yields from the Fraser Island and Cooloola region (attached) which are recognised as key spawning locations for this iconic species. "It is no longer viable for the pros, and anglers are heading interstate to where they feel they are a better chance of catching fish" says Mr Dines. He adds that the documented smaller size of tailor compared to the 1970s is now being recognised as a sign of overfishing in harvested species overseas. "We know that the tailor have shrunk, we know that commercial yields have collapsed, we know that anglers are having all sorts of difficulty finding tailor of legal size, but still we are told that everything is fine but without any evidence at all presented to support this assurance".

Based on the commercial yields shown in the graphs presented by Mr Dines, I would also have to think that everything is not as rosy as the Minister and Fisheries Queensland would have us believe. Annual yields in the Fraser Island and Cooloola region that ranged between 17 and 100 tonne and averaged over 60 tonnes per year up to 2000, range between 3.2 and 40 tonne after 2000 with an average annual yield of just 23 tonnes. The 2011 and 2012 yields of 6 tonne and 3.2 tonne respectively for all of Fraser Island and Cooloola are an obvious indicator that all is not well. "These low yields are not as a result of less effort on the part of the pros" Mr Dines assures me. "In fact, there is more effort dedicated to their catching tailor than there ever has been" he said.

Mr Dines also has concerns about seabirds such as Australasian gannets and several species of tern which are heavily reliant on tailor to herd baitfish to the ocean surface where the seabirds can access their prey. "Australia is a signatory to international treaties set up for the protection of several species of tern, yet we overfish tailor to the point where they can no longer provide food for the terns". "Only one thing can result and that is the depletion of tern populations" Mr Dines said when contacted this morning. "We must urgently put in place measures to stop further depletion of tailor stocks and allow the actual recovery of their population" he insists. "It may not be too late, but if we don't do something very soon, the likelihood of any recovery diminishes year by year".

[netmaker]

are the alarm bells broken? why is the government dragging their knuckles on reducing the take (pro and rec) on this iconic species?

[Just_chips]

Yep, simply defies belief.

I've heard the rec take is higher than pros, is this correct? My only concern is how do they measure the rec take......

[mattooty]

Yep, simply defies belief.

I've heard the rec take is higher than pros, is this correct? My only concern is how do they measure the rec take......

Angler participation, surveys at major fishing competitions and questionnaires.

[GM-Bluewater]

Can someone tell me what the Tailor is used for that the pro's take? Is it intended for human consumption? I do enjoy eating fresh Tailor the same day it is caught, however it certainly isn't the nicest once frozen or a few days old. I would think that the money recreational fishermen pump into the local economy would far outweigh any reason for a small number of pro's raping the gutters of Cooloola and Fraser Island.

Also, it would be interesting to find out the flow on effect this has in relation to the pelagics that target Tailor, is the yearly spanish mackerel quota affected by the decline in Tailor numbers?

Cheers

[Slider]

I would expect Kev that the rec take of tailor would in the main be greater than the commercial take. And when less than 2 tonne was taken by beach seine nets between Noosa Heads and Sandy Cape for the entirety of 2012, then it's easy to imagine the rec take for the same region being higher than that. However, the results of surveys completed into NSW rec fishing havens which found more and larger tailor post establishment inside rfh's indicates that the overall affect of nets on tailor pops is greater than rec impacts. This would be due, I firmly believe, to altered migrations caused by nets and reduced recruitment that results.
If the more and larger tailor inside rfh's are there because it is safe from nets rather than the nets having reduced pops and individual size prior to establishment, then the altered migration scenario must have some truth anyway. Has to be one or the other and the same result results. Whichever is the reason for more and larger tailor inside net free regions, it is easy to see that we need more of them to protect tailor.

I do think that tailor bag limits need to be reduced and the size limit increased. I also believe that it would be advantageous to extend the Indian Head to Waddy Point closure during August and September to Sandy Cape. This would only be of benefit however if netting north of Ngkala Rocks ceased.

GM - I find it hard to believe that the tailor that I've seen taken by net along this beach (Teewah) are destined for human consumption. The flesh is mushy and falls off hooks when freshly bought from the pros on the beach. I have never seen the catch iced, so it's hard to imagine that it is saleable once it reaches a retailer.

I had been prepared to allow the 2011 yield of 3.6 tonne between Noosa Heads and Sandy Cape to be a one off and by far the worst result on record and had hoped for a better 2012 before going too nuts with things. But less than 2 tonne for the same area in 2012 to worsen the worst result on record has taken us into totally unchartered territory. We can't allow nothing to change, as is currently the plan of attack. The Precautionary Principle must surely be enacted under these circumstances - unless we've thrown caution to the wind and I'm not convinced we haven't.

[jackash]

Scary stuff.... what do we do?

[Mike Delisser]

Scary stuff indeed. I agree about the bag limit, you shouldn't keep more than 1 good feed of this species as they loose that great flavor when frozen.

Slider if I could play devils advocate for 1 moment.... obviously the catches are down, and I think I can see effort is down (BTW I'm terrible at analyzing data), but can the effort be down because of price $, number of netters working, weather, other species targeted, ect, resulting in lower catches?
Cheers

[astro66]

well i know 2010...5 or 6 fish every time from june till september ...2011 one or two in july then nothing...2012 four fish ...2013 i have caught 3 so far this year since june...

[Moonlighter]

Slider = Lindsay Dines. In case you guys were'nt aware.

Quoting yourself in an article written as though it was published somewhere and presented here as if it is actually an authoritative piece of work.

Published in the "News" section here as if it is actually some kind of official report. Which it is not.

Interesting approach. Not exactly up-front is it?

Draw your own conclusions.

[Slider]

Mike - I have noticed that you play the devil's advocate well and I appreciate the question.
The problem with determining actual effort in many, if not all of Qld's fisheries, is that the license holder usually only logs the days when fish are caught. In the K8 fishery, days spent searching when no fish are caught are never logged and only the days when fish are caught are logged. So if a species is gradually being depleted and extra effort is required to catch the same quantity of fish, then the extra effort is effectively invisible.
So what we have here is a case of 'days fished', as supplied with the data by FQ being indicative of only days when fish are caught. If fish become scarce, then the days fished can reduce because there are less successful trips which gives the appearance of reduced effort.

I've been watching the local netter who catches the majority of tailor from Teewah Beach, Rainbow and Fraser the last few years driving up and down the beach whenever weather conditions are suitable, but not wetting a net cause he can't find any schools. None of those days count apparently, but they should to enable FQ to determine actual effort.

In this case, the number of boats (license holders) has remained relatively constant from 1988 to 2012 with no actual reduction in the number of fishers fishing and the price of tailor has increased marginally, but no less than is attained for other species. Target switching to dart has occurred to compensate for the lack of tailor in recent years, but dart have also hit the wall as far as yields are concerned and I'm not seeing them anymore either.

So in answer to your question - effort has been increasing but the fish aren't there to reflect the effort. You'll also notice that the CPUE has declined almost in parallel with yields and this indicates that either schools are smaller or there are less of them. Gauging by yields for 2011 & 2012 - there aren't any schools as a single school would/should account for more than the total yield for the year. That can only mean major probs for terns and gannets.

[Slider]

Moonlighter - I thought it would be obvious that my approach is in response to the method that appears to have been adopted by Fisheries to make us all think they're doing a great job - in the News section, written as if by a journalist quoting members of their own staff. Propaganda I would call it and I feel if it is good enough for them, then it's good enough for me. Well I thought it would be obvious when I have never refrained from signing my full name at the bottom of hundreds of posts over the years and very recently in both the wrong wrong wrong thread and the .... other one that was going at the same time which you surely commented in. I mean, I was hardly going to get away with it was I? No hidden agendas or any conspiracy theories to concern yourself with, just a light hearted jab at FQ is all.

Jackash - good question. A knee jerk response would be to ban the netting of tailor to allign with NSW. While this may see some benefit, I'm doubtful that it would solve the problem to a sufficient degree as it hasn't in NSW. A bycatch allowance of 100 or 150kgs would need to apply and herein lies a problem. Tailor will still flee from nets intended for mullet, bream, whiting, dart, trevally, goldens, snubbies etc because they will still associate netting with danger as nets are still dangerous to their species - even if it's just because of the bycatch. Alarm signals from the other species which are still of the same 'prey guild' as tailor (have a common predator - nets) will still cause alterations to tailor's spatial dynamics and cause loss of nutritious food, inappropriate spawning location and fecundity loss through stress of constantly avoiding the predator.
There is only one answer as far as I'm concerned and that is to create net free regions in locations where they spawn such as Indian Head to Sandy Cape, Noosa River to Double Island Point which are also locations where anchovy and sardine spawn which is part of the reason why tailor migrate and spawn in these locations. Ready access for larvae to estuaries such as the Noosa and in the Sandy Straights are another reason for spawning where they do. Ocean currents have a bearing here as does water temperature.
Net inside the estuary mouths for mullet and close the open beaches to netting and tailor and other species will resume their historical spatial dynamics and populations will rebound - even with recreational pressure.

The bycatch scenario above is the same as for spanish and spotted mackerel. Because these 2 species are still being taken in nets intended for school mackerel or longtails, the spaniards and spotties are still fleeing nets with similar problems as explained for tailor, and their recovery since 2003 when netting for these species was banned, has been slowed as a result. Is worth noting that a fifth of the W34 & W35 spotty yield for 2012 was taken in nets.

GM Bluewater - sorry for being sidetracked, but I can't be sure that tailor depletions have affected mackerel pops or not. It can't have helped of course, but we would need to know if the macks have adapted to compensate for the loss of tailor. I know they were loving the grinner population as it was a few years ago, but they may have depleted the grinners somewhat and be struggling for an alternative. Grinners may not be as nutritious as tailor and I expect that they aren't and this could well be relevant. I notice that spanish and spotty yields from SEQ waters have remained relatively constant since 2003, but perhaps they should have increased if a healthy tailor population existed.

[lampuki]

hi Lindsay - my own catch data would support your analysis, for moreton anyway. And the old heads state anecdotally that the fish have shrunk at Fraser. Questions I have, is their any reason the qld graph stops at 2005? And is the reason for the decline in effort in 2011/2012 attributed to your previous response re effort not being recorded on non productive days? The data from 2004 appears most alarming.

[Slider]

Cheers Lampuki,

Yes, reduced effort in 2011/12 can be attributed to no tailor schools available to net and flawed method of ascertaining actual effort.

Tailor at Fraser are now universally small - this has been especially noticeable the last 2 to 3 years and I have noticed less large fish since 2000. But this isn't what I mean by tailor having shrunk.

It was determined by DPI commissioned researchers that 2 year old tailor in 2004 were smaller than 2 year old tailor in the 70s. The 2004 research couldn't establish a reason why tailor had shrunk. At that point debate was raging around the world between fish biologists as to why harvested fish species were shrinking, like tailor. All sorts of harvested species had been found to be of a smaller size at maturity than they previously had been and the debate was whether this is caused by phenotypic plasticity or if it is an evolutionary change or just the size selectivity of the fishery. Without going into detail as to the differences between the 3 phenomena and causes, it is now accepted that reducing size at maturity is an evolutionary change brought about by excessive harvesting and fish that have shrunk are being overfished. Reduced size is said to be a symptom of overfishing.

An ecological fact associated with any species of animal that is under strong predation pressure, is that they release glucocorticoids and other stress related chemicals from a pituitary gland (HPA). These are chemicals associated with the 'fight or flight response to predation pressure. High levels of these chemicals in an animal's system cause loss of reproductive ability, infertility, loss of mass, increased vulnerability to disease (think Gladstone), higher per capita predation rates, reduced offspring survival and growth rates. These changes are slow to reverse when predation pressure is removed - think atlantic cod.

For instance - Atlantic silverside underwent a known evolutionary change in response to experimental harvesting pressure to a smaller size at age inside 5 generations. By the fifth generation, adult fecundity (reproductive ability) had declined on average 60% and larval survival to 10 days had reduced by 61%. These fish also hid for longer from simulated predatory attacks and had a reduction of 25% in food conversion efficiency and slower growth rates.

So when nets are being shot all over the place and tailor are constantly fleeing these nets, the above stated factors (and more) become applicable to tailor - and any other species similarly affected. Irrespective of us being certain of why tailor have shrunk, the fact is that the possible ramifications are large and we are turning a blind eye to these factors. The collapse in rec and commercial catches should have alarm bells ringing very loudly indeed.

[Slider]

As to all of Qld tailor data finishing in 2005: I found this data in about 2001 and was able to extend to 2005 using the data from the CHRIS (Coastal Habitat Resource Information System) website which only covers 1988 to 2005. The data to 2012 that I've used, I had to purchase from FQ and there are budgetry limitations as to how much data I could buy.
FQ are currently working on a new public data information system which will include recent data that I am told will be up and running in the next month or 2 and I should be able to fill any relevent gaps in my data then.

[manta man]

Hi Slider quite "Large Haul of Mullet and Tailor" netted on Moreton Island in the past few days. Also Spaniards just can't resist a Trolled Tailor they"re just irrisistable. Hey GM Bluewater, would'nt you, just be able to ask the Italians Bros on Fraser, how the Past Few Spanish Mackeral seasons been going.

[Slider]

Received this media release yesterday by the Minister for Fisheries - the latest assessment of species' sustainability in Qld's fisheries.

Notable is that tailor have been specifically mentioned as being sustainably fished, but coral trout have been downgraded from sustainably fished to 'uncertain' due to low catches and catch rates. Snapper are still of concern due to recreational and commercial catches remaining low by historical standards.

This confuses me. We have commercial catches of tailor that have gone through the floor in 2011/12 and recreational anglers are universally reporting great difficulty in finding tailor during this same period and the species has 'shrunk'. If catch rates compared to historical standards are a suitable gauge for snapper and trout to be deemed 'overfished' and 'uncertain', how are tailor then deemed to be sustainably fished? Especially when recreational snapper catches appear to be not too bad. To my way of thinking, this discrepancy throws doubt on what we are being told about each and every species that has been 'assessed' - like grey mackerel now being 'sustainably' fished when previously 'undefined'. Are we being fed some more propaganda?

I like this one - "Mr Mcveigh said the assessment of Qld's fisheries showed they were some of most sustainably fished in the world thanks to stringent fishery management arrangements". So stringent in fact that we hadn't actually noticed that tailor populations had collapsed!


Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
The Honourable John McVeigh

Key Queensland fish assessed for sustainability
The latest stock status report from the Queensland Government has rated 31 of the state’s key fish species as sustainable, up from 28 in 2011.
Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry John McVeigh said the assessment was based on analysis of commercial and recreational fishing catch, scientific monitoring and research.
“A comprehensive range of assessment tools are used including biological information on fish populations (e.g. age, length), commercial fishing logbooks, recreational catch estimates, and reviews by external scientists,” Mr McVeigh said.
“In the report, 75 key commercial and recreational fishing species were selected for scientific assessment of which 31 rated as sustainably fished included three fish that are underutilised as a resource. Examples of sustainable fish include barramundi, Spanish mackerel, dusky flathead and tailor.”
Mr McVeigh said only one fish stock continued to be cause for concern.
“Snapper, one of our most popular commercial and recreational fish species, was again classified as overfished,” he said.
“Commercial and recreational catches of snapper remain low by historical standards.
“While the recreational possession limit of snapper was reduced in late 2011, the long-lived nature of the species means it will take significant time before the effect of the management changes are realised.
“We have stepped up the monitoring of snapper to better understand its status, including improved monitoring of snapper catches and an independent survey of juvenile snapper in Moreton Bay.
“In a few years we’ll repeat the full stock assessment for snapper using the updated information we’re collecting now to give us greater confidence about the assessment result, and to see the effect of the changed management arrangements.”
Mr McVeigh said the assessment of Queensland’s fisheries showed they were some of the most sustainably fished in the world thanks to stringent fisheries management arrangements.
“Assessments like this stock status report are critical to monitoring usage of our fisheries resources for long-term sustainability,” he said.
“By highlighting any gaps in information, we can put processes in place to gather data on these stocks for future assessments.
“Most fishers in Queensland do the right thing, but we encourage all fishers to ensure they are up-to-date with the rules so we can continue to fish sustainably.”
Key changes in stock status are:


Spanish mackerel in the Gulf of Carpentaria moved from ‘uncertain’ to ‘sustainably fished’
Balmain bugs, grey mackerel (east coast stock) and northern king prawns moved from ‘undefined’ to ‘sustainably fished’
Coral trout moved from ‘sustainable fished’ to ‘uncertain’ due to low catches and catch rates
Blue swimmer crab moved from ‘sustainably fished’ to ‘uncertain’ due to declining catch
A stock assessment for coral trout is underway, and the first stock assessment for blue swimmer crab is planned as a result of the changes to their stock status.
The summary report on Queensland’s 2012 fish stock status is available online at www.fisheries.qld.gov.au (http://www.fisheries.qld.gov.au/) and the full report to be published in the coming months.
[ENDS] 13 June 2013
Media Contact: Louise Gillis - 0408 709 160

[Macks forever]

Unfortunately McVeigh has no idea what he is doing with fisheries and really does not care. His main interest is farming and agriculture.

He is happy to sign the garbage printed for him by the fisheries managers who are simply ensuring their ongoing dynasty. If they admit there is a problem they have to do something and they might have to admit there has been a problem for some time on their watch.

If the say there is no problem then they can keep filling out their nondescript reports and keep their jobs and keep warming their seats.

[GM-Bluewater]

Hey GM Bluewater, would'nt you, just be able to ask the Italians Bros on Fraser, how the Past Few Spanish Mackeral seasons been going.

I know how the last few seasons out of Waddy Point have gone, just putting it out there for others that fish a little further south. And you can't beat a fresh Tailor being towed for Spaniards, about the only thing they are good for!

[Slider]

Just for you GM - the attached is commercially line caught spanish from Sandy Cape to Moreton Bay. Encompasses grids W32, W34, W35, W36 & W37.

Spanish taken from W34 & W35 in 2012 was 5 tonne - is all the data I have for spaniards in 2012.

[Slider]

Article in tomorrow's Sunshine Coast Daily on this for those interested.

At some stage tomorrow or Sunday I will have quite a deal to say on matters - as much as I'd love to now as I'm chomping at the bit. ;)

[Slider]

Ok - so a response was sought from Daff by Bill Hoffman of the Sunshine Coast Daily on the apparent collapse of tailor stocks in the Cooloola/Fraser region.

Included in the response, it was stated that the decline in commercial yields and recreational catches is - and I quote - "not unexpected given the range of management measures introduced since 2002, including a total allowable commercial catch, bag limits, seasonal closures and increasing the minimum legal size." - end quote. All designed mind you to increase tailor populations and thus enhance commercial yields and recreational catches.

But let's analyse these management initiatives shall we and see whether they actually have any negative influence over such poor commercial yields and recreational catches in the region as is being stated as the reason for the poor yields and recreational catches in 2011 and 2012.
.

Seasonal closure for August and September between Indian Head and Waddy Point - introduced in the late 90s. So no, doesn't have any negative impact on commercial yields or recreational catches on Fraser Is from 2000 - 2012 and certainly doesn't negatively influence commercial or recreational catches in any shape or form in Cooloola.

Seasonal closure to commercial netting between Hook Point and Sandy Cape from 1st Sep to 1st April introduced in 2003. So no, doesn't negatively impact commercial yields on Fraser Is from 2003 - 2012 and certainly doesn't negatively influence commercial yields or recreational catches in Cooloola.

Seasonal closure to commercial netting between Tooloora Ck and Ngkala Rocks from 1st April to 1st September - introduced in 2003. So no, doesn't negatively impact commercial yields on Fraser Is from 2003 - 2012 and certainly doesn't negatively influence commercial yields or recreational catches in Cooloola.

Total Allowable catch by commercial fishers of 120 tonne - introduced in 2002. So no, doesn't negatively influence commercial yields after 2002 and especially when the tac has never been reached.

Bag limit of 20 fish for recreational anglers - introduced March 2002. So no, doesn't negatively influence commercial yields or recreational catches between 2002 and 2012 anywhere.

Size limit of 35cm - introduced in March 2010. This can only influence commercial yields and recreational catches in 2010 due to the fish not legal (between 30 and 35cm) in 2010 becoming legal in 2011. Funnily enough, 2010 yields weren't that bad, but 2011 and 2012 were tragic.

There is one other influencing factor that hasn't been considered. This is the algal blooms of hincksia sordida and anaulus australis which occurred along the Fraser and Cooloola coast during Spring, Summer and Autumn between the summer of 2000/2001 and August 2007 when the drought broke in this region and dispersed the hincksia which had near prevented all surf fishing during those years. The algae did negatively influence commercial yields and recreational catches between 2001 and 2007 and which can be seen in the graphs. This should have provided tailor with an opportunity for their population to recover and it may well have gauging from yields in all 3 grids for 2007, 2008, 2009 & 2010 to varying degrees. There has been no hincksia present for these years and la nina rainfall should also be of assistance to healthy yields. Yet 2011 and 2012 yields collapsed at a time when they should be as healthy as those prior to 2001 other than 30 - 35cm tailor and especially in Cooloola where none of the other management initiatives actually apply to the commercial fishery.

I remind everyone - these management measures were introduced to increase tailor populations and subsequently yields and recreational catches. But here we have a situation where DAFF/FQ are stating that these managent measures decreased yields and recreational catches.
Come on guys, what are you thinking? Or is the response to Bill Hoffman's questions and the clear collapse of tailor stocks that I've exposed by using your data, merely an attempt at a smokescreen? Sadly, it is a very poor attempt and one that I'm afraid I will not be letting you get away with.

Lindsay Dines

[manta man]

What can i say Slider except for (You Go Get Them) Good Luck. Manta Man

[Tangles]

Lindsay

I remember that you posted a lot on here about Tailer singing in pain like the whales with the nettings, still selling your Tailer sliders to catch them?

[Slider]

Cheers Manta Man.

Any fish with vocalising capabilities will emit alarm vocalisations when trapped in nets and that is most species. It can be expected that the same species would emit alarm vocalisations when in pain also - such as when hooked.
But no Tangles, I haven't traded in Sliders for a few years and if there is a point you're trying to make, then make it properly so I can address it properly.

Another article in today's Sunshine Coast Daily that is very interesting.

[Macks forever]

Thanks for all your info Slider.

Part of the problem that is plainly obvious to those that have been around a long time is that Qld Fisheries managers like to keep their seats warm by not rocking the boat and not upsetting anyone. The easiest way to do that and keep their job is to tell the world "We are doing a great job and there is nothing wrong with the fishery". To do that they manipulate a few figures and when anyone dares to question or even have a contrary opinion they just DENY DENY DENY until the problem goes away.

How many people reading this, who actually fish for tailor in the surf in Qld, will state categorically that there is no problem with tailor?
I certainly will not. I agree with Slider.

[Slider]

Yes, well - as of today I am pleased to state that there is no longer any denial from FQ regarding declining tailor catches - at least on the Sunshine Coast. It is also agreed that the technical staff at FQ and myself will meet within the next few weeks to discuss what is occurring and what management meaures can be implemented to reverse the trend.
While this is pleasing and I take my hat off to the guys at FQ who have instigated this approach, I am also aware that appropriate remedial measures still need to be implemented and that we need to establish what is appropriate. Most would be aware of what I believe to be necessary and I'll naturally be pursuing these objectives, but I will also approach the situation with an open mind. Well, not completely closed anyway.

And while open dialogue relating to tailor is great, there are a number of related issues associated with other species that I hope to address in the process. In particular is mullet netting and the current arrangements that exist.

Guess I can tone down the rhetoric a little now.

[Tailorfisho78]

Is someone trying to tell us something that we already know? Words need to be put into action, i'm sick of all the talk around stopping the pro netters pulling tonnes of tailor and "by catch" as they call it from our beaches. Not too sure why and what the dpi are doing with there research data every year on fraser island but it seems to be falling on deaf ears where it counts. Im like every other keen beach fisho that hits fraser island every year, a heap of talk leading up to the trip about 'this year is shaping up as a good year for tailor' then when you get up on the island the frustration kicks in as soon as the first lot of tailor hit the beach, lucky if they are 35cm! This isn't just killing our fish stocks but it is killing what was a very big tourism injection for fraser island. Don't know why we as australians sit on our butts and let this type of injustice take place every year. I guess its the same fight as keeping australian manufacturing jobs onshore, the state and federal goverment have no balls to try and stop it. Before i sign off i would really like to know if anyone has documented prove of where all the netted tailor end up because i know most of the fresh seafood places around se qld don't stock "fresh" tailor in there display cabinets for a reason that doesn't need explaining, so where do they end up? Asia, cat food, or maybe the dumb?? It seems as though the reco fishos have lost there fight on this topic and i cant really blame them because a few years back the fight to stop pro netting of tailor was very well documented and we saw plenty of "stop netting tailor" stickers on the back of most beach fisho's 4wd's or a stop netting petition at the local bait and tackle store or fishing club but all i ever read now days is yes, we have the data to prove the stocks have declined and we are concern about the future stocks but we are not doing anything about it! Well i will still be doing my yearly fraser trip this august and know that its more of a trip to get away from work and the stresses of life and if we catch any tailor or decent size beach species its just a bonus.
Cheers and beers
keithy

[manta man]

Well Tailorfisho you hit the Nail Right on the Head. It is interesting that the past few years on Fraser have been quite poor. You say you get a lot of Tailor, just under 35cm mmm usally the bigger ones don"t turn up till say mid September onwards.Also i have to wonder, of all the undersized Tailor returned to the water how many actually survive. Reason being Tailor have a soft mouths and are bleeders. I have to wonder how many do survive after having a set of Gangs retrieved from their mouth or triple hooks from a slug! Anyway Personally i have written a couple of letters to various authorities over the years and have not had a response. I hav'nt fished a Beach for at least 8 years and i miss it dearly. I for one am not entirely against the Netters but as (I've said on previous threads you just can"t keep taking all the breeding stock in Mass Proportions and expect it too be sustainable. Only the very Gullible would think that. It does"nt mater what species of Fish is being netted "Firstly the Size will Decline, and then eventually the numbers as well. Oh and just remember their Best Hauls are in Peak Breeding Season for any Species.. Oh and as no"s decline so do the Predators following. Again Slider i wish you well in pursuit of this subject. I do hope common sense does prevail for the Future Generations of Fish, and for the Children of Tomorrow and fellow Fishos of today.

[Macks forever]

In partial answer to your question Tailorfisho78:
"Before i sign off i would really like to know if anyone has documented prove of where all the netted tailor end up because i know most of the fresh seafood places around se qld don't stock "fresh" tailor in there display cabinets for a reason that doesn't need explaining, so where do they end up? Asia, cat food, or maybe the dump??"

From Courier Mail
National parks rangers investigate thousands of fish dumped in Moreton Island creek

THOUSANDS of fish have been dumped in a creek on Moreton Island National Park, with locals alleging they were thrown there by fishermen illegally netting in the area.
An island resident said it was not the first time fish had been dumped on the northern part of the island off Brisbane, an area often used by net fishers.
"I don't know why they dumped them there,'' the resident said. "Maybe it's to hide them from the rangers but it's not just one event. Tonnes have been dumped and it's been going on for ages.
"Some of the fish are relatively fresh, some are mush and some are just skeletons.''
He said some of the catch was tailor and fish were of a substantial size, which suggested they had perhaps not been properly chilled, forcing fishermen to throw them away.
"It's anything goes up on the northern end of the island at night,'' he said. "They know there is no policing so they do just what they like and they're pretty feral.''
National Parks Department southeast region director Rob Allan appealed for help to track down the culprits.
Fish were thought to have been dumped on the weekend and rangers and Fisheries Department inspectors went to a creek at Yellow Patch on Monday to investigate.
The area is in a Yellow Zone under the Moreton Bay Marine Park zoning and netting is allowed with some restrictions.
Queensland Seafood Industry Association chief executive Scott Wiseman said whoever dumped the fish was acting illegally.
"We don't know who this was but professional fishers' nets are supposed to be monitored all the time,'' he said. "The whole idea is that as much bycatch as possible is released unharmed.
"We'll follow this up and see if any of our members are operating in the area and make sure they are doing the right thing.''


Read more: http://www.couriermail.com.au/national-news/queensland/national-parks-rangers-investigate-thousands-of-fish-dumped-in-moreton-island-creek/story-fnii5v6w-1226680815485#ixzz2ZLxsjSYr

[Tailorfisho78]

Yes, well - as of today I am pleased to state that there is no longer any denial from FQ regarding declining tailor catches - at least on the Sunshine Coast. It is also agreed that the technical staff at FQ and myself will meet within the next few weeks to discuss what is occurring and what management meaures can be implemented to reverse the trend.
While this is pleasing and I take my hat off to the guys at FQ who have instigated this approach, I am also aware that appropriate remedial measures still need to be implemented and that we need to establish what is appropriate. Most would be aware of what I believe to be necessary and I'll naturally be pursuing these objectives, but I will also approach the situation with an open mind. Well, not completely closed anyway.

And while open dialogue relating to tailor is great, there are a number of related issues associated with other species that I hope to address in the process. In particular is mullet netting and the current arrangements that exist.

Guess I can tone down the rhetoric a little now.
Slider

Sounds like you may have a chance to be heard but if you ever want any support in any shape or form regarding the beach netting in particular tailor please do not hesitate to drop me an email as this is something that has been going on way too long and as we all know if something is not done about it my kids, my grand kids and future generations will not have the chance to enjoy a past time that has been handed down from my father and grand father for some 50yrs.

Cheers
Keith

[lampuki]

What would b the rec take from moreton these days? I can't see it being huge!!!! Then 1 pric pro nets and dumps tonnes at yellowpatch? they are good size fish, just wasted.

[Slider]

Thank you Keith - I do appreciate that and I'll certainly publicise the fact if I need assistance in this regard, but at this point it is appropriate that I work with FQ to address the problem. :-X

The netting of tailor in the ocean haul sector doesn't seem to be a problem anymore - about 850kg off Teewah Beach and 1 tonne from Fraser beaches for instance in 2012 isn't really having much impact :-? Mullet netting is now the most significant problem as far as depleting tailor pops however and I fully intend that this should be addressed.

Must admit to having seen some things at Moreton re QPWS that have absolutely stunned me - which I won't go into but are relevent today and ..... every day. :beatnik:::)

[malby]

Again I want to say that you are doing recreational anglers proud with your efforts Lindsay!;D

As you meet with FQ though just be reminded of Sherry Arnstein's ladder of participation.

As I'm sure you're well aware, so often Government organisations just want us to believe that we are having a say but 94785 in reality we are simply being placated in a tokenistic way to settle us down so that we don't keep taking things to the media and embarrassing them.

I actually believe that you need to continue to take this to the media and keep the pressure firmly on the State Government especially as we draw closer to the next federal election. In my opinion there needs to be clear evidence of a shift by DAF or fisheries to move to a place of genuine partnership whereby there is 'real and sustained change' and yes lets continue to encourage a closure (buy back) of mullet netting around our beaches and estuaries as this is really a key issue and is decimating fish stocks.

Only 2 weeks ago a mate of mine witnessed Pro netters at Double Island Point cleaning out the lagoon. They were using a high speed jet boat to scare and round up fish into the gill nets and they ended up with heaps of fish in the nets (according to my mate) but not so many mullet.

This sort of random fish killing has got to come to an end or there will be nothing for any of us let alone Tailor!>:(

Again, well done!!

Mal

[Slider]

Fear not Mal - am one step ahead of you.

[malby]

Yep, I'm betting you having been placated one too many times!

Glad to hear you are on it as usual.

[Slider]

Be nice if all I got was placated Mal - signs are that nothing so gentle is my lot for a while.

[SandStorm]

I don't know the migration route of Tailor or how far they go offshore, but you can have all the quota regulation you like but if they stray into international waters and are caught by foreign boats what can you really do to protect them then!

I can remember back in the 1980s seeing beaches lined with anglers some were catching fish into the high hundreds, maybe they are to blame also

[Slider]

No question that the recreational impact has played a roll SandStorm. There's no question either that recs are now going to have to be a part of the solution via reduced bag limits and I would think increased size limits along with further seasonal closures that protect spawning stock. But both sectors will have to take a hit - though a small one when catches are so low anyway. It is probable that the recovery would be slow and the potential exists for it to be many, many years before we see schools of greenbacks in our surf gutters again.

I'd be very doubtful that an offshore migration would be that offshore and that they're being taken in international waters.

[Tailorfisho78]

No question that the recreational impact has played a roll SandStorm. There's no question either that recs are now going to have to be a part of the solution via reduced bag limits and I would think increased size limits along with further seasonal closures that protect spawning stock. But both sectors will have to take a hit - though a small one when catches are so low anyway. It is probable that the recovery would be slow and the potential exists for it to be many, many years before we see schools of greenbacks in our surf gutters again.

I'd be very doubtful that an offshore migration would be that offshore and that they're being taken in international waters.

Agreed Slider
I for one support the above. an increased size of 400 - 450 would go long way to helping in my opinion. I have been reading the DPI research data from fraser island tailor and it is documented that adult females spawn at around 250mm long. increasing the limit to 400 - 450 would allow these fish the chance to spawn 2 - 3 times instead of once. do the maths, 1 adult female spawns at 250mm long and can not be caught until it is 400 long means by the time it is caught under increased size limits her 1st offspring have reached the 250mm length allowing them to spawn and suddenly you have the reverse of what is currently happening. The tailor would be reproducing 10 fold and with increased size limits and decreased bag limits and a buy back scheme of pros licences in my opinion would see the stocks return within numbers seen in the 1990's. the science is there but at the end of the day good old common sense rules this one?

[SandStorm]

What do the commercials sell them for, export, canning, fertilizer? I've never seen one in fishmongers

[Gazza]

The minsize is NOW(recently raised?)....35cms , thats about right.

"Fish are shrinking"....::)....
'cause that <35 cm. size is now C&R , with only the BIGGER ones too be kept!!...by law :'(

[Just_chips]

We'll see how the 2013 Tailor season pans out hey? 2012 was a non event as far as the bigger fish were concerned. They were few and far between.

I'm all for taking a feed of fresh fish and have taken plenty of fresh tailor in my time, but cannot justify to continue doing it to the detriment of the species as a whole. We can bitch and moan about it all we like, but the recreational take of tailor in the current climate exceeds the pro catches. Pro catches in beach nets are devastating because they wipe out entire schools, but the recreational line fishing accounts for tonnes and tonnes of fish too, so the axe must fall on both parties to achieve an acceptable solution.

[lampuki]

yep, I wouldn't disagree with a bag reduction/size increase, especially if it is the bargaining tool used to minimize beach netting. The problem is, introducing new rec limits costs $0, buying back licenses cost $$$s, I really hope the recent pressure being applied has a good outcome! I'm dead against any further closures.

[Slider]

I also would be dead against any closures other than seasonal north of Indian Head to Rooney Point to protect spawning stock and 1 year old fish making their way from the Sandy Straights to Sandy Cape during August and September, or September and October.

To my way of thinking that doesn't necessarily mean that fishing can't take place inside this seasonally closed area during the specified months, but the targeting and keeping of tailor could be prohibited for the term of the closure - as per barra.
It would seem silly to prevent Mr and Mrs Jones and their kids from fishing for whiting with worm along Orchid for instance, when it is only tailor that we are trying to protect.
Gets a little trickier when slugs or poppers can be used to specifically target gt, goldens, queenies, mackerels in this region during these months and tailor will also obviously take these. But the tailor still can't be legally kept and I don't see this as a significant issue.

This arrangement, in my opinion, should only occur under the circumstance of there being no netting within 500m of the beach north of Ngkala Rocks to Rooney Point. If this condition isn't on the table, then I'd fear for any agreed outcome being attainable.

I would like feedback on this idea of the seasonal closure of tailor only - for or against.

Size limit to 40cm and bag to 10 is where I'd like to see things as a general rule for Qld tailor.

Speaking of closures - the ones at Moreton eastern beach and around the Cape - does anyone know what they're intented to do?

[Tailorfisho78]

We'll see how the 2013 Tailor season pans out hey? 2012 was a non event as far as the bigger fish were concerned. They were few and far between.

I'm all for taking a feed of fresh fish and have taken plenty of fresh tailor in my time, but cannot justify to continue doing it to the detriment of the species as a whole. We can bitch and moan about it all we like, but the recreational take of tailor in the current climate exceeds the pro catches. Pro catches in beach nets are devastating because they wipe out entire schools, but the recreational line fishing accounts for tonnes and tonnes of fish too, so the axe must fall on both parties to achieve an acceptable solution.

I have to agree with you on the above Kev, Line (Beach Fisho's) do take a shitload of fish! For example, we go to fraser with Ten blokes, we all take our 20 fish = 200 fish. Lets say early season fish around the 900 - 1kg mark. so 200KG of tailor 1st week of August. Now times that by how many boys trips in August, September, October. Gee it starts adding up very quickly and this is just one section of beach and this is being taken from the "BREEDING GROUNDS". Lets remember the bag limit used to be 50 then it dropped to 30 for Fraser Island if the stay was longer than 72hrs and now we are at 20 and we are finding it even harder to catch a legal fish. Well if someone is trying to tell me we don;t have a problem with Tailor numbers and sizes they must be walking around with head stuck so far up their ass and also to think we do not need to put more measures in place to protect what we all like to go and enjoy these people need to have a really good look at themself because you are very much out numbered when it comes to opinions on Tailor stocks. Sorry if my opinion offends anyone but this is something that pisses me off and the sooner or Pollies can get off there butt and do something about it the better the whole fishery will be.
cheers and beers
Keithy

[Gazza]

35cms and 19bag.
My last & final offer
lol Greenies

[Just_chips]

35cms and 19bag.
My last & final offer
lol Greenies

lol Troll

If you cant contribute anything useful then don't bother......

[Gazza]

Lol , another greenie or netter
Or nutter trying to reduce RecFishos allowed bag /size
Not gunna happen m8....

[Tailorfisho78]

35cms and 19bag.
My last & final offer
lol Greenies

Educated?? I doubt it very much!

[Slider]

I also would be dead against any closures other than seasonal north of Indian Head to Rooney Point to protect spawning stock and 1 year old fish making their way from the Sandy Straights to Sandy Cape during August and September, or September and October.

To my way of thinking that doesn't necessarily mean that fishing can't take place inside this seasonally closed area during the specified months, but the targeting and keeping of tailor could be prohibited for the term of the closure - as per barra.
It would seem silly to prevent Mr and Mrs Jones and their kids from fishing for whiting with worm along Orchid for instance, when it is only tailor that we are trying to protect.
Gets a little trickier when slugs or poppers can be used to specifically target gt, goldens, queenies, mackerels in this region during these months and tailor will also obviously take these. But the tailor still can't be legally kept and I don't see this as a significant issue.

This arrangement, in my opinion, should only occur under the circumstance of there being no netting within 500m of the beach north of Ngkala Rocks to Rooney Point. If this condition isn't on the table, then I'd fear for any agreed outcome being attainable.

I would like feedback on this idea of the seasonal closure of tailor only - for or against.

Size limit to 40cm and bag to 10 is where I'd like to see things as a general rule for Qld tailor.

Speaking of closures - the ones at Moreton eastern beach and around the Cape - does anyone know what they're intented to do?


I fear the content of my last post will get lost unless I bring it to the surface again. I would like feedback on the suggested closure north of Indian Head and for the Moreton closure question to be answered if possible.

Gazza's posts aren't worth replying to.

[lampuki]

Hi Lindsay.

"Size limit to 40cm and bag to 10 is where I'd like to see things as a general rule for Qld tailor." - I agree.

I dont want to see another closure.

[Just_chips]

Proposed bag and size limit changes are fine, but I also don't want to see a closure of this calibre introduced.

[Moonlighter]

Quote Slider: Speaking of closures - the ones at Moreton eastern beach and around the Cape - does anyone know what they're intented to do?

Lindsay

I am surprised that you do not seem to be aware of the difference between fisheries closures and Marine Park closures. Allow me to educate you just a little, if I may.

The closures you refer to above are Marine Park conservation zones. The purpose of these Marine Parks zones have nothing to do with managing fisheries or fish stocks or anything like that. People need to get that thru their heads - Marine Parks are NOT designed or intended to benefit fishing in any way shape or form. The fact is that they are not developed, designed, or administered by the Fisheries Departments/agencies either in the Commonwealth or States!

They ARE designed, developed and implemented by the Environment Departments of those governments. Those bodies, despite trotting out the rhetoric about saving fish, and fisheries sustainability (the biggest weasel word ever invented), are neither charged with or interested in effective fisheries management and that includes the sustainability of the fishing of any particular species. In that context, their only interest is in issueing export permits for such species when State of C'Wealth fisheries agencies have certified them to be sustainably fished. It is simply NOT THEIR JOB to manage fishing or fisheries!

Marine Parks are not, as some people have been conned into thinking by our greeny friends, tools that have the intent or purpose of creating sustainable fishing. They are purely and simply the tools of the conservation movement and their aim is conservation, pure and simple. Lock it up, throw away the key, keep people out.

So, as soon as anyone tries to tell you that marine parks conservation zones are there to benefit fishing and that you, as a fisherman/woman should be happy about that, the BS meter should immediately go off the scale! Because you will immediately know they are telling you porkies and are trying to dazzle you with their fictitious and dishonest use of quasi science and twisted statistics.

And excuse my cynicism, but the conservation movement has been very effective in playing their cynical game to get more zones in Marine Parks closed to fishing than ever before. Recently, for example, only around 26% of respondents who made submissions to the South Australia marine parks proposals were from SA, the rest were interstate, and a major chunk, I think about 50% of those from outside SA, were from international conservation organisations (form letters/submissions) in mainly the US and Canada, for heavens sake!

Calls for more "closures" are therefore a long way off the mark. The only "closures" used as management tools by fisheries are seasonal spawning closures or nursery closures such as Swann Bay.

Please, also make sure that if/when you talk to Qld Fisheries you make sure you let them know that you are representing only your own views and perhaps those of a handfull of Ausfishers, not even all who have posted on this thread. You certainly do not represent mine, nor have you got any claim to representing the broader recreational fishers in this State.

Cheers

ML

[Tangles]

Agree with Moonlighter and to give examples,,

Be careful what you wish for: I think people should read the Qld 2012 Moreton -Marine Park-Monitoring report.

I loved just loved the absolutely unbiased manner this report takes to present its findings on how successsful the Green Zones are etc:


There are some are crackers in 32 page report, ie on shorebirds on exposed beaches,

"Beaches and dunes deliver important ecosystem services (e.g. nesting habitats for turtles and birds, foraging areas for shorebirds and fishes), but the attractiveness of beaches for human use and recreation makes them also ecologically vulnerable."


Photo 8. Example of pressure from vehicle-based recreation: flock of crested terns disturbed by a 4WD on North Stradbroke Island and a dead tern killed by a vehicle. Photo: DERM.[/I]

Now driving a 4wbie which causes some birds to fly off is portrayed as almost criminal and i sort of think the tern was placed over the car tracks.

[Tangles]

I also loved this in the report from DERM, they arent only looking at the biology of the bay


The socio-ecological focus of the Moreton Bay monitoring program means that people’s values and feelings about the marine park will be assessed as well as the biological aspects. This is critical as it provides decision makers with a range of information to consider.

I also loved the stereotyping of the stakeholders: I note with interest what a wrap the other groups get with seemingly a greater marine ethic? which clearly equates to a greater voice. I love how a govt department clearly considers people fishing to be less ethical than others who have a supposed ecological higher viewpoint!!

The tourism, industry, fishing sectors view the bay as a great asset with strong economic potential. However, this is tempered through their understanding of the need for sustainable development. Environmental, education and community groups also support sustainable development and work to ensure a healthy bay into the future. These groups view the bay through a different set of values—ecological, aesthetic and symbolic, as they call for a greater marine ethic, wider community education about the bay and the marine park, and greater care of mangrove and marine ecosystems. Through their drive to preserve the bay, they encourage others to get involved in volunteer projects from beach clean ups to seagrass watch, water monitoring and bird observing.

This is a DERM report, is it unbaised, ethical and just stating the facts. Well its really just a call for more surveys to be done in the end to justify another report as they really havent got much info yet.

I note in the first pages they note that only most zones have been surveyed which gave me a lot of confidence in the rest of the data.

Since August 2008, most zones in Moreton Bay were surveyed on multiple occasions by boat-based teams (Figure 1). Surveys were also taken six months before zoning was implemented, and then bimonthly in the 24 months after zoning. The study included the period of management change (the introduction of the new zoning), seasonal variations in fishing activity, and other uses of the study area.

Just my unbiased opinion of course:D

[Slider]

Lol - the marine park thing has really left you a bitter man by the sounds Moonlighter. Never mind, I was just curious and if your response is the only one I get to the question, then I'll just move on. But you are most definitely correct that I won't be representing your interests to FQ or anywhere for that matter as your views and mine are clearly different.

I can appreciate that nobody wants to see another closure, or any closure. I'm no different in this sense, but we do have to be realistic with regards to the current tailor situation.

[Slider]

Have read your posts twice Tangles and still can't work out how they're relevant. I may be slow, but can you explain this for me?

[Tangles]

Slider, stay with it, it was following on from Moonlighters post:

Marine Parks are not, as some people have been conned into thinking by our greeny friends, tools that have the intent or purpose of creating sustainable fishing.

Even from there own 2012 report on how great closing down fishing areas has been ( well DERM have to say that to justify it), they dont by their own admission really know whats happening as they really still havent got the cold hard facts, well how can they when they admit to not even surveying all the areas they have closed down to see what affect it will have, and start from a viewpoint that isnt exactly beach or boat fishing friendly.

Closing Fraser to fishing is what your saying, im saying be careful what you wish for

[Slider]

Oh, I see - following on from Moonlighters rant about conspiracy theories. No worries.

Closing Fraser Island to fishing? No wonder it's hard to stay on track when things can be twisted to that degree.

[Tangles]

Slider to reiterate, i was merely quoting DERMs own words from their report,

suggest you read it, and its easy to declare someones opposing view as a rant or a conspiracy theory, that sort of stuff reminds me of how certain anti fishing groups behave and argue. i personally greatly respect his views on this and his efforts to get sensible outcomes on behalf of people who sensibly use the bay and beaches,

also you proposed closing certain areas at times. (ok i missed a qualifying word)

I can appreciate that nobody wants to see another closure, or any closure. I'm no different in this sense, but we do have to be realistic with regards to the current tailor situation.

[Slider]

A qualifying paragraph I'd say.

[Moonlighter]

A rant you say? Pot calling the kettle black, is what I say. Look at your own first few posts!! No offense intended, as Im sure there was none in your remark directed a me. None was taken.

Tangles is right. Do not ask for increased size limits and decreased bag limits, or more closures, or you may get what you ask for. And most of us don't want and wont accept that.

Lots of people on the recreational fishing sector side thought more marine park "yellow" zones were a good idea because they exclude professional fishers. They saw them as quasi "recreational fishing" havens.

But what they didn't realize is that, to the greenies, today's yellow zones are just one step away from tomorrow's green zones. They suck you in with their position seeming to be reasonable, then next time, those yellow zones are the first candidates to turn green. Bazanga, got you!

Plus, there is the fundamental issue that I mentioned before - the greenies behind marine parks, whether they are green, yellow, or blue zones, don't have fishing interests at heart.

In fact,it is the opposite- they hate us and want all fishing banned. So i won get into bed with them under any circumstances. Yes, i might be jaundiced about this, but let me tell you, get into a room full of these types like I had to for 2 years and they cant hide their real agendas from coming out. I saw them up close and personal, and it was not pretty.

Fisheries can declare recreational fishing havens under Fisheries legislation. But I wont be part of quasi- recreational fishing yellow zones declared under Marine Parks legislation. And i would urge others to consider that position as well.

I will now take you to task about understanding the data presented in your graphs. They do not paint the correct picture. I am not a marine scientist, but I work with statistics and performance data every day. It is my bread and butter.

What I do know about most of those statistics you have presented about tailor is that they unintentionally misrepresent the true picture.

Why? because I know that changes in the way the data was collected have occurred at several points. Changes in rules have occurred at several points. Changes in reporting requirements for the data provided has occurred. Fishing practices have changed.

The data you presented in the graphs is what we would call corrupt without these factors being presented right beside the graphs, and its effects explained.

All of that makes for a different picture than you are portraying with what appear, at face value, to be straightforward statistics.

I know this because the statistics themselves never tell the full story - you need to know the history of events, the background, the methods and practices and how they have varied over the time series of the data you are looking at.

I also know this because i have consulted a senior, respected, well known expert and author on fisheries management in Queensland who DOES know the history and background behind these things. And that's his opinion, too. Not some armchair expert with an agenda. A guy with a real PhD in this very field, as well as being a pretty darn accomplished recreational fisherman too!

My opinion is that you have just enough knowledge of this stuff to present a half credible argument, and really, that's just enough to be just a bit dangerous.

I have resisted coming on here to joust with you because one thing I learnt in the Moreton Bay process is that it is pointless to argue with individuals who have already made up their minds. No matter how much contrary fact you present them with, it makes no difference.

But it concerns me to see other members here being drawn in by what I think is your misguided, though well-intentioned, passion for a cause. I don't want Fisheries, who I am sure are looking at this thread, to get the idea that the is any real level of support for the things you want.

I also want Ausfishers to understand that IMO the argument you have presented is based on flawed data, and the GIGO rule therefore applies.

Thats all from me.

[Gazza]

R u a member of Pew slides?

Remember ,
35cms/19 bag for tailor. (in possession)
1 line in Greenzones
5 snapper
No rfl , sip is fine.
Ta for your representation of me

[Slider]

I do hope Moonlighter got to read my response to his post before it was deleted. Can somebody explain why it was deleted when Moonlighter's has not?
Guess I'll just have to write it again.

Gazza - nobody can even catch 19 tailor for a start ...

[Gazza]

Make the minsize 30cms then?
AND then they CAN....simple!

OR...If you increase the baglimit to say 40? given your "cant get 19 now"
Lets tease the poor RecFisho anyways , 40 it is

[cobiaman]

Geez gazza, dont get too worked up and give yourself a heart attack mate. Why does it bother you when you dont even go fishing???

[Gazza]

So you catch cobias, what do you care about tailor?

[cobiaman]

So you catch cobias, what do you care about tailor?

Tailor are good bait for cobias

[Gazza]

Tailor r good eating , cobias are good crab bait.

[Just_chips]

Gazza's posts aren't worth replying to.


It's been posted once before but thought it might help more if this were put up at least once on every page.....

[manta man]

Well i"ll go for the 10 Tailor and 40cm, also close all Netting from Nygala to the Cape for a period of 3 months per year. Get rid of the Netters out of the Great Sandy Straights forever. Oh and while i"m here, raise the Legal Length of Whiting and Bream to 27cms anything smaller is a Joke.

[nigelr]

Thanks for all your info Slider.


How many people reading this, who actually fish for tailor in the surf in Qld, will state categorically that there is no problem with tailor?
I certainly will not. I agree with Slider.

Wow, imagine that, folk who actually regularly fish the surf for tailor actually having anecdotal evidence worth considering.....FMD what a revolutionary idea...thanks Macks forever!

[Tailorfisho78]

Well i"ll go for the 10 Tailor and 40cm, also close all Netting from Nygala to the Cape for a period of 3 months per year. Get rid of the Netters out of the Great Sandy Straights forever. Oh and while i"m here, raise the Legal Length of Whiting and Bream to 27cms anything smaller is a Joke.


2nd that! I agree with all of the above manta Man.

[Gazza]

Looks like whiting & bream stocks are "hanging by a thread" too.
LOL
Dont worry, I'll wave me magic wand , and have tailor increasing over the next few months , and then I'll summon the summer whiting to make an appearance after that.

[malby]

http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by manta man http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/showthread.php?p=1494751#post1494751)
Well i"ll go for the 10 Tailor and 40cm, also close all Netting from Nygala to the Cape for a period of 3 months per year. Get rid of the Netters out of the Great Sandy Straights forever. Oh and while i"m here, raise the Legal Length of Whiting and Bream to 27cms anything smaller is a Joke.

I'm in for that change also no probs. Great suggestion Manta Man as who is ever going to eat more than 10 Tailor per day anyway. If you are fishing with a mate that's 20! :o

I just got back from Double Island Point where I took a group of 'at risk' boys from a school on the Brissy Northside up for 3 days camping and fishing. See http://www.su-connect.org.au/ for details of the program I help run.

On the way up we dropped in at one of the tackle shops at Tewantin to buy some pillies and asked how things were up at Teewah. The response was not promising. The owner told us that Pro Netters had been working the beach several days last week with their mullet gill nets. He explained that their method was to drive along the beach with a net attached to the bull bar and the other end of the gill net was attached to a jet boat that shot out though the waves and circled around and back to the shore for a haul. This was then done over and over down the beach wherever they could spot the schools. Sounded very effective and so instead of buying a 4 kg I backed off and got a 2kg block of pilchards as I was a tad concerned.:(

The DI lagoon I knew was already buggered by these guys from doing their hauling and now it sounded like Teewah was gone too! :'(

So how the heck am I going to get these boys onto a fish up here I wondered??:-?

Well first we tried some prime beach gutters using pippies in the hope of snaring a dart as that normally works. Well straight up that was a total fail with almost no touches on fresh pippies.

So knowing the lagoon is out and now Teewah I was only left with DI Point itself as netting is banned within 500mtrs of the rocks as its a Dugong habitat area?! Hooray at least something is protected and we may have a show!!

Not happy about this idea as its more dangerous and meant I could not allow boys to cast (due to getting snagged) or get near the edge of the rocks etc.

But onto some safer rocks we went in a reasonably low swell (about 2 foot) and on Thursday arvo we managed about 6 Tailor with only one going legal at 42cm but there was plenty of smiles from the lads as they landed their first fighting Tailor. An awesome moment and one I'm sure many of you can still remember.

Next morning we went out further due to a high tide forcing us off the close in rocks and though we only caught 1 more Tailor that day we managed to get 2 more small groups of boys (one boy at a time and carefully/closely monitored) on to a heap of dart (good ones over 40cm in many cases), a few Tarwine, 1 keeper bream and one nice whiting.

Conditions out there with a howling southerly (at our back) were amazing and we watched as Dolphins, Eagles, Sea Birds and Turtles came by and all said gidday.;) Gotta love our Country that we can still get out and enjoy stuff like this and expose the next generation to the joys of fishing and our coastal environment.

All in all the trip was saved but we fished hard all day last Friday out at one of the best rock spots DI Point has to offer and all we got was 1 Tailor for our troubles (though we did focus on dart once we realised they were there). Saw some guys tossing lures and Pillies further out where its more risky and they got a few more but nothing of size.

So there it is. Up to date info straight from the beaches and rocks we are trying to protect for future generations.

I for one am committed to the idea of Recreational Fishing Havens being introduced in Queensland and I hope that we can all find a way to agree on the need for these, shut down and buy out the beach netters and leave something for kids like the ones I take away.

If you guys are concerned about the greenies shutting us down by sneakily introducing green zones that turn into 'no fishing zones' then PM Lindsay with your ideas. Maybe you don't want him to represent you with fisheries but I see a guy who is sold out and doing the best he can with a very limited resource base and I applaud his efforts.

Sure some of you may know more due to your background, training and life experience but lets find a way to help each other to work together to make RFH's happen! If we don't then scenes like what I'm writing about could became a thing of the past.

The last night around the camp fire was precious. Most of these boys have tough life circumstances and several said that the fishing was the highlight of their camp and half had never caught a fish let alone eating them fresh around the fire. They loved it and we now have some new addicts that will potentially join web sites like this in future years and have an alternative to computer games, gangs and drugs.

Hopefully we can all work together and create a future for these guys,

Cheers,

Mal8-)

[manta man]

Well done Malby, you and the Boys sound like you always have an enjoyable experience, and that is "What It"s All About". Cheers Manta Man.

[Matthias]

"New evidence suggests that Tailor may be responsible for a spout of ciguatera poisioning deaths in SE Queensland"

problem solved?

[Ellemcbeast]

I am disturbed by the quality of debate that takes place, when someone gets it into their head, that overfishing is the only, or, even major, cause of a fall in fishing takes.

There are many other contributions to be considered before the self flogging and further Government restriction begins.

Here is a short but probably not complete list using tailor as an example.

1. Reduction of bait fish: It is well known that pilchards are a large part of the coastal tailor diet. There has been a significant reduction in the pilchard population after they were hit with a virus, a couple of years ago. Anecdotally, there has been a significant reduction in observed schools of pilchards migrating along the coast. Tailor is a high level predator and the lower catch numbers may be a consequence of less available food, close to the coast.

2. Fish population cycles: It has long been known that fish population numbers ebb and flow as a sum of all the factors affecting them. Cycles as long as forty years have been observed for other species. It may also apply to tailor. If one does not eyeball a straight trend line on the tailor take statistics, it is possible to observe one and half 40 year cycles. This theory needs research over a couple of cycles to be confirmed.

3. Coastal Development: Changes to the coastal fish habitats due to development. The mangroves surrounding many of the local nurseries have been depleted with progressive development. This may be affecting tailor nurseries and other bait fish that support tailor growth.

4. The 10 year Drought: The decade long drought on land must have had an effect on fish nurseries and on nutrients fed in to the coastal seas, through lower river and nutrient flows.

5. Floods following the drought: The massive rains, which followed the drought, not only added significant fresh water to coastal regions, but also recharged the ground water tables of the sandy coastlines. The combination of the floods and the significantly increased runoff from overcharged sandy coastlines must have changed the salinity on the beaches and estuaries. This would probably have a greater affect on the baitfish, than upper predators such as tailor. Off shore pro fishermen, who don't net tailor, have reported large schools of tailor travelling about 400 metres out to sea, maybe following the path of baitfish in saltier water?

5. I am sure the forum could add to this list.

[Slider]

Just in case anybody cares to think that Ellemcbeast might have any sort of case....

the wet seasons are no good for tailor and neither are the dry ones. The attached graph (Fraser/Cooloola Yield & Rainfall) probably speaks for itself in this regard.

By August and September when the bulk of tailor are taken both recreationally and commercially, the surf is crystal clear. The fresh influence is neglible and can only be an enhancing factor, but I'll argue this point further if required.

Pilchards - (sardinops sagax) actually proliferate following floods due to connectivity from the land and anecdotally have been seen in massive shoals inshore (10 metres out from the beach) since the 2007 floods during late winter and spring in the Cooloola/Fraser region. Unfortunately, these shoals haven't been attended by predators of any variety which is of very significant concern.
The pilchard virus referred to which actually occurred about a decade ago and in southern W.A. and S.A. waters where the eastern Australian migration of tailor does not occur, is of no relevance and should not be mentioned as relevant. These populations have since recovered anyway and well and truly by 2011/12.

Btw - anchovy are just as significant a food resource for tailor on their southern feeding migration and they also have been anecdotally observed as being in a healthy population state and also benefit from connectivity.



I won't dispute the point regarding habitat destruction in tailor nursery grounds being a potential factor. However,if this is the cause of the collapse, then we are not going to see a recovery by doing nothing elsewhere as this scenario of habitat depletion is unchangeable and collapses in other species would also be concerning us at this present time - one would expect. Recovery of Sydney Hbr fish pops does also create substantial doubt that this is of major significance.

I expect that there is a more offshore migration of tailor and so do FQ. Should this be the case then 1/ they shouldn't be there and their population is unlikely to be sustainable there, and repercussions to offshore species inundated by the tailor are likely - and 2/ they aren't of much value to shore based anglers or beach seiners when they're offshore. We need to resurrect their inshore spawning migration for a number of reasons and this can be done. I doubt however that this offshore migration of 'hidden' fish is of any substantial size and can be relied upon to sustain the species in the long term.

It wouldn't be hard to perceive that we are overfishing tailor when it is documented that 80% of fish available to the fishery are taken by fishers each year - wouldn't you think?

[Ellemcbeast]

I thought your initial discussion had significant merit and needed to be considered in the totality of all contributing factors. I have not excluded fishing pressure as a contributory factor, but it is one factor.

The fact that the greatest concentration of tailor fisherman on Fraser Island coincides with major tailor aggregations is of course going to have an effect on tailor populations. The main reason tailor aggregate is to get together to procreate the species. If the majority of tailor are taken at this time then the number of fecund fish is bound to be reduced and future populations will be affected.

It would be interesting to see if a closed season on Fraser Island during aggregation times would result in a marked increase in tailor numbers in future years?
Good grief! An alternative suggestion to permanent Government imposed bag limits?

Despite the fact that pilchards the appeared to have recovered and are in a healthy state in the southern ocean, they have not recovered on the east coast. There are many less travelling schools today than a decade ago. Just talk to fishermen in northern NSW to confirm this.

The cause and effect of a lower tailor population because of lower bait numbers is probably not likely to be correlated in real time. The effects are probably delayed, and, if there is a link, then the effects are likely to be observed later anyway.

The graph on the comparison of tailor take with annual rainfall also confuses the facts. A high rainfall for a full year may not correlate with baitfish and tailor migrations close to the coast at the time of the rain, or at the time of floods. This needs more detailed evaluation.

The “straight trend lines” on the graph of tailor take from 1945 to 2011 appear to be eyeballed and not statistically drawn trend lines. There appears to be a bell curve of the fish takes from 1945 to the mid-eighties, but without more data it is difficult to be certain. That is why a longer data set that would cover any long period cyclicity would help the interpretation here.

[Apollo]

Are the yields in the charts taken from sales figures or log books?

[Lucky_Phill]

Can we please stick to the topic and keep personal attacks / sledges out of this thread.

First and Last warning to all.


Cheers LP

[Moonlighter]

As I attempted to point out earlier, one of the problems with that data is that it doesnt come from the one original source, and at various points in time, the data collection methods have also changed, and changes were made such as introducing TAC's, changing min legal sizes, plus there have been changes in log book practices and enforcement, and so on. There is quite an extensive history in behind that data.

You actually need to delve into the history behind the data to really understand what you are looking at.

So, what that means is that presenting that kind of data on one graph as if it was a continuium of the same data, without pointing out the points at which these kinds of changes happened, and without providing an explaination of how those changes might have affected the integrity of the picture painted by the graph overall, is really not satisfactory practice at all.

The result is that the "story" being told by the graphs is quite likely to not be what it appears to be, if that makes sense!

The fisheries specialists do all of that when they assess the status of the stock, or they should do that, and it will influence their management decisions.

Ellemcbeast - the suggestion you made re a tailor closure during spawning at Fraser Island - did you not know that exactly that has now been happening for quite a few years? In fact the spawning closure is on right now!

Plus, it was only a couple of years ago that recreational tailor bag limits were reduced to their current levels, along with a size increase to 35cm. That needs some time to play out over a few cycles and new data gathered to see the effect on stocks.

We should all definitely be demanding that good, robust science be the basis of management decisions that ensure the sustainability of all fish species. If that means changes to size or bag limits, then I, for one, would support it.

To be honest, what you, me or anyone else "thinks" might be a good idea to do, or what we would find personally acceptable, doesn't fall under the heading of "good science".

It's fun to debate those things, but you only have to look at the recent proposals for most bag limits being halved in NSW and which appear to now be based on some form of "socail acceptability or reasonableness" rather than the science of good fisheries management, to see where that approach could lead. Not good.

What we dont want is knee-jerk reactions from our politicians that are brought on by indivuduals or groups with a particular personal perspective or agenda, however well-intentioned that might be.

Cheers

ML

[hungry6]

I've been following this thread and I have to say I'm no tailor expert, and I'm not going to engage in the raging arguments above.
This is just from my personally observation, I do fish for tailor and have done so for along time and I do believe in conservation of a fantastic sport fish that they are.
Over the last 10 or so years I have taken boat and jetski out on the great sandy strait spit in August and Sept and I can tell you that. The closed season for tailor should cover this area also, Its good that the rock at indian and waddy are closed during spawning season as they congregate there, but I'm pretty sure they actually do their thing out on the spit.
For realistic management of this species the area that needed protection the most isn't even protected.
Just my 5cent as we no longer uses 2 cents

[rando]

Check out the catalyst (ABC ) article on predator avoidance training for mullaway fingerlings for release .

[malby]

Interesting read on the Alvey Reels facebook page..........

I have copied below fyi,





A recent Story in the Noosa News and Ipswich QT .We need to manage our fisheries to ensure their future. Beach NETTING: Cr Frank Pardon wants commercial takes on Noosa North Shore banned. Brett Wortman
A DISGUSTED Councillor Frank Pardon has renewed his call for a ban on commercial fishing on Noosa North Shore after two separate incidents involving what he regards as overkill of local marine stocks. One involves the ripping out of 30 tonnes of mullet from local waters two weekends ago, where Cr Pardon said the fish ended up being worthless because of the way the catch was handled.
The councillor said he saw the mullet in the nets on the Sunday and was told by an industry source that the 30-tonne catch was totally spoiled because of the amount of time it took to haul them in. "I've got this straight from the horse's mouth - they were in the nets around 10 (pm Saturday) and they did not get the fish out until about 12 the next day."
He believed it was a combination of having too many fish in the nets and the incoming tide that led them to be crushed to the extent they had no scales left. "These sort of netting practices are not sustainable, especially when you take them to the processor and the processor rejects them because they've been pulverised," Cr Pardon said.
"A friend of mine who was actually given some of these mullet said they were mush - they had not a scale on them." And in another instance not related to the mullet catch, on the same weekend he alerted local fishing authorities to the illegal take of 700 pipis by a couple of persons in a four-wheel drive 12 km along Noosa North Shore. The allowed limit for the popular food and bait is 50.
"My friend had driven up there and saw this happening and said Frank, 'what can I do about it?'," Cr Pardon said. "When I arrived the fisheries patrol was there. They went north from there and got another lot so good on them for responding like that. "They went up the beach and found another lot with too many pipis as well," Cr Pardon said. The long-time advocate for commercial fishing licence buy-outs on the North Shore said he had spoken some weeks back to the Fisheries Minister John McVeigh concerning this issue and "told him I'll be back". "I want a buy-out with compensation.
"No one's talking about kicking anyone out (without remuneration), but we didn't become a biosphere to do unsustainable practices," Cr Pardon said.

[Slider]

Has been a fair amount of discussion re the 30 tonne of mullet that allegedly were 'wasted'. While the commercial fishers involved and Markwells Seafood deny that any fish were 'wasted' I don't believe that anyone has as yet brought up the real issue associated here.It is now known that Markwells Seafood purchased the entire catch and state that no fish were 'wasted', contrary to the claims by Councillor Frank Pardon. However, it depends on what one means when using the term 'wasted'. It is not uncommon with large hauls of mullet that a percentage of the catch are damaged, either as a result of being crushed and tumbled in the net or due to excessive time elapsing before the fish are iced or processed. Those fish that are damaged and not suitable for sale for human consumption or bait are often sold to be used as fertiliser. Is the use of wild caught fish being used as fertiliser a 'waste'? Not according to Markwells or the relevant commercial fishers, but I'd be fairly confident that the rest of us see it as a waste. Thing is - this is not a one off event. It happens each mullet season. As to the suggestion from the commercial sector that mullet netting on our beaches is providing fresh seafood to the local community - I'd say is a rather large stretching of the truth when Markwells purchase the lot and process the catch in NSW to be sold to southern markets. Some fish might eventually end up in Noosa Woolworths and Coles, but most of the mullet available to consumers in this region come from the Noosa River and lakes.Of course, from my perspective, I see that the issue is not so much about the sustainability of the mullet fishery, but the sustainability of the other species affected by mullet nets and the impact on recreational fishing during the course of the mullet season - several of the best weather months for beach fishing and when tailor and bream in particular would otherwise be available to anglers but rarely are because they are fleeing mullet nets and especially hauls of this size. Rando - talked at length with Culum Brown following the Catalyst story on jewfish fingerling training. Which by the way isn't a new thing ... Canadian scientists have been training Atlantic salmon fingerlings for many years. The reality is with stocking programs that released fingerlings do not have innate recognition of natural predators and high percentages of all fingerlings of all species are predated upon before they reach maturity. Such training should ideally be applied to any restocking program whether it be in fresh or salt water. Mortality rates of untrained fingerlings are stated as being around 90% and the main beneficiaries are often invasive species which become well fed and reproduce above levels that would otherwise occur. Culum, by the way, agrees entirely with my thoughts on the netting of fish and the flight reactions that occur. But then, the applicable science states that fish must flee nets containing species of the same prey guild ... and I've watched them repeatedly doing just that.