PDA

View Full Version : Our fishing future?



sealife
20-07-2006, 12:15 AM
I'm a very keen fisherman. #I have fished alot of places around the world but Moreton Bay is my back yard and I have fished here for nearly 40 years.

I used to go fishing outside with my grandfather in his old displacement cruiser, before anyone would even consider going outside in a speedboat because outboards were just not reliable enough, before GPS, before marine parks, before bag limits, before size limits.

We found the V-reef by land marks. #When we found it, we would invariably catch a boat load of snapper (>100). #We used to use snapper winches, with 100 pound line, very large sinkers (or anything that would get the bait to the bottom) sometimes with 3, 4 or even 5 hooks.

We would clean the fish all the way home (usually about 4 - 5 hours steaming back to the river) and then spend the rest of the night finding people to give the fish to.

Now I know this story sounds disgusting in today's conservative world and quite rightly so, but back then it was what everyone did.

At the time there was no education campaigns on sustainable fishing, as a matter of fact, I dont think the word sustainable even existed in any government policy.

From my first memories of fishing, and up until about 10 years ago I noticed it was getting progressively harder and harder to catch a feed of fish. #

Over the past 10 or so years in Moreton Bay we rec fishers have had to swallow some pretty bitter pills in the form of marine parks legislation, greatly reduced bag limits and increased size limits.

We also have much better boats, outboards, electronics, fishing techniques, and about twice as many people boating and fishing here than we did 10 years ago.

But on the positive side, I have noticed in the last 5 -10 years that the dramatic downturn in our fisheries productivity has slowed, if not stopped. #I now seem to be able to regularly catch legal size fish in places you had to try very hard to catch a legal fish. #Is it because of marine parks protecting some key areas important to our fishery? Is it because of bag limits and size limits? Is it because most of us rec fisherman are very protective of our fishery?

I dont think it is any one of the above individually, but maybe all of them. #The one thing in common to all of them is that we, as individuals all play a role in managing our fishery. #Its not about blaming any particular area be it ethnic, commercial, industrial, individual or government. #Pointing the blame is just a cop out and achieves nothing.

Its about listening to all of the data and making informed, non-biased, smart decisions for the future, not just today. #Its about doing something yourself, not waiting for someone else to fix the problem. #Its about thinking of the big picture, and the big picture is about being able to come out to Moreton Bay and go fishing in 50 years time and enjoying it like we do now.

If the government do not put in management principles like marine parks, bag limits and size limits how else can we do it especially when you consider that the population in SE QLD will double over the next 20 years.

Don't believe for a second that they will stop commercial fishing in the near future. #Anyone who believes that is out there with the fairies.

I'm not proud of the way I used to fish in the past. #I can only try and make amends and fish for the future.

Its up to us to take one for the team, for the bigger picture, for our fishing future.

PinHead
20-07-2006, 01:56 AM
sealife...you have forgotten to mention environmental issues which I believe have made the greatest impact on the spawning areas around the foreshores of the bay. One of the key issues that I believe has made a significant difference to fishing in the bay is the cessation of coral dredging that happened about 10 or 15 years ago. This has now allowed the coral to grow again and the fish to return to the bay reefs.

Got_the_Fever
20-07-2006, 05:07 AM
I must agree with both comments regarding this topic so far. 30 years ago my old neighbour (back in those day everyone knew everyone else in the street and most were friends) used to go fishing at Woody Point and used to bring home 30 or 40 snapper every trip. He would give a couple of fish to a guy (Jim) up the road because he had been put off work because of a serious accident and he wasnt able to work anymore. He could keep a couple to feed his family and the rest he would bury in the back yard as fertilizer. Even back then I didnt understand why he had to catch so many just to bury.

Back in those days there where no limits on size or bag. I cannot and will not critize him because of catching so many fish, but I still dont understand if he only needed a few did he catch the rest just to toss them in a hole in the back yard. The level of information and education we have today IMO has made us better fisherman in regards to sustanability and allowing future generations to enjoy what we do now.

I have been guilty of the same type of thing so I am in no position to critize anyone for the past when we didnt know about sustanability or conservation. When I was a kid 5 years old I got my first rod and my dad took me fishing down to the woody point jetty, he promised me that when I was 10 he would take me to the pin on my first trip, to him I would be old enough to understand about boat safety and good enough with casting not to cause to much trouble for anyone else. I still remember my first trip because I was so excited about finally going with him to a fishing spot that he had been going to for over 20 years. Back in those days it was nothing to catch 60 or more bream and we used to clean them at the ramp at jacobs well, most guys used to do the same and everyone used to have about the same numbers as we did.

I guess what i am trying to say is that compared to those day we are all a lot older and a little wiser, we now have a sustanable fishery that we can hand down to the future generations and maybe they wont critize us to bad for our past sins. Sorry if i rambled a little.


Kel [smiley=2vrolijk_08.gif]

sushi_fish01
20-07-2006, 06:08 AM
Sorry guys im only a young fella but i have trouble seeing how anyone at any stage, Government regulations or not could ever belive that fishing in such ways would last???
But i guess i also cant say i would have been or seen things any different if i was bought up in the same era with the same influences.
IF marine parks and conservation REALLY work perhaps my childrens, children
will see things returned to their former glory, but i know ill never see it in my lifetime the damage is done ....sad really :( :(

flatstrap
20-07-2006, 11:15 AM
The opinions and experiences expressed thus far from a handful of long time fishos is representative of many thousands who have the same experience in their fishing lives. This is not insignificant. I believe that people that have a vested interest or hidden agenda will NEVER listen to these experiences as told over and over.
Isn't education marvellous?? The only regret is the time span before the relation of cause and effect is realised. Why wait another decade to realise that there is no enterprise can survive while killing its breeding stock. End of story.
It is a load of crap to say that the schools of bait fish will ALWAYS be there or to say that the more you net the schools the thicker they return next year. Is this logic the same as...If you shave your legs, the hair grows thicker!
When you know better, you'll do better.
The solution starts with yourself...flatstrap

Hornblower
20-07-2006, 05:32 PM
I suppose the moral of the story is that we have to trust the government to do the right thing by the environment and fishing in general. But you know what? They are exactly the people who have proven time and again they can't be trusted with it. I'm not just talking about the Beatty Govt either, it's any govt.

There has to be a better system. When they do an environmental study and pay Milions of dollars for it, do you think they don't indicate to the author what results they expect to find in it. The authors primarily know this themselves, i.e. if they think I am going to give them a response they don't like, then I won't be paid to do it.

That's my say, ;) ;) ;)

sealife
20-07-2006, 06:09 PM
Thanks for your views pinhead, sushi-fish01, flatstrap, and hornblower.

Its really refreshing to hear your views and to see I am not alone in my opinions.

I am only relatively new to this chat site but have noticed alot of finger pointing, complaining and anti-regulatory reference, but not much in the form of ideas to maintain or even improve what we have now apart from the standard-" blame the commercial sector".

Dont get me wrong, I agree fully with your comments flatstrap regarding baitfish etc, but it is going to require alot more than that.

Pinhead, you are right on the button regarding areas such as Mud Is etc. You can actually see how good the coral is getting there.

Sushi-fish01, there is hope, although alot of damage has been done, the regenerative capacity of our waterways is amazing, just look at Mud Is. After years and years of coral dredging, it is slowly making a recovery with both soft and hard corals growing there, all within 3Nm of the mouth of the Brisbane River!

Hornblower, it scares me to think that senario takes place. I think you might be right though, it really depends on what questions you ask to get the answers you want.

Anyway, I did not post this as a doom and gloom topic, more to see what other fisherpersons thought, and to see if I am not alone in my thoughts.

Thanks.

Sealife

flatstrap
20-07-2006, 06:57 PM
The baitfish is at the base of the food chain....Once that is fundamentally destroyed, EVERYTHING crashes.
Can you imagine a living planet without the humble plant?
The native Americans (Indians) philosophy was that the world was like a web, all is interconnected, destroy one section and all are affected. Methinks they had a better viewpoint than most people today.
Sorry to disagree, but this subject is a biggie!...flatstrap

PinHead
20-07-2006, 07:16 PM
sushi..it will never be the same..absolutely no chance of that now with all the foreshore development and the relevant destruction of the mangroves along these foreshores. It is not all to do with quantities of fish that have been caught..there is a myriad of other factors...foreshore development which has led to run offs of fertilisers etc into the Bay...industrial development...even the changing of the mouth of the river for the current port facilities..any change impacts on the spawning areas and flow of the water around these areas and the toxins etc in the water.

sealife
20-07-2006, 07:59 PM
Kel, Sorry I missed you out in my thanks list. Your reply was much appreciated and you certainly weren't rambling. I dont know about you but I could write a book on this topic.

Got_the_Fever
20-07-2006, 08:55 PM
Sealife it isnt a problem mate dont stress it. I know times have changed and I can only say they are for the better when it comes to fishing regulations. I would like to see a toughing up of some rules and bring in some new ones to insure we do have fish for the following generations. I would like to see the legal size of bream increased to at least 25cm and a bag limit of 20 put on them. This could be reviewed after a few years after a proper study has been conducted.

I know my next idea wont be greated by many fisho's but well here goes. IMO selected areas should be closed for a season or two just to allow fish stocks to build up again and to take a little pressure of them. I know my ideas wont make a lot of ppl happy but for a short time of pain I do think that it would result in better quality fish and a less stressed population of fish.

The closures could start at the pin and progessively work up the coast to the frasier coast. As I said before I doubt many ppl would be happy with my idea but in the long run I think it would go along way to helping the situation. As well as this I think that a gov buy back of commercial licences would also help. I have worked on a trawler and the slaughter is unbelivable, small crabs that are scooped up are crushed under the weight of the catch or under the foot when they spill off the sorting tray, small fish are killed by the same means or arent put back into the water fast enough to be able to survive the netting.

I know we need commercial fishing in order to supply the shops and markets but if we can reduce the number of licences out there then we can start to address some of the issues that we are facing at the moment.

I know i have opened myself up for some abuse here but it is my opinion and to me it makes sense.

Kel

flatstrap
20-07-2006, 10:07 PM
GTF
I like your idea. Take pressure off existing stocks and allow the mature fish to at least spawn. Makes sense to me.
No fear of abuse from this area. Thanks for your input...flatstrap

sushi_fish01
21-07-2006, 06:30 AM
I strongly belive permanent closures ie greenzones are not the answer IMO these areas need to be rotated over a period of a few years, close half a reef for 2-3 years then open that half and close the other. Theres a limit to how many fish can populate one area before dominant speices take hold and drive smaller fish away eg coral trout if left untouched dominant fish will control an area eating and driving other smaller trout away, if a big trout is removed several smaller trout will quickly take their place increasing the population.
Im sure they arnt the ony speices that works in this way.
The hardest part is getting ur point across to people who have the acsess and opertunity to make a difference...
just one opinion.
josh

P.S i realise im a bit further north than this topic started but were all afected.

Got_the_Fever
21-07-2006, 06:51 AM
You are right Josh, we are all affected. The only reason I didnt include north of frasier island in my comment was that i dont know the area so i cant comment on it. It would be just as easy to continue the temporary closures further up the coast. Sorry if i left you out, it wasnt a deliberate slight.

Kel [smiley=2vrolijk_08.gif]

fleagle
24-07-2006, 10:08 PM
There have been some good points made in this discussion. Perhaps the most salient is for us as fisherman to think about taking some responsibility for the excesses and mistakes of the past and ensuring they aren't repeated. Like Sealife and Kel many of us or our families or mates will remember tales of trips to Fraser Island with each bloke catching more tailor than he can carry, and Toyota ute trays being filled with fish caught in a single day. Same goes for winter bream fishing at the Pin where if a tinny didn't come back with 100 bream (and a couple of fishos stinking of mullet gut and Bundy) then you just weren't trying.

Makes you wonder when it's the same blokes who happily went down this road in blissful ignorance are now blaming governments, marine parks, fisheries and most of all commercial fisherman for the fact that it's not like the good old days any more...

Don't get me wrong I'm not exactly blameless either.

Think of your best and fondest fishing memories - your first fish as a kid, or finally achieving that sought after prize such your first jewie off the beach or finally catching a snapper with a real knob. I reckon the things that we have in common as fisherman today are more about enjoying the treasures of what we have than repeating the slaughters of the past.

Any thinking person can see that the future has to be with sustainable and wise management - otherwise the fishos of the future will have a lot less to look forward to and may indeed miss out things that even today we take for granted (let's not mention barra cod or maori wrasse!)

Could be good time to take a look at ourselves in terms of catches, impacts (not forgetting pollution/lost or discarded line/plastic bags etc etc) before
getting stuck into whoever else's fault it might also be.

Fish smart and act smart and I guarantee you'll come home feeling better about the whole thing and rest easy that at least you did your bit.

Got_the_Fever
29-07-2006, 04:12 AM
Fleagle what you have said is absolutely correct, we are the ones who have to make it better. We are the ones that are out on the water and it is up to us to make sure it remains a sustainable enviroment. Polly and buracreats dont have the answers, they never have. There are rules in place for us to follow but we can do better than that. We are the ones who have to take the lead role and not repeat the mistakes of the past.

I have read many reports here and have a lot of respect for the skill and knowledge. I am sure that if the clowns that come up with stupid closures that dont do any good where to actually consult the knowledge base that is available things could be improved beyond measure.

My biggest regret is that my wife and I will prob never be able to have kids so I will not be able to teach my kids the way my father taught me how to fish and go boating, showing respect for others. But at least if we all contribute to saving what we have then everyone elses kids and grandkids will have the enjoyment we do.

Sorry if i dont make sense, it is 4am and I cant sleep after night shifts.


Kel

fleagle
30-07-2006, 06:48 PM
Kel

That's a deadset gutsy and from the heart message mate.

I firmly believe that there's a quiet (not silent) majority who can see common sense. We can only hope that that the lunatic fringe at both ends of the spectrum don't muck it up for all.

Don't work too hard.

F

ps keep practicing just in case....

shayned
07-08-2006, 01:29 PM
Rolling closures would be a liveable solution surely, but imagine the drag race to an area on the first day it reopened. I guess the trick would be to time this with the worst boating season of the year to minimise this.

Got_the_Fever
07-08-2006, 08:20 PM
Shayned the best time to reopen the pin would be when it is full of mozzies and sandflys. That would decrease the traffic a little bit. ;D

Kel [smiley=2vrolijk_08.gif]

Bundy_Burp
10-08-2006, 12:11 AM
Rolling closures are a stupid idea whats the point of closing an area only to have it picked clean by a rush of people when its open again .
All rolling closures are going to do is open the door for the greenies and other fringe elements to try and close the areas for good .
It will start with a month or two closures here and then 3 or 4 months there then they would close things for good .
What we have to be able to do is show people that as a group we can control the situation by ourselves .
I know that in the past there were many stories about the huge cacthes and such but that was then and this is now , and I also know that we have left this problem go on for far too long .
Maybe a greater presence on the water in terms of the DPI and maybe lowering of bag limits may help its a huge problem but if we dont start doing something about it soon the closures wont be far off .

Bundy

Got_the_Fever
12-08-2006, 11:12 AM
Bundy if you had of read the post in its whole you would have noticed I mentioned about bag limits and increasing the size limits. If you have a better idea about saving our fishing future for the next generations go ahead and post them. I would be interested in hearing your thoughts.


Kel

Bundy_Burp
12-08-2006, 11:20 AM
I 'm sorry I didnt realize we werent able to express our opinions here or is it that we can only express our thoughts on whole posts and not just parts of them .
I was only stating that I thought the idea of rolling closures was not a good idea and where exactly did I mention in my post I was talking about your post I think some of use had better get of there high horses and try to work this problem out Sensibly .


Bundy

Camo
12-08-2006, 05:35 PM
I don't believe that the real problem is way we fish. As has been demonstrated by the members responses here, most of us are concerned about conserving the fisheries. The problem is the amount of people who fish. No amount of conservation will work if the population continues to increase at the rate it is. 1500 extra people a week is not sustainable for SE Qld.

What good are bag limits and size limits and closures, when the amount of fishermen using the resource is increasing. The bag limits will continue to decrease, and the size limits will increase.

I think we need to put a cap on the population in SE Qld. Obviously you can stop interstate migration, (Much as we'd like to). One solution might be to not build anymore new housing estates, and to prevent old estates being subdivided. Lack of accommodation may go a long way to decreasing the incentive to come here. I know someone is going to say it's simplistic and draconian. But it is no worse than closing the bay and destroying fishing as a past time for people in south east Qld.

After all why should we fishers be the ones to wear all the pain and carry the can, because of an exploding population and greedy shortsighted pollies.

Camo

Bundy_Burp
12-08-2006, 06:52 PM
Camo maybe it would be easier to bring in fishing licenses and only give them to queenslanders or if you have been a queenslander for more than a certain time I am sure that would be popular :)

Bundy 8-)

Got_the_Fever
13-08-2006, 05:40 AM
The idea of increasing DPI instectors on the water and at boat ramps is a good idea, but, economically i bet it wont even be considered by the gov.

1. I dont know how much dpi inspectors make a year but lets just look at $45000. How many more inspectors would be required? Are we going to have them working 7 days a week 24 hours a day, then add at least another $15000 to the original figure. Then you have to think about recreation leave sick leave long service leave and all the rest.

2. It is not just inspectors that would have to be hired, you are also looking at all the ancillary staff that backs them up. Admin staff to process the fines and all the other paper work that is associated with having field staff.

3. Then you are looking at all the new proesecutors that would be required to take the offenders to court. Then you have to look at the courts budget for balliffs and court sheriffs. Once a dissision is made by a judge or magistrate it then has to be carried out by court balliffs, Seizing forfitted goods, eg. boats cars etc.

I think already we are already into 10's of millions of dollars. This doesnt even take into the recruitment process the expanded training programs that already excist for new staff. Not only are there these considerations but you also have the capital outlay of extra boats and vehicles PLUS the extra management that they would put in place to supervise the extra staff required.

Even if they did introduce a fishing licence it wouldnt even come close to funding this kind of expansion of a department into a mega department.


As much as I would like to see a large DPI presence on the water to deal with the few fisho's that take undersize fish or go over the bag limits or steal crap pots and the like, the financial outlay would be astronomical, where does the money come from? Who do we take the money off to pay for all this? There is no way the gov is going to put this sort of money into something if they are considering closing so much of our bay.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

Kel

Bundy_Burp
13-08-2006, 09:06 AM
Even if there were rolling closures who do you think is going to enforce them either way the government is going to have to increase DPI numbers .
Are you really naive enough to think just because an area is closed that people wont still try and fish it at night come on wake up and join the real world .
Even though many of the ideas presented here in this topic have many good and bad points we all know that the government has listened to the people many times and then done exactly the opposite .
I also see many peolpe saying get rid of this government but what assurances do we the fishing public have that a new government would be any better than this one .
I think that if people here want to make any sort of difference instead of acting like they are trying to do something they should get behind the fishing party and really try to fix the problem .
Its going to take alot more than one man and his dog to mow this meadow .
Sorry for my ramblings and I hope I havent stepped on too many toes but as far as I know this is Australia and WE are ALL entitled to an OPINION .

Bundy

Derek_Bullock
13-08-2006, 11:38 AM
The idea of increasing DPI instectors on the water and at boat ramps is a good idea, but, economically i bet it wont even be considered by the gov.

1. I dont know how much dpi inspectors make a year but lets just look at $45000. How many more inspectors would be required? Are we going to have them working 7 days a week 24 hours a day, then add at least another $15000 to the original figure. Then you have to think about recreation leave sick leave long service leave and all the rest.

2. It is not just inspectors that would have to be hired, you are also looking at all the ancillary staff that backs them up. Admin staff to process the fines and all the other paper work that is associated with having field staff.

3. Then you are looking at all the new proesecutors that would be required to take the offenders to court. Then you have to look at the courts budget for balliffs and court sheriffs. Once a dissision is made by a judge or magistrate it then has to be carried out by court balliffs, Seizing forfitted goods, eg. boats cars etc.

I think already we are already into 10's of millions of dollars. This doesnt even take into the recruitment process the expanded training programs that already excist for new staff. Not only are there these considerations but you also have the capital outlay of extra boats and vehicles PLUS the extra management that they would put in place to supervise the extra staff required.

Even if they did introduce a fishing licence it wouldnt even come close to funding this kind of expansion of a department into a mega department.


As much as I would like to see a large DPI presence on the water to deal with the few fisho's that take undersize fish or go over the bag limits or steal crap pots and the like, the financial outlay would be astronomical, where does the money come from? Who do we take the money off to pay for all this? There is no way the gov is going to put this sort of money into something if they are considering closing so much of our bay.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

Kel




Knowing how these things work, if you look at all the on-costs including vehicle and equipment associated with a position like this you are looking at a realistic figure of about $110,000 a year.


Derek

fishingjew
13-08-2006, 11:06 PM
Unfortunately no one has invented a time machine so we cant go back to the past but can only look to the future.A start would be a few more artificial reefs to replace what was dredge out. Have them no go zones for three years to build up a viable breeding stock im to believe it takes that long for viable recruitment. The curtin reef seems to be doing quite well.

sealife
14-08-2006, 03:10 PM
Looks like this topic has certainly stirred up some passion. Great to see.

I am interested to hear what the Fishing Partys' environmental policy is. I have read many topics and replies from various members from the fishing party but have not heard their view point or policy to ensure our fishing future. I may be wrong, and I hope I am, but all I have read from the fishing party is negative comments about how hard they have been done by. I am not saying we fishermen haven't been given the short straw, I am just saying that unless our representative political party has a scientifically based, non biased, sustainable fisheries policy as a better option to the current climate, they're wasting their time.

I know some people here might take this the wrong way, and I hope it is just that I have not seen or read the right posts etc.

Could someone from the fishing party or someone in the know, tell me what the fishing partys' environmental policy is, or point me in the right direction to find out.

With the very likely possibility of a state election in the very near future, I want to ensure my vote goes to a political party with a scientifically backed policy that will ensure my kids and their kids can fish and enjoy what we take for granted now.

Cheers,

sealife

dasher
14-08-2006, 06:58 PM
G'day Sealife, check out this mate, hopefully will answer all your questions. :)
http://www.fishingparty.com.au/information.html