PDA

View Full Version : Commercial Fishing in Estuaries



snakecatcher
14-04-2006, 04:59 PM
What are your opnions on Commercial Fishers plundering our fragile estuary systems? I live near the Maroochy River which received (I think) and D rating last time around and is defintely a river system that deserves more attention and protection. The last time I was out I saw 3 commercial fisherman netting a short stretch of river upstream from the bli bli bridge - I appreciate that this is their livelihood but we can't continue to rape and plunder the fragile resources of these estuaries for what must be a limited legal catch and a lot of undersize bycatch (how much of which survives the netting process?). The State Gov't needs to wake up to the fact that these systems are a valuable resource and should be protected.

Mike

onerabbit
14-04-2006, 05:23 PM
There were heaps of whiting in the Richmond River a couple of weeks ago, until the haul netters started that is. I was told from a good source that they were taking 5-600 kg a night. Fair enough, everyone needs to make a living, but at what real expense.

Crazy that fishermen like this target fish that have come in to spawn.

Eventually, they will work themselves out of a job.

Just my opinion.

Muzz

beatle
14-04-2006, 05:24 PM
I agree with you snakecatcher it is a shame to see what is being done to our estuaries. The Tweed is virtually a dead river but it is constantly netted with the result that you seldom catch a decent fish. A very small area is proffessional free but this is just a joke as the netters are working in the rest of the river. Ammatuer fishermen are also to blame for keeping undersized fish.

bidkev
14-04-2006, 07:29 PM
Mike, I stsrted a thread due to similar concerns to yours. I am attempting to get at the facts and we then decide where to go from there. Quite a few pages but if you find the time, take a look here:

http://www.ausfish.com.au/cgi-ausfish/yabb2/YaBB.cgi?num=1143797596/0#0

kev

A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices.

MulletMan
14-04-2006, 09:33 PM
If you really want to see what a bashing the Commercial netters are doing to Moreton Bay then drop down to Victoria Point during the week days of a morning and see the massive quantities they are bringing in!

If you wonder where the flatty and the whiting have gone, here is a good chance to see the crate upon crate of them being pulled from the local sandbanks!

Then have a look in the Pt. O'Halloran Harbour just off Eprapah Creek to see the staked nets there every day and night!

And of course, dare a run by night in the same areas and come across the illegally staked nets in the area - quite common to cut them up (God, they felt good being fed through the prop!) with some dork yelling and shouting from an unlit dinghy.

And thank old Tom Burns for setting up the legislation in the first place to let them get away with it!!

rotten_bait_99
15-04-2006, 09:15 PM
when you look around in some of the rivers and creeks, you would swear blind that a lot of the rec. fisherman are very professional themselves. i think that all fisherman need to look a lot deeper into the problems we are facing. pro fisherman are catching fish they are legally allowed to catch, for local markets for people who either cant catch the fish themselves or are unable to. it seems people are a.o.k with imported fish or other fish caught professionally just as long as it doesn't come from their own back yard.

waldo35
16-04-2006, 07:50 PM
pink panther considering that the recco sector accounts for 1 and a half times the harvest from the pro section on whiting u seem to have put ur foot in it on that one . [ henry and lyle 2003].
not trying to be argumentative just pointing out the facts.

spinna
16-04-2006, 08:40 PM
Hi #;) # #spinna here im from nowra n.s.w . We have the same problems down here with pros in the river #:(. The GREAT N.S.W fisheries had a buy back scheme and what they done was to buy out a lot of the pros. But the problem with that was that when they did it some pros just went out and got another licence at about half of what they sold there old one for >:( . Now we have 19 pros in the river at any one time and about 26 that can do so. #>:(

jake_snapper_king
17-04-2006, 08:49 AM
pink pantha yes yes u have done it me to props goin through nets good work {#### off the guy in the tinny sad lol} thay need to stop taken these limited fish recoureses in the rivers and creeks

but not just in the rivers and creeks but out side i think thay should make fising not alound in some areas for like ten years that let htem fish there and do it to anyother spot so the fish have a chance to reproduce and skool up again like 12 mile shut off for 6 yr then 6 mile shut off and so on..? does any one think this is a good idea >? plz exspress your thoughts so some thing can be done.............................................. .................................................. ....

i shore dont wanna buy some old japeniess fish i wound rather a good quality fish from my own country so.. people out there if u want your kids to be able to enjoy the fish and fisihng in aus stand up to the problems

exspress your feelings get out there to save the fish poplulations>?

i am 14 and i can see the problems in aus fishing ... so i think you guys out there have a view of things that are happending to the fishing in aus

i remeber in currimundi about3 yrs ago there was massive bream in the river system and now u are lucky to get to big bream... doenst that tell u something



get out there and make a difference jake

tincanpeter
17-04-2006, 04:49 PM
I moved to Caloundra from St George in 1995. The government had just banned trawler in the Bribie Passage. My thought were the same as yours,Great this will give the fish a chance to spawn, grow and will increase the chances to get a decent feed. How wrong I was in fact there were less fish. I asked the old chap that ran the Bills Bait shop at Golden Beach. His claim was that the trailer stirred up the bottom, releasing food also with no disturbance of the bottom allowed more sea grass and again less food. I don't know if this is correct, but to a layman like me it sounded okay to me. What I do know is , it didn't help the fish stocks at the Caloundra end of the passage.

waldo35
17-04-2006, 08:28 PM
sad to see so many rejoicing in running their tinnies thru peoples legally allowed nets. these people are using their legislated and paid for rights to sustainably harvest seafood for the community and sum of u guys are laughinh at costing these guys hours of work repairing nets and lost income from damaged nets. again these guys have a legal right to be there doing what they do. they pay for this proprietal right of access to the seafood resource unlike u recco mob that pay nothing [ and dont come the i pay taxes etc arguement it just dont wash] to harvest enmasse and without any real knowledge as to what ur cumalative effort is . aint no such thing as a free lunch unless ur a recco fisher apparently.
next time u run ur tinny thru sumones livelyhood try stopping and explaining to them how funny it is.........im sure they share the joke.

PinHead
18-04-2006, 06:23 PM
Why not try the easy way to stop the commercial fishermen...conduct protests outside the retail outlets such as Morgans or the ones at Colmslie...convince the public not to buy seafood...then the commercial guys would go broke...I doubt it would make one iota of difference...the public want to eat seafood therefore the commercial fishos supply it..simple rule of supply and demand.

waldo35
18-04-2006, 08:40 PM
i am constantly amazed at the selfishness shown by recco fishers on this site. amazing . u guys really do believe that u r the only ones who shud have access to seafood . incredible. the fisheries act ensures equitable access to fisheries resources and yet u guys want it all for your self. thanx for sharing ur twisted world view tho im sure the australian seafood consuming public wouldnt agree with u, that the australian public supports their rite to access to enviromentally sustainable australian seafood.

Derek_Bullock
18-04-2006, 09:11 PM
Why not try the easy way to stop the commercial fishermen...conduct protests outside the retail outlets such as Morgans or the ones at Colmslie...convince the public not to buy seafood...then the commercial guys would go broke...I doubt it would make one iota of difference...the public want to eat seafood therefore the commercial fishos supply it..simple rule of supply and demand.

Just about everytime I log on to Ausfish lately and start reading through these posts it saddens me considerably the things I read. The post above by PinHead actually says it all in my opinion. There will always be a need for the public to be able to buy quality fresh seafood that comes from the sea as opposed to farmed seafood.

Added to that there will always be a need for those who choose to do so, to go out and catch their own fresh seafood.

What we as recreational fishers should be doing is working together with the pro fishers, and they also working together with us, towards a sustainable fishery for all based on sound scientific evidence.

The debates on a number of the threads here recently are not doing either side any good whatsoever.


Derek

waldo35
19-04-2006, 10:45 AM
thanks derek 4 putting it all into a sensible perspective

rando
19-04-2006, 11:29 AM
Provided always that it is sustainable for ALL.
The problem is that reports on commercial fishing look at the sustainability of THAT fishery not ALL fisheries.
You cant take one piece out of the puzzle and say this piece looks OK, the rest does not matter.

Derek_Bullock
19-04-2006, 06:23 PM
Provided always that it is sustainable for ALL.
The problem is that reports on commercial fishing look at the sustainability of THAT fishery not ALL fisheries.
You cant take one piece out of the puzzle #and say this piece looks OK, the rest does not matter.

As I said, sound scientific evidence, not peoples opinions.


Derek

rando
19-04-2006, 09:18 PM
Derek
I think If you read page 58 Part 3 section 11 of the report tabled in Dinga's post on the other tread Titled :How sustainability of the fishery is measured.

Where it states that

achievement of the objective is measured only by surveys or studies, accepted by the cheif executive, of commercial fishing for principal fish by trawling in the fishery
that might lend some weight to my "opinion"
cheers
rando

Derek_Bullock
19-04-2006, 09:33 PM
Derek
I think If you read page 58 Part 3 section 11 Titled
How sustainability of the fishery is measured.
Where it states that
achievement of the objective is measured only by surveys or studies, accepted by the cheif executive, of commercial fishing for principal fish by trawling in the fishery
that might lend some weight to my "opinion"
cheers
rando

Not arguing that point Rando and wasnt referring to your opinions. Was referring to matters in general. The greens and conservationists have "opinions", ploiticians have "opinions", rec fishers have "opinions", pro fishers have "opinions" but how many of those opinions are actually based on sound scientific evidence. #I would say not a lot even though there are a lot of good people out there trying to "do the right thing".

The whole marine park issue right across the country was and still is in many cases political decision making with people quoting this and that about protecting the biodiversity but very little of it is based on sound scientific evidence

Lets get some real studies done and come up with the facts.


Derek

Gazza
20-04-2006, 10:38 AM
:D :P :P :P

maybe , the "Commercial Business Plan" is to take ALL THE FISH from inshore , so when you catch "nothing" we buy it from them???

:o 8-)

dinga1
20-04-2006, 10:38 AM
what facts are being requested???

dinga1
20-04-2006, 10:42 AM
Gazza,

monopolies are frowned upon by the ACCC........

dinga1
20-04-2006, 10:45 AM
Rando,

the controlled environment of a scentific survey gives the best quality of data as most of the variability can be factored out and the "true" results can be interpreted without uncertainty

as oppossed to using fishery dependent data where you have no control over apparatus locations methods etc and the results are full of uncertainty

rando
20-04-2006, 11:02 AM
Dinga1
I was making the point that sustainability of the fishery is measured on the target species alone not the environmental effects such as bycatch. habitat destruction , turbidity.
rando

dinga1
20-04-2006, 12:06 PM
Rando,

have a look at the review event section, this says they are doing surveys to look at whether benthos and the amount of fish other than principal fish have been reduced in catch rate by a set percentage from the baseline point. as well as various other things like effort moving around etc.

would things like this allow the evaluation of the effects on bycatch, habitat destruction etc etc

rando
20-04-2006, 12:45 PM
Dinga
Relies on accurate reporting from trawlermen, they only have a vested interest in prawns.!!!

dinga1
20-04-2006, 01:21 PM
this is done via observers on board vessels now

bidkev
20-04-2006, 04:01 PM
this is done via observers on board vessels now

A very small percentage of the whole data is collected by observers. The majority of data comes from log books. The transference of "conclusions" drawn from the boats with observers, to reflect the whole fishery, is highly suspect. That aside, if you worked in a factory and the boss put a time and motion blokey with a stop watch at your machine, would your work at that time, truly reflect everyday practice? ;)

kev

It is not the size of the dog in the fight but the size of the fight in the dog.

waldo35
21-04-2006, 09:06 AM
isnt it amazing that an industry thats effort is 'estimated' on the back of a PHONE SURVEY has the gall to question the emperical data gathered by the pro fishing sector.
im am constantly amazed by peoples willingness to argue the blackness of white.

bidkev
21-04-2006, 11:12 AM
isnt it amazing that an industry thats effort is 'estimated' on the back of a PHONE SURVEY has the gall to question the emperical data gathered by the pro fishing sector.
im am constantly amazed by peoples willingness to argue the blackness of white.

Waldo, I am not highly educated and am in fact, self taught, but I am not stupid and have learned a lot from helping my deckie with her research into health promotion. It never fails to not only amuse me, but disgust me, that highly educated people embark on research with fundamentally flawed questionnaires. If the thruth be known, that is the reason for the state of Qld Health, not because the money isn't there, but because, some duff reseach concluded that it wasn't needed.

I have clearly stated that data collection from both recreational and pro fishing is sus. Just how many folk in these busy times have the "strength" or even motive to keep a diary correctly or to answer questions over the phone at times when they are making the kid's dinner etc. They will say what is most expedient.

Where is the methodology (in detail) as to how the questions to the rec sector were posed, and at what times those agreeing to the survey were contacted?? I have a "precis" of the methodology but there is not indication at all as to the questions posed.

eg Were the questions posed along the lines of most surveys where you are asked "how many times did you watch this programme...a)1to 5, b)5to 10, c)10to 15?

If a rec fisher was asked. "how many times, or what quantity in a similar manner to the above, there is a disparity between figures of 4. So if he caught 1 fish and answered a) the researcher could conclude 5! :o ::) Multiply that by the 4,500 reccos who took part apply that to the whole Qld recco sector, and you've got a crock of crap.

I suspect that I am unable to find a copy of the questions and the manner in which they were posed because in retrospect, they have been subject to scrutiny that would cast doubts on their findings.


Taking into account the data collected at ramps, wouldn't that affect the outcome in a biased manner? How can you apply data collected from ramps (boaties landings at that time) across a whole sector that is (in the main) made up of none boaties who's catches bear no resemblance at all to the fisho with a boat? Even the state of tide and time of year would have an influence on data collected at that point.

Has anybody here actually been part of that survey? No? hardly representative then, is it?

You can't have it both ways mate. You've pointed the finger at reccos based on data that you now infer is sus.........and I fully agree with you....it is sus.........but in which direction? Does it overstate impact or understate? If I was watching my own backyard then I would say "overstate" but if nothing else, I am honest and I will admit that it could actually (if done properly) show that we the reccos are a bigger impact on stocks than has previously been concluded. I only want the truth and am not arguing for "protectionist" reasons.

The reccos have bag limits based on the research. Irrespective of whether that research is flawed, the bag limit is the bag limit.......5 is 5 and that's it! Unlike the pro sector where you are given the choice of 5 BRD's soon to be 7. You are allowed to choose which is more convenient to you..the reccos aren't afforded that luxury. Can't you see the anomoly and why reccos view pros as they do?

I am fully prepared to accept any findings (both regarding reccos and pros) based on competent methodology, but to date, I have found very little. What I have found, IMHO is that nearly all the data I have collected to date does not state in sufficient detail as to the methodology and if it does, I find that methodology flawed.

kev

It now costs more to amuse a child than it once did to educate his father.

Gazza
21-04-2006, 11:15 AM
Hi Waldo......incoming... *duck* ;D

Mate ,buy the looks of all the juveniles in the bycatch industry ,RecFisho's must be leaving heaps of breeders :P .....thankyou for "excluding" them with your BRD's :P

Every Success ;)
Gazza

waldo35
21-04-2006, 06:08 PM
mmmm kev i think u agreed with me that recco effort estimates are flawed and inadequate. good onya. lets define recco effort definatively so recco and pro can work 2 gether addressing minimization of impact.

bidkev
21-04-2006, 08:15 PM
mmmm kev i think u agreed with me that recco effort estimates are flawed and inadequate. good onya. lets define recco effort definatively so recco and pro can work 2 gether addressing minimization of impact.


Working together is the way to go mate, but traditional "enemies" are bound to have some disagreements along the way ;) ;D

kev

A kid's idea of a balanced diet is a hamburger in each hand.

rando
21-04-2006, 08:21 PM
:-X ::)

Gazza
22-04-2006, 01:38 PM
Waldo: "lets define recco effort definatively"

::) ::)

Let's weigh TRAWLER "by-catch" automatically......... :exclamation
i.e. weighed before sorting
then MINUS the kept "target"
to give the LOGGED "bycatch"........ :exclamation
and vms/gps stats to minimise the "by-catch" issue , with "localised" results...... ;) 8-)

AND then??? steps taken by ASIC?? to peer-review :-?

Suggestion: Installing "hoppers" gives an endorsement , along EIS standards :-* ...and fair enough ,if an area has higher-than-normal juveniles LOGGED ,the hopper guys GET preference :exclamation

damons33
22-04-2006, 03:03 PM
i reckon if all the pro's got on wellfare for a while, they could get their bad and broken teeth fixed up for free and maybe get a hair cut and a shave...........
funny how they lobby us for support after they collapsed some of the worlds greatest fisheries with their "on the take" polly mates!
now shut up and eat your basa!
why should it only be the industries like farming, manufacturing and construction(wonder why no one wants to do a trade....easy it's frikken hard work for little money-supply and demand? no its exploitation of people financially unable to fight back) doing all the suffering in this country.....welcome to suffer time pro-fisho' bleed fat cat'
:-*
damon-no i'm not bias' i've just had a gutfull of gravy trains whinging'

waldo35
22-04-2006, 04:53 PM
damaon i think ur self description at bottom of post says all that needs to be said.

damons33
23-04-2006, 07:41 PM
do you like it?
:-*

it was created be one of your profishing colleagues-clever man isn't he!
and still you have more to add i reckon!
::)
think about the facts for a minute!
more rec's(fishing gear retailers and boat makers etc, etc) then you and the animal libbers' by at lest 10 fold,
so if your a fat polly that wants another term/stint because you want a $150,000 p.a pension and an office with car and driver........who's camp yah gunna go with-
animal libbers....nah
profishermen.....nah

lets see what becomes of the now banned sydney harbour pros as a pilot case for how it's gunna go for you guys up here....remember lawyers only do things that bring money into their accounts, not yours! they will use you up till you got no more money left.
and going by the way the look at global warming why care your kids are gunna be stuffed anyhow in an over populated world which is burning it up all the way to "the end of days" as the neo-conservatives call it.
:o
i like how you guys have gone about changing the perceptions of rec fishos' such clever people, i remember how they bashed old' bushy down the nsw sth coast, because they didn't like his oppinions on fisheries management.....seems everybody likes democracy until they arent part of the majority.
i like bob dylan songs'-cuz times' they are a changin'
8-)
damon

PinHead
23-04-2006, 09:00 PM
damons..I doubt the boat making industry is really part of the rec fishing lobby...the by far majority part of that market is the leisure boat market...I have said it before..until the general public stop buying seafood, then there will always be pros...regardless of how much money a boat builder or a tackled manufacturer has...they still only have one vote just liek the rest of us...that pollie that wants to keep that job ...he would rather have a boat builder vote against him than thousands of the public that cannot buy seafood anymore.

Disregard global warming as any sort of debating tool...that subject is very rapidly losing credibility.

CFisher
24-04-2006, 08:43 PM
Interesting thread here folks - think I will come in and lend a hand to Waldo though.

Pink Panther - a commercial fisher catches commercial quantities of fish - unloading crates of fish product from a commercial fishing boat is standard practice. Your emotional claim has no logic and I would imagine it is a little laced with exaggeration. Correct me if I am wrong, but you imply that all these crates of fish leaves nothing for you? Poor argument from my point of view - lots of crates of fish points to a healthy fishery. I watched the stake netters, tunnel netters, fence netters work the bay throughout the 70s and 80s and folk bitched and whinged about the "rape and pillage" all those years ago (me included I might add). The fact of the matter is, that the biology of these bread and butter species (bream, whiting, flathead, mullet) dictates that if stocks were being overfished then a time frame of 6 to 8 years would see everything crash - that is nothing left. Rather than get your back up at the sight of crates of fish being unloaded you should more logically be reasoning that the bay fish stocks are healthy.

Cheers
Andy

rando
24-04-2006, 10:16 PM
Cfisher
I have been fishing a school of fish off the beach and had the beachnetters throw a net around the school and Ive not caught another fish all day.
I think the intent of the other post was illustrating a similiar local result. If the netters hit Ephrapah for example you would be lucky to score a fish from the locality for days. If they hit a couple of locations close together, forget about fishing for a while .