Anglers under threat.

[Steve_Ooi]

Unfortunately anglers in Australia are under great threat, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Association (GBRMPA) has the Queensland anglers high in their gun sights , with wanting to close the door on anglers to #25 percent of the great barrier reef and are seeking to close down 25 percent of the beaches and river systems too.
Just because you don’t live in the GBR area doesn’t mean you wont be effected, Major Issue like this usually set precedents, precedents that could see sweeping changes to recreational fishing happening all over the country. If we let them closes down 25 percent of the GBR marine park ,who’s saying #that others won’t #seek to do similar closures to Morton bay, Gold Coast broad water or the whole coast line.
Your favourite beach gone, the reef you usually fish gone, the river mouth that produce good fish gone.
Most recreational fisho in Australia realise that the fishery is under increasing pressure and stocks in certain species are dwindling unfortunately it has taken the GBRMP quite few years to realise this. Instead of implementing the first steps of retain a sustainable fishery , the GBRMPA wants to go to the last and most extreme step …closure.

Here some figures and quotes off the GBRMPA website..

“It is estimated that 800 000 Queensland residents participate in recreational fishing. Interstate and international visitors also fish within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and World Heritage Area.
Recreational fishers catch 3500–4300 tonnes per year and target mainly reef, pelagic, inshore and estuarine fish, crabs and prawns.”
GBRMPA website
How many of those 800 000 rec angler in Queensland, actually fish in the Great Barrier Reef Marine park….? Considering that large population area’s such as Brisbane, Sunshine coast and the Gold Coast are not near the Great Barrier Reef.
And if not all of these 800 000 #anglers actually fish in the GBR area, then how much of that 3500-4300 tonnes per year catch actually comes from the GBR area….?
A true figure would be interesting..

[Steve_Ooi]

PUTTING FIGURES INTO PERSPECTIVE..

The recreational angler catch figures according to the GBRMPA website is something like 3500-4300 tonnes per year, I believe that these figure are for the whole State including areas outside of the Great barrier reef Marine Park ( someone may be able to clarify that #for me)
Now to put these figures into perspective #let have a look a the figures for the commercial fishing sector as stated off the GBRMPA website..
First of all they state that the commercial fisheries in the Marine Park comprise about 3700 professional fishers in 1400 vessels.
The commercial fishery can be broken up into four main sectors.
1) Trawlers
2) Line fishing
3) nets
4) collection / harvesting

Lets have a look at the trawler fishery first.. Now these are figure that are once again taken from the GBRMPA website.


Trawlers: Within the Marine Park, this fishery comprises about 630 operators in 800 prawn and scallop trawlers. This produces an annual trawl catch of:
„h 6500 tonnes of prawns ($100 million)
„h 1200 tonnes of scallop meat ($30 million)
„h 500 tonnes of Moreton Bay bugs ($7.5 million)
„h blue swimmer (sand) crabs and squid

"Issues of concern regarding trawling include by-catch, the physical impacts of the trawling gear on the seabed and increasing fishing effort. Recent research indicates that a single pass of a trawl net can remove 5-25% of bottom-dwelling organisms."

So that equate to about roughly 8200 tonnes of catch taken by trawler in the great barrier reef marine park, now remember that the 800 000 recreational anglers only take 4300 tonnes for the whole state.
Now I wonder what percentage of that 4300-ton figure for rec anglers comprises of prawns, scallops, bugs, crabs and squid..? Very small percentage I would say or a very minimal impact on that fishery.

Now a figure that was not on the GBRMPA site, was the amount of bycatch a trawler has..
According to figures off the AFMA website the average bycatch for a trawler has a ratio of 8.6:1, or 8.6 kilos of bycatch to every 1 kilo of useable product. A large amount of this comprises of fish and bottom dwelling species.
Studies by CSIRO show that nearly all fish are dead when discarded. Amongst crustaceans, robust species such as many crabs and bugs survive, but the more delicate species including non-commercial prawns die. Nearly all bivalves - mainly scallops - survive being trawled and discarded (Hill and Wassenberg, 1990; Wassenberg and Hill, #1989 and 1993¡¨ # # #AFMA website..

So applying the ratio of 8.6 to 1 to the catch figure for trawlers off the GBRMPA website, and the figure of #8200 tonnes per year can be brought up to 70520 tonnes .
8200 tonnes of this 70520 tonnes total is kept for sales and the other 62320 tonnes is thrown back, Now what percentage of this goes back actually #survives, especially if a large proportion of this bycatch is of fish species that according to the CSIRO don't survive very well.

Recreational angler figures really start to look like a drop in the ocean, a very insignificant amount compared to the trawler industry.
And we haven't even considered the 3 other commercial fishing sectors.

[Steve_Ooi]

Coral Trout..

Without a doubt most would agree that the coral trout stocks have somewhat declined in this sunny state of ours.
Most would also agree that coral trout goes pretty good on the table as well, of the total recreational catch figures (3500- 4300 tonnes) I wonder what proportion of this is coral trout that end up on our table. Considering that not all fishermen can access coral trout fisheries , not all anglers own boats, and not all boats can access the reef once the winds become more than 20 knots as well, no doubt it a very small amount.
Us recreational anglers are not the only ones that don’t mine a feed of coral trout , in fact it seem like most people do, and that's why a large proportion of the commercial line fishing goes in to targeting this species.
Once again according to the GBRMPA website here some figures for the commercial line fishing .
“ Line fishery: There are about 250 principal licensed operators and some 1500 other licence holders within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park and World Heritage Area. This produces an annual commercial catch estimated at 3000–4000 tonnes. The catch is made up of a wide range of species with Coral trout comprising 35–40% of the total catch.”

35 –40 % percentage of their total catch is of trout. That’s a very large proportion something like roughly 1400 tonnes a year. Now I don’t know how many trout it takes to make up 1400 tonnes, but it either two very big ones or a absolute enormous amount of smaller ones, and I figure coral trout don’t grow to 700 tonnes , so I’m ruling out that they got two big ones….
Recreational anglers have realised for years that trout numbers have declined, why did it take the GBRMPA so long.
Shouldn’t they have put into a place a closed season for coral trout spawning a long time ago, now they come to the realisation of limited stocks and they want 25 % reef closures.
Good management would dictate to have better control over the large proportion of trout taken by the commercial industry and the introduction of closed seasons, instead they go to the extreme and in doing so punishing the large majority of people who have had very little impact on this fishery, the rec angler.

[krazyfisher]

this issue gets me so angry, you say according to the GBRMPA. According to them I catch 1000 tonnes of fish, distroy the reef and the bait fish. They would probably also say that I take undersize fish rape and distroy the park where as In the last 3 yrs of fishing I have seen coral twice, cought maybe 12 trout I go most weekends and would actually bring a feed home once a month(I do catch more but catch and release alot) and that feed is for the dinner table that night for two people.I dont freeze fish, I fish for the sport and not the food. If we are out there to feed ourselfs than we are not real smart work out how much that feed of fish has cost, go to the fish market buy your fish get a video and a 6pack go home and keep the rest of the money in a jar and at the end of the year that yourself on a holiday. If this post is all over the place I am sorry but I was angry and I am sick and tired of the people that are doing the right thing being accused and prosecuted for what the few do.

[Steve_Ooi]

Krazyfisher i agree with you totally,
so far i reckon coral trout is costing me at least 150 dollar a kilo, for the amount of trout i've taken off the reef and the cost of my trips.
While the commercial sector takes some 1400 tonnes .
These figure are from the GBRMPA website yet they fail so see the difference between guys like you and me that catch a few fish and the trawlers, pro boats and netters that take tonnes....


here's another commercial fishery sector and some figure taken from GBRMPA website ...
Nets: Mesh ring and seine netting are undertaken by about 450 operators in coastal rivers, estuaries, foreshores and to a lesser extent in off-shore waters. This produces a catch of about 1400 tonnes per annum from within the World Heritage Area. The main species targeted are barramundi, king and blue salmon, shark, mullet and small mackerel species.
Issues of concern in this fishery include by-catch of species such as dugongs, turtles, inshore dolphin species and the ecologically sustainable management of shark species"


Now i'm not sure on how many sea turtles, dugongs and dophlins other recreational angler have caught as by catch, but so far for my 26 years of fishing i've caught none.
GBRMPA are worried about these bycatch ,yet the rec angler has extremely little if any real amount of effect on these species.
Nor do we have any real effect on the sea grass and habitat that these animals feed upon , yet the GBRMPA feel it's necessary to reduce rec angling that doesn't effect it.
It a bit like banning bicycle riding because it may effect the ant population..
If i can quote SouthPark here, Jonny Cochrane," this does not make sense",
"Why would a Wooky live on the planet of Endor with 2 foot ewoks", "this does not make sense ".

Like wise the GBRMPA proposals do not make sense.

[Steve_Ooi]

We all realise that #bio-diversity is an important part of the reef , and lot of us have probably jump over board with the mask and snorkel to have look at the amazing amount of creatures that the great barrier reef houses. Indeed a lot of these vulnerable creatures need to be protected, and proper management of these areas is also needed.
Closing these area to people that have very little effect would be absurd, let alone unjustified and unfair. It would it be a much better arrangement to limit the use of these areas to those that are causing real devastation not the innocent. It would be much better to make such areas into Marine National Park 'A' Zone .


Marine National Park 'A' Zone
Provides for appreciation and recreational use, including limited line fishing. Fishing is restricted to one line with one hook per person. (When trolling for pelagic species more than one line may be used.) Spearfishing and collecting are prohibited, as well as those activities not allowed in General Use 'B' Zone.
GBRMPA website


Here the harvest figures off the GBRMPA website..


Harvest:.. Harvest fisheries comprise seven components:
„h Marine aquarium fish (63 operators in the Marine Park and World Heritage Area)
„h Sea Cucumber (18 operators take around 200 tonnes)
„h Trochus (5 operators take around 170 tonnes)
„h Tropical rock lobster (30 operators take between 50 and 200 tonnes)
„h Coral (39 operators take 50 tonnes)
„h Specimen shells (5 operators take approx. 600 shells)
„h Bait (85 operators take more than 6 million worms and yabbies in Queensland, 5-6 operate in the GBRWHA).

So why restrict the rec angler that has very little effect on these areas...? it does not make sense

I can't remember the last time that I've hook a sea cucumber , although someone must think they taste pretty good if 200 tonnes are taken. How many rec anglers do you know that go out to the great barrier reef and come home with a esky full of sea cucumbers, starfish , shells, coral , false clown anemone fish ,black-axil chromis damsel fish, or a reticulated butterfly fish .NONE that I know of.
The GBRMPA should be targetting only those that cause mass damage.

Unfortunately its the GBRMPA #that have set the nets this time and us recreational anglers are just bycatch, #bycatch that is not want and is to be left high and dry. They fail to see the figures and they will fail to make the adjustment that are need that will restrict only those doing the greatest damage. #We may be small fry sardines individually but as a whole bio- mass we are one hell of a school, lets not let them put the purseine net around us and haul us in.

Steve Ooi

[Vern_Veitch]

Good posts Steve and Krazy. Hope you've both read the GBRMPA Feedback Form subject elsewhere in this section. I have done some questimates off the same database that GBRMPA use for recreational fisher numbers and about 250 000 fishers live in or north of the Hervey Bay region. Rec fishers are estimated to take about 300 000 +/- 10% coral trout. That is less than 1/6th of the total harvest.
GBRMPA publicity quotes a scientific reference group as stating 14 reasons for protecting biodiversity and justifying green zones. Problem is that shutting out fishing only affects less than 5% of one aspect. We do not catch turtles or dugong or harm halaemedae beds and seagrass. I have never caught a whale and hope not to.
GBRMPA and the greenies are not serious about real protection of biodiversity - if they were they would support our call for up to 5% of each bioregion to be pink (NO-GO) and the rest with better fishery management rather than blanket bans. We support yellow areas with some rule changes to allow limited spearfishing and 2 lines per angler - same rules for everyone including commercial fishers. Recreational bag limits should apply to all in a yellow zone with the only difference being commercial fishers could sell their catch.
We cannot expect that things will be left as they are but we need to be pro-active to get a better deal for rec fishers and some fairness for the commercials as well - Remember, they are only doing what they are allowed to in most cases, the same as us.
Vern

[dazza]

Hi Guy's.
It looks like the poor old rec fish is going to be bent over once again!!
The thing that really cheeses me off is that GBRMPA is supposed to be protecting an environment that has world significance, but are largley funded by the tourist operators etc, who are trying to dictate what happens in regard to its management. They are lookiing after their own interests. They are specifically targeting rec fisho's as we are an easy target. (my opinion only- from the bit or info I have chased up on this) Maybe liscences are the go. We will then have a bit more clout???
Steve you should send your figures and thoughts to the Cairns Post??
It would be interesting to see the reaction. The trawler boys would probably have you in concrete boots real quick.
We are all in the same boat weather fishing at the bottom end of Tasmania
to the tip of Cape York- we must pull together and be heard.
Go hard
Dazza

[Kerry]

Anglers under threat #??? no not just anglers but a wide section of the population when it's all said and done, even the commercial side of things.

However as usual different groups use figures in different ways and it always amuses me when the anti commercial lobby appear to put a $ value on the primary product (accross the wharf) but appear to ignore the $'s along the products path but when referring to the value of the recreational sector everything becomes a $ value right down to the sale of fishing magazines (and other non essentials ;D).

So what are they implying #:-X are we recreational anglers the only ones who buy mags, use fuel, service engines etc etc etc or in other words live, of course not.


Cheers, Kerry.

[Vern_Veitch]

Kerry,
the difference is in the tax. Smart commercial operators buy all their business needs and then some GST free. They mostly use diesel and get the primary producer rate. All of their costs are then tax deductible at the end of the financial year.
Don't know about you but I pay through the nose. I cannot claim boat maintenance, fishing gear or fuel as a tax deduction. Most recreational fishers are the same.
Just have a think for a moment how many seats that shines in nice air-conditioned offices or how many government cars it keeps running. Now think about how many people are really employed by recreational fishers spending money. Has anyone done the real figures? Probably not because they do not want to know.
Sure, commercial fishing employs people, fishers, drivers, marketers, cold storage workers, food outlet staff etc.
But don't underestimate the numbers employed by expenditure in recreational fishing. Queensland's boating industry alone is worth over $1 billion. How much for accomodation, fishing tackle, fuel, take away food, ice, registration and insurance etc.
These proposed closures will hit the recreational fishing support industries hard. Commercial fishers can easily quantify their compensation. What about the caravan park owners who all of a sudden have no attraction to offer.
Vern

[Kerry]

Vern, many parallel's have been raised around issues like these and people shouldn't under estimate the effects on both sides.

Regardless of tax and GST the same business people where I get fuel also supply commercial vessels and my odd few litres every now and again really doesn't compare to 4-5000 litres they supply (and the business relies on) other operators on a regular basis.

But all those odd few litres all add up but take "either" away and maybe that business simply doesn't exist? and that directly affects and inconviences me.

The end result might/can/will affect many.

Cheers, Kerry.

[Barrymundi]

Just a few figures from a Charter Boat Businness I manage.

Last Fuel Fill $5,000 - Paid $1.02 per litre when Normal Pump Price was $0.88 - Yes there is a rebate component. There is also a charge to the environment levy for fuel spill managment.
We could have parked the boat at public pontoon and filled it by a tanker for less money.
Last Slip, Antifoul, touchup $22,000
Last Major (18months ago) $110,000

All this was done locally employing local people and we are also recreational anglers who pay taxes.

Increase Green, put more pressure on the other areas.

Commercial and Recreational need to work together.

[Vern_Veitch]

Kerry,
I have not seen anyone go out of business in NT, Hinchinbrook Channel or Pumicestone Passage. In fact the opposite has happened when areas have been set aside primarily for recreational fishing. In each case business has increased.
Vern

[spinna]

Hi guys ;)
Well the same thing is going on down in nsw #:(and i can tell you 1 thing and that is soon we will only be able to fish in areas that have no fish or are very hard to get to i fish rock/beach/rivers/ and deep sea.As for the rocks well the only places we will be able to fish are areas that you need ropes or bloody long ladders. And the beaches is going the way that you will have to walk a bloody long way. And fishing out of a boat well thats going be be fun as you are supposed to know where the imaginary white lines are painted on the water to say where you can and cant fish. So we down south do know how you are all feeling . And we pay for a licence down here it really pisses me off that you bye rods. reels. bait. hooks. boats. regos. line. and then have pay for a licence and still get told sorry but your not allowed fish here. well thats my say #???

cheers all # # spinna ;)

[Kerry]

Vern, sounds like it has a real "comercialistic" ring about it ;D probably one step short of some of the sunday arvo fish ponds down south >:(

You know the ones where ya pay to fish but if ya pay more to fish in "this" pond then for X $'s a kilo you get to take the fish home as fish and chips :o

I think "real" fishing people don't like to be lead by the nose but at the moment that's about all it is "on the nose"

It's a bit like shopping centre mentality, force out the opposition and concentrate everybody in one area for the pleasure of shop owners :(.

Sounding more "commercial" everyday and that's not as in commercial fishing either ::)

Cheers, Kerry.

[Finnie]

I think I said it before in a post somewhere else, but sometimes we have to look through the
s#%tstorm and decide whether some of these changes are worthwhile.

I for one, like the idea of a properly managed licence scheme. It gives a body of money that we have every right to ask go DIRECTLY back into the fishery (as opposed to a lot of taxes that sink into black holes elsewhere). And it gives us a slightly louder voice via putting a money value on rec fishing. Something the major parties with their economic rationalist approach understand very well. Considering I often spend more than the $25 per annum licence fee on fuel each time I go for a fish, it isn't that much. The thing I do get a little upset about is the sometimes lack of communication of the rules. Each person buying a fishing licence should have a current rule book (and a measuring device) handed to them....the instant they buy the licence. And if the bag limits are changed........mail out an update sticker to be jammed in the book, too easy.

The idea of putting areas aside for the protection of the fishery I don't think any of us would argue against. Some rules are important to maintain the quality of fishing that we currently enjoy. I think all of us understand that there are different areas that at different times of the year should be left alone to maintain the quality of a resource. What we need to do is make the various fisheries management departments understand is that we essentially want the same thing..........a beautiful and pristine place to fish, with plenty of the finned things swimming around out there. Apart from the animal liberation groups (from my way of thinking a fundamentally flawed logic anyway - read comments in "A jerk on one end" - can't remember the author) everyone using the marine parks should be working in the same general direction instead of fighting.

Although this is wordy, ultimately my point is that out of all the people who love experiencing the aquatic world, fisher-people are high on the list of "conservation minded" groups........and we should be proactive about pushing forward to show people this and encourage the creation of a fishery we can all enjoy in the future.

Cheers,
Finnie

[jaybee]

Time for the apathy to stop and for people to get off their butt and support people like vern and write to their local member. I have provided a link with what I went to my local member with. This was worked out with other members of the board, and may not please all, but its a starting point. Time for people (and goverment) to realise that we are a majority not a minority because that is how the governemt treats sunfish and recfish when the go into bat for us, because not enought people fill in a RIS.
http://members.optushome.com.au/jaybee3/Tailor.pdf

[Volvo]

http://www.ausfish.com.au/chat/images/smilies/cwm23.gif Bit too old n wiser otherwise ide say what they can do with their fishing licences lol.
Hard enough tryin ta get a floatin pontoon for loading and offloading your wife n kids or oldies for the benefit of safety around these parts especially with the amount of rego paid not only to boat n trailer but car as well, and unless mistakin isnt my trailer n extension of my car after its hitched up?? :).
But like most fees it all or most goes into revenue.
Freshwater?? may be able ta see benefit of due to restocking, but saltwater ?????.Dont think so Mabel.
For Years now someone or other is constantly screamin, either on the net or letters back to editors of Fishing mags of what should or shouldnt be done for the preservation of fish stocks n habitat.
All ten thousand different opinions and ideas and me thinks all of a sudden some of us are about ta get what ya wished for in some form or another.
Maybe one day wake up and fishing will be totally outlawed http://www.ausfish.com.au/chat/images/smilies/cwm23.gif.
Maybe time for all rec fishos and Commercial Fishos ta get around a table and discuss what really is best for the species n habitat rather than being at each others throats and tryin ta eliminate each other from the water.
United we stand devided we fall??? think someone once said that somewhere or other??.

[jaybee]

For Years now someone or other is constantly screamin, either on the net or letters back to editors of Fishing mags of what should or shouldnt be done for the preservation of fish stocks n habitat.
All ten thousand different opinions and ideas and me thinks all of a sudden some of us are about ta get what ya wished for in some form or another.
thats apathy volvo, if a person writes to their local member it is better then doing the above. Voice an opinion here but shout to your local member
cheers.

[Kerry]

Apathy might be an issue but a bigger issue is 2 faced politicians #:P. One only has to study the Victorian MP issues to see that.

The problem is most will roll over when whistled #:( but have "their" own interests to "consider"

And as for fishing licences ha, who really beleives "they" would put every $ back into the source :o. Again we get to learn these things from similar ventures.

Cheers, Kerry.

[Finnie]

For an interesting perspective of where NSW Fishing Licence Fees go, see this link http://www.fisheries.nsw.gov.au/licence/where.htm

Licences can in some way improve the problem with "apathy". Polititions understand a couple of things very well.....the number of votes they are getting and where the money is coming from. Instead of struggling to get 1000+ submissions in favor of rec. fishing, QLDers would suddenly have 10s to 100s of thousands of "full fee paying, voting fisher-people" to point at the polititions. Couple that with a significant monetary contribution to the fisheries that are utilised, and you have a much stronger bargaining platform.

I know not everyone will share my views on licencing, but I'm still glad us NSWelshmen have them!

Cheers,
Finnie

[jaybee]

This issue isnt a Vic issue kerry its here in QLD back yard and i fully agree with finnie. With a license you have more clout and in the chat room is a place to #voice your opinion..if you want something to happen on a positive note according to your values then you should be writing your local member. If not its classed as apathy..Lack of interest to do anything about it on a serious note...
cheers

[Kerry]

So does that mean Qld politicians are different to Vic politicians #;D that I'll take some convincing. You'd have to go blue in the face even to consider there's a difference. Try running that question past a Vic angler #;D

I tell ya what there was a tremendous amount of interest in the Vic MP issues but it doesn't matter what type of steam roller it is it, once ya steam rolled the result is the same. So where were the pollies when everybody was being steam rolled in Vic #>:( looking after their own behind. Didin't matter which fence they sat on as long as it was a dividing fence.

Obviously the battles will go on and on but with little learnt from the previous ones.

Now anybody care to suggest that if access is reduced by 25% that "if" licences were in vogue that they would be reduced 25%, not in a month of sunday's. Oh what a silly thought.

;D obviously now with such schemes there'll be no need for southern anglers to come up this way, way too good at home ;)

Cheers, Kerry.

[jaybee]

So does that mean Qld politicians are different to Vic politicians # no it means more people have to write their local members if you dont you will not be counted..united we stand..anyone can grandstand in a magazine or a chat board but to actually spend 5 minutes writing their local Mp is what counts....Its the same in any state and its been proven in NSW..the amatuers got what they wanted and now NSW fisheries are fully accountable..n e way I am off to watch sbs on the closure of the great barrier reef..
cheers.

[Vern_Veitch]

I'm on deck again with one of our local state pollies next Tuesday. Not sure what the topics are yet but will have a few of my own.
Watch this space.
Vern