QFS number crunching !

[Lucky_Phill]

beefaboat@optusnet.com.au
5th May 2002
Joseph,
I won't re-write all your letter, but I'll give you an idea of what I have done.
year Harvest Days Boats GVP ( $M)
1989 6210 61974 886 28.7
2000 7464 77724 942 42.5

increase % 20.19 25.41 6.32 48.10

This equates to increased " effort " for not as much tonnage return for the " effort ", but the GVP increase was probably due to the " export market ", particularly for the Mackerel. This, related over the species spectrum, says that the ring netting of Mackerel in Hervey Bay, has saved the Pro's arses, and they are making a killing, while the going is good.

This is born out by the1989 to 2000 numbers that show an increase of Commercial Mackerel tonnage for Spottie Mackerel up 1930%. The Recreational catch is down 18.75%.
This IS unsustainable.

Although it is shown that the " Bread and Butter " fish ( for recreational fishoes ), has had a decline in commercial catches ( Whiting 23.2%, Bream 19.45%, Tailor 17% ), it goes on the say the Recreational catch has decreased in a different percentage rate. ( Whiting 17.18%, Bream 2.5% and Tailor 92.3% ). That Tailor tonnage drop is a bit of a worry. These figures could indicate that the commercial netter has, in some instances, re-focused their " effort ' to other areas, in particluar, Mackerel.

It is note worthy that the Commercial tonnage for Tailor is down 17 %, but the Recreational tonnage is down 92.3%. One could easily work out that the Species is in decline.

It is also interesting to note the large tonnage drop of the Mullet. That is 909 tonne. This decrease is in no way caused by the Recreational angler, as he does not target this species, therefore the Commercial Netter is responsible for the decline.

An overview goes like this:- Commercial Catch :-
Spottie mackerel up 1930%
Grey mackerel up 127%
Total all other species down 83.83%

The Recreational Catch over all species has increased over 2 years by 4.56%

You don't have to be a genius to work out what's going on.

All the above numbers are supplies by the Queensland Fisheries Service. The same people/ department that issues fishing and netting licences.

cheers Phill

[Vern_Veitch]

I had a detailed reply to this posting prepared and lost contact. Aarrggghhhhh. 30 minutes work down the drain.
QFS certainly know how to confuse the general public. The table on page 97 of their Conditions and Trends Report does not even add up.
The bottom line of what I prepared previously is that there are some species that are more valuable to the commercial sector such as prawns and it is fair and correct that they get allocated almost all of that resource (so long as they can minimise their impact on habitat and bycatch).
The same principle should be applied to species of high value to the recreational sector such as tailor and barramundi.
In some cases where there is considerable value to both sectors such as coral trout, then their needs to be some detailed investigations and management needs to consider catch sharing arrangements.
The commercial sector harvest a total of 24000 tonne for $295 million value to Queensland. The recreational sector harvest 8500 tonne for a slightly higher value based on QFS conservative figures which I believe undervalue the benefit to the broader community considerably.
NSW and the NT have reaalised the value of allocating large areas to recreational fishers. Let's hope it does not take Queensland 20 years to do the same. I thought someone said we are the "SMART STATE"
Vern

[jaybee]

;D hey vern maybe thats why the QLD gov decided to listen to me when I started my e-mail as "Mr Beattie you espouse this state to be the smart state" but hey this is all slowly coming together thanks to you and phil..I feel really confident now that the gov will have to do an ecological review of all species and start spending some money to do so..lot of votes here for them to lose...
thanks to you guys from #being on the ball, however there are a couple of places vacant for the meeting in parliament house on the 16th at 3pm if anyone is interested...just wish Tom Burns was still a member of parliament #http://www.ausfish.com.au/chat/images/smilies/cwm35.gif he would be getting into this tooth n nail
cheers
Joseph
Damn I forgot to mention that on their introduction they quoted 880,000 thousand amatuers but on the page referring to amatuers they dropped to 660000, damn thats a lot when you look at (estimated fish caught)[ damn shame when the gov can't get their figures right...so if sunfish dont know how is the average voter supposed to know ???

[Kerry]

Always been curious how anybody really knows what the recreational catch is and how it can be stated with any certainty ???. Obviously the commercial catch has a bit better basis for which to verify numbers.

Cheers, Kerry.

[jaybee]

Sorry but I beg to differ Kerry, the pros are allowed 100kg over the quota plus there is still the black market they use and a lot of the catch isnt recorded (black market) because of tax..cash in hand and I know this for a fact because I have had to go and pick up tonnes of mullet and tailor that was being sold for cash in hand after the inspectors caught them..admittedly that was quite a few years ago but I bet it sitll goes on today because cash in hand is better then the paperwork, running costs to market and loss through tax.
A example is DPI quotes that tailor bring between $1-$5 a kilo..if so then why at its cheapest at woolies is it $9 a kilo..a pro is better off delevering or having their catch picked up at a set price after all, he doesnt care because he has his money in pocket..Pros only need to put a certain amount through the books to keep their license..Dont get me wrong here I am not condeming pros because there are amatuers out there doing the same thing. #
cheers
Joseph

[Kerry]

Jaybee, that sounds reasonable but only supports the question as to who knows what rec's catch anyway as if they don't really know for sure what com's catch then they have absolutely no idea what recs catch so really what do the numbers mean ???

As for what the DPI state every person that has their hooks into fish processing have on costs which is also one of those arguements why some state fishery $$$'s that aren't really equiv. What a fishery is worth to a fisherman is totally totally different to what the real worth is to what the end user pays.

So really quoting $$$'s to the commercial sector is not comparing apples to apples when comparing $$$'s in the recreational arena, Obviously numbers and different numbers are convienient depending on the requirements and the discussion/purpose of those numbers.

Cheers, Kerry.

[jaybee]

Well Kerry that is what I will be trying to get across at the meeting thursday week. Looking at their report that covers all species is null and void if you ask me specially when they quote a number of amatuer fishers in the introduction then drop it by 200,000 on the recreational paper http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/fishweb/ all in the same report...hey if you live local and get the time off come into the meeting and help me voice our opinion.
cheers
Joseph