Teewah Tailor Slaughter

[ffejsmada]

G'day Lindsay,
Don't think I'm being a smartar$e, 'cos I'm not, that's not my intention at all, but I'd like to know if you have any scientific qualifications as to your arguments against beach netting.

Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% behind you and your theories and back you fully (without arguing and supporting you on the thread) in relation to said matter.
Is all your info gleaned from personal experience and public gazetted papers, FOI papers, governmental scientific reports etc. or do you have a conservation / scientific background yourself?

Do you have any backing or acknowledgment from any governmental departments into what you are trying to achieve?

Keep up the good work and good luck in your endeavours, at least you are not sitting on your hands doing nothing like most of us!

Cheers, Jeff.

[rabbi]

Hey guys,
I have kept records of all my mulloway captures for the last 12 years.
This year has been the worst I have ever seen in 12 years for lack of big jew and tailor. The highlight has been on the amount of netting going on and there has been some huge net captures of big fish of all sorts this year.
I know I have very rarely met my bag limit this year on jew whilst the netters are cleaning up.
Not looking good and I know who will cop tighter fishing regulations.

I hope this thread opens the eyes of someone with power and who gives a damn!!

[4x4frog]

Hey guys,
I have kept records of all my mulloway captures for the last 12 years.
This year has been the worst I have ever seen in 12 years for lack of big jew and tailor. The highlight has been on the amount of netting going on and there has been some huge net captures of big fish of all sorts this year.
I know I have very rarely met my bag limit this year on jew whilst the netters are cleaning up.
Not looking good and I know who will cop tighter fishing regulations.

I hope this thread opens the eyes of someone with power and who gives a damn!!

That's an interesting point rabbi.
reading it, a thought came to em that...'Do the netters know something we don't?' Are they getting in for one final big season before Bob, the bald one and the wongster close all but the barron beaches off to all fishing?
I know netting has been going on for years but it just seems to me anyway that this year it's particularly more concentrated than usual. Surely, that can't be just put down to the publics' greater awareness of the fishing issue.
Being just a pleb, I don't have any real solution but know in my heart that netters need to be regulated and checked just as I feel the rec community needs to be kept in check. Just read the thread by jesse this morning which shows there are mongrels in all sectors still. http://www.ausfish.com.au/vforum/sho...d.php?t=168363

[PinHead]

an interesting thread..a couple of items come to mind.

1. Sustainabliity - this has to be of paramount importance. Now..in a round about way , and if Lindsay's vocalisation theory is correct..the pros net the fish..they scare the crap out of the others who bolt out to sea. hence the recs catch very little. Now if the rec catch is 4 times that of the pros aren't the pros doing the sustainability a favour by scaring them away from the rec anglers? I know..twisted but can be seen that way also.

2. Financial - the recs need to make a living from the occupation they are currently in. On the other hand there are a great many businesses making money from the rec anglers..and probably a lot more to the economy than the pros do.

There is also the need to supply fish to the commercial markets..i know I enjoy a feed of fish and chips and seafood from retail outlets at times.

Lindsay says he would like to see numbers controlled on Fraser. Personally, It would not worry me if the beaches were closed from the Noosa River to DI and also Fraser. I do not go there and I do not fish for tailor..one of the lowest fish on my eating rankings. BUT...I would fight against any form of control as others enjoy their time at these places and the fishing there.

The key is balance between the commercial needs and the rec needs...where this balance is, is another conundrum.

Controls on rec anglers will close many businesses ..should not happen.
Closing commercial fisheries cannot happen completely either..eating fish is very beneficial and a lot of people do not have the resources to catch their own.

where does it start and where does it end? I don't know.

[nigelr]

Yes 4X4, I think they may be making hay while the sun shines so to speak, can't see beach-hauling lasting 15 years, rec fishing, well maybe that's another story.
Maybe hoping to improve their buy-back price by being able to show large catches over the last few years?
Personally on a local level I've really only noticed the focus on mulloway since '03, but looking at similar anecdotal accounts on Ausfish, effort may have ramped up since about then, I think one would have to be privy to Co-op floor figures to know the real story. Somehow I don't think they would give those figures out willy-nilly........
Cheers.

[Slider]

Thank you Jeff - I expected that you would have noticed many of the things I've referred to. To be perfectly honest, I would think that any angler worth their salt should have as well once they've found out that fish vocalise. I'll try to answer your question with a brain that is lacking sleep and still suffering the conventional after affects of excessive beer consumption - fairly doughy. I may need to top up the info provided here with more after I have a nanny nap.

I don't have any scientific qualifications - which I think can be an advantage at times in that allows me to see the big picture without the constraints of 'tunnel vision. But this is all pretty logical stuff that anyone with half a brain should be able to handle.

My conclusions stem from an article my mum and I saw on the 7.30 report or Catalyst in the late 90s that pretty well spelt out the basis of the vocalisations of netted atlantic or pacific salmon and the subsequent area abandonment. They even played the recorded vocalisations - and at that stage I didn't know that fish could vocalise. Mum and I both knew right then that something similar was happening here. I've dug through the ABC archives and contacted them - even tried getting hold of Kerry O'brien to see if he remembered it, but have drawn a blank. If only I could find that story then my credibility would be so much easier to attain.

I don't have any support from anywhere to help me in my endeavours. But if you look into these things long enough and have enough exposure to the situation being studied, then you soon put the pieces together. Every aspect of the theories is backed by available secondary evidence - it is all scientifically sound.

I thought I had struck gold last year when Patrice Brehmer the Frenchman who is THE expert in this field said that his theories were the same as mine. He'd ben studying fish behaviour around nets for 10 years at that stage and with expertise in acoustic tracking of fish. We spoke about collaborating and he was going to come out here with American and Mexican scientists to study this fishery. I made tentative inquiries about using Sandy Cape lighthouse as a base as I see the cape as being the best place for a research project like this to occur. Then Patrice ceased all communication other than a xmas wish last December.

I had no idea what had caused this, then I was told about 'scientific jealousies' and I understood that he wanted to be the one to be given the credit for proving 'our' theory. Which is odd when I'm not a scientist and only wanted to help him prove what we both believed very strongly. You could say that I was semi devastated that such a promising line of communication had suddenly dried up.

Over the years I have tried to convince any Fishery authority that would listen that research into this field must happen. But nobody was interested.

So I've continued to observe and get on the net every now and then and spend another thousand hours dredging through countless research papers to look for secondary evidence - and I've got tonnes of that. Never found any evidence at all that I might be wrong though - not a single shred from anywhere or anyone. And I'd send another hundred emails to scientists or research laboratories all over the world without hardly ever getting replies. Definitely got more replies from overseas than I got from within Australia though.

By around 2008, I knew I had it all pretty well sussed, but I'd run out of enthusiasm as I had tried everywhere I possibly could for assistance without success. Began to think along the lines that if nobody else gives one, then why the hell should I.

I still have a heap of the secondary evidence stashed away in my pc if anyone ever shows enough interest to want to look at it. I'd even offer everything I know on the matter for free as I have always done. But I'm no longer holding my breath.

I would encourage anybody that has an interest in fish sounds or related matters to Google the following. You'll see that I'm not really full of it.

Use search words such as - soniferous fish
- net avoidance+fish
- fish vocalisations
- startle and escape vocalisations
- area abandonment+fish
- secondary transmission+fish

[Slider]

I think what would happen Greg, is that the tailor end up spawning where they shouldn't be and causing poor recruitment. And then heading inshore at Fraser to the no netting zone and being caught by recs there anyway.
So if sustainability is the main objective, then to stop netting would be the first thing to do. We know that fish numbers increase when netting stops as has occurred in all states of Aus other than Qld where we haven't a single fishery that isn't netted - as far as I'm aware.

And if Fisheries were serious about curbing the rec catch then they wouldn't have any trouble in achieving that - but shouldn't be necessary.

We also know that the beach rec industry is worth a lot more than the beach netting industry. The government knows that too - did their own report around 2001 which showed it to be five times more or thereabouts. It'd be on the net somewhere.
Victoria just completed a study that Qld could refer to - Qld are good at referring to other states research.

Where are we gonna get the fish from to supply the fish market? Well, we would want to know how much of the product currently caught here goes there first, then we might be able to work on something. I still think mullet from inside the mouth. And at the end of the day, if that was the stumbling block to Cooloola and Frasers accessible beaches being net free, then perhaps the northern end of Moreton should be the scapegoat. Nobody reading this would like that, but nobody wants them anywhere they play themselves. At least there are advantages with an island situation and just netting the top. Only thinking out loud so don't anyone think I'm going to push for that.

[ffejsmada]

Thanks Lindsay, I appreciate your honest and thorough reply.

You've certainly done some work over the years, it's hard to understand that no one wants to use your knowledge and pursue the matter further.

A student studying Marine Biology at Uni needing to do a thesis for example.

Cheers.

[ffejsmada]

One of my daughters is a Marine Archeologist, I'm waiting on a reply from her to see if she can shed some light, see if she knows anyone who might be interested in helping you.

I'll be in touch by PM when she studies your google links and other things.

[Lovey80]

Again Lindsay some great reading on this subject and as always every time you post more and more get educated.

Anyone that thinks that these fish are being treated properly for human consumption has to be kidding themselves. If they are for human consumption that is a disgrace! Can't wait to see your findings on that one Lindsay.

I have said it recently in another thread and I'll say it again because I genuinely think it is the fastest way to achieve the same outcome.

While you have many good and noble reasons for turning Noosa to and including Fraser (include the lot of the Noosa too if you find that it is in fact going to cat food) a Recreational Fishing Haven it will be a very hard slog to have the Pro Netters bought out on purely Environmental grounds. There is a lot of evidence and a lot of dots to join to categorically make the case water tight so to speak.

Making the case for a RFH across that whole area will be easiest and fastest done by making it evident on Economic grounds. If there is a great long term economic benefit to the state and the region by having the Netters bought out in tern for RFH's, no greedy politician will be able to resist it. On top of that, the environmental brownie points they can use for the greenies will be irresistible. This would be a win win for nearly everyone. The increase in tourism dollars alone would have them champing at the bit after all the recent publicity about Queensland and Australia falling off the tourism bandwagon in recent years.

So there you would have it, a solution that creates overall revenue and jobs that is creating a more sustainable and environmentally friendly region. What polly is going to knock that back?

[Lovey80]

On a side note, I attended one of the few fishing club meetings I am home to attend last week. While the club already donates to a freshwater stocking group the club had additional funds to spend as it is approaching the end of the year. A motion was put forward that some funds be donated to a saltwater stocking group on the sunshine coast (no one mentioned just an idea, is there any???).

Immediately i saw nodding heads amongst the group of 20 or so members there which really does attest to the attitudes generally among Rec Anglers wanting to give back to the resource.

I immediately made a protest that Recreational Angler funds should not be used to stock rivers that have any kind of netting in them or the joining beaches as the proceeds of our funds would end up strait in the pockets of netters. I would love to see mangrove jack and jew stocked in the rivers of the Sunshine Coast and Pumice Stone passage but not while there is commercial netting raping everything they can. That motion got squashed right there and then.

[Slider]

Thank you Jeff - as you say, it would be a perfect scenario for a student in the field to do a thesis.

Lovey, I have been aware for some time that I'll never succeed in having the government do anything about netting based on these theories alone. Even with the tern people on side and their clout, the theory is effectively unproven and shouldn't be used as a stand alone reason.

But there are many other reasons why netting on the Noosa North Shore and at Fraser are no longer a desirable thing.

We are currently working on putting a package together of every aspect associated, for presentation to the relevant Ministers. Sunfish and Ecofishers I'm sure have the expertise with regard to that. But it would seem sensible to include the environmental aspects as well, which I'm currently working on - including having respected scientists in relevant fields participating and I am communicating with a few of these currently.

But we all want to give this an almighty shake given those participating and the circumstances being what they are, which can potentially assist the rec cause in other areas as well.

[FNQCairns]

Way too many words for me to read today so all this may have been said to some degree already.

The Principles of ecology cannot be dismissed (because it's all we have in truth) when speaking of methods used to take fish, the numbers of fish taken, and the broader numbers in species still in existence up and down the coast.

Coastal netting in the broader sense is sustainable...has to be, extremist views aside the fishery still produces...In the fundamentalists minds-eye equating the current and historical reality of our coast fishery, in no way parallels the American bison for example.

The very use of the word sustainable means that it holds a definition that must be used in context otherwise the discussion become a joke for the want of the more correct word or darker shades of it...this word is most very often the word preservation.

Extremist greens consider any fish taken is one too many (considered in conversation/media as unsustainable), Extremist C&R anglers consider one fish taken is too many, many single etc anglers consider 3 fish taken is too many..... time pressed family anglers may consider 20 fish taken is too little, Commercial fishers may consider 4 tonne taken should have been more........all the above is nothing much higher in the real world than bulldust and so very often rooted even officially as one eyed self interest.

Only the principles of ecology knows what is sustainable, what is conservation, what is preservation so what is overfishing and why.

To date none of the above by the very nature of sustainable has amounted to overfishing, note in the broader sense - snapper I believe QLD fisherys figures/methods as corrupt along with the wider but failed use of words in officialdom like 'threatened' and outside of their true legal context as a result.

Would be nice to see netting banned as ecology says that taking entire schools of fish is the lowest form for potential future harvests possible (mother nature over earth's entire evolution has made no ecological tools to combat this methods level of extraction V area and time) so it rubs me the wrong way but that understanding in it's self doesn't make it a unsustainable method.

The hunter gather method (line fishing - Anglers mostly) under ecology would upon that very same school and over any real world time frame/area needed to extract 4 tonne is a trillion times (trillion?, dunno but seriously the number is huge) more conservation orientated, the impact then upon sustainability becomes so low it becomes a term wasted in conversation of the species....if the correct terms are used anyway.

[Slider]

Couple of points I'd like to make in regards to your post FNQ.

The fishery in Qld may be sustainable now, but for how long? Australia's population is the fastest growing in the world and the Sunshine Coast is the fastest growing in Australia. There is currently a lot of media about where these people are going to go.

And certainly the population of North Queensland is still small in comparison to what it is going to be in 50 years time. Sure it's sustainable now and there probably wouldn't be too many disagree with you on that score. But I also know that there are less fish in your neck of the woods than there was and by no small amount. Why would fish populations fall and then stop falling if nothing has actually changed for that to occur? Logically speaking, if anything the rate of population fall has to pick up speed not slow down.

If we look around the world at countries whose populations reached saturation point prior to now, we'll see that their fisheries have collapsed. But their fishery authority thought they were managing the fishery well I'm sure. Are we really any better at managing our fishery?

The NSW Fishery is an example that can be referred to - how many fish are being caught off the beach around Terrigal and Wamberal or Forresters Beach where my mother and grandparents grew up and fished from the turn of last century? I happen to know it's a lot less than when I was kid and it wasn't very good then. My grandfather often told me that the fish had gone due to the netting in the area and he'd watched it from his house beside Wamberal Lake on Ocean View Drive in much the same way as I'm watching Teewah, but for nearly 90 years.

And this is the aspect that Patrice and myself were both most concerned about - as the populations get bigger and netting pressures increase, the fish learn how to avoid nets and take measures that cause recruitment to fall. The fishermen take measures to compensate for the fish avoiding the nets at the same time as habitat is lost and water quality reducing and then a population crash occurs with too many being taken for the recruitment ability of the fish.

If it was a simple mathematical equation, then as it stands then the fishery most likely is sustainable. But nature doesn't work that way and we must take into account variables that are coming to light only now.

Tailor pops might have bounced back and the ban of the netting of tailor in NSW and fishing havens are probably why - I know the Richmond had massive numbers of juveniles in it's system last year which are curently part of the catch at Fraser this winter. Recruitment in Northern NSW of tailor due to altered netting practices would appear to me to be a major factor. But tailor are a migratory species that Qld fisheries can benefit from the measures of the NSW fisheries. Bream have all but disappeared from Teewah Beach - who's going to rescue this more localised population? This fishery doesn't just exist around that of tailor and not all of us fish only for tailor.

The whiting at Sandy Cape were once (mid 80s) a solid school from the spit to Rooneys - I'm guessing around 25 - 30km of beach. They most certainly aren't anymore and the netting pressure hasn't reduced and it's easier than ever to get vehicles to the cape now and there are a lot more people fishing there than ever before.

Australia is a young country that is still catching up with the rest of the world in the population density stakes. Why should our fishery be any different to the rest of the world's?

[FNQCairns]

Hi Slider, you are right there must be less fish than years ago on each and every beach almost Australia wide, our recreational fishing regulations are in effect pegged as if the population is already 100+years in the future...overzealous they consider their Angler regulation choices more on the what's 'sporting' side, because they can.

I am of the uneducated opinion that the netters would not be increasing their take (based on any 10 year average), if we are correct in finding less fish then so too are they, smaller schools wider inbetween than in years past.

An effort for benefit equation has to come into play, are the netters doing 6 times the work to pull a living from the beaches compared to 30 years ago and are recreational fishers, Just what is the true state of play here.

A sustainable resource never means a fish tank of fish aka in our mind eye 150 years ago, it will always mean less fish and a smaller average size if we could in fantasy measure and count them all, it also means a relatively turbocharged growth rate.

I got to know a central NSW beach very well and if the netters came through we wouldn't bother for a couple of days, even then it may remain hit and miss for up to a week. In no way did this beach ever represent to me as unsustainable, still I didn't like this overall situation from a personal point of view.

The biggest favour we could do for the fishery is ban ALL inshore netting but with total fish ATM managed as grossly sustainable/conserved in regulation, doing this will push fishery management even further toward some dark shade of preservation.

One thing for sure if ever we do reach what would be a true sustainable level for our fishery resource and people do choose to freak over it (and they will), quick regulation by banning the netters will see populations rebound amazingly fast for most species but that will never be necessary because before we get there the netters will have already been forced from the industry by the increasingly poor yearly business returns that must also must accompany this degree of decreasing fish numbers.