FNQ, I think your points are valid, as I think they always are and I respect the educated manner in which you make them. It's certainly not the first time I've had this particular point raised of how is it that the pros are still able to find fish when I'm stating that they are in a state of decline.

To save me a bit of typing in answering, I'd like to refer you to my post at the bottom of pg 3 of this thread. This post touches on the increased efficiencies of the netters to counteract area abandonment and fish population declines of target species.

Not mentioned is the use of Markwells Fisheries trucks to cart the product away - to NSW. Or the payments made to sleeper licenses so as to maintain the size of the overall pool of fish and returns to each active license.

I also reiterate that I am of the belief that tailor stocks are rebounding due to netting alterations in NSW that allow for better recruitment and a lesser take of fish prior to their migrating into Qld waters.

On your point that should the netters arrive at a situation where they find that their take is insufficient for them to be viable and that they will stop netting and populations will rebound. I have major concerns with this assumption.

The lessons learned from around the world on fish population crashes, is that once a species arrives at a level of population that is so low that netting discontinues through lack of viability, then those populations rarely, if ever, do bounce back. Pelagic species are particularly vulnerable in this regard.

The levels spoken about are in the order of 20% of virgin stock levels.

Tailor were estimated to be at 30% in 2003 and researchers providing results to Qld Fisheries at the time, had real concerns whether the species could rebound back at all if recruitment levels didn't imminently improve. Fortunately, it appears they have for the above mentioned reason.

But tailor are a migratory species that cross over the borders of different Fishery legislation.

Bream are not, nor are tarwhine, whiting, dart, snub nosed dart or golden trevally.

There seems to be this great fear amongst the rec fishing community, that should we highlight the need for netting to be stopped on the basis of declining fish stocks, then we will be victims of the measures taken by government. This needn't be the case as all the available evidence supports our position of continuation, PROVIDING that commercial fishing practices are altered - ie the removal or scaling down of NETTING.

As demonstrated wherever netting has been removed from an area in Australian waters, fish stocks have bounced back.

So for us as rec fishers to prevent stock decline and our removal from areas, then it is imperative that we get in first and push for netting practices to be altered on environmental and social grounds. We must present viable options for government so that poor decision making processes don't occur and which nearly always remain permanent decisions. We do have science on our side in this regard and we should be utilising this aspect to our advantage.