Classifieds

Page 1 of 13 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 189
  1. #1

    Snapper Stocks - Another View

    All this low snapper stock talk, being promoted by various groups, is rubbish!

    This is exactly the advice given to recreational fishermen about ten years ago, when bag limits were reduced from 30 to 5 fish and size was increased from 30 centimetres to 35 centimetres.

    All recreational anglers voted in favour of this because a bag limit of 30 was too many and a size increase would improve the numbers of breeding stock.

    In any fishery, the stock that needs to be left unfished is the juveniles. These fish obviously are the base of all your future stock.

    We were told that with these restrictions, and with by-catch reduction devices and turtle exclusion devices fitted to trawler nets, this would improve snapper stocks, and it has.

    Here we are ten years down the track, with snapper stocks in excellent condition; we are being told we have to face totally unnecessary, new restrictions.
    The reduction to 5 fish and 35 centimetre limit has vastly improved stocks and they will continue to improve.
    This fabrication that snapper stocks are down is a complete lie.

    We are told these new restrictions will fix the problem in ten years.
    What problem?? Who counted the snapper from Stanage Bay to Tweed Heads?
    Calculating snapper stock is not an exact science; it’s an estimate, best guess and assumption.

    For a start how do you factor in natural mortality, predator loss, stock movement and trawl loss.
    It’s “best guess”, and yet people continue to make exact statements about stocks. You can twist fish stock research to come out any way you want. A lot of statements about snapper imply they have an exact count, and this cannot be done.
    Even the time of year you do the research will make a massive difference.
    Suppose you research an area in January, February and March when snapper are heavily dispersed, you will get a bad opinion of stock.
    Research the same area in June, July and August and the stocks will be fantastic!
    Obviously you can use any blend of figures and circumstances you like.
    So which figures do you present? Depends on what statistical outcome you want.

    These bad stock claims are a very clever deception. In about five year’s time, these people will beat their chests and claim to have “fixed” a problem that we did not have in the first place, and claim credit for good fish management policies.

    The current claim started mostly on the Gold Coast, when local reefs silted up and catch rates were down from the reefs being covered over.
    As with all things in nature, this is improving, and currently the Gold Coast is experiencing a very good snapper season.

    However, various bodies seized on the original Gold Coast problem, to promote a problem right across snapper stocks, and to implement ridiculous restrictions to keep their departments in the spotlight and improve future government funding.

    How can they have the audacity to claim that snapper stocks are down, when snapper are being caught and released on a regular basis in some very unusual locations such as up rivers to brackish water, shallow systems in Bribie passage, estuary mouths, canals etc., as well as all the usual locations, bay situations, deep and shallow reefs offshore to 150 metres. North to as far as Mackay the stock spread is so vast that snapper can be caught in most locations.
    The snapper fishery is in good shape, and will continue to improve. Keep in mind we have just had ten years of serious drought, now the weather cycle has returned to a bit more normal for Queensland, snapper stocks will remain strong.

    Add all this to the fact there has been a massive change in angler behaviour to catch and release. Anglers are better educated through DVDs and fishing media. They now release all fish not required for food. In fact, a lot of anglers release ALL fish. As one angler remarked “the drug is in the tug”

    Note: 95% of fish released are in relatively shallow water, and being very hardy, swim off like a rocket. The survival rate of these fish is very high.
    Of the 5% released in deep water, not all of them suffer barotrauma, and by the way they swim off, their survival rate seems good.
    What about these wild statements that most fish released die? How do they get away with this rubbish??

    Note: Some of the permanent restrictions we already face are 5 snapper per person, 35 centimetre minimum size.

    There is also the cost of fuel, and travel to the fishery.

    Add to this very limited days per year to go fishing due to weather limitations i.e.: 10 -15 knots of ESE, south, SW wind that coincides with a Saturday or Sunday when you have no other family commitments. At best this is only 15 -25 days a year. Not a lot of fishing time! Add this to boat, car and trailer maintenance and registration, it is also very costly.

    Enquire of any outboard technician and you will find the average outboard does between 35 and 50 hours a year.

    Go to a boat ramp on a busy Sunday with 5 - 10 knots of wind, when most people go fishing, and have a look into every boat returning, they don’t have snapper hanging out the sides of boats!
    Anglers are far more conservative and better educated these days.

    The true code of all anglers is to conserve and look after the fishery.

    It seems the people compiling snapper stock statistics are implying that every boat in Queensland goes fishing seven days a week! They must think this is the case going by the figures I have seen bandied about re the recreational yearly snapper catch.

    Say “NO” to any further restrictions at all and “no” to any licence or fee.
    Monies paid into these schemes are wasted in other states, and cannot and will not be made accountable by the government here. It goes on cars, phones, offices and more bureaucrats.
    The snapper fishery is in good shape and will only get better.
    Anglers need to stand up and fight. Australian freedom is being removed a brick at a time.

    You cannot fight this problem on multiple fronts.
    Our best course of action is to vote in a government that will support our cause. Find those who support us and vote them in.
    This is the best and only course of action.
    Remember we fish and we vote!

    Anglers not affected by this should consider pitching in and helping, because when snapper and offshore bottom fishing is closed down, you will be next.

    John Pope

    30 years in the tackle trade
    30+ years a passionate angler
    And 30 years passionate snapper observations

  2. #2

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    I agree. The estimate of rec snapper catch at over 400 tonnes is just bollocks. Where they came up with that we will never know.

  3. #3

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    Agreed, I would hate to see the results for snapper caught in December. If the zealots extrapolated that they would be claiming that there are no snapper in the bay (or SE Qld for that matter).

    In any event the closure and proposed licencing is just another example of Bligh trying to look like she is doing something and divert focus away from the gross incompetance and rife corruption of her pathetic government.

  4. #4

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    All I can say is... Prove it. Prove that recs dont take 400t. Prove there is no problem.

    See recs have had the opportunity to provide input, but they continue to pull out the conspiricy lines about data being gathered purely to fuel the green grab. So be it, but now you are paying the price for your ignorance.

    In some ways, I support the licence scheme. I dont agree to having to pay for it, when I already pay twice from my PPV, but it needs to be done. Until such time as we have proof i dont think anyone here can comment.

    I dont neccessarily agree with the data presented, but there is nothing better to work with at this stage. I think the science, or lack of is flawed. I think that looking back in historical data on other species that weather patterns have been ignored during the 2 snapper studies. However at the end of the day, I cant prove anything, and neither can you. If you can, I challenge you to put foward here some real evidence to the contrary. When I say that, a few figures pulled out of ones head is not real evidence.


  5. #5

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    Quote Originally Posted by MisFish View Post
    All this low snapper stock talk, being promoted by various groups, is rubbish!

    This is exactly the advice given to recreational fishermen about ten years ago, when bag limits were reduced from 30 to 5 fish and size was increased from 30 centimetres to 35 centimetres.

    All recreational anglers voted in favour of this because a bag limit of 30 was too many and a size increase would improve the numbers of breeding stock.

    In any fishery, the stock that needs to be left unfished is the juveniles. These fish obviously are the base of all your future stock.

    We were told that with these restrictions, and with by-catch reduction devices and turtle exclusion devices fitted to trawler nets, this would improve snapper stocks, and it has.

    Here we are ten years down the track, with snapper stocks in excellent condition; we are being told we have to face totally unnecessary, new restrictions.
    The reduction to 5 fish and 35 centimetre limit has vastly improved stocks and they will continue to improve.
    This fabrication that snapper stocks are down is a complete lie.

    We are told these new restrictions will fix the problem in ten years.
    What problem?? Who counted the snapper from Stanage Bay to Tweed Heads?
    Calculating snapper stock is not an exact science; it’s an estimate, best guess and assumption.

    For a start how do you factor in natural mortality, predator loss, stock movement and trawl loss.
    It’s “best guess”, and yet people continue to make exact statements about stocks. You can twist fish stock research to come out any way you want. A lot of statements about snapper imply they have an exact count, and this cannot be done.
    Even the time of year you do the research will make a massive difference.
    Suppose you research an area in January, February and March when snapper are heavily dispersed, you will get a bad opinion of stock.
    Research the same area in June, July and August and the stocks will be fantastic!
    Obviously you can use any blend of figures and circumstances you like.
    So which figures do you present? Depends on what statistical outcome you want.

    These bad stock claims are a very clever deception. In about five year’s time, these people will beat their chests and claim to have “fixed” a problem that we did not have in the first place, and claim credit for good fish management policies.

    The current claim started mostly on the Gold Coast, when local reefs silted up and catch rates were down from the reefs being covered over.
    As with all things in nature, this is improving, and currently the Gold Coast is experiencing a very good snapper season.

    However, various bodies seized on the original Gold Coast problem, to promote a problem right across snapper stocks, and to implement ridiculous restrictions to keep their departments in the spotlight and improve future government funding.

    How can they have the audacity to claim that snapper stocks are down, when snapper are being caught and released on a regular basis in some very unusual locations such as up rivers to brackish water, shallow systems in Bribie passage, estuary mouths, canals etc., as well as all the usual locations, bay situations, deep and shallow reefs offshore to 150 metres. North to as far as Mackay the stock spread is so vast that snapper can be caught in most locations.
    The snapper fishery is in good shape, and will continue to improve. Keep in mind we have just had ten years of serious drought, now the weather cycle has returned to a bit more normal for Queensland, snapper stocks will remain strong.

    Add all this to the fact there has been a massive change in angler behaviour to catch and release. Anglers are better educated through DVDs and fishing media. They now release all fish not required for food. In fact, a lot of anglers release ALL fish. As one angler remarked “the drug is in the tug”

    Note: 95% of fish released are in relatively shallow water, and being very hardy, swim off like a rocket. The survival rate of these fish is very high.
    Of the 5% released in deep water, not all of them suffer barotrauma, and by the way they swim off, their survival rate seems good.
    What about these wild statements that most fish released die? How do they get away with this rubbish??

    Note: Some of the permanent restrictions we already face are 5 snapper per person, 35 centimetre minimum size.

    There is also the cost of fuel, and travel to the fishery.

    Add to this very limited days per year to go fishing due to weather limitations i.e.: 10 -15 knots of ESE, south, SW wind that coincides with a Saturday or Sunday when you have no other family commitments. At best this is only 15 -25 days a year. Not a lot of fishing time! Add this to boat, car and trailer maintenance and registration, it is also very costly.

    Enquire of any outboard technician and you will find the average outboard does between 35 and 50 hours a year.

    Go to a boat ramp on a busy Sunday with 5 - 10 knots of wind, when most people go fishing, and have a look into every boat returning, they don’t have snapper hanging out the sides of boats!
    Anglers are far more conservative and better educated these days.

    The true code of all anglers is to conserve and look after the fishery.

    It seems the people compiling snapper stock statistics are implying that every boat in Queensland goes fishing seven days a week! They must think this is the case going by the figures I have seen bandied about re the recreational yearly snapper catch.

    Say “NO” to any further restrictions at all and “no” to any licence or fee.
    Monies paid into these schemes are wasted in other states, and cannot and will not be made accountable by the government here. It goes on cars, phones, offices and more bureaucrats.
    The snapper fishery is in good shape and will only get better.
    Anglers need to stand up and fight. Australian freedom is being removed a brick at a time.

    You cannot fight this problem on multiple fronts.
    Our best course of action is to vote in a government that will support our cause. Find those who support us and vote them in.
    This is the best and only course of action.
    Remember we fish and we vote!

    Anglers not affected by this should consider pitching in and helping, because when snapper and offshore bottom fishing is closed down, you will be next.

    John Pope

    30 years in the tackle trade
    30+ years a passionate angler
    And 30 years passionate snapper observations

    Great read, thanks for spending the time for putting this up

  6. #6

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremy View Post
    I agree. The estimate of rec snapper catch at over 400 tonnes is just bollocks. Where they came up with that we will never know.

    The same place that is part of the three "S" routine I have every day, shower, shave and

    Scalem

  7. #7

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    I am going to throw a spanner in the works here.

    Most of the assessments made about good snapper stocks were done between 5 and two years ago at the peak of the drought. Drought periods raise salinity levels dramatically and more "offshore" fish venture right into the coastline and sometimes up rivers (two captures I know of of pearl perch caught will into the Tweed River). Since the drought the numbers of fish being caught have dropped dramatically back to "normal" pre-drought periods. I suspect and almost predict that the next drought we have of say three years with less than median rainfall will see good numbers re-appearing along the coastline.

    Along with the fresh water that comes with the breaking of the drought, comes huge amounts of less desirable pollutants which would have to sour the tastes of the fish we target and force them offshore further.

    Pollitically, this is a hot potato, but one that could well have millions of dollars attached to it in management. I think that not all of our media saturations we are exposed to are for the benefit primarily of the fish stocks.
    Jack.

  8. #8

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRealAndy View Post
    All I can say is... Prove it. Prove that recs dont take 400t. Prove there is no problem. How about Fisheries proves it conclusively..with accurate data. We are not the ones pushing for closures..they are..based on their rubbery assumptions.

    See recs have had the opportunity to provide input, but they continue to pull out the conspiricy lines about data being gathered purely to fuel the green grab. So be it, but now you are paying the price for your ignorance. what ignorance..some simple maths shows that the 400t is a myth.

    In some ways, I support the licence scheme. I dont agree to having to pay for it, when I already pay twice from my PPV, but it needs to be done. Until such time as we have proof i dont think anyone here can comment. I will comment all day long against this..I have a right, same as you, to voice my opinions.

    I dont neccessarily agree with the data presented, but there is nothing better to work with at this stage. I think the science, or lack of is flawed. I think that looking back in historical data on other species that weather patterns have been ignored during the 2 snapper studies. However at the end of the day, I cant prove anything, and neither can you. If you can, I challenge you to put foward here some real evidence to the contrary. When I say that, a few figures pulled out of ones head is not real evidence.
    Let's start with the 400t..that is 400,000 kg.

    Let's make some assumptions of our own..but on the larger side of the scale..let's use 10kg fish.

    So that equates to 40000 of these being caught per annum.

    Bag limit is 5 so that is 8000 anglers bagging out on 10kg fish.

    365 days in the year..and we all know that many of these are unfishable due to weather etc but let's use the entire year...that is almost 22 anglers bagging out on 10kg snapper every day of the year...yeah right.

    You still think they are correct ??? I sure as hell don;t.

  9. #9

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    Andy, do you really blame anglers for not giving up the info after the GBRMP debacle? Then on top of that DPI-F supported the EPA and the MBMP zonings. True right Anglers have a right to be suspicious of "research" data monitoring after they have been screwed in the past. To call people ignorant for not wanting to give these clowns the ammo to shoot at them again is not just ignorant it's arrogant.

    I too want the data to be correct and that is the first starting point. Just because fisheries don't have the data doesn't give them full slather just to make up the numbers and implement what ever they like. It's irresponsible and down right unprofessional of them to even suggest the measures on the table at present.

    I hate to do it but I have to admit Pinhead is right again!
    Democracy: Simply a system that allows the 51% to steal from the other 49%.

  10. #10

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    ..............

  11. #11

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    Quote Originally Posted by PinHead View Post
    Let's start with the 400t..that is 400,000 kg.

    Let's make some assumptions of our own..but on the larger side of the scale..let's use 10kg fish.

    So that equates to 40000 of these being caught per annum.

    Bag limit is 5 so that is 8000 anglers bagging out on 10kg fish.

    365 days in the year..and we all know that many of these are unfishable due to weather etc but let's use the entire year...that is almost 22 anglers bagging out on 10kg snapper every day of the year...yeah right.

    You still think they are correct ??? I sure as hell don;t.
    How about this?

    400,000 kgs - say a legal fish is about a kilogram, thats 400,000 individual snapper caught per year. Say that there are 100 days a year where conditions allow a reasonable number of people to get to snapper that means on average, 4000 snapper are caught per decent day of weather. And say the bag limit was reached that would mean that 800 people catch their bag limit. How many anglers fishing for snapper in south-east Qld on a good day? Check out the trailers at the ramps from Cooloongatta to Mackay. And say that there are 3 good fishermen fishing per boat that means that only 277 boats need to catch the available bag limit of 15. So if you divide this by the number of ramps including Scarborough, Spinnaker, Raby Bay, Mooloolaba, Vic Point, Manly, etc, etc, that would mean that 20 boats with 3 anglers leaving from each ramp in southeast Qld can catch 400t in a year.

    When you consider that of those average 4000 individuals caught, 6 or 7 are replaced by a single 6-7kg fish - of which there are heaps according to rec anglers - then the numbers don't seem so exaggerated.

  12. #12

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    I still don't believe those fugres but if you think that Fisheries RIS is fine then by all means write to your local member and to the Minister and tell them what a marvellous job they are doing. Better still..if you think the snapper stocks are in danger please don't go fishing for them...save the snapper.

  13. #13

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    Quote Originally Posted by PinHead View Post
    I still don't believe those fugres but if you think that Fisheries RIS is fine then by all means write to your local member and to the Minister and tell them what a marvellous job they are doing. Better still..if you think the snapper stocks are in danger please don't go fishing for them...save the snapper.
    I don't fish for snapper Pinhead.

  14. #14

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    .................

  15. #15

    Re: Snapper Stocks - Another View

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRealAndy View Post
    All I can say is... Prove it. Prove that recs dont take 400t. Prove there is no problem.

    See recs have had the opportunity to provide input, but they continue to pull out the conspiricy lines about data being gathered purely to fuel the green grab. So be it, but now you are paying the price for your ignorance.

    In some ways, I support the licence scheme. I dont agree to having to pay for it, when I already pay twice from my PPV, but it needs to be done. Until such time as we have proof i dont think anyone here can comment.

    I dont neccessarily agree with the data presented, but there is nothing better to work with at this stage. I think the science, or lack of is flawed. I think that looking back in historical data on other species that weather patterns have been ignored during the 2 snapper studies. However at the end of the day, I cant prove anything, and neither can you. If you can, I challenge you to put foward here some real evidence to the contrary. When I say that, a few figures pulled out of ones head is not real evidence.
    Andy,
    You are well aware that disproving the 400 tonne catch figure is impossible because all the raw data along with the methodology used is not going to be released by these lying scumbag politicians & their Departmental lackeys.
    Terms like "best estimates" are voodoo science. The George St wankers are the ones who need to prove their case.............we do not need to.
    ROLL TIDE, ROLL.................

    Regards,
    Peter


    http://www.superiorterminals.com.au

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Join us