I dont fish for snapper I fish for other things.Originally Posted by brisbane_boy
I'm interested to know about the education statement, mate? How do you know what education I have? And why is it relevant?
Wow, I thought I would cop a flogging here.
BTW, I disagree with the science, but I have seen it. How many here have?
Anyway, like I said, disprove it. The figures suggested here are worse than the science provided by Fisheries. Keep it coming. I want proof.
Most experienced snapper fishos doubt the total tonnage ESTIMATED by Fisheries researchers. The only way to get reasonable snapper figures is by implementing catch cards or logbooks (Options 1 or 2 in the RIS).
Options 1 and 2 have been doctored by Fisheries economists (by adding a hefty fee) so that most rec fishos will be forced to accept option 4 (four month closure) which was what Fisheries wanted two years ago.
The sad fact is that option 4 will not give Fisheries accurate catch data for recreational anglers and guestimates will continue to be made based on boat ramp surveys and telephone polls. If the four month closure is implemented most rec anglers will refuse to participate in these surveys (during the other 8 months)leaving Fisheries with a bigger guess as to the tonnage of snapper taken.
As long as my arse points to the ground you can bet that the 4 month closure when implemented will only apply to one sector, US. (See page 10 of the RIS which highlites this).
If most of you don't already know Fisheries propose (option 1 for Charter sector) to charge the Charter operator $4.28 for each kilo of snapper caught on a charter.
This additional cost will be passed on to the charter operator's clients US the recreational anglers.
Cheers
Barry
big deez, one only has to read the latest independent review of the snapper stock assessment to realise how much guesswork has gone into those figures.
in the real scientific world (i.e not the political one), an independent review like that one would have the authors scrambling back to the drawing board to re-do their assessment with better data.
Note this is the document fisheries QLD have used in support of their stock assessment, both by managing director jim groves on this forum as well as throughout the RIS. Instead of actually considering how unsupportive this document is, they have just written "the scienctific assessment is rigorous". i.e staring fact in the face and denying it...
this is one of the most blatant lies i've seen and it annoys me a great deal
here's how the report reads in summary form
uncertain, uncertain, substantially uncertain, non-trivial uncertainty, uncertain, uncertainty, uncertain, yet remains plausible!
no self respecting scientist should be happy to roll with that mate, and it's clear for all to see.
http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/documents/...-to-Client.pdf
Yeah mate, I've read the report. So what's the alternative in your opinion? Are snapper stocks ok? Or are they overfished? Have you read the reviews of every stock assessment? I doubt there'd be one that didn't have those words. As for self-respecting scientists, have you read any of their other work? Are you as equally annoyed about the other stock assessments that these authors have been involved in?
any other stock assessments i have or haven't read aren't relevant to the current discussion about snapper, so i'll just nip that one in the bud before continuing. if your mob suddenly tells me the mackerel are on the verge of extinction again and produce a similarly uncertain stock assessment then i'll take issue with it, sure
the alternative in my opinion is blindingly obvious, you guys should regain some credibility and actually attempt what that review says. get some real data to use
isn't that obvious to you? that a phone survey might not be strong enough data collection to produce a meaningful assessment?
I realise it's not directly in your power as a fisheries scientist to implement things like catch cards, but continuing to stand by clearly inept data isn't doing your credibility any good.
show me an assessment that can stand up to review with minimal uncertainty (i.e sound data collection) and i will be much happier with it
cheers
Dan
by the way mate, you failed to answer the question, are you happy to roll with such a scientifically un-sound assessment after reading that review?
if so, why? would you feel happy to roll with it in the private sector outside of the political field of fisheries science?
I'm sure the scientists that did the assessment stand by it or would not have put their name to it.
well i feel very sorry for you and your colleagues then, being professionally castrated to the point where you are happy to stand by a report which is independently reviewed 3 times and the best document you can provide in support of it is filled with uncertainty and comes to the convincing conclusion of "remains plausible"
in the real world if a scientific paper with that utter lack of strength was presented it would be thrown out the door quicker than you can blink
science + politics = pay per view 'science'
you're either naive or politically biased
Vegetarian - Ancient tribal slang for the village idiot that can't hunt, fish or ride.
it also could be 220 anglers bagging out with 1kg fish or 440 anglers only get half a bag of 1kg fish. there are how many boat ramps in Qld with access to snapper grounds ?? Seems a bit more realistic now
I am neither saying the figure is real or not but you are making assumtions on what people catch much the same way as fisheries are. either way no matter what figures are put up there will always be sceptics.
fair enough deepfried that we're guessing either way until real data is made available, but that's what people want, independently gathered data from a more meaningful source than a phone survey and i'm sure the vast majority of people arguing the fisho's case on here will be very reasonable when presented with these figures.
as it stands now, no argument can be scraped from the bottom of any barrel to save the obviously and blatantly inaccurate guesswork being passed off as a stock assessment, this point is supported by the independent review
it's kind of pointless trying to base arguments on numbers which are plucked out of the atmosphere, either way.
fisheries QLD can continue to present us with a spade and call it a bicycle, but anyone with the ability to read just has to click the link to that independent review and actually read it to see it for the spade it is so to speak
what is the input from pro fishermen as to the average size of their catch. they are the guys that pull fish nearly every day. i wonder if they have seen an decrease in either catch rates or average size.
Gday,
I have done 500+ hours in my Berty East of Cape Moreton in the last 2 years. Year round, day and night, and you know how many boats I see out there on a regular basis, 2 or 3. The normal regulars are there on the radio, and once in a while i will see someone with the naked eye.
On a 5 knot day on a weekend, sure it is a zoo at Hutchies and the like, but how many have been out in the last month? 2 months?
I seriously doubt that the rec fish take on snapper in S.E QLD is anything to worry about.
It is all another imbecilic, non science based, Green pandering Government joke!
My 2 cents
Good luck, and go out and catch the sh!t out of em while ya can
Cheers,
Myles
No offence, but once again your point of view is less scientific than Fisheries.Gday,
I have done 500+ hours in my Berty East of Cape Moreton in the last 2 years. Year round, day and night, and you know how many boats I see out there on a regular basis, 2 or 3. The normal regulars are there on the radio, and once in a while i will see someone with the naked eye.
On a 5 knot day on a weekend, sure it is a zoo at Hutchies and the like, but how many have been out in the last month? 2 months?
I seriously doubt that the rec fish take on snapper in S.E QLD is anything to worry about.
It is all another imbecilic, non science based, Green pandering Government joke!
My 2 cents
Good luck, and go out and catch the sh!t out of em while ya can
Cheers,
Myles
Come on people, you are all experts, I want real scientific data.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote