PDA

View Full Version : hundreds of dead undersize whiting



ambo
08-03-2006, 10:07 PM
hi guys went to my local beach this arvo to throw the castnet for some bait to take out this fri nite


while i was throwing at the end of stumers ck coolum beach a guy comes up asking what im trying to catch

i told him i was after whiting or mullet

he points up the beach to hundreds of undersize dead whiting all along the beach for about a kilometre

i was gobsmacked picked some up for bait but was disturbed by the amount of waste of juvenile whiting


i think possibly nets but i really dont know but i hope they find out what or who caused this waste


concerned

ray

Archer
08-03-2006, 11:45 PM
You had some rain up that way recently? May have been a fish kill in the creek happens from time to time after abit of rain. :'(

Maria
09-03-2006, 12:33 AM
Marks on the body can sometimes identify if netting is to blame - particularly broken or torn gills, crushed body, large areas of scales missing etc.

Ben

beatle
09-03-2006, 05:55 AM
Lived at Lennox Head a few years ago and walked along seven mile beach often. Whenever the trawlers were working off the beach overnight there were thousands of dead fish of many species all up the beach.

waldo35
09-03-2006, 08:34 AM
thanx archer for offering a biological alternative to the usual 'blame the fisherman game'. as to 1000s of dead fish from trawling mmmmmmmm, when i trawl im followed by packs of dolphins /shark/tuna/gulls/gannets and what the fish dont eat the birds do so i find it hard to believe that these fish are the result of trawling.

waldo35
09-03-2006, 08:36 AM
oh and gill net mesh size is legislated to prevent the capture of immature fish.......ie they just swim thru.

Big_unit
09-03-2006, 08:41 AM
thanx archer for offering a biological alternative to the usual 'blame the fisherman game'. as to 1000s of dead fish from trawling mmmmmmmm, when i trawl im followed by packs of dolphins /shark/tuna/gulls/gannets and what the fish dont eat the birds do so i find it hard to believe that these fish are the result of trawling.


That sounds right to me, everything that a Trawler over kills gets eaten at the back of the boat. Its still waste & destruction, all the same.

Big_unit
09-03-2006, 08:44 AM
oh and gill net mesh size is legislated to prevent the capture of immature fish.......ie they just swim thru.

Yeah Ive seen just how many small / undersize fish get killed from these legislated nets, its still a lot. Not to mention that the predators following still have very easy pickings just hanging behind the nets where the smallest fish are concentrated.

Jeremy
09-03-2006, 10:58 AM
oh and gill net mesh size is legislated to prevent the capture of immature fish.......ie they just swim thru.

Many of us here, myself included, have witnessed first hand the thousands of small whiting (mainly) floating on the surface in the wake of the trawlers. Theory is one thing, practice is another.

Yes, fish kills do happen for other reasons, but don't deny that it COULD have been due to trawlers.

Jeremy

frankj
09-03-2006, 12:09 PM
On the ABC news this morning this event was reported to be commercial by-catch. A lady, not sure who she was, but she appeared to represent the commercial sector, commented that this kill was the fault of the government regulation, because they were not allowed to commercially utilise the by-catch.

What does that say, let us take and sell all the undersized fish we trawl and everything will be OK!!!

I don't know enough about commercial methods to really comment but I was under the impression that trawl nets were supposed to be designed to let underfsize fish escape. Obviously I'm wrong.

Frank

Just found the following

Quote ABC

Fish washed up on beaches is trawler bycatch

Queensland's Environmental Protection Agency says thousands of fish that have washed up on Sunshine Coast beaches today are trawler bycatch.

Coolum was most affected.

The Independent Trawlers Association says current laws are contributing to bycatch kills.

President Vicki Burnett says a 2001 trawl plan needs to be reviewed.

"If government was less restrictive in what ... could be retained you wouldn't be pushing so much bycatch over the side ... before the ... trawl plan came in a lot of this stuff we could retain and bring in [as] a marketable product, so it's not only the fishermen that have been restricted but the consumer that is missing out as well," she said.

Jeremy
09-03-2006, 12:17 PM
so i find it hard to believe that these fish are the result of trawling.

shows how much you know.

Jeremy

serene_lady
09-03-2006, 01:35 PM
If trawl nets are of a mesh size that catch prawns of 75mm in length I can not see how a fish of 100 to 200mm can escape. At beaver rock in the Mary river there is a flock of about 20 to 40 pelicans that wait for all the bycatch from the stripe rope nets. I realise that birds are still going to eat fish somewere, but this is a concentrated effort in a small areaof the river and a lot of the under size fish here are Threadhin, Grunter bream, Barra, Silver bream, and also the lesser varitys that other fish need for food. Is it any wonder that is getting harder to catchgood quality fishof a reasonable size when a lot of these fish are eaten before they even get to spawning size. These ropes are normaly tied to trees on either bank and anchored anything up to 200mt out into the river.When the bigger tides run, prawn bags are attatched to these ropes and the prawns and fish are washed in with the current, it is very effectiv as at times the prawn catches can be 100kg or better on a single tide on one rope. ,and in this strech of the river, about 2ks long there can be up to 10 ropes being set at one time, and there other ropes further upstream. Now I dont mind the fishermen catching the prawns, but the bycatch over a year must be enormous, and these ropes never leave the river unless they rot and are then replaced. Bob.

bo_sawyer
09-03-2006, 02:07 PM
Jeremy ;D ;)

Louis
09-03-2006, 02:50 PM
It's a dam shame to see that level of fish die such a wasteful and needless death.

Can anything be done by the big trawlers to make sure that this doesn't happen?






Louis

waldo35
09-03-2006, 03:24 PM
frank she didnt say anything about commercializing undersize product thats just ur spin on it . as to wether trawlers have mechanisms in place to deal with the by catch issue they do. enormous amouts of work have been put into by catch reducdtion include devices in nets, tutle excluders, the use of hopper systems to return unwanted bycatch to the water alive. this is a real issue for the industry and real work is being done constantly to adress this issue. unfortunately we only report our good work within industry circles.

waldo35
09-03-2006, 03:27 PM
oh and big unit that shovelly u holding in that foto mmmmmmmm arent they a threatened species........ i know the trawl industry stopped harvesting them yrs ago

choppa
09-03-2006, 03:30 PM
i didnt know this discussion was already happn,,,, i posted a thread in general chat re the paper report today,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,choppa

fish-n-dive
09-03-2006, 03:54 PM
In my younger years I worked on the prawn boats in the Gulf. I can state from that experience that the bycatch was probably 90-95% and 5-10% prawns.

And after being crushed by the pressure of the catch in the net along with the water pressure crushing them :P, the use of a hopper systems to return unwanted bycatch to the water alive is pretty much a waste of time (sorry Waldo35). :-/

I have seen different systems to selectively exclude sizes/unwanted species which at best are good publicity exercises.

Cheers 8-)

ambo
09-03-2006, 04:02 PM
thanks for your honesty fish and dive

i only mentioned this to create talk and maybe some answers

that sounds like the best explanation ive heard

cheers ray

seatime
09-03-2006, 05:51 PM
Not convinced by the undersize reports, on the telly they looked like Diver Whiting. Unless they now have a size limit that they didn't have before.
In the past Divers trawled up were sold as by catch but apparently they are no longer allowed to do this.

Back in about 2001 we found tens of thousands of mutton birds floating from Newcastle to Nthn NSW. We reported it but there was never anything on the news about it as they didn't come onto the beaches.
A lot of strange stuff happens at sea. For the fish kill to come onto the beaches they must have come from close by. Logic tells us trawlers are most likely to blame and if they worked in close the nights before the kill then they are probably to blame.

fish-n-dive is close to the percentages for by-catch, it's incredible what gets washed off the back deck.

waldo35
09-03-2006, 07:43 PM
yeah mate i saw the media beatup on profishers. where was the evidence mate that this fish came from trawlers. who were these trawler operators that said it was trawl bycatch i didnt see any of them intewrviewed or even quoted by name. fish kill happens naturally during times of heavy rain when the water becomes so silty from run of that the fish cant breathe in the water and they die. i noticed the news claim that this dead fish was noted along a 25 km strip does not this suggest a natural response to the amount of silt/poisons/runoff from developement rather than the bycatch from trawlers. did u notice that they were waiting on toxicology reports from the epa......mmmmmmmmmm gotta keep ur minds open folks .........one day they may turn on ur industry and ull have gotten rid of the only true allies u guys have got.
we are ,at the heart of the matter,all fishermen/women.

waldo35
09-03-2006, 07:44 PM
yeah mate i saw the media beatup on profishers. where was the evidence mate that this fish came from trawlers. who were these trawler operators that said it was trawl bycatch i didnt see any of them intewrviewed or even quoted by name. fish kill happens naturally during times of heavy rain when the water becomes so silty from run of that the fish cant breathe in the water and they die. i noticed the news claim that this dead fish was noted along a 25 km strip does not this suggest a natural response to the amount of silt/poisons/runoff from developement rather than the bycatch from trawlers. did u notice that they were waiting on toxicology reports from the epa......mmmmmmmmmm gotta keep ur minds open folks .........one day they may turn on ur industry and ull have gotten rid of the only true allies u guys have got.
we are ,at the heart of the matter,all fishermen/women.

waldo35
09-03-2006, 07:51 PM
and fishndive how long ago did u work on trawlers.......pre turtle excluder and by catch reduction device days id bet. this industry has worked very hard over hthe past 10 years with gear technologies,effort reduction net size reduction fleet reductions to adress the issue of by catch. the days that u talk of are long gone , im not saying that there is not still work to be done but fishermen have always worked proactively 2wards ensuring enviromentally sustainable harvest.
please dont taint an industry with ur personal experience that is no longer a valid representation of wot happens 2day.

Big_unit
09-03-2006, 09:10 PM
oh and big unit that shovelly u holding in that foto mmmmmmmm arent they a threatened species........ i know the trawl industry stopped harvesting them yrs ago

They are prolific in the Great Sandy Straits, perhaps you have just proven that if Trawlers stop harvesting particular species then that species has a chance at revival & survival. Its great that you have admitted that Trawlers do cause serious population decline in targeted fish species.

Fact is Trawlers are the rapists of the sea, they cause a massive amount of habitat destruction as well as endangering targeted & non targeted species.

Most primary producers today have strategic programs in place to minimise and correct enviromental damage. Does the Trawler industry have such programs in place ? If so then go ahead and tell us what they are.

James

seatime
09-03-2006, 09:14 PM
I blame aliens!

Dug
09-03-2006, 09:42 PM
On the local news tonight 5 trawlers spotted cleaning nets off the beach and the fish started washing up an hour later.

There were no other fish kills reported on any other beaches in-spite of heavy rain from Bundaberg to Coffs Harbour.

It would seem extremely strong circumstantial evidence against commercial trawlers. >:(


There must be a way to minimize the slaughter of juvenile fish, denying there is a problem is not an effective option.

coxy
09-03-2006, 10:23 PM
My last holidays over the new year saw me fishing at Nth straddie with a gutter full of dead juvenile whiting laying at my feet. They looked healthy & had no apparent marks. Very distressing but other species like bream & dart still prevalent. Couldn't figur it out as no storms or weed around.

Gorilla_in_Manila
09-03-2006, 11:01 PM
Don't know if there is any difference in the regulations for keeping bycatch in NSW, but I was back home at the end of last year and had a trip down to Iluka and was surprised to see "Local Trawl Whiting" fillets for sale in most shops. Fillets were only about 10-15cm long, so seemed to be much smaller fish than the 27cm minimum for rec fisho sand whiting.
If there is a difference between the regulations between QLD and NSW and the NSW trawlers are allowed to sell them as bycatch, that might explain why there weren't any washed up in northern NSW.
Maybe they will wash up in fish shop freezers covered in bread crumbs. :-/

On the other hand, there has been plenty of info about fish killed in the Richmond river lately due to the heavy rains.

Whatever the cause, it is always sad to see fish just washed up dead, benifiting no one except the ghost crabs (and the anti fishing groups).

Cheers
Jeff

rajawolf
09-03-2006, 11:41 PM
James,

I thought that was a blowup shovelly u had in a headlock... ;D ;D ;D

Cheers,

Tony :)

timbacutta
10-03-2006, 01:38 AM
Trawlers were banned or limited in keeping of by-catch due to targeting. Ie: winter whiting schools in Hervey Bay.

Jeff.

P.S. Same story of by-catch washing up on beach at bundy when trawlers working in close chasing prawns. Usually after heavy rain has washed them out of creek mouths.

DICER
10-03-2006, 08:52 AM
the fact of the matter is that once fish are caught in the net the size exclusion limit drops dramatically, ending up with a smaller mesh. I'm not surprised to see such a large undersized whiting kill.

I'm sure there is work being done and there is much research and development but it looks like more could be done, judging by the current outcome, hey? Do you have a scientist aboard your vessel Waldo?

waldo35
10-03-2006, 08:58 AM
james thanx 4 ur questions as to wether the fishing industry has controls in place toi deal with bycatch.
yes they do.
1 . turtle excluder devices; grids that have bars spaced 120 mm apart set in a 55 degree angle before the codend [ bag for hauling seafood on board] which allows turtles, marine life larger than the bar spacing, bycatch such as crab and bugs [ this is from dpi stuies] to escape the trawl thru a large opening in the net.
2.bycatch reduction devices. openings in the net that are specifically designed to allow fish to exit the trawl by swimming out of these opening. there are a myriad of these devices including the use of square mesh codends that facilitate the egress of small fish.
3 effort reduction. everytime a fishing boat is sold [qld east coast] with a license its allowable effort is reduced by 5%, if a license is sold thelicense loses 10 % of its allowable effort. there is a finite allowable effort so effort is continually being reduced.
4.effort reduction thru defined seasons. prawn fisheries are limited to seasonal effort. fishing is only allowed during a specified period which has been defined with import from all user groups. a vast majority of this work has come proactively from the fishing community.
thanx again james for ur open questions.
gorilla there is a diver whiting trawl industry licensed to work on the east coast. no not the prawn trawl industry but a specific legislated separate license. i would imagine this product comes from there.
dug. i saw diver whiting as the main component of the fish that was on the beach of which there is nosize restriction and mate they looked like adult fish to me. again wait for the epa toxicologist report b4 making ur mind up. as yet there is no empirical evidence that this fish came from trawlers and as many people seem to be pointing out there are many cases of 'fish kills' with no [not even circumstancial] evidence of trawler involvement

waldo35
10-03-2006, 09:05 AM
dicer do i have a scientst on board......yep me. my fishing rational is to use short shots to determine
1,where the largest prawn is
2where the cleanest [ least amount of bycatch is] largest prawn is
clean prawn allows me to do longer shots cutting back on wear and tear on me, my crew , and my gear.
doing short shots[ try shots ] allows me to identify areas i can work to provide maximum returns for yield.
3. i am trialing a new bycatch device at the moment, a process that includes a definition of wot my bycatch/harvest ratio is.
thanx again for ur openmindedness and willingness to ask questions .

DICER
10-03-2006, 09:17 AM
so tell me what is your trade off point?

seatime
10-03-2006, 09:38 AM
Education is the key to many of these marine life conundrums.

It doesn't help with the media spin, their motivation is sensationalism to sell advertising. Believe nothing the media says until all the facts are in front of you.
Just look at the image of fisherpeople in general perpetrated by the media. If you believed their green spin we are Neanderthals rampaging around the oceans destroying everything in our path.

The media publishes the green view because doomsaying sells more advertising than wholesome, family orientated activities.
A good weapon to use against the media is to find mistakes in their stories and point them out to their competitors. Turn it around and put the dirt back on them. They need educating as much as the public. Some journo's could be taken out for free fishing (catch & release) trips. maybe.

We go fishing for sport, leisure, entertainment and to earn a living because we are at the top of the food chain. Plankton sits and watches as the world goes by, re; green lobby. There are a lot more pressing issues confronting society today than what the conversationalists would have us believe. I feel a little better now, tks.

Gorilla_in_Manila
10-03-2006, 10:16 AM
gorilla there is a diver whiting trawl industry licensed to work on the east coast. no not the prawn trawl industry but a specific legislated separate license. i would imagine this product comes from there.


Hi Waldo,
Had a bit of a look at the NSW regs and it seems the school whiting are specifically targeted under the prawn trawl licences. No mention of whiting as a target species in the ocean trawl section, and ocean trawl is not allowed north of Smokey Cape. With the extensive list of species targetted under the ocean trawl, makes you wonder how they can still have a significant bycatch problem.

So guess the trawl whiting at Iluka I saw came from the local prawn trawlers there since they were labelled local. :'(

Link to prawn trawl info.
http://www.fisheries.nsw.gov.au/commercial/commercial2/ocean_prawn_trawl_fishery

Cheers
Jeff

Gorilla_in_Manila
10-03-2006, 10:29 AM
And for anyone interested, here's the link to the QLD trawl fishery info.
http://www2.dpi.qld.gov.au/fishweb/12545.html#10

Seems like the only licenced whiting trawl is 5 operators near fraser Island. Whiting not mentioned as allowable bycatch on the other trawl licences, so will be intereting to see what the toxicologist report says.

Cheers
Jeff

Benno75
10-03-2006, 10:44 AM
Waldo - I'm not unsympathetic to you or your industry. But you make the point that none of the trawler operators have been interview. Why not? They are receiving some pretty bad publicity over this. If they have a fair and reasonable argument it would be in their interest to balance the scales - wouldn't it?

Sustainability is is a complex issue. Its also a difficult one to quantify, but I guess at the heart of it thats what this discussion is really about. I tend to side with the rec fishers though(thats what I am) and also because there are fairly strict bag, posession and take home limits. It seems that there is a completely different set of rules with regards to the marine environment and sustainability when you apply them to the professionals.(Thats the rec fishers perspective)

I admit, as a kid I have been on trips(back in the day) where we caught and kept stupid amounts of fish - feed the whole street type stuff. I think that attitudes along these lines have changed considerably over the last 10 or more years. I think thats why rec fishers get so hot under the collar at the sight of such wasteful by-catches like we've seen off the sunny coast.

I don't think anyone wants to see you unemployed though Waldo - but I know personally that I'm struggling to fathom any kind of justification for the waste and destructoin thats been cause over the last couple of days. IJust imagine if this is indicative of 1 days work for a handfull of trawlers . . . Waldo, some of these professionals do need to tell their story. If it aint their fault, then who's is it cause the issue should be addressed.

I've got a 6mth old. I'd like to think he can teach his son to fish one day.

Jeremy
10-03-2006, 10:56 AM
I'm struggling to fathom any kind of justification for the waste and destructoin thats been cause over the last couple of days.

The waste and destruction isn't limited to the last couple of days. This is commonplace. It is just because the trawlers were working near the shore and cleaned their nets near the shore, that the dead, unwanted bycatch was washed back onto the beach.

Jeremy

Jeremy
10-03-2006, 11:09 AM
Waldo, the Queensland Seafood Industry Association has accepted responsibility for the fish kill. Here is the full stroy as reported by the Sunshine Coast Daily.

Fish kill fury

10.03.2006
By PETER GARDINER
A 16km stretch of Sunshine Coast beaches was turned into a graveyard of rotting fish carcasses yesterday after one of the worst- ever cases of local by-catch wash-up from trawlers operating close to shore.

Countless tonnes of dead whiting, trevally and other unwanted fish littered the shore from Buddina to Peregian after up to 12 prawning boats operated as close as one kilometre offshore.

Local beachgoers summed up the senseless slaughter yesterday in one word – disgusting.

Anger and disgust grew among residents from Marcoola through to Peregian as whole schools of prized whiting, which retails in local fish shops for $25. 95/kg, had their eyes picked out by seagulls. The trawlers were responsible for the foulest waste of fish stocks seen in local waters and The trawlers were chasing tiger prawns washed out to sea from local rivers in the big fresh and despite assurances by a trawler spokesman that fishing had stopped yesterday, three were visible close into shore off Marcoola.

The grotesque kills – much more extensive than significant fish wash-ups in late January along a similar stretch of beach – have sparked a call from recreational fishing lobby group Sunfish for three nautical mile exclusion zones.

“I believe that the commercial fishing industry has to take responsibility for their practices to ensure that this sort of thing does not happen again,” Mr Mulherin said.

“I have spoken to Mr Neil Green, the President of the industry association and am assured that the QSIA accepts that responsibility.

“If the industry is unable to prevent this type of occurrence I will need to review the fishing practices and make the necessary changes.” The Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries said the boats had been operating legally but east coast trawl manager Mark Lightowler said the public would not put up with a repeat occurrence.

“If the conditions are likely to lead to fish washing up then don’t trawl — or keep the by-catch on board and then dump it further out to sea,” he said.

He said a trawl management review may look at letting these trawlers keep some of the whiting take that is now reserved for commercial whiting boats.

The thickest of the fish carcass clusters were along a kilometre stretch of beach between Coolum’s north flagged area and Stumers Creek.

Here the practise of trawlers throwing unwanted fish overboard was revealed in all its ugliness.

“I didn’t know they were allowed in that close,” Yaroomba residents Des Arthurs said as his two children played metres away from the rotting fish.

“To me it’s wrong – I thought there was some sort of exclusion zone out into the ocean.

“Can you imagine what all the tourists up here at the moment think about this – I’m sure the council and the tourism people will be up in arms.”

“Everyone has to make a living but they have to look after the environment.”

Marcoola resident Rick Forbes added: “It’s a tourist turn-off and a disgrace – this is not the first time.

“When is someone in authority going to do something about this?”

Coolum resident George Hamilton who walks the beach daily said he was stunned by the waste.

“I’m surprised they are allowed to dump bycatch overboard and have it float to shore like this,” Mr Hamilton said.

“I’ve been coming here since 1962 and lived here for seven years and have never seen anything like this.”

“If they (the trawlers) aren’t allowed to keep these fish then why don’t they have to bring them to shore for sale or at least made into fertiliser or pet food?”

Trawler and seafood group representatives claimed the cost of seafood could soar if the boats were pushed offshore.

Independent Trawlers Association president Vicki Burnett said since 2001 the trawlers, by law, had to return any by-catch other than the prawns, crabs and bugs.

“The whiting killed are trawl whiting – they are not the same whiting people catch from the beach,” she said.

Ms Burnett said a campaign to stop trawlers coming in close to shore would decimate the smaller operators and the laws might have to change to ensure the by-catch did not have to be sacrificed.

QSIA chief executive officer Geoff Tilton admitted it was a large bycatch wash-up and one that was hard to explain given the devices fitted to nets to exclude most of these fish before the prawns were snared.

serene_lady
10-03-2006, 11:54 AM
Are these trawler operators trying to make a point and saying that you may as well let us sell our by catch because were going to kill everything on the ocean floor anyway. It wont be long before our inshore areas have as much fish life left in them as the sahara desert, only difference is it will have water over it. Bob.

Big_unit
10-03-2006, 12:00 PM
James,

I #thought that was a blowup shovelly u had in a headlock... # ;D ;D ;D

Cheers,

Tony #:)

;D ;D

So it was you peering through the window...

;D ;D

James

Big_unit
10-03-2006, 12:10 PM
At the end of the day I dont agree with Trawling. I would prefer to see it stopped or severely restricted, I realise this is both impractical and unethical. I would support any group except the Greens in a proper & ethical way to see Trawling minimised with a view to ensuring that fish stocks / habitats are conserved. My main objective is to see recreational fishing is sustainable and enjoyable for future generations. After all fishing is an Australian way of life and green zones are no way to ensure that we can maintain our way of life.

Cheers
James

Benno75
10-03-2006, 12:32 PM
[quote author=serene_lady link=1141819676/30#40 date=1141955649]Are these trawler operators trying to make a point and saying that you may as well let us sell our by catch because were going to kill everything on the ocean floor anyway. #


I agree that the issue is not what happens to the by catch, the issue is that the by catch is caught in the first place.

So how do you address that?

Forcing trawl operators to dump their catch out to sea just sweeps the issue under the carpet. If you can't see it washed up on a beach, then you don't notice it happens.

Restricting their ability to sell it gives the trawl operators no option but to dump their by catch.

Allowing to sell it allows trawlers to target species which are curtrently classified as by catch(eg whiting) and it takes emphasis away from the industry investing in R&D into methods and equiment which reduces by catch.

Forcing trawlers further off shore does land the responsibility of the issue smack bang on the shoulders of the trawler bloke trying to make a living making his profession logistically more difficult and more costly.

So who's responsible - the industry, the government, the trawler operators.

If fish kills like we've just seen are unavoidable and standard operating procedure within the industry then reckon it dispicable, but how do you address it.

jim_farrell
10-03-2006, 01:31 PM
Government/we gradually buy out licences. The common argument from pro's is that they struggle to make a living anyway. I don't care what the cost is. Fair compensation should be paid. Waldo, what is your licence worth, name a price. I'm not saying you guys are bad, just doing a job.
Someone needs to convince me that this is one or two bad eggs. Otherwise, it is obviously standard practise.If it is standard, it is a disgrace.

This argument can't be resoved. As with river trawling thread, pro's will be accused of changing their practise whenever a third party is on board.

Halve the amount of trawler licences.
This will halve by-catch.
This will increase marine populations.
Therefore increase $ per trip for pro's.
Less boats, easier to regulate. :)

seatime
10-03-2006, 01:42 PM
If anyone is to blame it's DPI&F, they regulate the industry. I'm not a pro but I have done a little prawn trawling, tunnel netting, crabbing and mashing, way back in the past. Someone has to supply the demand.
The current trawling practises are a couple of generations old. You can't expect businesses to pack up their way of life because it doesn't agree with yours, look at the timber workers in Tassie and Vic. It would also be political suicide, and that's probably the crux of it.
To balance the debate, can you imagine the numbers of undersize and unwanted by-catch returned by amateurs over a typical weekend in SEQ.
Most undersize fish caught and returned to the water dies or gets nailed by larger fish. Not that I return much, if you can't catch it.
There is no good excuse for the fish kill but no need to attack people going about their business either.

Jeremy
10-03-2006, 02:01 PM
#Most undersize fish caught and returned to the water dies or gets nailed by larger fish.

Do you have any evidence to support this? I participated in a flathead survival study last year at Jumpinpin. 170 or so flathead were tagged and kept in holding tanks at seaworld for 5 days and then released back into the estuary. Only 5 flathead died within the 5 days they were held. About 3%.

Given that evidence, I reckon fish released by recreational anglers have a pretty high survival rate. Fish taken from deep water might be a different issue and I believe a study is planned to look at this in the near future also.

So no, that does not balance the debate.

Jeremy

seatime
10-03-2006, 02:18 PM
Jeremy, just remember the marine park closures, protected grey nurse area etc were based on similar scant evidence as your flathead survey.

When those scientists used their pissweak studies to validate the closures, rec fishos, me included, were up in arms. How could they do this with so little evidence. But a one off survey conducted under controlled conditions if enough for you to use as amunition in a debate.

Ok, I'll retract the "most" statement and wait for the results of more studies. :)

Jeremy
10-03-2006, 02:23 PM
OK, yes it was a single study.

So can you repeat again the evidence on which you based your claim that "Most undersize fish caught and returned to the water dies or gets nailed by larger fish"?

I guess a single study is better than none.

Jeremy

BTW, the was NO scientific evidence I am aware of upon which the GNS closures were based. All anecdotal evidence from divers who claimed to see GNS with rec hooks in their gobs.

Matthias
10-03-2006, 04:11 PM
gelsec you have no idea about the scientific studies undertaken with regards to closures of marine habitat. Most of the inshore reefs on the east coat of Queensland have been decimated by all manners of human activity. Many of the fisheries were about to completley colapse or had already. Do you have another management strategy that would work to bring back our fisheries from the brink???

Maybe if the pro's were a little more helpfull in supplying the DPI&F with information about catch rates etc, there could have earlier steps taken to ensure sustainability.

Big_unit
10-03-2006, 04:47 PM
Do you have another management strategy that would work to bring back our fisheries from the brink???

STOP NETTING.

seatime
10-03-2006, 05:37 PM
Matthias, no I don't have any idea about the scientific studies, and I'd hazard a guess, not a lot of people do have all the scientific data at hand. I wouldn't know where to look or what to look for. So please enlighten me and others who will read this. ::)

I never supported trawling, I only wanted to see some objectivity. It's a passionate subject with no easy solution, but lets remain civil about it. :)

Jeremy, I retracted that statement, it was a generalisation and I shouldn't have said it. :) Apparently there is scientific evidence about habitat closures, but I can't help as I have no idea, ask Matthais.

As I said guys I'm not a pro but I've seen the other side. and there is always another side. Lobby the politicians. One sided debates aren't much fun. This is one of those touchy subjects like buying online and in retrospect I should have stayed out of it. have a good one, go hard and stay moist, Steve. :) :)

fish-n-dive
10-03-2006, 05:57 PM
It's true that it was years ago that I worked on the prawn boats in the Gulf.................but all in all not much has changed................how does a shark or any other larger fish escape...................they don't, ......................they get crushed along with everything else in the net.

I still don't see how a net full of prawns (small net size) can allow anything except krill out through the net holes, especiall if the net is filling up with everything it passes over.

As an aside, i'ts interesting that in Europe they are now selling line (not longline) caught fish at a premium price as a direct action against netting.

fish-n-dive
10-03-2006, 06:28 PM
By the way...............I'm not a greenie in the pure sense, but if you want your eyes opened, read the book or watch the video 'Cod Wars'.

Cheers 8-)

jstock
10-03-2006, 08:50 PM
[smiley=angry.gif]isnt it funny how in october 2005 Noosa had 6 inches of rainfall in two hours but no dead fish were found washed up.Even the Government have addimited its handed out two many comerical licences and plains to buy back half.Of course the trawllers are responsible who else could kill so many fish.What gets me is how, if a recreation fishermen is caught with an under size whiting the DPI will fine u a $150 per fish,yet the commercial fishing industry kills tonns of fish every day.Wake up Australia.At least farmers put something back into the soil, were as commerical fishing just takes and takes and takes. What do u think happened in Canadian waters?I guess some people just want to live in denial.

Big_unit
10-03-2006, 09:15 PM
[smiley=angry.gif] Wake up Australia. At least farmers put something back into the soil, were as commerical fishing just takes and takes and takes.

That is so true, hence my comment earlier about most primary producers having programs in place to help replace and reconstruct the environment that has been damaged and even more so I know we (Farmers) have had to put in place programs which we have had to fence of waterways, remnant vegetation & any area of land which is prone to erosion which is generally at our own expense. A lucky few received grants for environmental works. The fishing industry appears to have no such programs in place, Turtle excluding devices just dont cut it.

James

DICER
10-03-2006, 09:36 PM
I hate to see waste!!!!

choppa
10-03-2006, 09:53 PM
to throw in another 20 cents worth,,, i read about this in the local daily and placed my thoughts in a thread in general chat yesterday,,, and its GREAT to see the amount of response from both here,, and on my comments,,, the same daily local had another page 1 story again today,, so when i got a phone call to meet a group of ""CONCERNED"" pollies on the beach, i placed everything on hold and made trax fast,,, (after 2 days there was still fish everywhere,, to much for the local wildlife to handle)

pollies concern

no 1 on the agenda was the cost in clean up,,,,,,,,

45 minutes later, i had to leave to return back to office,,,, and yep,,, they were still discussing no 1 on the agenda

?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????

jstock
10-03-2006, 10:23 PM
:'(Mad cow disease killed the meat industry, the bird flu, will kill the poultry industry,so is it any suprise that the commercial fishermen are killing the fishing industry?Do the DPI care! of course not ,not when moneys involved.And whats behind it all?--------------------------GREED.

essky
10-03-2006, 10:25 PM
choppa, great you got to meet with these 'concerned' pollies, but I bet it was dissapointing to leave with them still thinking about how to clean up the mess.

Seems to me that they are only concerned with sweeping the issue under the carpet, so thier electorate looks good, and no difficult questions regarding fishing, both rec and commercial, as well any issues dealing with the mass killing of wildlife, are asked.

disclaimer: , I am only going on what choppa has said. Hopefully, they started to touch on the more important issues when they worked out how to clean it up..

troy

jstock
10-03-2006, 10:43 PM
Why is it that the Government is spending millions of tax payers dollars trying to protect Australian waters from international fishermen like the Indonesions when they cant even regulate our own fishing industry. too little too late.you can bet the clean up wont be funded by the fishing industry.

choppa
10-03-2006, 10:47 PM
hey no need for the disclaimer troy,,,,,,last week they had their heads in a bucket over the storm damage to the beach fronts and what $ would be lost to the tourism traffic,,,,,, the week before it was some c**p about talcum powder turning up in their mail boxes,,,whats the bet that the 20 cents worth of my opinion i gave to sandy ( hi darl) from the local rag wont even get published tomorrow,,,,,

a fellow colleague gave a bit of insight,,,, we blame everything and everyone for this carnage,,,except for the fish,,,,if only they knew better

waldo35
11-03-2006, 06:42 PM
do a search in dpi guys and see wot work has been done by fisheries to adress bycatch reduction. and james if u worked on trawlers yrs ago it would have been pre tutle excluders bycatch reduction devices net size reductions seasonal closures and nursery/sensitive area closures. please dont try to comment on a fishing fleet u no longer have any idea of what it really is. i fished the gulf 4 20 years and watched all of these things come in and be worked on by fishermen long b4 they were a legislated requiremnt. we have been working on sustainability issues for well over 10 yrs. im not saying that the work is done it is a constant dialouge with the environment. i am myself trialling a new bycatch device this week and i hope i can show sum real further gains in bycatch reduction. to paint us all as uncaring greedy 'ocean rapist' is a real slap in the face to all of the many people who have worked and are working very hard to address our sustainability issues.
try and find the fisheries assesment of 2004 and i quote it again' aside from such abiotic factors such as rainfall moreton bay is primarily a sustainable fishery' [ talkin otter trawl].

lee8sec
12-03-2006, 09:06 AM
If this carnage happens NOW with by-catch measures in place just imagine what the damage has been for the last 30 plus years? :'( This isn't just Qld either, its all the river systems & coastal/beach areas where this type of pro fishing is done. Time has come for ALL the state fisheries bodies to act & stop pretending all is ok, obviously it isn't. The pros have a case to be allowed to make a living out of fishing but the total cost of damage needs to be taken into consideration on HOW, WHERE & WHEN they are allowed to fish. Leigh

Derek_Bullock
12-03-2006, 09:50 AM
I flew into Brisbane for a few days last week and one thing I had to do was have a feed of good Queensland prawns so headed down to Sammies Girl (what used to be Sams Seafoods) and bought three kilos of the best they had.

In that I guess I am no different to many of you reading this and posting to it, whether it be Sammies Girl or any other seafood outlet.

If we do what many are recommending and stop prawn trawling altogether then where are we going to get our prawns from ...... some highly polluted rice paddie in Vietnam where they are fed on human excreta ? ? ?

I am with Waldo on this one. #The DPI is and has been working with pro fishers for many years in reducing by-catch.

As for me, I'll still head down to Sammies Girl to get me a feed of good Queensland prawns when ever I can.

It's when I can't that I will be screaming blue murder.


Derek

timbacutta
12-03-2006, 02:13 PM
Independent Trawlers Association president Vicki Burnett said since 2001 the trawlers, by law, had to return any by-catch other than the prawns, crabs and bugs.

“The whiting killed are trawl whiting – they are not the same whiting people catch from the beach,” she said.

Trawl whiting, must be the new Trawl Industry name for winter whiting. Just because they are not caught off the beach where they washed up, they are more more than likely going to end up in Mortean Bay where the average fisho justs wants to catch a feed.

For this industry representative to dismiss them as just trawl whiting, not as a vaulable part of the recreational fishing catch just goes to show why many amateur fishos had such a low regard towards Commerical Fishermen.

Jono_SS
12-03-2006, 02:36 PM
Bundylundy

I think the majority of dead whiting were "Sillago robusta", which are called trawl whiting or stout whiting.
Winter whiting are "Sillago maculata".

therefore, they are 2 different species and no matter how long they were allowed to live, they would not have grown into the whiting we catch in Moreton Bay, Pumicestone Passage or any other estuary.

Jono_SS
12-03-2006, 02:42 PM
....so I gues that means the title of the article is wrong...if they were Sillago robusta or Sillago maculata, they were "undersized" - they were just "small".

the phrase "never let the facts get in the way of a good story" springs to mind.

Big_unit
12-03-2006, 03:23 PM
I flew into Brisbane for a few days last week and one thing I had to do was have a feed of good Queensland prawns so headed down to Sammies Girl (what used to be Sams Seafoods) and bought three kilos of the best they had.

In that I guess I am no different to many of you reading this and posting to it, whether it be Sammies Girl or any other seafood outlet.

If we do what many are recommending and stop prawn trawling altogether then where are we going to get our prawns from ...... some highly polluted rice paddie in Vietnam where they are fed on human excreta ? ? ?

I am with Waldo on this one. #The DPI is and has been working with pro fishers for many years in reducing by-catch.

As for me, I'll still head down to Sammies Girl to get me a feed of good Queensland prawns when ever I can.

It's when I can't that I will be screaming blue murder.


Derek

Derek,
# # You seem to be actively making certain that all and sundry are aware of the latest news and you seem to campaign for rec fishing to be saved. Why have you done a huge backflip with the above post ? It appears that as long as you can buy local seafood then there isnt a problem. The DPI&F are a bunch of text book reading fools that believe who ever they want too if it suits their purpose. Trawler operators just rape the waterways, but hey who cares as long as you can buy prawns whenever you want. Its that same greedy pathetic attitude that will cost us one of Australias best loved sports.

>:( >:(

James

Derek_Bullock
12-03-2006, 03:39 PM
James

It is all about sustainable fisheries for both professional and recreational fishers based on sound scientific evidence, not the garbage and unscientific rhetoric spouted by politicians and greens/conservationists.

Have you said the same about the Chair of the Fishing Party Qld who owns a seafood business in the Whitsundays and only deals in Australian seafood. (His words on here)

Like I said - sustainable fisheries for all.

So no I havent done a backflip as you suggest.

Cheers.


Derek

Big_unit
12-03-2006, 05:19 PM
This is officially a waste of time now.

Cheers
James

Derek_Bullock
12-03-2006, 05:26 PM
What do you mean by that James ? ? ?


Derek

jstock
12-03-2006, 09:34 PM
derek the definition of sustainable is Capable of being sustained it dosnt take much insight to realize that far from being sustained numbers being caught have significantly reduced over the last decade. why do u think we are now importing more and more fish every year.



University of Canberra Professor Bob Kearney is a world expert on fisheries, advising the federal government on threatened species.

"Around the world, the world is running out of fish. Australia is not the only one whose catches have levelled off, it's levelled off worldwide since about 1988, so the whole world is now looking for…the whole developed world is looking for imports and the developing world is looking for exports and a way to feed their people so it is a real dilemma," he said.

Professor Kearney has just co-authored a pulling net in report with the CSIRO, which predicts Australia will have a million tonne shortfall of seafood by the year 2020.

Derek_Bullock
12-03-2006, 09:54 PM
Hi Jstock, thats a very apt part quote from a very good report on the Landline Program.

Oh yes, Professor Kearney the advisor to Government. One of the advisors no doubt who are advocating up to 33% closures of your and my good fishing spots. Based on very unsound scientific information.

I suggest you read the rest of that report that you started to quote. It will tell you about sustainable fisheries from the professional fishers prospective. That's something the good Professor doesnt want.


Derek

Derek_Bullock
12-03-2006, 10:20 PM
derek the definition of sustainable is Capable of being sustained it dosnt take much insight to realize that far from being sustained numbers being caught have significantly reduced over the last decade. why do u think we are now importing more and more fish every year.
Jstock

Simple but true answer to that. Because it's cheaper.

Are you aware that whole fish caught in Queensland is being sent to the Asian Markets, processed and then sent back to Queensland as fillets. #Want to know why? #Because once again it is cheaper than getting it done in Queensland. Imagine that, the costs of freight to and from Asia is cheaper that Aussies filleting the stuff here.

Want to know how much Basa (freshwater mekong catfish) fillets we import into Australia from Vietnam a year? #Around 7000 tonnes last year. #Want to know why? Because once again it is cheaper than local, in some cases up to a quarter of the price, fish. #Basa is currently the biggest selling fish on the Australian market. #Do you know that around 400,000 Vietnamese are involved in the Basa fishery. They produces more fillets than Australia’s total seafood production of around 550,000 tonnes a year.

I could give you heaps more examples why we are importing fish BUT LET ME TELL YOU, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES, it's all about greedy people making more money.


Derek

Jeremy
13-03-2006, 06:43 AM
to paint us all as uncaring greedy 'ocean rapist' is a real slap in the face to all of the many people who have worked and are working very hard to address our sustainability issues.


Well said Waldo. For once I agree with you. At least you also see the bycatch as a problem and are trying to do something about it.

As someone else pointed out though, it is difficult for recreational fishers to see the justice in tight bag limits and size limits, when prawn trawlers kill the same juvenile fish and face no repercussions for it.

Jeremy

Gazza
13-03-2006, 10:00 AM
Waldo, to continue "prawning" when there seems to be large schools of whiting in the same area.....NEEDS to be looked at.

Bugman put up photos a while back after the Brisbane was sunk.....

Mate ,IF the whiting has a TAC ,and you were allowed to keep them, as long as you guys abide by that same TAC, that would be something you trawlers & the Frazer Is. guys "need" to sort out.

JMO....digging for a solution , not a "rapist" dig ;)

timbacutta
13-03-2006, 06:44 PM
Jono-SS,

Thankyou for pointing out my mistake regarding the stout(trawl) whiting. I never knew that they existed and apologise for my ignorance. In the photos on the news reports, they looked like winter whiting.

Following your post, I did some research and am now better informed. The old saying, that you learn something new everday never rang truer.

With regard to trawler by-catch, I still reseve my own opinion.

Jeff.

lee8sec
14-03-2006, 10:39 AM
In regard to the often quoted "sustainable fisheries" line, doesnt the sustainability relate to the "target" speicies not the "by-catch"? #An extream example would be if "A" fish is the target and has a high replentishment rate, fish "B" & "C" are by-catch and have low reproduction/repletishment rate that "B" & "C" could be wiped out yet the fisheries would still be regarded as "sustainable" as fish "A" is still available in high quantities. Leigh

Louis
14-03-2006, 02:34 PM
I put this on the other thread originally. So my appologies for those who read it twice.







Much of the coastline of Australia is scanterley inhabited and has quite reasonable levels of fish stocks, certainly more than places such as Moreton Bay.

Recreational anglers pay huge sums of money through taxes etc into the economy.

I’m not sure of the exact price but I believe that it costs the average angler when everything is done and said about $65 per kilo of fish they catch.

When I look at the money I have tied up in boats and repairs and fuel etc I can say that this certainly would apply to me.

Subsequently I don’t know why the Government doesn’t buy back as many of the Commercial Fisherman’s businesses as they wish to sell.

I’m not advocating forced buy backs as this is in my opinion would be wrong. But instead offer them decent prices and perhaps new licence deals for less populated areas where their catch rates would be higher anyway.

Those Commercial Fishermen who wish to take up the offer would then place less pressure on already stressed areas and those Commercial Fisherman that wish to stay, well that is their right and we should respect their decision.

It appears to me to be a win/win situation for everyone involved.





Louis

kc
14-03-2006, 03:40 PM
This is a debate which will never go away. As Derek points out, Australias non fishing public deserves access to Australias seafood. On the other hand seabed trawling is described by the likes of the highly excalimed "Blue Planet" series as "the most destructive method of fishing ever devised by man"

TFPQ has adopted a policy against inshore beam and otter trawling. Regardless of the current efforts in bycatch reduction it is still just too destructive. Both to fish stocks and seabed communities. The marine equivalent of clear felling. That and the commercial exploitation of billfish species are 2 sticking points we have with commercial fishers. On most other things we agree or can compromise on.

Every time I buy wild prawn, and that's a lot, it is with mixed emotions. These are amongst our best seafood, but at what cost.

In short guys like Waldo are not the problem. They are usually hard working blokes working legally to earn a living....in some cases a very good living. If society deems the environmental price we pay for prawns is too great, then buy out the trawl licenses and get used to farmed prawns.

If that happened, then personally, I would appaud it . I don't believe inshore beam and otter trawl can justfy the public service they provide when compared to the damage they cause.

KC

dinga1
15-03-2006, 11:37 AM
whilst the bycatch from prawn trawls can be quite high there is also a need to consider the scale of the fishing area that is utilised. prawn trawling can not and does not happen just anywhere. bottom habitat restricts the potential trawl area to a small overall percentage of the fishery area. a lot of the effort would be concentrated in a few areas and potentially doesnt affect the ecosystems evenly across the board. monitoring species and catch rates of bycatch species only demonstartes changes in the populations of species in the area the trawl are undertaken. why isnt it conceivable that populations of bycatch species are sustaining themselves in areas that dont receive trawl effort eg reefy,rocky areas and these stocks can more than handle the biomass removed from prawl trawling??? just something to consider.......this small "take area" in comparison to the entire coastline combined with advances in gear technology means that the potential for bycatch reduction is real. DPI research has shown this to be possible (see Matt Campbell post a refernece in the other bycatch thread). Environment Australia has also enforced legislation that bycatch reductions of 40% are the target for the East Coast otter trawl fishery. peoplke are aware of the situation and ar adressing it as best they can at present. Fishermen are involved in this process as well.

Matt_Campbell
15-03-2006, 12:48 PM
Its interesting to read that there are folks that are so passionate about removing prawn trawlers (beamies and inshore) from Qld but still purchase the end product from those industries.

nulla
15-03-2006, 12:59 PM
Hi dinga1

I assume you are involved in the trawl industry and it is good to hear your point of view.

Word of improvement with BRDs etc needs to get out. The 78% reduction in bycatch for the scallop fishery (in your post on the other thread) is indeed very good news. I hope the "If all of the scallop fishers were to use the devices" means that these measures will quickly become mandatory. In my view this goes a long way towards acceptance of that section of the industry, but there may still be other issues.

I can't agree with the argument you seem to put that while bycatch with prawn trawl may be quite high, this is acceptable if it is sustainable. What is literally the destruction and waste of 10s of 1000s of tonnes of fish etc may or may not be sustainable but I doubt that it is an acceptable use of a limited resource. Reducing the amount of by-catch by the elimination of non-target species from the trawl area would hardly be considered acceptable.

Having a 40% bycatch reduction target is still only a target. If it is achieved that will be a great step in the right direction. What if that is the best we can do. Bycatch levels will still be very high. Do we just say OK, thats the best we can do so we accept that we still waste 10s of 1000s of tonnes?

Its good that the industry accepts there is a problem and they are doing the best they can. Let's hope a solution is found quickly.

waldo35
17-03-2006, 01:57 PM
dinga nice work my brother keep it up.
nulla still tryna work out how post fotos here [ any tips] but i trialled a new/modified brd last week with initial trials very encouraging........ showed a 60 % reduction in bycatch......seemed to work particularily well 4 whiting.
kc i dont know bout a very good living if i could do the hours i do on wages comensurate to my talents [ master class 4 med 2] id be doin a lot betta. and mate to quote the blue planet and the abc seriously .......this organization is so green ridden that on their websites they spread misinformation about the fishing industry [one abc website claims the only prawn fishery in aust. using teds is the npf.... wot a load of twaddle the only prawn fishery in aust. not using teds is sth aust as they have no turtles. kc u wanna hava look at the wmb oceanic survey done on moreton bay b4 u start making unfounded claims.

waldo35
17-03-2006, 02:06 PM
mmmmm louis surveys show a decline in in recreational fishing participation from 24.6% in 2001 to 20.6% in 2004.....so ur economic input argument seems to be waning also if u are going to claim that recreational fishing is an industry why should it be allowed to be the only unregulated industry in aust. and gee mate how much munny do u reckon i spend in tax dollars on fuel, repairs etc.

bugman
17-03-2006, 02:10 PM
Waldo - could you please give me a link to the particular page you are referring to on that leftist green ABC web-site?

waldo35
18-03-2006, 08:15 PM
bugman these outrageous claims are made on the abc website 'the lab' which i think is a jjj spin off from the dr karl program. this sitye has a section purporting to offer betta seafood choices. in this it claims the brown tiger is an overfished resource. the 2004 fishery assesment paper on the east coast states no depreciable drop in tiger stocks over the last 10 yrs. also there had been an issue with the brown tiger in the npf fishery which was addressed in 2002 by closing the month of august [when browns were trad. targetted]. last yr stock assesment showed the brown tiger had recovered to sustainable levels and the fishery was reopened in august. further more the information used to determine low brown stocks was from fishers log books from the tiger season in 2001, a season where 85% of the first 6 weeks effort was directed into fishing 4 banana prawns. an immediate assumption wasx made by fisheries that there were no browns that yr. what a load of twaddle there were heaps
it was that they werent targetted and therefore there was no logbook info and fisheries [using the no info = probable high risk equation] made an uninformed and in my mind poor choice.
thanx bugman 4 ur question but i only said green ridden not leftist.

waldo35
18-03-2006, 08:33 PM
jeremy just did a search on dpi fisheries for a size/bag limit on stout whiting [ which seem to me to be the majority of the bycatch shown on the beach] cant find a size or bag limit. not tryna score points just tryna see a little further past the media hysteria.

bugman
21-03-2006, 10:08 AM
Thanks Waldo,

Here are some links I found mentioning brown tigers

Even the seems the federal environment minister feels the brown tiger was in trouble
http://www.abc.net.au/rural/nt/stories/s1081342.htm

The science site has this list which was published by the Bureau of Rural Sciences as Overfished
http://www.abc.net.au/science/features/fish/table.htm

Was this the article - has the same list
http://www.abc.net.au/science/features/fish/default.htm

Sounds like the season you were refering to
http://www.abc.net.au/rural/nt/stories/s891218.htm

I've always wondered if I have a green tinge ;)

Bugman

waldo35
21-03-2006, 12:04 PM
bug man checked all those sites and looked particularily at the dates all 2004. not currant information im afraid. gulf tiger season was open last year in august as stock levels showed recovery to a sustainable level.[ that wud be 2005] . try searching for sum currant info tho id counsel staying away from abc sites if u want to do so.

bugman
21-03-2006, 03:03 PM
I think what I was trying to say Waldo is that the article you were referring to on the ABC site was actually quite old. The ABC site hasn't actually published any items (non news) regarding brown tigers for quite a few years. You'll notice the lab article was actually written in 2003 at the height of the concern over the sustainability of the brown tiger. Even the federal minister was concerned at its fate - as shown in another of the links provided.

Don't worry mate - I can get my hands on much more up to date and important Qld fishery data without having to rely on the ABC ;)

waldo35
21-03-2006, 03:31 PM
well it would appear that we were saying the same thing bugman and yes getting hold of any info about anything is easy if u have the right http or type the right words in a search engine. and of course the abc hasnt published any positive news re any fishery recently...... their green tinge is an out n out lush verdancy. wasnt aware that u were trying to point out the time delay with the articles u highlighted....just didnt come over that way to me but hey thanx for ur honesty and involvement.

waldo35
21-03-2006, 03:33 PM
bugman ps the fact that the abc only has old articles which support a green agenda........so much for tax payer funded impartiality