What The?
Gender:
Re: Moreton Bay Closures - what's happening?
« Reply #30 - on: Yesterday at 5:33pm » G'day All,
Some very valid points and reasoning amongst all this.
It is widely accepted that fishing pressure from both commercial and amateur influences is the cause of the depleted fish stocks.
And...
In my mind it is also obvious that there are only a certain number of fish to go around everyone - especially in the more heavily populated areas like Moreton Bay.
One of the big issues for TFPQ is this type of question and blanket "I recon" statement......we just don't know!! Not having a go at you here. We are all guilty of this.
From our perspective it would be highly desirable if the numbers and breeding patterns were known and then used to determining the correct TAC and to see if slot sizing, bag limits and other management tools were better than closures. This should be the focus of Governments and fisheries managers NOW, not doing deals with the greens to stay in power.
For example....and on one of the few fish we have much info on.......Coral Trout.
Studies into Trout numbers. and there are a few, put the total biomass at around 2 millions tonnes and the current combined commercial and recreational catch was (pre commercial quota) estimated at 3% of that.
The world accepted standard for a sustainable fishery with breeding dynamics of this species is 20% i.e. if you take 20 out of every 100 fish out in a year, then the spawning recruitment will replace these 20 fish with new ones.
So, to "manage" this fishery we get 33% No Take Areas, a commercial TAC down from 4,000 tonnes to 1500 and bag limits of 8 per angler...plus 3 by 10 day spawning closures (when only 6 or 7% of trout actually attend a spawning aggregation in the first place)
And this for a fishery where the science indicates it is vastly UNDER fished. The GBR fisheries management, particularly on hard reef is politically motivated, not about protecting fish stocks.
So, to Moreton Bay. What is the estimated biomass of Bream, Whiting, Flathead, Jew, Tailor, Snapper etc etc.? What are their breeding dynamics and as such what is a sustainable fishery for each species? Is slot sizing and spawning closures an option for this species? What is the real and unemotive impacts of some commercial fisheries, such as beam and otter trawl.? This has to balance with an acceptance that the fish stock is owned by everyone and everyone, not just recreational fishers should have access to it. We need commercial fisheries, but what we don't need is any form of fishery which is unsustainable and inshore trawl MAY fall into this catagory.
It may (& this is just an "I recon " statement) be the case that the best way of keeping a breeding population viable is to harvest it. A bit like the best way to make grass grow is mow it.
Studies on trout on the GBR actually show a greater number of fish on fished reefs than on unfished reefs. The size on unfished reefs is bigger but density if greater (by a substantial margin) on fished reefs.
Dr Aylings theory appears to suggest that an unfished area establishes a stable population with very little spawning recruitment each season while a fished area has a very dynamic spawning population....nature working hard at keeping up with supply and demand.
Anyhow...rambeling...The point being. We need the science, not well intentioned best guesses.
If science supported closures, then so be it, but if there are other means of achieving the same end, without shutting people out and destroying businesses along the way, then they should be our first option.
At the end of the day, no one, and certainly not TFPQ wants the Bay degraded or overfished. It needs to be looked after for both present and future. This is an enourmous asset to Brisbane and needs the right management regimes put in place so it can still be enjoyed, but enjoyed in a totally sustainable way.
KC