Fishing Ban in QLD

[chonna]

Just found this on brisbane times:

Fishing Ban to Cover Snapper, Teraglin & Pearl Perch

Queensland fishing enthusiasts and commercial operators will be banned from catching snapper, teraglin and pearl perch off the east coast from next year.

The six-week interim ban, to take effect from February 15, is a temporary move while the state government decides what permanent measures it will enforce to restore depleted snapper stocks.

State Fisheries Minister Tim Mulherin today released a blueprint for the Rocky Reef Fin Fish Fishery, which includes four options to crack down on snapper takes off the east coast.

Advertisement: Story continues below They would impact on the recreational, charter and commercial fishing sectors.

Under two of the options, recreational fishing enthusiasts would face mandatory or voluntary logbook rules and a $70 or $90 permit fee to catch snapper.

These two options include an annual six-week closure to the recreational take of snapper, pearl perch and teraglin.

Two further options suggest the recreational sector could face either a two-month or four-month annual closure to the take of snapper.

Options affecting the commercial sector include either a four-month annual snapper ban or other measures to limit access.

Catch details would have to be reported in logbooks and fees would be charged.

The options, which would remain in effect for 10 years, have been released for public comment.

The measures are designed to reduce the annual total take of snapper to 400 tonnes among all sectors.

Currently, the recreational sector is responsible for taking 415 tonnes of snapper a year while the commercial sector hauls in about 190 tonnes and the charter sector takes 40 tonnes.

Mr Mulherin said the state's snapper stocks were overfished and the interim six-week ban was needed to address the problem.

“The fishery's not going to collapse overnight but we need to take steps now to ensure the sustainability of the fishery,†he told reporters.

“What the scientific assessment is telling us is that the fishery level is running at 35 per cent of unfished levels. Internationally if a fishery gets below 40 per cent there are sustainability issues.â€

Mr Mulherin said the initial six-week ban, from February 15 to March 31 next year, had been timed to reduce the social and economic impact.

However, the move would reduce the take of snapper for the year by an estimated 14 per cent, he said. It would be accompanied by a public education campaign.

On-the-spot fines for low-level breaches are in the $200 to $400 range.

Mr Mulherin defended the government's preparedness to act on declining snapper fish stocks, saying advice was received in 2006 that the fishery was at risk.

He said bag and catch limits had been introduced since then.

Public comment on the plan is due by February 28. For more information phone 13 25 23.

[tikki169]

I have no problem with a closed season but wanting to charge $70-90 a year is getting a bit ridiculous. If that money was going to go into restocking supplies and proper management plans then yes but we all know it will just be absorbed by some government department for bonuses.

I also think their catch amounts are off. I'd say commercial fishing catch far more than recreational and we put under size fish back. The amount of times I've been to Sunny Bank or capalaba fish shop and seen undersize snapper there is criminal.

[crazywalrus]

I really doubt the figures. 415 tonne of Snapper taken. From the QLD Gov site they state that there are 790 000 fishers that fish at least once per year. http://www.daff.gov.au/brs/fisheries-marine/data/rec-indig/survey-stats/rec-qld Well there are a lot of people that only fish once per year. So the chance of catching a Snapper are minimal. So you can probably take at least 50% of fishers out straight away that only fish less than 5 times for the year. 395 000 fishers. I know that before I joined AFO and got a Boat I had never caught a snapper or had the means of catching a snapper. ( don't hound me down I know folks catch Snapper land based however not a common catch for most) So lets take out 30% of people that do not have a boat or access to one. 276 000 left. Lets take out people that only fish in the freshwater. say 15% this leaves 235 000 people. let us assume that only 40% of us have the ability to catch a snapper due to type of fishing or geographical location this leaves 94, 000 people. Now you actually have to catch a legal fish. (we are not all as lucky as tugger) personally I have only probably taken 1 or 2 kgs of snapper this year but previously I have never taken legal snapper. So this is assuming that every fisher has taken home 4kg of snapper each.

Personally these figures are very rubbery as I do not believe in an instance that there are 94,000 people that target Snapper. Please give your impressions. :S

[1800amix]

I guess it would be a problem if I actually caught fish instead of just burning fuel and throwing bait in the water LOL

[rosstralia46]

I think this is stupid a closed season is fine but many people practice catch and release if they really want to limit how much people take increase the size limit and bring the bag limit for 5 to 3 not that i think that is right but it would be better than putting a log etc i agree with crazy walrus those figures are completely and utterly stupid fair enough if we are all tuggers but we r not and its another stupid move by the government imo a closed season fine but really cmon

[straddiebrad]

if i go off shore i would try and bag out it costs a lot to run you boat fuel bait service and so on as the big boat doesnt go out too much,and there thinking of a fee ,it will be a fee that i wont pay,

[straddiebrad]

i had to edit my last reply i thought you were having a go at mark until i reread the post :pinch: so if you saw it my bad :whistle:

[crazywalrus]

i had to edit my last reply i thought you were having a go at mark until i reread the post :pinch: so if you saw it my bad :whistle:

lol no Brad What I was trying to say is that are not a lot of people that are as successful as Mark. I reckon there are very few people that would even catch a legal Squire each year. i think in real terms the % of fisherman that take home fish is really low. No offense taken mate

[doss]

i agree with rosstralia46 on these

[dassa]

With the track record of the bitch CAPTIAN BLIGH I would doubt any of the moneys from this would find it's way back into fisheries.

I think most fisho's would welcome a closed session for snapper,but along with more resources put in to the fisheries depot instead of cutting funding and the slugging the recreational fisherman for more goverment funding,what next a tax on oxygen. I like the idea of a log book but who is going to police it our self's,not all people are going to do the right thing when to many don't play by the rule's now we see it week in week out and nothing gets done about the repeat offenders now.

Another idea I belive would be for them to increase fine,make the courts more accountable for handing out fines and then put that money's back into fisheries to support more officers and for them then to do what there are payed to do not sit in an office and clock watch like they are payed to do now.(this wasn't ment as a dig at the fisheries officer's)

[1800amix]

Maybe we should just take up trolling for other species like shark instead and use Bligh and her crew as bait :evil:

If she get's voted in again I'm blaming all of us.

[tikki169]

As much as I hate it, why not just drop the bag limit to 3 and that would save 20% of the rec catch or according to their dodge stats around 83 ton.

[neal82]

As much as I hate it, why not just drop the bag limit to 3 and that would save 20% of the rec catch or according to their dodge stats around 83 ton.

it would drop it by 40% not 20, but it's not very often i catch more than 3 legal snaps anyway so it woulnd't bother me too much if they did drop the bag limit. i'd more than likely use the big esky to keep them alive so i could upgrade if was lucky enough.

[mick fillet]

http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fisheries/recreational_fishing/target_species/snapper

/>http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/research/areas/systems-research/wild-fisheries/outputs/2008/972/status_short/Snapper.pdf

some relivant info on just snapper and there breeding cycles and there growth rate and sizes to how many years old they are and how often they breed.

personaly i dont think there has been enough time scince the marine park zoning plan and changes to snapper size limits and bag limits to see the massive results of an explosive snapper population thats yet too come going off the information above.Tthey have just got to give it time.

on the other hand i can see why the snaps need protecting for the moment only 1 percent of snaps live to see 10 yr old

[Angus]

6 weeks? Is it really that big of a deal? (waiting for the deluge of rotten fruit thrown).

Once again it all comes down to science. If they can show me that this will improve stocks, I would listen.

Obviously this could have terrible effects on charter operators etc.

But in the long run if the charter boats can show punters a better trip every time in the on season?

Just playing devils advocate here really.

Angus

[Doobsy]

A closed 6 weeks in Feb/Mar... Farcical.

If they want to see any (minimal) effect, it should be July/August.

Reduce the bag limit to 2 per person including charters, fine people breaking the law $1,000.00 and shops selling undersize fish $50,0000.00 and get more of a presence of authority out there.

My $0.02

[crazywalrus]

>http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/fisheries/recreational_fishing/target_species/snapper

/>http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/research/areas/systems-research/wild-fisheries/outputs/2008/972/status_short/Snapper.pdf

some relivant info on just snapper and there breeding cycles and there growth rate and sizes to how many years old they are and how often they breed.

personaly i dont think there has been enough time scince the marine park zoning plan and changes to snapper size limits and bag limits to see the massive results of an explosive snapper population thats yet too come going off the information above.Tthey have just got to give it time.

on the other hand i can see why the snaps need protecting for the moment only 1 percent of snaps live to see 10 yr old

thanks for the links Mick. The second link is really interesting. I would have thought with the bigger population and nsw being a good fishery for snapper, combined with the higher bag limits and smaller size limits that they would have a much greater take by recreational fishers than QLD. "The Annual recreational harvest of Snapper in NSW is likely to lie between 180 ans 250t" This does not make sense. There has to be either QLD over estimating the recreational take or NSW underestimating the take. It is probably the QLD government with the rubbery figures. Bligh and Co has not shown a real great record of handling numbers. :whistle:

[Old Scaley]

I agree with Angus on the science - we can't whinge about poor catch rates and then arc up when someone tries to do something positive about it. I know that there are many armchair scientists on the site, and many who have long experience to back up their views (and we are all entitled to a view), but I tend to place my faith in people who have made this sort of study their life's work.

I reckon that the Feb closure is a "toe in the water" approach as they would know that most people would not be targeting snapper at that time of the year, including the charters who are more likely to be chasing pelagics or hitting up sweetlip, cod etc.

The real risk is that the real closure could be in the prime July/Aug/Sep time when the big ones are around the reef areas. I hope they leave some of this for us!

Ironically, 2010 seems to have been a great year for river snaps. I thik the offshore catch quality may have been a bit down, though.

Anyway, that's my 2 bobs worth.

[rosstralia46]

how about with the ban unlike barramundi you can still target but not take them but all these suggestions and that it only works if everyone plays by the rules i think its pre obvious not everyone does for example the white bucket brigade. it will be interesting if this actually works but it would be more substantial if they did it in snapper season

[Old Scaley]

how about with the ban unlike barramundi you can still target but not take them but all these suggestions and that it only works if everyone plays by the rules i think its pre obvious not everyone does for example the white bucket brigade. it will be interesting if this actually works but it would be more substantial if they did it in snapper season

True - maybe we need a law that says everyone must obey the existing law and then we wouldn't need a new one:dry:

[ellicat]

"What the scientific assessment is telling us is that the fishery level is running at 35 per cent of unfished levels."

The problem with that statement is that no-one knows what the "unfished levels" were. So the start figure is very rubbery and based on guess work.

It was within the last 6 months, as Mick indicated above, that it was brought to our attention that they have no study results on the effects of the bag limit reduction to 5.

The figures Ted is concerned about may not be 100% accurate but I believe the proportions are likely to be accurate from what I have read in independent reports/studies previously.

I cynically suspect the "6 weeks in Feb/Mar" will become the "2 or 4 months" overlapping or completely including July/August.

If it's a genuine dabble to find the best common ground for sustainability then good on them. There's plenty of other fish in the sea at that time of the year. If they get the numbers from the effect the bag of 5 has had and it suggests sustainability at that level, I wonder if they will can the closed seasons :whistle:

The fees/permit rubbish is nothing more than another disguised tax grab to subsidise economic mismanagement.

You will also notice in Mulherin's statement the use of the word science/scientific. Seems the polly speak writer has learned a lesson from the green zone dupe, where they were unable to back any claims with science of their own from our part of the World..

[crazywalrus]

I agree with Angus on the science - we can't whinge about poor catch rates and then arc up when someone tries to do something positive about it. I know that there are many armchair scientists on the site, and many who have long experience to back up their views (and we are all entitled to a view), but I tend to place my faith in people who have made this sort of study their life's work.

I reckon that the Feb closure is a "toe in the water" approach as they would know that most people would not be targeting snapper at that time of the year, including the charters who are more likely to be chasing pelagics or hitting up sweetlip, cod etc.

The real risk is that the real closure could be in the prime July/Aug/Sep time when the big ones are around the reef areas. I hope they leave some of this for us!

Ironically, 2010 seems to have been a great year for river snaps. I thik the offshore catch quality may have been a bit down, though.

Anyway, that's my 2 bobs worth.

Can I start by saying here that I do believe in smaller bag limits and increased size limits for fish however there is something wrong here. The Stats do not add up - there is a really large discrepancy between NSW and QLD. I may be cynical here but I do think someone is cooking the stats.

Answer me this

1. why is the size limit less in NSW ?

2. why is the bag limit 10 in NSW?

3. why does nsw fisherman only catch 180 to 210t of fish and QLD fisherman catch 415t. Are we better fisherman?

4. when targeting sweetlip in deep water how are you going to limit your catch to sweetlip and not Snapper?

I am all for conserving fish for the next generation as I have two boys. We have recently in the last few years brought into effect the 35cm minimum size and the bag limit of five. (personally I would not be against a BL of 2) We have not given this enough time in real terms to have an effect. Given that Snapper in Qld can breed at 25cm and breed throughout the year this new size limit has to have a real effect on the fish stocks in a number of years. Personally I can not comment on any anecdotal results of reduced catches as I have only started targeting Snapper in the last year. But I regularly catch Squire at and over the size of 25cm (breeding stock)

I do not really have any problem with an increase in the minimum size to 40cm which will give the female fish another year to breed. It would have reduced my take for the year to one fish. anyway I could go on here. just think they should have to justify the stats as someone is lying and there need to be some consistency between bag and size limits between the states. What I do not trust is a government that does not give you the correct stats and cannot even balance the books.

[Old Scaley]

Quote "The fees/permit rubbish is nothing more than another disguised tax grab to subsidise economic mismanagement."

Ellicat, you are dead set right there. The sad part is that the cost to government of introducing and processing that tax would be greater than the money recovered. The even sadder thing is that it will mean that fishing for snapper (and eventually other species) would be only be available to those who could afford it and the chances of introducing kids and others to the wonders of fishing would diminish greatly.

Unfortunately governments of all persuasions use cost as a way of controlling access to things many of consider as "rights", eg. education, health etc.

Now I have said way too much, so over to you guys!

[Brian D]

I agree with the closed species closed season idea but I don't think 6 weeks is enough.

When it comes to reef fish I say close one or two different species for a entire season.

I agree with a with small fee if it is managed correctly however I think a greater portion of GST revenue should be allocated to the sectors from which it is generation from. This would feed the economy from which it is taken, in turn generating more GST.

I do not for one second think that rec fishers take more then pro fishers - they must think we are stupid.

[ellicat]

I agree with the closed species closed season idea but I don't think 6 weeks is enough.

When it comes to reef fish I say close one or two different species for a entire season.

I agree with a with small fee if it is managed correctly however I think a greater portion of GST revenue should be allocated to the sectors from which it is generation from. This would feed the economy from which it is taken, in turn generating more GST.

I do not for one second think that rec fishers take more then pro fishers - they must think we are stupid.

The 6 week closure is only an interim measure (the lubricant application). The closures will be for 2 or 4 months.

Peronally I wish they would tell us what they have decided on right now and forget all the spin and attempts to fool us that they are consulting. Anyone who follows this sort of guff realises they have just started the softening phase for political expediency. Just get it over with.

[Gad]

301056Peronally I wish they would tell us what they have decided on right now and forget all the spin and attempts to fool us that they are consulting. Anyone who follows this sort of guff realises they have just started the softening phase for political expediency. Just get it over with.

patience ellicat play the game. Next year they will announce their snapper season restrictions

[wesfish]

i agree with mick about not giving it time for the results of the last restrictions put on snapper, wish some one could film the million juvy snapper around mud as that is future stocks for south east. they should give it 10-15 years for the results.

the bay is a massive nursery and it is chockers at the moment!

their figures from what i have guessed works out that out of 800 000 fisherman we take home 500kg of snapper each year roughly?

not sure if that is correct but 400 000 kg

800 000 multiply by 0.5ton equals 400 000kg correct me if i have mis thought this

equals 0.5/500kg

so it looks like we all catch massive loads of snapper :laugh: :laugh:

i am all for a closed season at spawning time for 2-3 months. but not up for paying for something that the government do not own. how can they say they own the fish.

[Malcolm]

I can not think of a possible way they could even estimate what rec fisho's catch

[ellicat]

i agree with mick about not giving it time for the results of the last restrictions put on snapper, wish some one could film the million juvy snapper around mud as that is future stocks for south east. they should give it 10-15 years for the results.

the bay is a massive nursery and it is chockers at the moment!

their figures from what i have guessed works out that out of 800 000 fisherman we take home 500kg of snapper each year roughly?

not sure if that is correct but 400 000 kg

800 000 multiply by 0.5ton equals 400 000kg correct me if i have mis thought this

equals 0.5/500kg

so it looks like we all catch massive loads of snapper :laugh: :laugh:

i am all for a closed season at spawning time for 2-3 months. but not up for paying for something that the government do not own. how can they say they own the fish.

Not quite, Wes :pinch:

Too many zeros gets confusing :pinch:

800,000 x 500kg = 400,000,000 kg (400,000t)

400,000kg divide 1000fishermen = 400kg per fisherman per annum

400,000kg divide 365 days = 1,095kg/day

1095kg / 500 fishermen per day = 2.2kg per day

1095kg / 250 fishermen per day = 4.4 kg per day

400,000kg divide 180 fishing days per annum = 2,222 kg/day

2,222 kg / 500 fishermen per day = 4.5kg/day

2,222 kg / 250 fishermen per day = 9 kg/day

I think the numbers are feasible, but certainly not precise.

The Fisheries numbers were extrapolated from the 2009 survey I believe.

[Cowfish13]

I would have reasoned, 415t = 415 000kg (per year). Then with 790 000 fisherman/people per year, that gives 415 000 kg/790 000 people = 0.5253kg/person.

Which seems very reasonable. If you take out the numbers which crazywalrus vaguely estimated (to end with 94 000 people able to catch Snapper), it gives 4.4149kg/person. Again, very reasonable

[wesfish]

i agree with mick about not giving it time for the results of the last restrictions put on snapper, wish some one could film the million juvy snapper around mud as that is future stocks for south east. they should give it 10-15 years for the results.

the bay is a massive nursery and it is chockers at the moment!

their figures from what i have guessed works out that out of 800 000 fisherman we take home 500kg of snapper each year roughly?

not sure if that is correct but 400 000 kg

800 000 multiply by 0.5ton equals 400 000kg correct me if i have mis thought this

equals 0.5/500kg

so it looks like we all catch massive loads of snapper :laugh: :laugh:

i am all for a closed season at spawning time for 2-3 months. but not up for paying for something that the government do not own. how can they say they own the fish.

Not quite, Wes :pinch:

Too many zeros gets confusing :pinch:

800,000 x 500kg = 400,000,000 kg (400,000t)

400,000kg divide 1000fishermen = 400kg per fisherman per annum

400,000kg divide 365 days = 1,095kg/day

1095kg / 500 fishermen per day = 2.2kg per day

1095kg / 250 fishermen per day = 4.4 kg per day

400,000kg divide 180 fishing days per annum = 2,222 kg/day

2,222 kg / 500 fishermen per day = 4.5kg/day

2,222 kg / 250 fishermen per day = 9 kg/day

I think the numbers are feasible, but certainly not precise.

The Fisheries numbers were extrapolated from the 2009 survey I believe.

see trying to think while under the rum spell just dont add up :laugh: :laugh: i now see sense haha

[Gazza]

Just to throw a spanner in the works :whistle:

Sure let's have a log book I have no problem with that (online would be good) waive any fee's for those who participate by submitting logs and

THEN check those figures again

I have caught that amount of kg of fish easy but stuff all legal :pinch:

and all undersized released

relocate the dolphins @ Harries :evil: and thousands of under sized snaps would survive to grow bigger :evil: :evil:

What really pi$$'s me off

Like others have said where do they get the facts ????????????

Unless they ask us :woohoo:

and just for fun what will /or has the impact on size and take limits on sharks and rays had /or will have :woohoo: :pinch:

1 per person and size limits DERR :evil: :evil:

In a resent fishing report I read in the paper quote good Flathead to be found if you can get your pillie to the bottom due to bullies

MAYDAY whats it going to be like in 5 years :evil:

[ellicat]

see trying to think while under the rum spell just dont add up :laugh: :laugh: i now see sense haha

:laugh: ...and here I was feeling guilty checking your figures (occupational hazard)