Snapper: Summary of Key Issues Raised

[Gad]

Meetings have been held at Noosa,Mooloolaba,Redcliffe,Wynnum and Victoria Point.

Below are some the key issues brought up at the Redcliffe,Wynnum and Victoria Point meetings.

For further information on the review of the fishery, or for records of other individual meetings held along the east coast of Queensland, please visit www.fisheries.qld.gov.au

Public consultation now extended until 5 pm, Friday 8 April 2011

Rocky Reef Fin Fish Fishery Review – Port Meetings Summary of key issues raised during consultation meeting

Location: Redcliffe Number of attendees: 200

Fees

Issues raised include the following:

• Already pay fees under the Private Pleasure Boat Levy. Funds from the levy should be used to fund research for snapper. • Vessel based permit and fees are inequitable as bigger boats can fish further and catch more. • Consideration should be given to shorter term permits and fee exemptions such as occurs in NSW • Discussion around why the charter fees for a unit of quota are higher than the commercial fees. • All the fees (recreational permit, charter and commercial) proposed are too high. Do not trust how the fees will be used - the fees should be restricted to managing the snapper stock only. A high level of transparency is required in expenditure.

Closures

Issues raised include the following:

• What is the purpose of the interim six week closure in February and March, as it does not occur during the peak spawning period • Any closures will have a major economic impact on the charter sector and other marine industries – it will result in job losses.

Impacts of RIS proposals

Issues raised include the following:

• Will compensation be paid to recreational fishers, tackle shops, charter operators and commercial fishers? • Options 1 and 2 are elitist as both options require fishers to pay for a permit. Fishers have to be literate and own a computer to report catches. The rules are complex and you would need to have a solicitor on board to interpret the rules. Option 3 is skewed against recreational fishers as only recreational fishers will be impacted by a closure. • There is a massive economic impact of options 2, 3 and 4 on fishing tourism in Redcliffe region and the viability of charter businesses. • The recreational sector is being forced into either options 1 or 2 as options 3 and 4 are unpalatable and not viable.

Alternative management strategies

Issues raised include the following:

• Artificial reefs and habitat protection are key issues that need to be addressed. • There are no artificial reefs for the Redcliffe area. Artificial reefs in the Sunshine Coast and Southern Moreton Bay areas are too far to travel to from Redcliffe. • Spawning closures should be implemented using a responsive management system. Water temperatures can be monitored and predicted using satellite technology and periodic closures set in advance. These closures need to be scientifically backed. • An increase in size limit for snapper could be introduced without having to put in fees and permits. • Post release mortality is low for snapper caught in less than 30 meters of water - most of Moreton Bay is less than 20 meters. There is no consideration for increases in the size limit in the RIS. • Discussion around the net take of snapper – don’t support this. • Further discussion around net take of snapper – you should be able to retain whatever is landed to minimise waste. Netted snapper are dead.

Data and science

Issues raised include the following:

• What has been the effect of the recent floods on snapper stock? Reference was made to the reported fish kill where squire were washed up on Peninsula beaches. • Discussion around whether the science is flawed - post release mortality of 55% is based on trapping studies from NSW. • Concerns about the methods used to record snapper at boat ramps - recreational fisher claimed fisheries staff were not interested in measuring his catch at the ramp because he had a good catch of snapper. • Who polices the completion and submission of charter logbooks? • Where and when do snapper spawn in Queensland? • What is the difference in growth rates between snapper in Queensland and snapper in NSW?

• What information do we have on growth rates from tagging studies? • Amateur Fishing Association of Queensland has snapper club records going back to 1904. None of this data has been used. • There are inconsistencies in the RIS. A member of the Stakeholder Network Working Group has published an article contradicting the status of snapper - last year was the best season in years. • Discussion around the four month closure – it is only for snapper but the shorter six week closure includes pearl perch and teraglin jew. • Snapper are abundant - recent charter trips clients have taken their bag limit easily. Don’t believe that snapper is in trouble.

Process

Issues raised include the following:

• What happens when the recreational sector reaches the 260 tonne catch limit and how will you know that the limit has been reached. • Will bag limits be relaxed in future if the fishery is shown to have recovered. • Government has already made a decision on future management arrangements - for example government have already implemented the six week closure with no consultation. • Discussion around the eligibility and allocation methods that will be used for the commercial and charter sectors

[Gad]

Public consultation now extended until 5 pm, Friday 8 April 2011

Rocky Reef Fin Fish Fishery Review – Port Meetings Summary of key issues raised during consultation meeting

Location: Wynnum Number of attendees: 250

Fees

Issues raised include the following:

• Discussion around the fee structure - how do they know that the fee won’t be changed from $90 to $150 after the first year. • The PPV could be increased by $5 to fund the services. The $90 fee would not be required then.• Why don’t you have a licence system like NSW where it is $30 fee for a year or less for shorter periods or $75 for three years.. • Concerns raised about the costs associated with the fees and the impact it will have on rec fishers ability to continue using their boats– already pay registration fees for boat and trailer and the $90 fee will add even more expenses. Will government pay compensation for boats? • Stakeholder Network Working Group recreational members were not supportive of the fee and were never consulted on actual dollar values.

Closures

Issues raised include the following:

• Why apply a six week closure in February-March when few people go recreational fishing? • Is the six week closure a spawning closure? Sea surface temperature should be used to determine the timing of the closure in advance. • The six week closure is not scientifically based. There should be some benefit to having a closure such as to protect spawning. Has any modelling been done on the closure options? • Commercial fishers already pay a licence fee to operate - will the government be providing compensation for the six week fishing closure?

Impacts of RIS proposals

Issues raised include the following:

• Will the number of snapper permits issued be limited to 9000 and would land-based fishers need to get a snapper permit? • Discussion around the permit for snapper – do you need a permit to retain snapper caught from water craft like kayaks and sailing boats? If not than it doesn’t seem fair. • Charter boats and recreational fishers will continue to catch snapper during the six week closure and these will all be thrown back dead. What should fishermen do about this?

Alternative management strategies

Issues raised include the following: • Discussion around the closures - should the closure be broken down into weekly blocks spread across multiple months to protect spawning fish? • The closures should be during months when snapper are known to spawn and coincide with moon phase.

Data and science

Issues raised include the following:

• How can you get recreational catch estimates from a phone survey? • Why don’t you get catch estimates and length measurements from the ‘real snapper’ fishers? • Why don’t we know what is in the green zones and why don’t fisheries monitor them? What modelling has been done to look at the potential benefits offered by green zones to the snapper stocks? • Only slight declines in catch on the Gold Coast, elsewhere everything is good. • Commercial and charter operators already fill out logbooks and are fined if they do not do so. Recreational fishers should be required to fill out logbooks like the commercial fishers. • There is plenty of snapper around. You can’t base your assessment on one year of catch data. • Have been fishing for five years and did 50 trips last year and caught 350 snapper. There is nothing wrong with the snapper stock. Fisheries should be collecting information from fishers doing the fishing. • Stakeholders here at the meeting are emotional and very angry because we believe the science is not credible and the proposals based on this are not sound. • Biggest concern by Stakeholder Network Working Group recreational members is the lack of data available. • In New Zealand they have sound data and have established their baseline data. Where is the raw data on Queensland catches to establish the baseline and is the raw data available?

Process

Issues raised include the following:

• Minutes of the meeting should be recorded and made available to anyone. Concerns that feedback will be diluted and not get back to those in power.

• Result of this consultation process should be made available to anyone who wants it. • Tackle shops haven’t been given enough copies of the RIS and people don’t know how to get involved and have their say. • With the flooding, people knew straight away what the situation was and were kept very well informed by the government. Why isn’t it the same with the rocky reef RIS? People don’t know when the closure is. • Why weren’t letters sent out to all registered boat owners in QLD telling them about the management changes and the six week closure? • Concerns about the design of the RIS questionnaire - the questions are deliberately misleading and biased and designed to get a skewed outcome towards a certain response. Independent body should have been used to design the questionnaire. • Meetings are a farce – you have already decided which option you are going to take. • There has been no feedback on how effective the green zones have been or how effective the recent bag and size limits for snapper have been. • Which groups were represented on the Stakeholder Network Group? Why was NSW represented – they do not manage our fishery. • What role did Sunfish members have on the Stakeholder Network Group and were their opinions considered. • The mood of the meeting is indicative of a first time meeting and not one at the RIS consultation stage - if consultation is to be done properly, then the review needs to take more time. • The four options are not acceptable as the science is not credible. • Where is the option proposed by Sunfish? • Have not been given opportunity to propose other options in the response form. • The department has to learn that they need to consult properly. The department has not been listening to fishers.

For further information on the review of the fishery, or for records of other individual meetings held along the east coast of Queensland, please visit www.fisheries.qld.gov.au

[Gad]

Public consultation now extended until 5 pm, Friday 8 April 2011

Rocky Reef Fin Fish Fishery Review – Port Meetings Summary of key issues raised during consultation meeting

Location: Victoria Point Number of attendees: 120

Fees Issues raised include the following:

• What is the expected revenue from the recreational permit fees? • How will the money collected from the fees be used? • Recreational fishers are already bearing high costs of fuel, boat and vehicle registration – the permit would be a significant additional cost. • Pensioners can not afford the permit fees. Would you consider a concession for pensioners? • Are the figures used to calculate the $90 permit fee available publicly? • The RIS presents the permit fee as a disincentive to fish for snapper. • If I own two vessels, do I need to pay for two permits? • Will there be increased enforcement as a result of the permit fees? • The $90 fee is just a revenue raising exercise.

Impacts of RIS proposals

Issues raised include the following:

Discussion around the bag limit of 15 rocky reef fin fish - what period of time does this limit apply to or is this an annual limit?

The interim closure will result in extremely high economic impacts for local businesses on the back of recent disasters.

The impact of the $90 fee is a deterrent to go fishing. Need to understand that there will be flow-on effects on other fishing related businesses because of this.

Would a permit be required to catch pearl perch and teraglin?

Alternative management strategies

Issues raised include the following:

Why are restrictions to the fishery the only tool being considered to rebuild the snapper stock? Why not enhance recruitment by restocking?

Increasing the size limit for snapper should improve recruitment.

Discussion around increasing the size limit for snapper and limiting the take of large fish by decreasing the bag limit.

None of the options are supported. Can hybrid options be developed?

The breeding grounds have already been degraded. These areas need to be protected.

Need to protect breeding areas and juvenile snapper from trawling.

Why don’t you use a system like the NSW recreational fishing licence?

Concerns raised about fishermen from New Zealand fishing for snapper in Australian waters then selling it back.

Data and science

Issues raised include the following:

What expertise has been used in assessing the status of snapper?

Uncertainty in the recreational data has been questioned by the Australian Government report.

How were the recreational catch estimates derived?

Why did the department use a phone survey for recreational catch estimates rather than go direct to recreational fishers for information?

To what level do you aim to rebuild the snapper fishery - what is the target?

If recreational fishers provide logbook data, these will be used against us.

Discussion around the snapper data – there was agreement that there is a problem with snapper but there is no support for the four options. Do not have a problem with the model but do have a problem with the data. To address this issue, there needs to be quality data to base decisions on, acceptable solutions and if a permit system is required there needs to be a lower fee with options to take up a permit for a short term.

An alternative is to increase the PPV slightly to cover the costs of management. We need genuine solutions that people can comply with and an inexpensive system.

Process

Issues raised include the following:

• Why is mahi mahi included in the review? They are a migratory fish and a fast growing species.

• Responses to issues raised at these meetings need to be included in the meeting records.

• Very concerned about the lack of enforcement.

• Meetings should also have been held in Ipswich - there are many fishers and boat owners here.

• What is Fisheries Queensland’s preferred What is the objective of the proposals in the RIS?option?

• Why has no response been received to letters sent to government?

• Concerned about the transparency of process if the working group did not know about the interim closure.

• Better fish identification, bag limit and size limit information are required. NSW produces a very useful booklet.

• What is the oppositions view on the proposals?

• Problem with undersized snapper sold in fish shops in Queensland.

• Need to explore the management arrangements used to manage snapper in other states, specifically the slot limits.

• When will eligibility for charter quota be determined?

• Where are the artificial reefs that the government promised as a result of Moreton Bay rezoning?

• All attendees at the meeting tonight are urged to fill out the response forms. Don’t leave it at just coming along to the meeting tonight. Go the next step and provide feedback in writing.

For further information on the review of the fishery, or for records of other individual meetings held along the east coast of Queensland, please visit www.fisheries.qld.gov.au

[ellicat]

Any good answers to all those questions ?...or is it the usual ALP response - i.e. "Just tax it" and we will all will be better for it ?

[Gad]

They missed the part that the government didn`t give a question/answer choice.

Option 1:

6 week closure REC ONLY.

$90 per boat fee, NOT NEGOTIABLE.

TAC 260t.

Pro and Charter have NO CLOSURE, JUST A TAC.

Option 2:

Same as 1 above, but $70, and not compulsory reporting.

TAC 260t

Pro and Charter have NO CLOSURE, JUST A TAC.

Option 3:

2 month closure REC ONLY, between June and October.

Bag Limit 2.

Pro and Charter have NO CLOSURE, JUST A TAC.

Option 4:

4 month closure for all sectors, spread through out the year.

Guess what the Charter and Pro Sectors would opt for.(that is if they haven`t already got)

The only ones to get shafted will be the rec fisho`s,option 4 would be the go,then maybe the tackle,bait,boating,accomodation and other business`s relying on the rec fisho`s dollars would unite and scream the government down to the negotiation table