Proposed reef fishing closure

[GregOug]

I just received the latest email from Steve Starling ‘Starlo and Jo’. The first article is about the Western Australian government proposing to close reef fishing for Eight to Nine months each year! If you are interested in more information go to fishotopia.com.au and register for the newsletter. Hopefully you will receive the current one where this absurd closure is discussed.

cheers

Greg

[kmcrosby78]

Whilst commercial fishing is allowed to continue year round ........... Now that's a cleverly thought out proposal ...... 

[bigkingie]

27 minutes ago, kmcrosby78 said:

Whilst commercial fishing is allowed to continue year round ........... Now that's a cleverly thought out proposal ...... 

The aim is to reduce the catch by 50%. The rec catch is only 9% of the total - so there must be a substantial reduction in the commercial catch to reach that target.

[GregOug]

The problem is, the problem won’t stop with the poor WA fisher men and women. Once one state does something like this the others are sure to follow.

[Drop Bear]

IMHO... The key is to restore fish habitat.

[GregN70]

I've always thought that fragile reef areas, need to be shut like this for about 10 months per year to preserve stocks, otherwise there will be nothing left soon, and its getting very close to it now..

Especially along the Southern Great Barrier Reef from about Mackay to Bundy which has been absolutely flogged to death for the last 40 yrs. Like open it only for a month in Dec and then again in Jun. And Same for those extremely rare Spanish Mackerel which are on the verge of extinction in Qld waters.

For both commercial and Rec though.

[bigkingie]

8 hours ago, GregN70 said:

I've always thought that fragile reef areas, need to be shut like this for about 10 months per year to preserve stocks, otherwise there will be nothing left soon, and its getting very close to it now..

Especially along the Southern Great Barrier Reef from about Mackay to Bundy which has been absolutely flogged to death for the last 40 yrs. Like open it only for a month in Dec and then again in Jun. And Same for those extremely rare Spanish Mackerel which are on the verge of extinction in Qld waters.

For both commercial and Rec though.

They already have seasonal reef fish closures on the GBR. Plus 33% green zones with no fishing at any time. Stocks of reef fish are described as very robust and appear to be increasing in numbers. 

 

[GregN70]

2 hours ago, bigkingie said:

 Stocks of reef fish are described as very robust and appear to be increasing in numbers. 

 

Not in my area, I would call stocks somewhere between scarce & extinct 

[bigkingie]

24 minutes ago, GregN70 said:

Not in my area, I would call stocks somewhere between scarce & extinct 

On what basis - apart from your own opinion?

 

[GregN70]

6 hours ago, bigkingie said:

On what basis - apart from your own opinion?

 

Observation 

[bigkingie]

3 hours ago, GregN70 said:

Observation 

Well, that is your own opinion. And it flies in the face of all the official assessments. Stocks of coral trout - the most heavily fished species are well above what is considered maximum sustainable yield. Dr Ayling described them as 'extremely robust' and seem to be increasing in number before the green zones were introduced and there have been reductions in commercial effort since then as well. 

[GregN70]

1 hour ago, bigkingie said:

Well, that is your own opinion. And it flies in the face of all the official assessments. Stocks of coral trout - the most heavily fished species are well above what is considered maximum sustainable yield. Dr Ayling described them as 'extremely robust' and seem to be increasing in number before the green zones were introduced and there have been reductions in commercial effort since then as well. 

I've taken up diving recently and have been taking a look what's actually down there, and I can tell you i was shocked at just how barren many places really are, Including these "godly" green zones. And to be honest I woulnt believe a word Dr Ayling said about anything,

[bigkingie]

8 hours ago, GregN70 said:

I've taken up diving recently and have been taking a look what's actually down there, and I can tell you i was shocked at just how barren many places really are, Including these "godly" green zones. And to be honest I woulnt believe a word Dr Ayling said about anything,

Well, no wonder you are getting a few laughs. There is no way you could have covered a significant area by yourself and given you have only recently taken up diving. You have no baseline of what healthy stocks look like. If that's not enough even properly done diver surveys tend to significantly underestimate fish stocks:

 Reef fish communities are spooked by scuba surveys and may take hours to recover - PMC (nih.gov)

[GregN70]

16 minutes ago, bigkingie said:

Well, no wonder you are getting a few laughs. There is no way you could have covered a significant area by yourself and given you have only recently taken up diving. You have no baseline of what healthy stocks look like. If that's not enough even properly done diver surveys tend to significantly underestimate fish stocks:

 Reef fish communities are spooked by scuba surveys and may take hours to recover - PMC (nih.gov)

Plus there's FA to catch anywhere aslo, like an absolute barren wasteland out there.

[bigkingie]

1 hour ago, GregN70 said:

Plus there's FA to catch anywhere aslo, like an absolute barren wasteland out there.

Rubbish.

[Bob9863]

Breading zones and off limits areas are hugely successful at increased fish populations. 

Blanket bans especially on recreational fishing do bugger all that's beneficial. 

Stopping all fishing will work brilliantly but at a huge cost to the public, what's needed is a balanced approach. 

Another really good measure is minimum and maximum legal sizes, it's had a huge impact on cod numbers around here. Building habitat and artificial reefs work really well to. A balanced approach is what's required. 

 

[bigkingie]

24 minutes ago, Bob9863 said:

Breading zones and off limits areas are hugely successful at increased fish populations. 

Blanket bans especially on recreational fishing do bugger all that's beneficial. 

Stopping all fishing will work brilliantly but at a huge cost to the public, what's needed is a balanced approach. 

Another really good measure is minimum and maximum legal sizes, it's had a huge impact on cod numbers around here. Building habitat and artificial reefs work really well to. A balanced approach is what's required. 

 

There aren't any known 'breeding zones' for saltwater fish. Also green or sanctuary zones aren't shown to increase overall fish no's when there is effective fisheries management in place - as is the case with Australian fisheries. They only work in poorly regulated fisheries where any management initiative would give some positive affect. 

[Bob9863]

I've fished a lot of places next to exclusion zones and definitely caught a lot more fish. 

A few exclusion zones will definitely help improve fish numbers and size. But you don't need massive areas or large numbers of them, and you definitely don't need to close entire areas off to all fishermen. 

[bigkingie]

5 hours ago, Bob9863 said:

I've fished a lot of places next to exclusion zones and definitely caught a lot more fish. 

A few exclusion zones will definitely help improve fish numbers and size. But you don't need massive areas or large numbers of them, and you definitely don't need to close entire areas off to all fishermen. 

Not really - not in Australian waters anyway. There is a lot of magical thinking on this You need something a lot more rigorous than your personal experience to draw any conclusions. You won't have a big enough sample size or an adequate timeline of before and after the green zone were established. Bet you haven't considered that the green zones are often chosen in highly productive areas and this would influence adjacent areas.  And to assess a management initiative you have to compare it to other methods and their cost effectiveness. It costs almost nothing to slightly adjust bag and size limits, closed seasons, quotas for professional etc, and these cover the whole fishery and not just one area. It's telling that marine parks were not an initiative of any of our fisheries departments. 

[GregN70]

All I can attest is areas that I fish and dive (Coastal and offshore waters off Yeppoon) are in my experience, based on current observations and catches compared with that which I experienced 30yrs ago when I first visited here are merely a shadow of what there once were. If you can’t see we’ve completely ruined it your either delusional or have a vested interest (eg pro-fisherman).
 

Apologies for not producing a statistical analysis data plot research paper. 30yrs ago I didn’t think we’d end up this rooted. 

[Bob9863]

Those measures, not the total closures but safe zones and limits on both minimum and maximum size have worked in the Amazon and areas in Asia that have otherwise been wiped out due to dynamite fishing ect. 

If it works everywhere else in the world it's been tried it will work here. Not total closures or massive marine parks but a balanced number of measures that give the fish a break and a chance to breed, and allow both recreational and commercial fishing to take place. 

Without a, doubt commercial fishing does the lions share of damage, but there's room for it if it's done responsibly. 

Something does need to be done, but it can't be some knee jerk over reaction. We need a moderate balanced change, not some scorched earth policy like this. 

[Hweebe]

On 06/09/2022 at 1:44 PM, GregOug said:

I just received the latest email from Steve Starling ‘Starlo and Jo’. The first article is about the Western Australian government proposing to close reef fishing for Eight to Nine months each year! If you are interested in more information go to fishotopia.com.au and register for the newsletter. Hopefully you will receive the current one where this absurd closure is discussed.

cheers

Greg

If i was a Rec fisho in WA and this was passed - there would be no reason for owning and maintaining a boat / trailer to only fish 3-4 months a year. (even less when taking our poor weather days)

[Bob9863]

That's the real aim of this sort of thing, to take away people's desire to fish. It's the same thing they do with hunting ect, it's about reducing the number of every day people that engage in outdoor activities. 

It's not about looking after animals or the environment it's all about controlling what people think, what people do and making them city centric sheep that just live and do as they are told. 

[Angry51]

You're dead right about the hunting, they put hoops and hurdles 

every step to get you to give up trying because it's too much trouble.

[bigkingie]

11 hours ago, GregN70 said:

All I can attest is areas that I fish and dive (Coastal and offshore waters off Yeppoon) are in my experience, based on current observations and catches compared with that which I experienced 30yrs ago when I first visited here are merely a shadow of what there once were. If you can’t see we’ve completely ruined it your either delusional or have a vested interest (eg pro-fisherman).
 

Apologies for not producing a statistical analysis data plot research paper. 30yrs ago I didn’t think we’d end up this rooted. 

The problem I have with that is that before you said "Especially along the Southern Great Barrier Reef from about Mackay to Bundy" was 'flogged to death', 'barren' etc. This is a range of 520 km (that's just as the crow flies).  This was on the basis of you recently taking up diving. Then you doubled down and said "Plus there's FA to catch anywhere aslo, like an absolute barren wasteland out there". 

All this shape shifting doesn't do much for your credibility and doesn't give any justification for disregarding official assessments and scientific data. 

[Another Wazza]

On 07/09/2022 at 8:25 PM, GregN70 said:

Not in my area, I would call stocks somewhere between scarce & extinct 

I see what’s going on now, @GregN70 is trying to throw us off the scent by saying there’s a lack of fish around Yeppoon, wink wink,

Hoping he can keep us southerners at bay, rather than heading up that way and giving them a good old fashioned seeing to, Hahahaha

[bigkingie]

11 hours ago, Bob9863 said:

Those measures, not the total closures but safe zones and limits on both minimum and maximum size have worked in the Amazon and areas in Asia that have otherwise been wiped out due to dynamite fishing ect. 

If it works everywhere else in the world it's been tried it will work here. Not total closures or massive marine parks but a balanced number of measures that give the fish a break and a chance to breed, and allow both recreational and commercial fishing to take place. 

Without a, doubt commercial fishing does the lions share of damage, but there's room for it if it's done responsibly. 

Something does need to be done, but it can't be some knee jerk over reaction. We need a moderate balanced change, not some scorched earth policy like this. 

They can't have had much in the way of fisheries management if they were resorting to dynamite fishing. In that case marine parks would have some positive affect. I made that point before. These countries you say we should learn from have fishing pressures orders of magnitude higher than we do.

[Bob9863]

Which is the point, if places that have been completely destroyed of fish life can bounce back using this minimalist methods, then they can do so much more here without banning fishing for the weekend punter. 

[bigkingie]

1 hour ago, Bob9863 said:

Which is the point, if places that have been completely destroyed of fish life can bounce back using this minimalist methods, then they can do so much more here without banning fishing for the weekend punter. 

Sounds like a magic pudding theory. For a start Asian fisheries are typically fished down to levels we would not find acceptable. In the case of WA fisheries scientists had calculated a 50% reduction in catch is needed. The rec effort is open entry and has been increasing each year - so that's why closed seasons are proposed. 

[GregN70]

10 hours ago, bigkingie said:

The problem I have with that is that before you said "Especially along the Southern Great Barrier Reef from about Mackay to Bundy" was 'flogged to death', 'barren' etc. This is a range of 520 km (that's just as the crow flies).  This was on the basis of you recently taking up diving. Then you doubled down and said "Plus there's FA to catch anywhere aslo, like an absolute barren wasteland out there". 

All this shape shifting doesn't do much for your credibility and doesn't give any justification for disregarding official assessments and scientific data. 

Come for a dive with me smart mouth. Perhaps stop being a know-it-all keyboard warrior and come for a real see for yourself look. I’m guessing you’ve never actually been anywhere near this area, and you just like being a troll. 

[bigkingie]

4 hours ago, GregN70 said:

Come for a dive with me smart mouth. Perhaps stop being a know-it-all keyboard warrior and come for a real see for yourself look. I’m guessing you’ve never actually been anywhere near this area, and you just like being a troll. 

I told you what was wrong with dive observations - which you ignored. You extended it to 'everywhere' so would that include my home waters, anywhere I have visited? I have been to Cairns for instance. On a charter the boat bagged out (reached the boat limit) - we filled a huge fish box with small-mouthed nannygai and other reef fish in a few hours. It wasn't far from port either. 

[Andrew_P]

Let’s agree to disagree and move on fellas. 

[ellicat]

Mod Note

On AFO we're happy to have vigorous debate on a topic. We're NOT happy to have personal attacks. So keep your posts to stating opinions or arguing against others' opinions but leave the personal attacks off the forum.

Non-complance will see warnings issued (3 warnings and you're gone forever).

Thanks