RFW DRAFT response Managing the Recreational Demersal Catch
RFW DRAFT response Managing the Recreational Catch of Demersal Scalefish
The DRAFT response by Recfishwest to Fisheries Management Paper 225 is now on the RFW website at http://www.recfishwest.org.au/DraftSubmFMP225.htm
I am strongly emphasising this is NOT a final version, just a DRAFT of both contents and layout.
It is looking for constructive comments from Recfishwest members and the recreational fishing community before finalising the RFW position at the RFW Board meeting on 14 November.
RFW are getting this out early so others have nearly three weeks to read and consider and comment on it, not be rushed in the last few days before submissions close on 16 November.
The version on the RFW website http://www.recfishwest.org.au/DraftSubmFMP225.htm has internal links so the details can be accessed directly from the summaries, and so that people can be directed to specific proposals in answer to questions.
The extra explanatory details are essential reading to expand on the simple one liners (or few liners) in the summary at the beginning.
People can use anything they agree with or wish to use in their own submissions.
People can comment on, including disagreeing with, RFW's DRAFT, or say things they believe should be included, but they will need to come up with reasons / alternatives / etc, not just reactions.
Tell us what you think and ask us to explain anything you don't agree with - you may give new details which will change Recfishwest's DRAFT.
The presentation of the document could be improved with a few rearrangements of the section numbering and moving some paragraphs so they will flow and relate better. This will be done later - the priority now is to make this available to others.
No one ever said this would be easy. We know that some recreational fishermen will not like what HAS to be done, but sustainability of some species and the future of recreational fishing for some of them is at stake.
Please keep comments on the contents of RFW's draft. There are plenty of other threads for side issues, or start your own.
TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background......
Recfishwest - looking after YOUR recreational fishing future. http://www.recfishwest.org.au/
You need Recfishwest to look after your recreational fishing interests. Who else has the time, the knowledge, the professional approach, the realistic alternatives, the willingness and the contacts?
Recfishwest needs YOUR support. We would really like you to become a member, get involved and help us.
You can join for just $20 or $10 for over 65/under 18, $40 for a family of 4 - by post, by phone 9246 3366, fax 9246 5955, by email , in person, or fill in a website form see http://www.recfishwest.org.au/MembershipDet.htm
You are the ones who benefit when Recfishwest succeeds, or you will lose out when Recfishwest is ignored.
SPESS
Posts: 3735
Date Joined: 29/12/06
After quite a long read
After quite a long read (opening the "more" sections) id like to say that you guys (TerryF, wally, frank etc) have done IMO a great job with this "DRAFT". I would have to say that i agree with alot of the "DRAFTS" and not so with only a few, however the few im not too keen on are "ONLY" an other option at the moment and and atleast one of all the options in each catagory im happy with. My submission is complete and will be sent. Its a 100% improvement on the bullshit said at the ministers meeting the other night......I glad you guys have really thought it through in a way thats the best for us guys and more importantly the future of our stocks!
Once again guys excellent job....Cheers SPESS!
Keep it tight, reeeeeeel tight!
Wally
Posts: 171
Date Joined: 13/09/06
Not me
I Had nothing to do with the recfishwest draft Spess
I have had a read thou, and I like most points, few in there that I totally disagree with, but ya going to get that in any submission,
Think the personal bag limit ( now 7) needs to be dropped to at least a mixed bag of 4 cat 1 fish with halving of all cat 1 species bag limits. on top of re introducing the boat limit
Another one is 3 nm around Rotto needs to be shut down , we need a serious no take zone that can be studied for 5 or 10 years, still allow a shore based fishery and trolling through
Other then that its a worthy read for others that don't know where to start in their own submissions
Wal
GOATRUTAR
Posts: 3691
Date Joined: 12/04/07
As a whole seems reasonable
As a whole seems reasonable but I can see a few points that don't sit well with me.
The closed season should be put in place to protect key species but where the dhufish is concerned the main spawning time has been missed!
Option1 is for a closure from 15 July-7 Oct and option 2 is from 29 Jan - 30 March!
I have always found that the dhufish are in their gratest numbers from Oct-Feb?????JMO!!
To me it goes back to my old harp about the Mandurah crab ban,(closed season when there is minimal crabs to be taken).A BIT BACKWARD!!!!!
As for periods of total bans on fishing or fishing within certain contours I could see anglers having issues with by-catch when fishing for different species such as KG whiting and what would happen if you wanted to fish say the direction or south west bank but would obviously have to cross over the 30m contour.
As for your comment on reducing the bag limit Wally I disagree(no suprises there).We have had our bags cut to F@ck over the past few years and another cut just isn't warranted.It will just push people to do the wrong thing when those special days do occur and you get your 7 fish!
I find it a bit hard to introduce a licence targeting the family when it comes to shore based fishing.
I'm not sure what would be the best measure but I would hate to see the average family not wetting a line as a family outing because a licence was required.(I undestand the fee to be minimal but still doesn't sit well with me)
I still believe it is great to introduce new regs to help preserve the future fishing stocks but if it can't be policed they are worthless!
As stated in the draft more personal required and all the funds raised by a licence to be reinvested back into the industry.
I understand it is just a DRAFT but just my 2 cents worth.
IF IT SMELLS LIKE FISH IT MUST BE GOOD FOR YOU!
Wally
Posts: 171
Date Joined: 13/09/06
Ya missing the whole point
Ya missing the whole point Ruta, fisheries want us to reduce the effort and take of cat 1 fish. thats it in a nut shell,
Recfishwest proposal for the closures is too reduce the effort and take, my suggestion of reducing the bag limits also reduces the take
Unless ya want the do ya feel lucky punk draw, we better come up with something else or they will introduce the lotto tag system that ya can take too the bank
What would you suggest Ruta that reduces the total take of demersals, that after all is what fisheries are looking for and what the paper 225 is all about
Wal
Jamie Chester
Posts: 80
Date Joined: 12/11/06
Guys constructive comments
Guys constructive comments and ideas on these suggestions please!!
Alright will go through the main concepts how I see them.
Fistly you must have an idea of what you want to achieve – these things are
1. Reduction of rec catch (particularly of dhufish and snapper) to sustainable levels
2. An effective monitoring system of rec take must be in place to allow adaptive and effective management
3. These things must be done as simply as possible and as cost effectively as possible and also in a way that delivers pain in the way of actual catch reduction but in a manner that doesn’t remove the “fun” out of fishing. KEEP THESE THINGS IN MIND – to me these three points are crucial.
The main problems I have with the draft are in the closed season recommendations and lack of support for a logbook system.
Recfishwest draft points out that a logbook system is expensive but I have an idea how it could be done effectively and cheaply. (Besides accurate info is priceless!) Firstly legislate that upon landing you must fill out your logbook if you have taken any cat 1 fish. This is easily policed.
At the end of the year fisheries would have the option of then measuring take as exactly as they want to depending on the resources dedicated to it.
For example they could simply have handed back into them 1000 log books which could be selected at random and then collated and the results extrapolated. Or they could take any sample size they see fit of logbooks – this could be so easily done and the figures would be so much better representative of the rec take. You don’t need to actually monitor every log book - which is why people say that it is too expensive.
As a bonus you could also then have a ceiling on the amount of dhufish that any one angler can take in a twelve month period without having to implement a tag system. The thing is that it is the people who catch the most dhufish that need to be limited – this number could be set at 10 per year for example – which means that once you have reached a number of 10 dhufish in your logbook your maximum take for the year would have been reached and no more could be taken by that angler for that year period.
This could be done with snapper too if they are seen as a worry.
But there you are – simple system that is easily policed and monitored – not too draconian – cheap – and can impact at the pointy end on those people who take too many dhuies/snapper. Remember that even with these recommendations, even with closed seasons, a rec angler will still be able to legally take 600 dhuies a year – way way way too many – high use anglers need to be limited – not to unfair levels but certainly not in the open ended way that is being suggested.
And it would be a management sysetm that is intrisically adaptive!!
The closed season system being proposed is too draconian – for me it is too restrictive to have two months consecutively – and besides it will impact on certain user groups more than others – for example the summer closure will impact on the high summer users – the winter closure on those winter users – better to close say July and January to spread the impact (or mid Jan to mid Feb) if you are really worried about impacting holiday fishermen – this Jan closure would also coincide with spawning agg times for dhuies – why this has been ignored is beyond me.
Another problem is the two month summer/autumn closure is ridiculous in that it encompasses the safest weather for boating in the west coast zone – it may be suggested this is why this time will be effective for a closure – but there are real safety concerns for me about this – think of other ways to reduce catch rather than banning fishing when the weather is so safe and forcing rec fishermen to risk their lives even further – seriously flawed suggestion this one.
Lastly the charter take. Now here we have a situation where we ACTUALLY HAVE DATA on their take over the last five years – therefore unlike the other parts of the rec take we have real figures to work with – the problem with private rec take is that we are really just stabbing in the dark trying to reduce take – how can we not take the opportunity given our hard data to actually reduce the charter take by a concrete amount – ie 20% 30% 40% whatever.
This would negate the need for arbitrary confusing rules like this 120 metres pink snapper ban thing – which is starting to get convoluted.
No - with charter boat take it seems ridiculous to me not to use the hard data to achieve EXACTLY what is needed.
How can this be done.? Well the problem is that certain boats have higher catch history of demersals than others. Now if you just reduce their take to a set quota based on percentages of previous catch then you are actually starting to reward past bad practice by the real meat charter offenders – these are the guys that need to be limited – so some sort of sliding scale could be introduced where the guys that have previously been responsible without regulations in place are not penalized.
Now that means that the charter boat operators will then have to decide how to utilize their allocated quota to maximum effect in regards to profit they will make from the fish they are allocated.
The advantages to the charter boats from this sort of management are that because we can DIRECTLY control their catch rates and precisely reduce them from previous levels we have a situation where they can operate outside of a lot of the other rules that are being touted – and that includes a license system and perhaps even closed seasons. Why? Because they have kept and will continue to have to keep log books – therefore the take (overtake?) on charters will have been addressed exactly – a situation not available to the rest of the rec sector.
That means you could have a situation where if you really wanted to go fishing for demersals during July or Jan (when I would like to see the closures come into effect) then a charter would be your only option – a HUGE advantage to the charter sector. But irrelevant to management because the charter sector would have been addressed PRECISELY!!
Summary of Recfishwest recommendations:
1. Support Extension of pink snapper spawning closure Cockburn Sound from 1 October to 31 January. Needs to be done
2. Support possession limits to include place of residence subject to search warrant. [i]This is a bit tricky in that you can easily have one days bag limit that converts into more than 20 kilos of fillets or even go on a trip and bring back 20 kilos of fillets and then still have a few kilos left over from before you left and therefore be over or even fillet a big tuna for example and be over possession limits – I know this isn’t what its meant to stop but you would still be technically breaking the law which seems stupid
www.accessantennas.com.au
TerryF
Posts: 374
Date Joined: 11/08/05
RFW DRAFT response Managing the Recreational Demersal Catch
The closed seasons/closed areas/spawning times/spawning areas for dhufish is complicated, but is well covered in the draft (direct link to that part http://www.recfishwest.org.au/DraftSubmFMP225.htm#10 ) particularly the bit headed "Closed Areas." (yep, I know this draft needs more headings, internal links, list of contents, etc.)
Licences:- there are 2 options covered in the the draft (Direct link to that part http://www.recfishwest.org.au/DraftSubmFMP225.htm#6 )One option does not include a general licence.
One point that needs to be stressed is that management needs to be adaptive and be changed if and as better information comes along which shows that the current management can be improved.
Don't expect that the rule changes to come in 2008 will be set for xx years. Expect changes from time to time.
TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background......
Recfishwest - looking after YOUR recreational fishing future. http://www.recfishwest.org.au/
You need Recfishwest to look after your recreational fishing interests. Who else has the time, the knowledge, the professional approach, the realistic alternatives, the willingness and the contacts?
Recfishwest needs YOUR support. We would really like you to become a member, get involved and help us.
You can join for just $20 or $10 for over 65/under 18, $40 for a family of 4 - by post, by phone 9246 3366, fax 9246 5955, by email , in person, or fill in a website form see http://www.recfishwest.org.au/MembershipDet.htm
Tell us what you think and ask us to explain anything you don't agree with - you may give new details which will change Recfishwest's decision.
You are the ones who benefit when Recfishwest succeeds, or you will lose out when Recfishwest is ignored.
GOATRUTAR
Posts: 3691
Date Joined: 12/04/07
Wal the problem is to reduce
Wal the problem is to reduce what target!
Is the figure of demersal species that are caught by the amatures really accurate?
I know the information is based on the creel surveys but how accurate is it?
It is these things that worry me.
I fish and target these species and I find that from year to year my catch rate is really steady.In fact it is within a couple of fish each year.
Maybe I just can't except the problem is as big as the fisheries make it because I'm sceptical about some of their previous decisions and closures.
IF IT SMELLS LIKE FISH IT MUST BE GOOD FOR YOU!
TerryF
Posts: 374
Date Joined: 11/08/05
RFW DRAFT response Managing the Recreational Demersal Catch
That's because the fish are being mined (removed) not being sustainably harvested.
And recreational catch data is not the only source of information.
See page 7 of Fisheries Research Report No. 163 http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/frr/frr163/frr163.pdf
DRAFT response by Recfishwest to Fisheries Management Paper 225:- http://www.recfishwest.org.au/DraftSubmFMP225.htm
TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background......
Wally
Posts: 171
Date Joined: 13/09/06
Ruta I hear what ya saying,
Ruta I hear what ya saying, whether we like it or not, there are too many fisherman and not enough fish
Fisheries are saying 100 tonnes of jewies can be caught by the rec sector, in the bigger picture, this isn't that many, in actual fact that figure scares the jeeheebas out of me. it equals to about 20,000 Jewies which spread out for the west coast recreational fisherman isnt that many divided up. couple of fish each at most
You /me and everyone else needs to get there head around it before fisheries make the decisions for us, whether ya believe them or not, its going too happen.
Again the science/ research is minimal, but thats what they are using, snooze and you will loose, its called the precautionary principle and thats what is happening
Wal
GOATRUTAR
Posts: 3691
Date Joined: 12/04/07
Quote:"That's because the
Quote:
Terry what is the difference?
How can you determine the difference between mining and harvesting when these fish move around a vast area and get taken from a multitude of spots.
Quote:
"Aside from the strong recruitment pulse, there is evidence of a substantial decline in the numbers of older fish during the past decade. The maximum observed age of dhufish has dropped 10 years from 41 to 31 years old, and the proportion of older dhufish (>13 year old) in the catch has decreased from 28% to 9%. This lack of older fish is indicative of recent depletion. It should be noted that while large fish are still being caught in the fishery, they are not necessarily old fish because length varies greatly with age. Length is not a good indicator of age, with a large dhufish of 900 mm total length possibly being anywhere from age 10 to more than 30 years due to growth
slowing markedly after maturity and inherent variability in growth rate."
The average sized fish that is taken on my boat over the period of a year would be in excess of 10kgs and that means "generally" over 850mm with maybe 10 fish over 900mm.(Size dhuies)
These are records that I have kept in excess of 5 years,so I have not seen a change and infact an increase in catch on some years.It is stated that the older fish (>13 years old) numbers has dropped 60+% but I simply do not believe this as being true.
I don't see that as decline and I go from my own records and use that as a guide.
I know that the information is correct rather than someone possibly tweaking figures!
Terry you will have to excuse my scepticism when it comes to figures and it isn't a direct crack at you just the figures that get put forward to everyone.Some people believe everything that is written and when someone like yourself makes a post they take it as gospel.
IF IT SMELLS LIKE FISH IT MUST BE GOOD FOR YOU!
Jamie Chester
Posts: 80
Date Joined: 12/11/06
Rutar just so you know what
Rutar just so you know what you are seeing is the product of some unusually strong recruitment that has led to there being some 10 kilo plus fish around.
It is extremely lucky that we had 3 years of good recruitment 11-14 years ago or right now we would be stuffed.
These fish move around a vast area????? The exact opposite is probably true - i used to be a non believer like that too but too many tag returns are coming in that suggest that at best dhuies move a moderate amount - not vast distances.
EVERY figure that has been produced over the whole fishery has concluded that the pressure is too high for dhuies and snapper.
Next time you go fishing try turning off your GPS and tell me how you go.
www.accessantennas.com.au
TerryF
Posts: 374
Date Joined: 11/08/05
RFW DRAFT response Managing the Recreational Demersal Catch
Age and size don't always correlate, as quoted earlier. You don't know the ages of those fish you caught, and the ones covered in the Research report HAVE had their ages measured.
My last post was largely a quote from one part of Fisheries Research Report No. 163 http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/frr/frr163/frr163.pdf
I could have added a reference to pages 92 to 97 which has LOTS more information about the age structure of dhufish from commercial, recreational and research captures.
I don't want that and and don't think that happens, and to avoid that I give the links so that people can read the source and decide for themselves
This is a complex topic and people need to get the facts, not just grabs of a few opinions from forum posts.
That Research Report gives evidence that dhufish are being overfished in the West Coast region.
If you want to argue against that, and if you think the Minister will take notice of your limited data compared to what is in that report, then the reality is you've already lost that argument because the Minister and most recreational fishermen agree too many fish are being caught and that some real cuts in catches are needed and you will not change their minds about that.
Moving on - this post is about getting comments on the response by Recfishwest to Fisheries Management Paper 225:- http://www.recfishwest.org.au/DraftSubmFMP225.htm
TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background......
GOATRUTAR
Posts: 3691
Date Joined: 12/04/07
Jamie it is not rocket
Jamie it is not rocket science but granted the gps makes it alot easier.
I fished last Thursday and all fish taken on the day were on new ground!
Quote
"These fish move around a vast area????? The exact opposite is probably true - i used to be a non believer like that too but too many tag returns are coming in that suggest that at best dhuies move a moderate amount - not vast distances"
Define "moderate amount"!!10-100kms.
The word "Moderate" is being used because the truth is unknown!
The reported mortality rate of dhufish that are released is of a extremely high percentage so the amount of tag returns would be minimal!
My theory with the dhufish is that they have preferred paths and could possibly move through certain routes on a year to year basis.They will congregate in these areas if there is sufficient food and suitable structure.
I have no doubt at all that they will travel from depths of 100m into 10m on a regular basis over their lifetime in an effort to feed and breed.I know of mates who have seen breeding congregations of 20-30 fish in 10m of water.
I also know divers who dive depths of 40m and see dhuies on a regular basis at certain times of the year and then none for months.
Also Terry what other data is being used apart from the creel surveys to determine the rec catchs.
Quote
"IT equals to about 20,000 Jewies which spread out for the west coast recreational fisherman isnt that many divided up. couple of fish each at most"
Wal heaps of registered boats used in a heap of different applications.
Not all boats are fishermans and I would say it would be the minority who get into dhuies!
I have no-doubt that there is heaps that aim to catch dhuies but reality is that not many do on a regular basis.
Jamie Chester
Posts: 80
Date Joined: 12/11/06
Yeah fair enough Rutar -
Yeah fair enough Rutar - dont disagree with what you are saying for the most part re dhuie movement because i suspect the same - though it is interesting that almost all non-anecdotal evidence that exists suggests low movement - there is one fish that moved from rotto to ledge point - but that is the exception - there have been quite a few tag returns btw.
Anyway all this is irrelevant - the minister has decided that rec catch needs to be reduced - how do you suggest it should best be done - curious about comments on my ideas but of course on the whole rfw draft too.
www.accessantennas.com.au
GOATRUTAR
Posts: 3691
Date Joined: 12/04/07
Quote "This is a complex
Quote
You get to have your posts and I'm just adding a different perspective.
This is a complex topic granted!
These are facts that I know are true!
Sorry Terry I will keep my limited data to myself.
Only stating my own opinion not that of everyone and simply telling it as I find it!
IF IT SMELLS LIKE FISH IT MUST BE GOOD FOR YOU!
GOATRUTAR
Posts: 3691
Date Joined: 12/04/07
Jamie you will have to
Jamie you will have to excuse my ignorance but I'm not sure who the log book works!
How would it be policed?When has it been used before?
IF IT SMELLS LIKE FISH IT MUST BE GOOD FOR YOU!
Jamie Chester
Posts: 80
Date Joined: 12/11/06
OK - when you get a cat 1
OK - when you get a cat 1 license you get issued with a log book - whenever you land fish you must fill out the logbook before you leave the ramp - it can be policed easily because whatever fish you have onboard must equate to the log book entry eg two dhuies one baldie and a pinkie if you are checked.
Is it easy to fudge? - well no easier than any other system - if you want to any system will be beatable for the cheats and to dissuade people the enforcement must be there and the fines stern enough to make people think twice.
The other advantages as I see it is the potential for more complete insight into total rec catch and the potential for adaptive management - and you can also limit users who take more than their fair share - like i said there could be a limit of ten dhuies per person per year using the logbook system for example - this could be changed to lower/higher once the rec take is measured (or extapolated from a random sample given the limited resources available for collating info) far more accurately than creel surveys.
Its also a good way for people personally to be aware of exactly how much fish they take.
I want people to pick holes in my ideas - feel free.
www.accessantennas.com.au
Wally
Posts: 171
Date Joined: 13/09/06
Wal heaps of registered
Wal heaps of registered boats used in a heap of different applications.
Not all boats are fishermans and I would say it would be the minority who get into dhuies!
yep your right Ruta on the registered boat thing, But the point is not boats, its fisherman, how many hard core fisherman, most boats have 2 or 3 on board, So even if there was 1000 hard core boats on the west coast, carrying 3,000 fisherman, 20,000 Jewies equals too less then 7 jewies per year, now I personally think that these figures are very Conservative. I reckon there would be alot more fisherman fishing for Jewies then 3000 on the whole west coast from Augusta to kalbari
The above is a classic example of why ya need compulsory log books, to much pie in the sky stuff, its the biggest problem that the fisheries department face, we really don't know what is getting ripped out, and until we do know, it will always be the coms take more, or fisheries have got there facts wrong,
And don't sell it as a log book, Its a fishing diary, that legally you have to submit, its got ya moon phases/ tides/ conditions etc just like what you would write in your personal diaries now, you keep a copy for your reference and the department get one
Wal
Jamie Chester
Posts: 80
Date Joined: 12/11/06
Wal you wouldnt have to
Wal you wouldnt have to submit it - fisheries would request a certain number per year that are picked at random and results could be extrapolated from there - its easy! You could actually have 2000 handed in then collate the results from 500 1000 1500 2000 and see how they vary - eventually you would know how many you need to get pretty spot on figures.
www.accessantennas.com.au
Adam Gallash
Posts: 7815
Date Joined: 29/11/05
Yep
Thats how it will work Jamie. Which is effectively the same way the creel survey works. Sample representation.
As for a sustainable fishery. I just can't see it happening without further bag limit cuts in the metropolitan, which is what we are discussing. I think it would be unfair for the pro's to take all the cuts and the recs not to. Without the pro's in these areas there will now be more fish available to the rec sector. So whilst you may not be able to take as many on a given day, you will have more fish to take in general in the longer term.
As an angler who is consistently able to get a good catch for a feed Goat. I wouldn't think that these changes would make too much of a difference for you. All you need to do is diversify your catch and become better at catching more species. I spose it all really depends on what management measures are implemented. I can't say I've read all the background information available, but based on personal experience I think dhuies are under extreme pressure from over fishing in the West Coast bioregion. Based upon how long it takes for a dhuie to get to size and catch rates indicated in the previous West Coast creel survey, our current fishing practices aren't a sustainable exercise. They will undertake the surveys again next year to confirm the accuracy of their statistics.
Whilst some may doubt their accuracy, I can assure you that having done the base level of compiling those statistics for analysis, there is no need for them to be manipulated. Having done the peak tourism (fishing) period for the Gascoyne region, you would be very very suprised by the amount of fish being removed. We are talking a very small amount of boats as compared to what goes out every weekend in the Perth metropolitan that tries to get their bag limit/or enough for a feed.
IMO, things need to change and the sooner the better. I just hope they don't push it too far, but some conservative management plans would be great to ensure fish for the future, rather than fish for now.
Cheers,
Adam
GOATRUTAR
Posts: 3691
Date Joined: 12/04/07
If the dhuies are under
If the dhuies are under threat reduce the bag on those but why the whole lot of cat 1 fish!
One of the reasons for buying the sounder that I did was so I can have a look for the grey band and hapuka so this might be the next target!We really don't get a great deal more species than that on the bottom bounce!
IF IT SMELLS LIKE FISH IT MUST BE GOOD FOR YOU!
Ewan
Posts: 93
Date Joined: 15/05/06
log books...
I like the log book idea Jamie - a part of the reason i like it is as Wally said it can be marketed more like a fishing diary, gives people ownership over their fish stocks, like we are actively participating in the management of our fish. and, as Ruta demonstrates, it is a pretty cool record to have for your own enjoyment! every fish ive every caught...that would be cool to document. but i wouldnt unless inspired by Da Law.
hard to police the compulsory reporting/logging, but anything is when there are bugger-all policemen. You could quite easily say that current bag limits and size restrictions are hard to police when you are in one of the most sparsely populated jurisdictions on the planet...i reckon ive been checked 3 times in my life, and i am sure many others are the same...yet i keep to bag limits cos i know why they are there. actually i usually dont come close to 'achieving' bag limits cos i dont think they are tight enough! education is the key and Fisheries (and RFW) are pretty good at that i think.
I also like the capping of the pointy-end fishers aspect of it too, if say the whole years take is limited - one problem with any kind of bag limit restrictions is that all you need to do is go fishing more, and of course as the population grows, more people will be fishing anyway, so cutting bag limits is doing nothing more than keeping up with population growth, fishing effort etc...obviously we have been taking more than we should for long enough to be close to crisis point, i think that relying on bag limit cuts couldnt possibly do the job required, no matter how savage they were. Think of all the baby boomers about to retire and go fishing every day...!!! lucky buggers...
i am up for spatial and temporal closures for both rec and pro fishers. i dont have a boat (have to rely on Gully's generosity there!!) and so perhaps am not qualified to comment on the impacts of such closures for demersals, but with more research (and it seems this is happening) to find out where and when, it would seem logical to avoid spawning aggregations - is this when they are schooling? anyone out there ever come across a school, caught their bag, and then told someone else where they were, and/or gone back the next day? i have, all within the law. and i know of plenty of examples where people have done this well and truly outside of what is legal. a bag limit reduction wouldnt stop such exploitation. perhaps a closure could.
However we cant RELY on there being top-quality research for these kinds of decisions - due to the cost, skills and time required, it wont be around for a long long time, and the precautionary principle should reign supreme i think. Otherwise by the time we have the research we will simply say that we should have done X or Y sooner. Look at the climate change 'debate'. All it did was stall any kind of action for the length of the 'debate'. There has been plenty enough evidence for long enough to know it to be true and i think the same can be said for the state of our fisheries. Having said that there is no point in implementing a closure at the wrong time of year or in the wrong place.
innovative thinking in terms of management strategies, and education to reduce the number of offenders are certainly needed. i wasnt able to go to the meetings but am stoked to read the thinking in the posts above and for Terry and RFWs drive on this issue. this is a pretty good chance to develop worlds-best management for our children's children's fish...
we need to always remember too, that we are only one component of a fish's lifecyle, there are many other impacts on their populations, and so any management should factor in alot of spare room for other impacts/responses. for example things like climate change and pollution/developments/habitat loss. for e.g. there are significant changes predicted for the marine environment in response to sea level rise and global warming http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/impacts/publications/marinelife.html
plus ever more industry and population, we must continue to make sacrifices to ensure future stocks are able to respond to pressures...its not just overfishing that should be considered or talked about...
Ewan
TerryF
Posts: 374
Date Joined: 11/08/05
YOUR future for fishing for demersals in West Coast.
Thanks for the comments so far on YOUR future for fishing for demersals in West Coast.
Recfishwest wants feedback from you - especially our members.
There will be some changes to the submission, including making definitive recommendations where we have included options in the draft.
Recfishwest pushed the envelope to get a draft out in enough time for realistic discussion by the community.
We need some real comments on our draft which will be debated by the elected Board on Monday and Wednesday 12 and 14 November before submissions close on 16 November - just a week away.
This is a really big issue and we know that we can't make everyone happy, but we need some feedback from the silent ones that read the threads but rarely comment
We are interested in teasing out good ideas, not writing a submission for individuals - they can do that themselves.
It is not easy trying to run a middle road with such a diverse user group but we believe that overall, the submission has something for just about everyone.
It doesn't mean that we will win the day, we just have to do the best possible. We do want anglers to have a peak body that they can be proud of for having a go.
We KNOW that the RFW submission will be read very carefully by the people who will make the recommendations and the decisions.
If ever this sentence applied, this is one of those times:-
.
.
The link to DRAFT response by Recfishwest to Fisheries Management Paper 225:- http://www.recfishwest.org.au/DraftSubmFMP225.htm
TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background......
Recfishwest - looking after YOUR recreational fishing future. http://www.recfishwest.org.au/
You need Recfishwest to look after your recreational fishing interests. Who else has the time, the knowledge, the professional approach, the realistic alternatives, the willingness and the contacts?
Recfishwest needs YOUR support. We would really like you to become a member, get involved and help us.
You can join for just $20 or $10 for over 65/under 18, $40 for a family of 4 - by post, by phone 9246 3366, fax 9246 5955, by email , in person, or fill in a website form see http://www.recfishwest.org.au/MembershipDet.htm
Tell us what you think and ask us to explain anything you don't agree with - you may give new details which will change Recfishwest's decision.
TerryF
Posts: 374
Date Joined: 11/08/05
Final version of comments recreational demersal fishing
The final version of the RFW submission to FMP225 is on the RFW website at http://www.recfishwest.org.au/SubDemersalFishingFMP225.htm
This has changes from the draft, some of which which specifically mention the comments and suggestions RFW has received from RFW members and comments on the forums.
Comments to Dept of Fisheries on FMP225 close Friday 16 November.
What happens after that? Quoting from FMP 225 page 6:-
That's the reason for item 6 in the RFW submission "Support a submission assessment committee to be comprised of..."
TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background......
Recfishwest - looking after YOUR recreational fishing future. http://www.recfishwest.org.au/
You need Recfishwest to look after your recreational fishing interests. Who else has the time, the knowledge, the professional approach, the realistic alternatives, the willingness and the contacts?
Recfishwest needs YOUR support. We would really like you to become a member, get involved and help us.
You can join for just $20 or $10 for over 65/under 18, $40 for a family of 4 - by post, by phone 9246 3366, fax 9246 5955, by email , in person, or fill in a website form see http://www.recfishwest.org.au/MembershipDet.htm
Tell us what you think and ask us to explain anything you don't agree with - you may give new details which will change Recfishwest's decision.
You are the ones who benefit when Recfishwest succeeds, or you will lose out when Recfishwest is ignored.