COMMERCIAL QUOTAS: SHOULD OCEAN BEACH & ESTUARY HAUL FISHERS HAVE QUOTAS?

[CEO]

    There is much misunderstanding of the role of some commercial fishing operations. We are hearing a call from some rec fishers for quotas, to be placed on commercial beach and estuary haulers. For what reason we are not sure. This topic may expose the reasons and/or the myths.

[CEO]

    If Australian Salmon were permitted to be harvested by commercial beach haulers, would anyone want a quota on the volume they can harvest? What about the annual spawning run of mullet out of the estuaries? That event too, is just around the corner. Anzac Day is usually the trigger, though it obviously has more to do with the phase of the moon, than a Diggers Day. Lots of us just love fresh Sea Mullet!

[clive]

Marine park zones have restricted the activities of beach haulers...ouch!

[CEO]

    .......and the pipi harvesters too, Clive. Drat!

[ACTAngler]

The answer would depend on whether the existing management arrangements (incl. limited entry through shares, gear restrictions, area and seasonal closures) are working or not.  Are any of the target species classified as overfished?

[CEO]

           Where's Woodie, with his ideas on quotas? This is the place to air them Woodie.

[woodie]

lets get some facts say about 1.8 tonnes  per year from Crowdy to Laurieton including pipies, worms, from the general fishermen, women, family and kids sea river rough figures though. This would be over estimate I reckoned.


Commercial fisherman would kill this by 1000 times, by sea, beach and river in this Zone area planned, this would under estimated on commercial....


Not just Quota?s, but how far they can travel within there area.

[woodie]

But don't forget they get every thing in there net, by the tonne no matter size the fish is.

[ACTAngler]

But don't forget they get every thing in there net, by the tonne no matter size the fish is.

Sounds like a gear selectivity issue to me.  Are they overfishing the target (and non-target) species, or not...

[kingpro]

         I think we might need a reality check here - 1,800 kilos for rec fishers in Crowdy / Laurieton area and 1,000 times that for pro fishers in the same area would mean the pros are catching 1,800,000 kgs of product from this small area = 1.8 million kilos That is so far from fact it is fantasy.
          Pros dont catch everything in their nets -  beach haul net sizes are set by DPI regulation to allow undersize fish to escape and net lengths are set to minimise gross catch size.
          The predominate catch for beach haul (Mullet) is considered by DPI scientists  to be a fully sustainable fishery in its current form.
          The minimum set mesh net is 3&3/4 inch mesh - too big to catch virtually any undersize fish.
           Pro fishers are subject to hundreds of stringent regulations including weekend and seasonal closures, daytime closures, night closures, area closures and a myriad of other rules and regulations that are fervently enforced by fisheries and marine park, food authority and maritime inspectors. Rules many rec fishers have never heard of. Pro fishing would have to be one of (if not the most) overregulated professions there is - and getting more regulated every day.
            So dont go bleating its open slather = nothing is further from the truth.
'kinpro
         

[woodie]

         I think we might need a reality check here - 1,800 kilos for rec fishers in Crowdy / Laurieton area and 1,000 times that for pro fishers in the same area would mean the pros are catching 1,800,000 kgs of product from this small area = 1.8 million kilos That is so far from fact it is fantasy.
          Pros dont catch everything in their nets -  beach haul net sizes are set by DPI regulation to allow undersize fish to escape and net lengths are set to minimise gross catch size.
          The predominate catch for beach haul (Mullet) is considered by DPI scientists  to be a fully sustainable fishery in its current form.
          The minimum set mesh net is 3&3/4 inch mesh - too big to catch virtually any undersize fish.
           Pro fishers are subject to hundreds of stringent regulations including weekend and seasonal closures, daytime closures, night closures, area closures and a myriad of other rules and regulations that are fervently enforced by fisheries and marine park, food authority and maritime inspectors. Rules many rec fishers have never heard of. Pro fishing would have to be one of (if not the most) overregulated professions there is - and getting more regulated every day.
            So dont go bleating its open slather = nothing is further from the truth.
'kinpro


       

I have watched the beach haulers in action and can tell you under size fish get caught up in the net as the fish are packed so tight  they have no room to slip through.

will be sticking beeking again this year.



i was asking for some 1 to get true figures on this including the trawlers, that's why i said X by 1000

many years ago i use to go out with a commercial fisho, who would target Jew, kings off diamond head and the times i went out we must of caught 50 odd Jew + kings on top.

and this bloke went out in any condition of sea so he fished a lot he was mad as a meat axe.

[billfisher]

Actually rec fishermen catch as many or more than the pros for a lot of popular species:

Survey of Recreational Fishing in
New South Wales (NSW DPI)

Comparisons between the recreational and commercial catches in NSW
(table 1) indicated that the fisheries were geographically distinct. Species
forming the bulk of the commercial catch were generally taken from coastal or
offshore waters, while the major portion of the recreational catch was taken
from estuarine waters. Both groups of fishers harvested about 200 species of
fish, but the total recreational catch was about 30% of the total commercial
catch. About 6 of the prominent species harvested by both fishing groups
were taken in greater numbers by recreational fishers. These species were
generally common estuarine species taken in metropolitan waters where the
number of recreational fishers and their fishing effort was greatest. These
results were anticipated and were consistent with the information provided by
earlier small-scale studies.


Table 1. Harvest of NSW recreational fishing catches compared with an
estimate of NSW commercial fishery landings (grouped species).


Harvest of key species by fishing sector
Recreational (kg) Commercial (kg)*

Whiting 394,081 1,181,793
Flathead 886,824 496,335
Bream 728,752 365,383
Garfish 22,672 97,875
Tailor 252,736 190,675
Aust. salmon 221,977 790,143
Snapper 116,967 273,159
Trevally 87,530 273,884
Leatherjackets 107,966 117,034
Wrasse/tuskfish/gropers 52,373 69,810
Luderick 280,130 503,600
Mackerels 128,627 443,567
Cod (various) 8,133 35,835
Catfish 94,222 28,965
Mulloway 273,703 63,796
Morwong 139,929 429,606
Tuna/bonitos 844,480 1,000,500
Sharks/rays 60,186 441,090
Yellowtail kingfish 180,003 137,349
Prawns (saltwater) 104,833 2,346,976
Blue swimmer crab 154,831 165,461
Squid/cuttlefish 65,717 824,183
Mud crab 30,000 135,144
Lobsters 7,398 120,000

*data derived from a range of Commonwealth and State sources. Other
species data based on a 5 year average of ocean fishery landings into NSW.

[CEO]

   Thanks folks. Clearly this is the debate we have to have. The recreational harvest of Mulloway is about 5 times more than that of our commercial colleagues.
    Why these myths get traction and are perpetuated, has always been a mystery to us. And then there are those who blame the poor old pro when all he is doing is providing the community with fresh product and providing for his family. And commercial fishers are only doing what the government permits them to do and work within the regulations. So why they are targetted, instead of the government, is also a mystery to us.
     Of course there are those rec fishers who mistakenly believe that if all the pros were taken off the water, then there would be more fish for some recreational fishers. That too is another myth.
     Currently we are importing 70% of our fish from overseas. Another 20% comes from interstate. So really NSW impots about 90% of its seafood product. And look at the length of our coastline! That, to me, is a  scandalous situation. It's not the scarcity of the resource that is the problem. It's the bloody red tape! Our estuaries for certain, can handle a greater commercial effort.

[kingpro]

Mulloway recs 273,703  pros 63,796
Yellowtail kingfish recs 180,003  pros 137,349

Woodie,
            In light of the above figures of official catches of mulloway and kingfish showing significantly larger catches by the rec sector - what is your point about the pro fisher legally catching mulloway and kingfish for market.
            Members of the public who dont catch their own fish are also entitled to be able have access to the rescource ie eat fish.
            This pro fisher pays significant license fees to go about his work and is completely legal and entitled to do so.
             Are you saying the major impact on the rescource should be further restricted.
            The major impact is rec fishing.
             Please clarify what it is you want,it seems you are intent on blatant pro bashing.
'Kinpro

[woodie]

Definitely don't want further restrictions in this area, but why are the rec fisho being the target from crowdy to laurieton and if this goes ahead you would still be able to haul from beaches thats my point.

i rely on pro fishers when i want to make curried prawns.

Can we get specific figures from crowdy to laurieton area what rec fisho catch.


my point was the times i went on trawler hundreds of kg's of mulloway kings caught just off diamond head crowdy he did this for years before doing long line tuna. 

i'm not sure if other pro fisho do this in the area now