Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: MULLOWAY IN TROUBLE.  (Read 8004 times)
CEO
Development
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2138


View Profile
« on: September 10, 2008, 09:53:31 PM »

  Mulloway are currently heavily growth overfished. The massive fish kill on the Richmond River earlier this year, included thousands of juvenile Mulloway, which has added to the problem. (The Richmond estuary is one of the prime Mulloway growth and development sites in NSW.)
  Recent scientific studies unequivocally confirm that female Mulloway aren't sexually mature until they attain the length of 68 to 69 cm.
  Scientific sampling also indicates there is only 10% to 20% of breeding stock left in the biomass. (Alarm bells ring for scientists when brood stock gets down to 30%)
  Hence the current legal length of 45cm, with only two fish over 70cm and a bag limit of 5, is woefully inadequate to rejuvinate growth ovefished stocks.
  ECOfishers suggests a minimum legal length of 70cm immediately and for Queensland too. How would you feel about only one Mulloway (over 70cm) per person per day?  What are your views?
  The NSW recreational catch of Mulloway is about five times greater than the commercial catch.
PS Eastern Gemfish is the only species off our shores, currently recruitment overfished.
                                        Let's hear from you.
Logged
CEO
Development
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2138


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2008, 08:31:02 PM »

Great to hear from you fishers. An enormous response. We have taken all your views on board and are currently developing a proposition to put to the Minister. It will involve the commercial trawl fishery, being OBLIGED, by regulation, to fit a by-catch reduction device, known as a "Nordmore Grid," that will allow juvenile Mulloway up to 70cm to escape the cod end.  We will also be addressing the issue of Trawl and Red Spot Whiting fisheries in order that these commercial fishers aren't adversley impacted by our proposal. There is absolutely no point whatsoever, in recreational fishers, fishing to a reduced bag limit and greater legal length, if the commercial fishers don't have similar restrictions, by way of gear restrictions. (BRD's)
  So a huge thank you to those hundreds of rec fishing families who have already indicated they will only take one Mulloway and observe a minimum legal length of 70cm - that truly is "Conservation thru Sustainable Use." And that fishers, makes us all part of the solution. Well done.

 A number of our scientists and commercial fishers are working on our proposal. More details later by email.
Logged
CEO
Development
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2138


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: September 28, 2008, 08:56:02 PM »

UPDATE: Our proposal to the Minister, on your behalf, is now likely to include two (2) Mulloway of 70cm or more only, for NSW recreational fishers. We are also negotiating with Qld to have them adopt the same limits. Interestingly,the "Nordmore Grid," is compulsory on ocean trawlers in Qld waters and it is a NSW invention!
Logged
CEO
Development
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2138


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: September 28, 2008, 09:06:21 PM »

 ECOfishers, we have just been asked, "Who wants more than one 5kg Mulloway a day anyway?"
  Well, I can only think of blackmarketeers. I've never eaten a 45cm Mulloway either. We call them "soapies," for obvious reasons. Estuarine fishers may bag out on them because of their schooling nature at that age and stage. Not for me. I enjoy real fish.
Logged
Spiney
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 94


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: September 29, 2008, 07:32:47 AM »

I certainly support two or even one Mulloway over 70cm per day. Interesting that certain species are considered to taste better. I think both Mulloway and Snapper are highly over rated. I enjoy eating Eastern Rock Blackfish and even the lowly Luderick if prepared correctly. It is a shame Luderick at times become a wasted resource fetching as little as a couple of dollars per kilo at the local co op. If the catch was correctly prepared for marketing it may attract a higher price. Unfortunately I have not to date been able to enjoy a meal of Australian Salmon.
Logged
CEO
Development
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2138


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: September 29, 2008, 03:18:21 PM »

  .....and a fat lot of use government marine parks have been, in arresting the Mulloway decline over a decade! Most of the commercial fishers who took a buy-out in the Cape Byron Political Park, have used their "golden handshake" to buy back into the industry!
Logged
smittt
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: September 29, 2008, 08:32:28 PM »

nothing worse than seeing a school of small jew being caught like chopper tailor
Up the size limit please and hopefully we can see a return like the kingfish
Logged
ACTAngler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 633


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: September 29, 2008, 10:03:14 PM »

I would support a size limit of 60-65 and a bag limit of 1, only with a corresponding 80% reduction in commercial catch.
Logged

No more fishing bans please.
sandfly
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 129


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2008, 08:22:46 AM »

      I consider any size limit under 70cm as achieving little. Mulloway don't reach sexual maturity until 68-69 cm so let them at least breed once before they become someones dinner. Bag limit of 2 seems reasonable even for a fisher with a big family.
Remember we represent " sustainable ecology" lets practice it.
      We are always condemning the Radical Greens about lockup and lock out without scientific backing. Here is a chance to show we respect the environment and can play a part in insuring its future by using scientific data to everybodies avantage.
Logged
CEO
Development
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2138


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2008, 11:24:56 AM »

  Great. This is just what we love to see, "ECOfishers making people part of the solution!"
  Nordmore grids are a compulsory mechanical by-catch exclusion device in most other developed countries around the world, including Queensland.  Why not in NSW? They are simply made, from a variety of materials including plastic and aluminium and sown into the net. A 100mm gap between the bars would seem to be our preferred option.
  One NSW commercial fleet has trialled and tested them extensively and are so pleased with the results, 90% of that fleet are using them permanently, on a voluntary basis and loving it!
  Surely, anything we can do to reduce the by-catch from trawl nets has got to be a good thing for the resource.
     Conservation through sustainable use. Making people part of the solution. Go ECOfishers.
                                        WHAT DO YOU THINK?
   PS   A 70cm Mulloway has a mass of about 4kg, a nice table sized fish and beyond that "soapy" stage. Two of those a day is more than fair.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2008, 11:30:31 AM by CEO » Logged
CEO
Development
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2138


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2008, 11:43:28 AM »

MUST HAVE: This is the debate we all must have, fisheries biologists, marine scientists, recreational fishers, commercial fishers and the community at large, so get into it! The extreme Greens think they have a mortgage on all the solutions - preservation is their catch cry. Lock it up and lock the community out! Well they don't. ECOfishers on behalf of the community seek sustainable solutions. Conservation (not preservation) through sustainable use. Iy is your fishery. It is our resource. Your views are valued.
                                POST YOUR VIEWS NOW.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2008, 11:47:09 AM by CEO » Logged
ACTAngler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 633


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: September 30, 2008, 10:17:41 PM »

I thought BRDs were already being phased in under the Fisheries Management Amendment (Fishing Gear) Regulation 2008 in NSW?  I understood them to be "compulsory" in the Estuary Prawn Trawl and Ocean Trawl fisheries, but with a phase-in period till 1 Jan 2009.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2008, 10:27:27 PM by ACTAngler » Logged

No more fishing bans please.
CEO
Development
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2138


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: September 30, 2008, 11:23:56 PM »

If it is anything like the "phase in" of snapper legal lengths to 35cm, we could all be waiting another 5 years. The parlous state of Mulloway stocks can't wait that long, otherwise they would be headed for "recruitment overfished." Already brood stocks are about the 30% critical mass, the scientists announce. And the size of the spawning biomass is absolutely crucial to the sustainability of the stocks. Pity you didn't have the opportunity to attend the three day Australian Society for Fish Biology Annual Conference, where a number of presentations were made on this very topic. The Society invited ECOfisher NSW to make a presentation. And we have been invited again next year, to Perth..
  ECOfishers expects some positive leadership on this issue from the Minister. We want him to put the "fish" back into NSW Fisheries. Under his watch, a number of recreationally important species are now classified as "fully fished." Now that's not a record any Minister would be proud of!
« Last Edit: September 30, 2008, 11:35:20 PM by CEO » Logged
CEO
Development
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2138


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: September 30, 2008, 11:28:29 PM »

......... and a very big thank you also, to the spear fishers for their support for the ECOfishers proposal. It is a win - win proposal. A win for fishers and a win for the resource. Fishing sustainably and making people part of the solution.
Logged
ACTAngler
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 633


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: September 30, 2008, 11:37:25 PM »

Re: mulloway, the Status of Fisheries Resources in NSW 2006-07 states that the 68-69cm is the "50% size at maturity" size, which I understand to mean that 50% of females would be sexually mature at this size.  This report also suggests that "optimum length at first capture is in the range 80-100cm".  Should the minimum size be greater than 70cm?
Logged

No more fishing bans please.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9   Go Up
  Print  


 



 

 
Jump to: