|
ACTAngler
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: September 30, 2008, 11:44:05 PM » |
|
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..
I couldn't get off work unfortunately. Maybe we can catch up at the National Recreational Fishing Conference in Canberra in October.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
No more fishing bans please.
|
|
|
|
sandfly
|
 |
« Reply #16 on: October 01, 2008, 07:22:49 AM » |
|
Does New South Wales Fishing Clubs Association and Anglers Action Group have an opinion of this subject? Let's hear it here. Seems support is really strong. BRD's of size to allow escape of small mulloway from trawl nets are a must and must be of a size that allows Houdini performances by at least 95% of all Mulloway under 70 cm.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
 |
« Reply #17 on: October 01, 2008, 09:50:59 AM » |
|
Now the Greenies are cashing in on this debate. They advise they want ALL trawling banned within the 3nm limit ( state territorial waters) because of it's impact on marine mammals and the Grey Nurse shark!!! ECOfishers can't support that. Where would we get our fresh prawns, squid, octopus, Balmain bugs etc from???
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
 |
« Reply #18 on: October 01, 2008, 01:05:57 PM » |
|
Marine scientists and fisheries biologists advise that 50% of brood stock in the biomass, is more than sufficient to maintain stocks at sustainable levels. Fisheries managers agree. From the current Mulloway research ECOfishers have been involved with, we know that Mulloway are highly fecund and grow rapidly, so 50% is considered appropriate. One of the inadequacies with the current Schedule of Legal Lengths, for Mulloway, is that recreational fishers are legally permitted to take 60% of their daily harvest, BEFORE it has reached sexual maturity. There's not much sense or science in that.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 01, 2008, 01:15:00 PM by CEO »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
 |
« Reply #19 on: October 01, 2008, 01:18:16 PM » |
|
Isn't it a typical response from the Greenies. Lock it up, ban it and throw away the key. That's not conservation. That's pure PRESERVATION.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
 |
« Reply #20 on: October 01, 2008, 09:33:07 PM » |
|
Now we have got consumer groups telling ECOfishers they want their trawled seafood, "certified dolphin and by-catch free!" Apparently that is what is required in the USA for the export market. Crikey! Where is this all going? Is it labelled "Dolphin Free Shrimp?"
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
 |
« Reply #21 on: October 02, 2008, 10:22:36 PM » |
|
DON'T SHOOT THE MESSANGER! Now that this debate has made the mrdia, we must all be careful NOT to shoot the messanger. Commercial fishers work within the Labor government regulations. So whether you agree with commercial trawling (estuarine or offshore) or not, it is not the commercial fishers who are doing anything wrong. They are simply working to government regulations. ECOfishers has received a lot of vitriolic comment concerning trawling activities by commercial fishers. A lot of it is both unfounded and unjustified. Estuarine and ocean trawling are both legetimate commercial fishing activities under Labor's Fisheries Management Act. However, that is not to say both operations can't be refined, improved and made more environmentally sustainable. This is what is behind your ECOfishers proposal to improve things. After all I've never been a fan of the imported Vannami prawns. I've always preferred fresh local product. To me imported Vannami prawns are in the same tub as Asian Bassa. (Catfish) So all, let's not throw the baby out with the bath water and don't shoot the messanger. Estuarine and ocean trawling is perfectly legal under current Labor government legislation. Hence, should you have a problem with trawling in any of its various forms, don't target commercial fishers. They are only doing what is permitted by law and regulation. Target the law makers!
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 02, 2008, 10:25:47 PM by CEO »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Nete-Quette
|
 |
« Reply #22 on: October 03, 2008, 03:17:15 PM » |
|
MEDIA RELEASE 1.10.08
Mulloway Stocks Overfished
ECOfishers, the voice of NSW recreational fishers, is calling for a radical review of Mulloway stock management in our recreational and commercial fisheries.
Fisheries biologists and marine scientists have identified Mulloway stocks as currently ?growth overfished?. (Growth overfishing occurs when stocks are harvested before attaining sexual maturity and the opportunity to spawn.) And government marine parks have done absolutely nothing to arrest this decline.
A contributing factor is that with declining stocks, the current legal length (45cm) and bag limit (5 Mulloway with only 2 over 70cm, is woefully inadequate.
The latest science confirms female Mulloway don?t attain sexual maturity until 68cm in length and 3.5kg in mass. This iconic species grows to 30kg at 165cm, and lives for at least 24 years. Mulloway are a superb angling species and table fish.
Fisheries statistics estimate the recreational harvest of Mulloway is up to five times (x5), the commercial harvest.
What is not considered in these estimates is the by-catch of juvenile Mulloway (under 45cm), that are caught, killed and disposed of, in the commercial Ocean Trawl Fishery.
The Solution: ECOfishers? solution involves additional restrictions on both recreational and commercial fishers.
ECOfishers proposes a bag limit of only 2 Mulloway per person per day, 70cm or longer, for recreational fishers IF the Minister makes the ?Nordmore Grid? (a mechanical by-catch exclusion device sown into the cod end of an ocean trawl net), compulsory by regulation for off-shore trawlers working inside the 15 fathom depth contour.
Clarence River estuary trawlermen have voluntarily been using this by-catch exclusion device for some time, with remarkable success. These commercial fishers are leading lights in resource management.
Part of our proposal is also to make the Trawl Whiting fishery a separate boutique fishery with separate endorsements. Alternatively, it may be better to identify the Whiting Trawl grounds, on which the Nordmore Grid would be exempt.
ECOfishers? proposal is a total package. One component hinges on the other. There is no point in reducing the recreational harvest if the commercial fishery similarly does not contribute by way of by-catch reduction devices.
The science is clear. The warning lights are flashing. The scientific community has confirmed it.
So ECOfishers calls upon the Minister to take immediate and decisive steps to arrest this decline. We want Minister Macdonald to demonstrate some positive leadership on this issue, and put the ?fish? back into NSW Fisheries.
Ken Thurlow CEO ECOfishers NSW
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Nete-Quette
|
 |
« Reply #23 on: October 03, 2008, 03:24:31 PM » |
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ACTAngler
|
 |
« Reply #24 on: October 03, 2008, 07:18:26 PM » |
|
What paper was that published in? I can't wait to read the replies!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
No more fishing bans please.
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
 |
« Reply #25 on: October 03, 2008, 08:22:58 PM » |
|
Nice little article published in todays Tweed Daily News. Look out for the same media release in the Northern Star, the Grafton Examiner, the Coffs Coast Advocate and the Port Macquarie News, to name a few regional dailies. The Sydney Telegraph is toying with it. Can some of our members get it to the Newcastle Herald, the Port Stephens Examiner, the Bay Post etc. Already this topic is is red-hot among commercial radio talk back shows, on the Far North Coast. This is a debate the community MUST have. At least ECOfishers is putting the "fish" back into NSW Fisheries!
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 03, 2008, 08:31:21 PM by CEO »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
 |
« Reply #26 on: October 04, 2008, 10:03:25 AM » |
|
4/10/08. ECOfishers media release appears in the Coffs Coast Advocate, on a Saturday morning - their largest circulation day. And already it has the fishing community buzzing!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
 |
« Reply #27 on: October 04, 2008, 11:06:30 AM » |
|
Some vigorous responses already from the Coffs Harbour area, all highly supportive. Only one cranky recreational fisher doesn't want the current bag limits changed. He says ban all trawling everywhere and he enjoys catching and consuming 45 cm Mulloway from the estuaries along the mid north coast. ECOfishers has sent him a copy of a Mulloway scientific report. Now that may change his views.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
sandfly
|
 |
« Reply #28 on: October 04, 2008, 11:14:32 AM » |
|
Even bait suppliers are supporting ECOfishers stance on mulloway. Seems they can see the benefit. Those grumpy old fishers are few and far between and only see the "me,now" side of the equation. What is the professional fishers reaction to suggested policy? Most of them are realistic operators and should see this as assisting their environmental endeavours.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
CEO
Development
Hero Member
Offline
Posts: 2138
|
 |
« Reply #29 on: October 05, 2008, 07:55:12 PM » |
|
300,000 juvenile Mulloway caught, killed and discarded as by-catch in one trawling season on the Hawkesbury alone. Scientific fact. What a waste of our finite resource! A Nordmore Grid would have enabled those 300,000 undersized Mulloway to escape relatively unharmed.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|