Steve-o
-
Posts
52 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Fishing Tips, Advice and Articles
Blogs
Store
Posts posted by Steve-o
-
-
I think they were rationing 2 cans per day of "near beer" in Afghanistan. It is like 0.02% alcohol.
-
I never thought beer tasted that good which is why salty food is never far off... to cleanse the palate for the next swill.
If I had a beer and didn't start feeling numb around the eyes it wouldn't be the same.
I like that natural brewed Bundaberg Sarsaparilla. Apparently it is fermented in the bottle, and if you leave it in the car too long it can become alcoholic. But just off the shelf it's okay.
-
I've never met an angry cocky to tell you the truth. They usually like the chance to talk to someone who isn't the dog.
-
I dunno but if you hook two on a hook back to back they flip against each other and make a clicking noise in the water.
-
Is the high water mark the area of that gets covered in a flood or is it the area that's wet?
This sounds like an awesome trip.
-
-
I saw this.
They want to ban bowfishing in saltwater as a part of the proposal.
You can currently bow fish where you can spearfish when it comes to saltwater. They propose ending that.
I don't think this sport should be banned or even regulated. I don't think you should need anything more than a fishing license to do this. There should be rules associated with it, such as not done within 50m of other waterway users for safety, common sense type things, but apart from that there should be no special permit system or exemption for bow fishing.
Doing so encourages the public to hold the view that bowfishing is inherently dangerous or risky and encourages the perception that bows are lethal weapons and not sporting goods.
If it can be taken legally with a line it should be legal with a bow. Sight stalking for fish in inland waterways would probably be fun for a lot of people and get them a feed of remove pests from the ecosystem.
Imagine cruising down a waterway on a little boat with an electric motor and wearing Polaroid sunnies and seeing fish hiding in the snags along the shore. Then account for refraction and take a shot and motor along until you seen the next one swimming about. Probably would be great fun and should not be seen as unusual or in need of extra regulation.
Having said that I've never bowfished and have no interest in doing so, but I don't think this should be over regulated and should be an accessible option to everyone.
-
If you are separated from the boat, such as it getting swamped or otherwise sunk, these gizmos don't seem like they will help.
Maybe if you run out of fuel you can open it and launch a flare, but if a bunch of you are thrown from the boat it's not gonna save your life. It's gonna still be in the boat.
-
You could carabiner an epirb to your lifejacket.
-
Best thread on Fishraider.
BTW if anyone knows where to get that bed I am interested in the price.
-
I've heard of whitebait on two tiny gang hooks for bream but not whole pilchards on gang hooks.
-
1
-
-
I also started getting back in to exercising because I want to do a nine day hike, did a two hour practice run and realised I was way out of condition and was never going to be able to go up and down hills carrying the weight of nine days of gear in a backpack.
Ten years ago I was the fittest person I'd ever met but now I am a bitter dissapointment.
The plan is heavy weights on legs, back, chest, arms, shoulders until mid-late spring with a calorie surplus for strength gains, then a month of cardio to get the fitness back and burn the fat gained and off I go.
Cardio stops you building muscle at the optimum rate.
Hope you guys get better soon.
-
2
-
-
-
8 minutes ago, SquibblyDibbly said:
At that size it'd be pretty well uncatchable! The population there must be healthy as if the the big dog is that big.
I could not believe it when I first saw it, the way it was so close to shore, the way it was so unafraid, and just how massive it was.
I assumed someone had put it there for a TV commercial or something (but onlynl three of us were there) or the fisheries research office right next door up the road (now closed) put it there for research.
I did not think it was a naturally occurring thing at all.
It had a very artificial feel about it.
-
4 minutes ago, Koalaboi said:
The groper Steve-o refers to is most likely a very much loved local by everyone who lives, swims, surfs and snorkels in the area.
Honestly, I would not like to be the person who caught this feller if anyone from the area saw me!!
KB
On day it might eat a small child!
-
23 hours ago, kingie chaser said:
While I don't think anyone could disagree that we need mining but lining pockets seems to to always out trump environmental protection.
To me it's like Adani trying to put a mine in a place that could spell disaster for Australian greatest natural beauty, I can't believe the government would even consider it but $$$$ talks.
Just look at the cold seam debacle, do you ever even own your own home/land when these idiots essentially have the authority to come in & take over your land.
Like I said in my original post, how did they go from proposed introducing of marine parks all up the nsw coast the then possibly approving a gas mine that could affect such sanctuaries??
Surely there are better options?
I can see it form your view, but if you put it in to perspective, mining contaminates an area than can be measured in distances of approximately 5km at the greatest extent.
This is a large area in the context of how big your backyard is, or how big a city block is, but 5km of contaminated land is really really insignificant. It's not an entire ecosystem going down.
Think about the average walking speed of 5-8km an hour, and think how far you walk in an hour.
The area contaminated is less than that and the area made barren (and able to be reclaimed) is much less than that.
I have no conflict of interest here my only belief is that the vested environmental interest groups know the exact situation on the ground and want to use fear and panic to control my thoughts and behaviour towards fulfilling their agenda.
I believe they show absolutely zero respect for the human condition and seek to exploit it for enabling a level of social conformity reminscent of a police state with ideologues, group think and a cult of confession.
Kind of like brainwashing people to burn witches at the stake in the name of eternal salvation for expressing political dissent as in days past.
That's just what it looks like to me. They have the FULL picture and only give you the half of it.
-
Do the signs still say do not consume fish west of the bridge because they're full of carcinogenic dioxin?
The nasho is really a nice clean spot and you feel miles away from Sydney.
-
1
-
-
There's a giant blue groper at least a metre long maybe a metre and a half or more, that lazily swims around Bass and Flinders point on occasion, right at the base of the rocks less than two metres out.
Best of luck. It's a monster.
-
1
-
-
Hi fishkent.
The sand between North Cronulla and Wanda is covered in beach worms.
Put some stinky fish heads in a stocking, drag it through the inch deep water as it is running back out and look for V's in the water. This is where the beach worms are sticking their heads up for a whiff of that sweet sweet rancid seafood smell.
Put some pliers around the V at sand level and pull. You will have a beach worm, sometimes 50cm long!
Cut them up in to inch long pieces, thread on a small gape long shanked hook and you can catch anything. There's really nothing in the sea that won't go mad for a bit of beachworm.
Off the beach just there you can get bream, flathead, whiting, tailor, jewfish, salmon, dart and I guess anything else that is on a beach. All of these can be taken on worms.
If you want, use a big strong hook and get a few 10cm long worm sections and poke them once in the middle on to the hook so you have 5cm of worm either side. That can be your big jewie or snapper bait.
You can find pippies too if you walk along with no shoes.
Try the beach worms they are better I think than nippers for whiting, and go back and hit the sandflats and see if your luck doesn't change.
If you see someone with an Alvey walking parallel with the beach, searching entire gutters each cast it's me. But you probably won't see me around. I've never seen anyone else with an Alvey down there.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, flatheadluke said:
Hi Steve,
I'll leave you with this final thought: BPM Energy have no chance of winning this fight. They have wasted $25mil so far - they should quit before the losses pile up even further. Anyone investing with them will at the very least have a loss to offset against their tax return.
We will get the entire east coast community in our corner. Fishing Clubs, Surf clubs, Bowling Clubs, sand castle building clubs you name it. This will be a single issue at the next state and federal election much like work choices were. The PM and Premier will come in and squash this (either current Liberals or future Labor).
Go try and mine in a country where its a case of simply bribing a despotic dictator to dud the locals and make billions.
Thanks for the thought Luke.
If I thought you had a fight worth fighting, I'd be fighting right alongside you.
Ultimately I don't see your concerns as outweighing human development in Africa, South America, Asia or the Indian subcontinent.
I feel bad that for the second time in this thread mining and big business have been portrayed as evil. I'm not here to change your mind for you but I actually do not resent people who have an idea that they bring to market and become rich off. I am more or less grateful that they gave millions of people something nice, like an iPhone or a PlayStation or even a cheap pair of Nike's built in Vietnam - helping that country establish an economy for future living standard increases.
I'm happy with my very unimpressive bank balance that lets me afford the products billionaires push on me, products that enable me to have a standard of living where I can go clubbing, hiking, camping, fishing, diving, driving and wear nice clothes all at the same time as being in a lower socioeconomic class.
I really think if someone did all that for me and millions of others, they deserve their billions and they have done great things for the human race.
-
1 hour ago, flatheadluke said:
Fossil fuels are not the only way to power farms and homes, both here and in the developing world. There are many viable and renewal alternatives that can, not only can meet this need, help alleviate the many real problems the developing world face as a consequence of man made climate change: flood, fire and drought. For example, the East African drought of 2011 killed between 50,000 to 260,000 people.
Battery storage and technology can enable this to be dispatchable as is the case in South Australia. The price continues to come down and its undeniably the future. No one is suggesting we deprive the developing world of infrastructure, we still export plenty of iron ore etc.
Really? So extracting then burning oil and gas wont have an effect on carbon emissions? The argument might be 'if power plants don't burn this oil and gas they will burn something else's' ignores the economic reality that constrained supply drives up price and reduces demand/consumption and carbon emissions.
You can't exhaustively clean up an oil spill in the ocean, its gets into the ecosystem from the smallest mollusc right up to the largest shark. And while the spill is being cleaned up what of the Oyster farmer in the Hawkesbury or the Pearl Farmer in broken bay and their stocks/livelihood? Then what about the subsequent spills, just clean them up too? I don't want my 4 year old swimming in the shore of Avoca rock pool to be ingesting micro particles of oil while she chews on sand, nor do I want to duck dive through a wave and cop a hair full of oil. And the recent statement that BPH Energy are only going to drill for gas I don't believe. If BPH Energy discovered a large and rich oil deposit near the broken bay FAD they would simply leave it in the ground? I suspect it's the 'thin edge of the wedge' strategy, they just want a single site established then they will progressively roll out more over the years.
Energy includes oil, gas and uranium. We are a net importer of oil but a net exporter of the other two. Domestically, with the rise in solar, wind and hydro we are do not need to explore and develop new fossil fuel mines (like this one being proposed) to meet our current or future energy needs.
Three elements you have not contested (therefore must not care about):
* Sonar blasting and the impact on the environment
* How close this is to the coast line, the PEP 11 licence permits drilling and exploration as close as 5 kms off the beach.
* The risk/impact to commercial fishing and tourism industries.
AGL for example have recognised the reality of the new environment and diversified their business to include renewal energy sources. AGL will probably survive into the future continuing to employ tens of thousands of Australians, other firms will rightly end up going broke much in the same way the shipping companies that didn't invest in/embrace shipping container technology went broke.
Hey there Luke. Thanks for keeping this going.
I'll try and do every point you raise from here on in.
1. Combustion engines and mechanical parts are a better solution for the developing world. The skills needed to operate and trouble shoot a diesel are much lower than those required for electrical storage, generators and repairs. It's also safer. In addition, electricity needs to be delivered usually with high voltage wires. This type of infrastructure is not available in the rural communities of developing nations, neither is the expertise necessary for maintaining an electrical system. Our systems cannot be transplanted to these places. They do not have the infrastructure or skill to use and maintain the equipment.
2. Droughts are bad. I agree with this. Modern agricultural practices such as powered irrigation, bores and drought resistant crops can alleviate this. Cereal grains could be planted in vast quantities rapidly, and harvested just as quickly, using tractors instead of hand sowing. These grains could be drought resistant crops instead of the traditional crops. The people taken off the land could work in infrastructure development such as road construction, or in stores and banking to modernise the economy leading to other advances due to a labour surplus.
3. Net carbon is determined by global demand. This rig, if it goes ahead, should reduce the pressure on other rigs. Running at reduced capacity could even be more efficient with less emissions per tonne occurring due to economies of scale. Regardless, the emissions at the capture point are not the pressing concern when you have billions of cars on the road and people lighting up their homes for Christmas to show the neighbours their level of social prosperity.
4. Oil can and does naturally leak in to the ocean where no drilling occurs. I have great faith that if there was an oil spill it would be dealt with and cleaned up. The ocean is huge. Over time any oil that wasn't cleaned up would disperse in to the background and become undetectable, having no impact on the environment. The localised effect on populations of marine and bird life would be harmful for that immediate area, but it wouldn't wipe out life and it would all come back in short order.
5. If there was an oil spill and an oyster farmer was hit hard, the government would bail them out and they would be compensated by the company responsible. Life for them would go on. They would still have refrigeration, running water, electricity and food. There are hundreds of millions of people in developing nations without plumbing and electricity. I'm sure the oyster farmer can see the big picture and would be annoyed, but I'm also sure he would survive.
6. You write as if major oil spills are a regular thing and will harm your ability to enjoy the beach. I do not believe this is a regular thing at all.
7. So we are a net exporter of energy but for all the energy we actually use as Australians we are net importers per capita? There are lies, there are damn lies and then there are statistics....
8. Green energy is in development. I welcome the day it comes. Meanwhile, children are starving to death and living in mud huts. We can do something about this but for some reason a bloody sardine takes priority? And before anyone says they can do it themselves, worry about our own backyard - unless you are Einstein or invented the internal combustion engine or wrote the Magna Carta, you have no dog in this fight. You yourself did nothing and prosper off the discoveries and teachings of others. You are no Da Vinci.
8. Sonar blasting - the problem is what? Some fish died? Okay? I don't see the outrage.
9. The government lady said if anything is built it will be 30km offshore. She said you will barely be able to see anything unless you use binoculars. In fact, I think that that distance is beyond the curve of the earth and over the horizon, so you won't be able to see it or be affected by it.
10. Again localised commercial fishing and tourism should not be placed ahead of human development. This should be about everyone.
11. Am I up against AGL now? Why is AGL here? AGL is a company that does what makes best business sense. Unless you are arguing on their behalf I do not want to discuss AGL without giving them the right to reply.
-
Pretty sure that's the type of get up people used pier fishing in Japan.
-
Lots of body boarders access breaks that are not on beaches by jumping in off the rocks and coming back in up the rocks.
Maybe they could offer education.
I think the reason a lot of people drown is because they think they are going to get smashed up on the rocks and so instead of swimming up over the rocks, try and stay away from the rocks, and get tired, or go fetal position near the rocks and get tumbled around instead of going up and over.
-
5 hours ago, SquibblyDibbly said:
Hey Stevo-o,
I appreciate your view point there mate, I really do. Most who oppose fossil fuels consume more than their fair share.
I personally don't advocate flicking a switch and turning off all fossil fuels overnight, as I mentioned earlier our entire economy is built around mining and to a lesser extent agriculture.
However, I believe we have to transition to renewable methods of energy production and more sustainable methods of agriculture and that we need to speed up the timeframe attached to this. There are lots of interesting developments here such as a seaweed based cattle feed product that neutralizes the methane they produce, continual improvements in PV solar panels cost and efficiency, solar/hydro projects to produce electricity at night.
We export the majoirty of our coal and gas, we do not need more new coal and gas projects. Especially ones that threaten the health of our oceans.
Its not something to be done over night but we cant throw our hands in the air, give up and continue digging up limited supplies of fossil fuel to power our lives.
Thanks mate!
I support anti pollution initiatives and keeping things clean and pristine. I love rainforests more than most. Renewable energy is great, I support this too - less pollution.
I don't think people in developing nations should be held back because we, in already developed societies, have decided to boycott certain systems after we already have the infrastructure in place. Sorry, I am more concerned about millions of women dying in childbirth and children dying of dysentry than I am concerned about a shoal of bait off the coast of Newcastle.
Let's give them all the coal and gas they need to catch up and talk about it in 20 years, when the systems we gave them need to be replaced at the end of life cycle, rather than hold them back by not letting them use the same things as we have when we still don't have a green solution to replace our own infrastructure.
5 hours ago, zmk1962 said:Oh-Karen...I mean, Oh-Steve...I mean Steve-O ... or is that Oh !!!!!
I sense you are carrying some baggage and I am sorry for that.
If this was meant for me ... then I'd like to point out you know nothing about me otherwise you would not be making such statements.
Infact, it is inaccurate, insulting and polarizing comments like yours that stop intelligent debate and undermine the democracy that we have.
So until you are ready to have a fact based discussion without the insults and unwarranted extrapolations please don't come back.
Cheers Zoran
I am now an American woman. Awesome. That was always my childhood dream since I heard that Lenny Kravitz song.
It's not about you. I just don't understand how anyone can put personal recreational fishing ahead of global human development.
5 hours ago, flatheadluke said:@Steve-o I am going to put the emotive language and rude and insulting words to one side and acknowledge the valid point you do raise - we all do consume fossil fuels.
Many Australians do earn a livelihood from oil, coal and gas exploration and production. We cant just suddenly take that from them. But we do need to progressively move away from that for the sake of future generations.
We are in a climate emergency, no one can deny that the stats and anecdotes are overwhelming and irrefutable. Fortunately there are alternative sources of energy which I need not spell out here and as @SquibblyDibbly pointed out we are in the process of transitioning to net zero carbon emissions.
The key problem with the PEP-11 licence is that the seismic blasting is killing small baitfish, which in turn is killing the fish that predate them. This is happening in big numbers and is impacting commercial fisherman (along with rec fisherman like us) both here in Newcastle and down in the Otway Basin.
Moreover, there is a very real risk of oil spills as happened off the Louisiana coast in 2010 as part of the deepwater horizon BP disaster. Our tourism and commercial fishing industries would be decimated by an oil spill not to mention the potential impact of the annual migration of the humpback whales along with a myriad of other species like sea turtles, dolphins and various fish species.
Australia is (by a massive factor) an net exporter of energy. We do not need the oil and gas off the east coast of Australia to keep our economy functioning. It's a case of a single business wanting to make massive profits regardless of the impact to the community or the environment. There is nothing wrong with wanting to stop profit driven multi nationals from mining in sacred aboriginal sites, under warragamba dam, kakadu, the great barrier reef or along the most heavily populated part of the coastline in Australia.
I am not talking about climate of pollution or any of the sort. This oil rig is not going to have an effect on net global carbon, that is determined by demand for fuels. So it's not even a valid global climate issue. Electric cars and a reduced demand for petrol is what will change things. I believe the UK and France are outlawing combustion engines for new vehicles between 2035-2050? In the meantime, a tractor beats a donkey for harvesting enough grain for millions of people in Africa, enabling less people to be toiling in the sun and the development of an economy followed by massive increases in living standards.
Hopefully there won't be an oil spill. But if there is, I'm sure there are methods to clean it all up and it's not a cataclysmic event. I really don't think there will be one. I didn't know we were a net exporter of energy. I thought the overwhelming majority of petrochemicals were imported.
Bagged out Monday 29th in Bate Bay and Hooked 102kg
in Fishing Reports
Posted
If you go to the hospital for that they will slice you open to get it out, stitch you up and leave a nice scar.
Just push it through, crush the barb, and slide it back out. Two little dotty scars you won't see after a few months.