Fishing Review.

[Guest Jocool]

A raft of changes are being discussed by the DPI regarding fish bag and size limits, as well as rules. They have a public submission process in effect. Here is your chance to contribute!

This is straight of the Fisheries website.

The NSW Department of Primary Industries has released two discussion papers for public comment on proposals and options for changes to fish size limits and recreational fishing rules in NSW waters. The proposals and options for changes to the size limits for saltwater fishes are relevant to both the commercial and recreational fishing sectors.

The discussion paper entitled Review of NSW Recreational Freshwater and Saltwater Fishing Rules presents proposals and options for changes to fish size limits, bag limits and fishing methods for recreational fishing in saltwater and freshwater.

Written submissions will be received until Friday 30 September 2005, and can be sent via email, post or fax to: -

    Email: fish.review@fisheries.nsw.gov.au

    Fax: (02) 9527 8576

    Fishing Review

    NSW Department of Primary Industries

    PO Box 21

    Cronulla

    NSW 2230

For further information, call the fisheries information-advisory phone line on 1300 550 474.

If you want to download one of the discussion papers, .....here for rule review, and here for the salwater size limit review.

[Guest Jocool]

This is also of the DPI site. It offers a quick run down of the proposed changes.

Anglers in NSW are invited to have their say on proposals to change some recreational fishing rules, including modifications to size limits, bag limits and fishing methods.

Two discussion papers have been prepared in consultation with the commercial and recreational fishing advisory councils.

The discussion papers have been prepared in response to the findings of environmental assessments being conducted for the state’s major fisheries, the results of the National Recreational and Indigenous Fishing Survey, the recommendations of the Palmer Report on Illegal Fishing for Commercial Gain or Profit in NSW, and community feedback from previous reviews.

This process will give people the opportunity to comment on the proposals and options for changes to the current fishing rules.

The discussion papers include proposals for changes to freshwater and saltwater bag and size limits and methods, and for fishing competitions.

The changes being considered for freshwater fishing include:

    * creating a spawning closure for Australian bass and estuary perch

    * extending the Murray crayfish rules to apply to all other species of spiny crayfish

    * increasing the minimum size limit for Murray cod, and introducing a catch and release requirement for cod larger than 100cm

    * introducing a maximum time of 24 hours for setting gear

    * changes to the bag and possession limit of trout in some waters.

The changes being considered for saltwater fishing include:

    * introducing a bag limit for common baitfish

    * a combined bag limit of 20 for all leatherjacket species

    * smaller bag limits for some highly valued species including mahi-mahi, marlin, sailfish and swordfish

    * introducing of minimum length for several species

    * creating a spearfishing code of practice.

The Department of Primary Industries (DPI) will distribute 75,000 discussion papers throughout NSW using many bait and tackle shops, Fishcare volunteers, DPI Fisheries Offices and direct mail to stakeholder groups, fish cooperatives and fishing clubs. Copies of the papers can also be found online.

[allen glover]

This is also of the DPI site. It offers a quick run down of the proposed changes.

59882[/snapback]

All sounds great to me except for the 60cm size for dollies. It is to restrictive and pointless on this species. A 10 fish bag limit would be more than fine and fix the problem(what problem).

Boat limits may affect charter operators and may need some special allocation for them.

not that they give two hoots about bag limits anyway but I bet the pros will have something top say about it all. they always do and as the current monkey in charge will invariably cave to their demands its again all pointless.

[Guest bluecod]

.....the current monkey in charge will invariably cave to their demands ......

59991[/snapback]

Whoever gets in on Tuesday will want their own Cabinet so there might be a shake-up in the next week or so, depends on the faction deals done behind the scenes. Time will tell!

This could be a good opportunity for rec anglers to push, not only for tighter bag limits, but also on maximum keeper sizes for some species - but then again the rec anglers will bear the whole weight of any changes and more likely the pros will reap the benefits - then again, if the maximum keeper sizes were to apply only in rec fish areas, the rec angler will reap the benefit

[Guest Jocool]

I just picked up a hard copy of the report from the boat show. I will be reading that with interest. Perhaps if you guys have read it too, we can throw around some ideas to put forward a submission with all our names on it??

Food for thought!

[Guest bluecod]

I just picked up a hard copy of the report from the boat show. I will be reading that with interest. Perhaps if you guys have read it too, we can throw around some ideas to put forward a submission with all our names on it??

Food for thought!

60019[/snapback]

Were Club submission into the above regarded as one submission or did they take into account the number of members of the club?

one submission

Joe the 2nd quote is a reply from Bob Smith to a question I asked regarding the Sydney RFA - I would suggest that to maximise any point of view, submissions be lodged individually.

[Guest Jocool]

Good point George. But that doesnt mean we can't canvas ideas on here, and share our thoughts!

[Guest bluecod]

Good point George. But that doesnt mean we can't canvas ideas on here, and share our thoughts!

60027[/snapback]

That's right Joe, and is the reason I indicated that I would support a maximum "take" size limit on certain species [flathead, bream, mulloway, blackfish etc] in recreational fishing areas, as I believe that keeping the breeders will only improve the quality of fish stocks in RFA's.

What we need is constructive dialogue on this and other forums Raiders may habituate and have that dialogue translated into individual submissions.

[Ken A]

I have read it & I think if you read the section under Luderick it shows how keen they are to be realistic.

They won't increase the size on Luderick because it would be disruptive to commercial fisherman

They won't put a decent length of Jewfish because it will reduce the amount of legal fish taken in the river.

I won't even bother commenting on Snapper & Bream its beyond a joke.

[Grantm]

I would like to see smaller bag limits for estuary species. A bag limit of 20 for Bream and Luderick is ridiculous for one person. 5 max I say. In fact most estuary species need to be dropped a bit.

I would like to see a maximum size limit on all estuary species as well. Maybe this is a bit over the top but thats the way I feel. I hate seeing monster fish laying on the cleaning tables.

Its getting harder and harder to catch a feed, and although this is moreso to do with the pro's, I still think we need to fish responsibly. I love to take a feed home but only ever what I need, and I always return the odd biggun I actually catch to continue breeding. Im only talking estuary species cause thats all I know.

Love to see option two of the Flathead plan min 40cm max 70cm. Bream werent mentioned I dont think, but they should have a max limit too.

The irony is of course by taking less fish as rec anglers only gives the pro's more to take. Is there really a winner ?

The other thing I dont like is that our fishing grounds are almost bare due the pro's raping them and rec anglers have to limit their catch as as result. What are the pro's going to do to help ?

BTW my opinions about lower bag limits and max size limits are not because of the current state of our fishery, but because it is a responsible way to fish to ensure ongoing populations, regardless of the fish stocks.

Cheers

[BOB_SMITH]

Quote

Two discussion papers have been prepared in consultation with the commercial and recreational fishing advisory councils.

I smell something fishy going on here. I now suspect that even the advisory groups are getting screwed. The ICAC file is going to get thicker I reckon.

Watch this space

Bob Smith

[Guest Jocool]

Quote

Two discussion papers have been prepared in consultation with the commercial and recreational fishing advisory councils.

I smell something fishy going on here. I now suspect that even the advisory groups are getting screwed. The ICAC file is going to get thicker I reckon.

Watch this space

Bob Smith 

60284[/snapback]

Thats another point worth pondering.....

If it is getting funded from OUR Rec Fishing trust, why is it done with consultation of commercial operators? Let them pay for their own paper! Or at the very least, let Rec Fishos have a say in the commercial sector!

[Grantm]

In light of "the other thread" there is obviously a lot of opinions out there in regards to bag limits etc.

Why not put them here as general opinions, this will keep them off the fishing threads, and in a place where they perhaps belong. Im sure the mods would not have a problem if everyone put their comments and beliefs into a general discussion and away from the reports. That way no one is having a go at any one else which seems to be the problem. Im sure 'opinions only' wont be offensive.

This particular thread has asked for this type of discussion and no one else has posted their thoughts or opinions which I find strange seeing there is a lot of passion about this topic.

Cheers

[Guest iain]

Exactly Grant. Thank you!

My ten cents:

I personally am not a good enough fisho to regularly 'bag out' plus I only keep enough for my immediate needs. After catching 10 or so of the same species I've usually had enough and ready to try something else. Therefore lowering bag limits won't affect me (or the blokes I fish with) that much.

Where's the corresponding bag limit reductions for the pros? To focus on lowering what we rec fishos take is 'majoring in the minors' compared with the impact of dragging nets through our rivers. Until the pros go I believe the impact of lowering rec bag limits will do little to improve the fishery.

I know I sound negative but until I see the headline 'Trawlers banned from Sydney' it's hard to be positive. We're tinkering with details while Rome burns. My focus remains firmly directed on pressuring the Government to make this happen as opposed to those that choose to misdirect their attention to their fellow rec anglers.

[Guest iain]

Dave,

I know where you’re coming from and acknowledged, we absolutely should look after the resource and every rec angler I know does. This particularly applies to species heavily targeted by rec anglers like Flatties.

However looking at those same numbers, if you take the overall NSW commercial vs recreational catch for ‘fish’ i.e. Whiting, Flathead, Bream, Garfish, Tailor, Australian salmon, Snapper, Trevally, Leatherjackets, Wrasse/tuskfish/gropers, Luderick, Mackerels, Cod (various), Catfish, Mulloway/jewfish, Morwong, Tuna/bonitos, Sharks/rays & Yellowtail kingfish it’s 4.8 million kg recreational vs 6.9million kg pro.

Add Prawns, Blue swimmer crab, Squid/cuttlefish, Mud crab, Lobsters, Abalone, Nippers and ‘other’ you end up with 5.3 million kg vs 23.6million kg, a ratio of almost 4.5:1.

And then there’s bycatch. Estuaries are the nursery of the fishery (hence the reason we have minimum size limits) and dragging nets with a mesh diameter sufficiently small to catch prawns (and small ones if you look at Hawkesbury prawns) is responsible for millions of young fish being needlessly killed. Conversely recreational anglers use non lethal methods and are required by law to return undersized fish unharmed to the water.

I’d love to see a study that shows the number of ‘incidental’ fish killed for every kg of commercially caught fish that goes through the markets. It will never happen though as the pro’s are hardly going to divulge just how wasteful their practices are so we’ll have to rely on anecdotal evidence and commonsense that says that if you drag a fine net through a river your going to kill a shiteload of fish.

Two shining examples of how the pros adversely impact the fishery are Kingfish and Salmon. Commercial exploitation is reduced and lo and behold what happens? The population explodes despite recreational fishing targeting them and you don’t need a scientific survey to tell me there are more Kings and Sambos around these days. You try and tell me that the critical decline in SBT is due to blokes like you and me dangling a line!

Competing for the Sydney fishery are 482,739 recreational anglers/danglers and a commercial fleet. Recreational angling represents a healthy, family friendly pastime that attracts tourists and contributes (very conservatively estimated) $300 million to the economy. Conversely the commercial fleet contributes a catch to the value of approximately $1.9 million at first point of sale and accounts for less than 1 per cent of total seafood consumption in NSW.

In NSW the pro’s take far, far more than recreational anglers and do so in an environmentally damaging and wasteful way. In Sydney the industry is miniscule and contributes five eighths of bugger all of the seafood consumed. There is no reason or justification for them to be operating in our estuaries and quite frankly it amazes me why people (not you Dave) defend this dirty little industry so passionately.

[macman]

G'day

What's wrong with the current bag and size limits ? I'ts all such bull****, people who want to break the rules, can and will do it anyway. All it does is make the already honest more carefull and less likely to take home a feed. Is there really anything wrong with a 36cm limit on flathead. Maximum size on blackfish ??

Then after you've been out for a days fishing and thrown back all those 35cm plus bream on lures , you can walk in to a fish shop and order half a dozen 20cm ones from the window.

I can count on one hand the number of times I've seen bags of 20 blackfish, each time they were by locals that were flogging them on the blackmarket, do you reckon they ever get pinched, no bloody way. And why should it matter when the same day pros on the beach can net a whole school then leave them up the beach because the price is too low.

It's all just so broken, where would you even start.

Here's one for you, I'm fishing in NSW off the beach for jewfish using a 10cm whiting as a live bait, am I breaking the rules ?

Matt ( Sorry for the rant, but I am sick to death of all the crap I see while I'm out fishing)

[Grantm]

It's all just so broken, where would you even start.

60897[/snapback]

GDay Macman,

You have every right to rant, it does seem very broken.

But we must persevere. And old outdated bag limits etc is a start. Reading some of the posts and threads in this section at least keeps reminding us that there are people out there trying to make it better.

[Guest Jocool]

Guys...Making a submission has been made easier!

CLICK HERE!

[Guest Jocool]

Bump!

[knapers]

This is just my 2 cents worth (not as well worded/spoken as previous posts) but i cant help but think the problem doesnt really lie within the pro fishos or the rec fishos, i think the problem lies within the public and in turn the Restaurants, fish and chip shops etc. For the last few weeks we have seen the Tele and all other papers go on and on and still on about how whales are beeing slaughted etc.

The non fishos are the ones buying the fish from the fish market not the pros not the rec fisherman but the public, why focus on the pro fishos and the Licensing of reco fishos when were not the ones buying the reap of the pros rewards????

To the point, the thing that we should be doing is drawing the publics attention to the huge amount of ocean life that is being RAPPED from the ocean each day.

Cheers, and please reply........

[Warpig]

And then there’s bycatch. Estuaries are the nursery of the fishery (hence the reason we have minimum size limits) and dragging nets with a mesh diameter sufficiently small to catch prawns (and small ones if you look at Hawkesbury prawns) is responsible for millions of young fish being needlessly killed.

I’d love to see a study that shows the number of ‘incidental’ fish killed for every kg of commercially caught fish that goes through the markets. It will never happen though as the pro’s are hardly going to divulge just how wasteful their practices are so we’ll have to rely on anecdotal evidence and commonsense that says that if you drag a fine net through a river your going to kill a shiteload of fish.

60489[/snapback]

I've heard pretty lousy bycatch anecdotes over the years too, so iain's post finally piqued me into doing a bit of a literature search. The most interesting article I found is:

Gray CA, Kennelly SJ, Hodgson KE (2003) Low levels of bycatch from estuarine prawn seining in New South Wales, Australia. Fisheries Research 64 (2003) 37–54

Most University libraries should hold this journal if you can't get a look at the online version, which is here if you have access:

http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journalde...ion#description

This crowd put observers on prawn trawlers on the Richmond, Manning, Wallamba and Shoalhaven Rivers between September 1998 and June 1999. Their data showed that prawn catch-to-bycatch ratios by weight for each estuary ranged from 1:0.07

to 1:0.52, which is WAY, WAY, WAY lower than I would have thought, and have heard anecdotally.

To cite the authors:

"The relatively low levels of observed bycatches in the seine fishery were attributed to a combination of the small size of nets (40m headline length) and the relatively short time (3–15 min) it took to operate each individual seine. The latter also led to observations that bycaught fish were in particularly good condition when discarded. The data indicate that discarding in this fishery probably has minimal impact on other interacting finfish fisheries in the region."

The worst bycatch ratio they cite in the article (from someone else's work) is 1:3.5 from Botany Bay in 1990/1991.

The authors don't appear to have been sponsored by commercial interests, and they were from NSW Fisheries. Their experimental design seems to be excellent.

Anyway, my aim in writing this was to show you the data the government is working with when they make the rules.

All the best from the Pig.

Edited August 10, 2005 by Warpig

[Irukandi]

Come on fellow fisho's I call for a mass rejection of the proposal until fisheries can do what they are bloody well paid to do and manage our stock, not just shift the catch ratio towards the commercial fisheries.

We don’t have to except this proposal, we need to reject it until fisheries can give us a fair bloody dinkum proposal on sustainability of our stock and not just a rob Peter to pay Paul proposal.

I am all for sustainability and only take what I need and some times release all of my catch as I would rather a steak at the end of the day and fish for the enjoyment not the kill, but people are entitled to a feed of fish and lets not loose site of this.

This is not going to do anything for our stocks or the endangered species. The Wobbygong shark ? hmm stop all recs from taking any and let the pro take as much as they like ????? sustainability I think not, And the Poor old mullet ?? 20 for the rec fisho when the pros can net the whole school and then only to take the roe and dump the flesh, sustainability ???? I think not.

This is not a finger pointing post but we need to be realistic about sustainability and not just a shift of resources.

We pay money for the fisheries mob the manage our stocks, that’s right… our stock.

Lets make them earn their money and manage the fisheries. I call for a full rejection of this proposal until they can offer a true attempt at sustaining our stocks.

Regards Mick

[Guest Jocool]

Apparently there is an updated 'Options Paper' from Fisheries. I will let you know what that all means when I find out!

[Guest Jocool]

It seems that the options paper is pretty much similar to the standardised reply form that has been circulating on the forums. It's good to see that Fisheries has heard what we are all saying and responded in a timely fashion!

Some come on guys....have you downloaded and used the forms? Remember...we won't get a chance like this very often, to be able to tell the government what we really think! So come on, GET INVOLVED. If not for your own sake, then for the sake of your kids!

[allen glover]

Exactly Grant. Thank you!

My ten cents:

I personally am not a good enough fisho to regularly 'bag out' plus I only keep enough for my immediate needs. After catching 10 or so of the same species I've usually had enough and ready to try something else. Therefore lowering bag limits won't affect me (or the blokes I fish with) that much.

Where's the corresponding bag limit reductions for the pros? To focus on lowering what we rec fishos take is 'majoring in the minors' compared with the impact of dragging nets through our rivers. Until the pros go I believe the impact of lowering rec bag limits will do little to improve the fishery.

I know I sound negative but until I see the headline 'Trawlers banned from Sydney' it's hard to be positive. We're tinkering with details while Rome burns. My focus remains firmly directed on pressuring the Government to make this happen as opposed to those that choose to misdirect their attention to their fellow rec anglers.

60433[/snapback]

Here Here !

A