# Band Together…



## Beekeeper (Aug 20, 2011)

Band Together&#8230;

21 million Aussies on the books at present&#8230; Possibly 1/5 of them wet a line at times. That means around 4.2million are recreational anglers
If each of us gave $10 each, every year, we would accumulate $42million each year.
Numbers like that would sway governments to listen to a group of people about whom, up till now, they couldn't give a rat's arse what they did.

Even if we didn't have that money, if 4.2million people rose as a body and demanded their ear, they would listen.

The problem is collecting that group, organising it to stand as one, not "she'll be right&#8230; they don't need me&#8230; there'll be plenty without me&#8230; I'll just continue fishing."

I personally know many men who have been fighting for anglers' rights over at least 20 years&#8230; most of them are aging terribly&#8230; into their 70's and on, up over the hill as well. They are fighting your fight, while you go out and catch fish that years ago could only be dreamed of.

Surely there must be at least a couple of you in AKFF who would willingly cross swords (verbally and on paper) with the clowns who push our faces into the mud and give commercials the right to net the guts out of our fish stocks then export it overseas&#8230; and then the same Government allows inferior product imported back here for our population to eat.

That really gets up my nose!

When you complain about this, the explanation always falls back on the "National Economy." National economy, my arse! That just doesn't make sense to me.

Netting good healthy fish to can for pet food&#8230; eg tailor & salmon&#8230; how do you feel about that? Winter-whiting trawled daily to feed dolphins at Gold Coast resorts. Semi-trailer loads of mullet bodies buried in trenches beneath sand on beaches&#8230; unwanted after the roe has been taken to feed overseas gourmets. Roe for Christ's sake&#8230; generations of future fish wiped out just to line the pockets of greedy netters.

To me, the sea food-chain should not be broken&#8230; every species has a part to play&#8230; netting the guts out of one species has to adversely affect this chain&#8230; the lowly mullet (I love eating this fish) would appear to be not of any importance to fisheries, who I know for a fact, fully realise that they are disappearing at 50% each year, yet fail to impose a complete no-take ban on the species. Old-timers talk of mullet schools, the beginnings nor ends of which you couldn't see&#8230; they were so huge.

If Fisheries were to completely ban the take of mullet for a few years, the species would take off like wild-fire. But&#8230; never again allow the butchery that occurs now&#8230; don't allow it to be sold for crab-bait, or the roe taken and sold overseas&#8230; what's wrong with using the frames as crab-bait? The crabs won't give a bugger!

Pilchards&#8230; another species netted around the world&#8230; wouldn't be missed by us as a food item, maybe, but their place in the vital food-chain surely would. Look at all the species that would have to look elsewhere if they were to disappear. Just about everything eats them!

They're just two species that are under threat throughout the world. We humans apparently don't think enough about the food chain to push the point&#8230; DON'T DO IT!

Fisheries throughout the world apparently can't see the writing between the lines&#8230; They don't realise the importance of this sea food-chain&#8230; consequently, lots of fisheries have gone to the wall. All due to greed for big biccies on the part of some-one with enough resources already, to re-build ocean liners into massive fish containers, with other smaller vessels near-by filling it up daily.

In my own local Redcliffe area, after the initial prawn glut ceased, prawn trawlers when using ground rope with a tickler chain, used to catch some prawns, trash fish and a little weed&#8230; when they began using wire ground rope, they still took the trash fish, not only a little weed, but the roots and all plus 6inches of mud! And of course plenty of prawns! One ex-deckie who told me about this, said that they knew they were doing wrong scouring the bottom like that, but at last they were making money with all the prawns that were caught! So they continued!

They still do it&#8230; right here in Moreton Bay in a Marine Park! Have been doing it for ages! Oh Boy! This place used to be home for Dugong&#8230; acres of them&#8230; I wonder where the grasses that they eat have gone?

Fisheries blithely go about their business&#8230; seemingly unaware of the damage done by trawlers. How come they allow trawlers to scour the sea-bottom in, of all areas, a Marine Park?

Our much loved Tailor&#8230; Blue-fish to our Yank friends&#8230; Elf or Shad to South Africans&#8230; a species that was depleted in South African waters to such a degree that Fisheries pulled the pin on taking them at all&#8230; by anyone! Complete No Take until the species made a come-back&#8230; then one or two per angler, and never to be netted again! I haven't kept track of this for some years now, but apparently stocks were coming ahead in leaps and bounds! Try to interest our fisheries managers in doing the same? Not likely!

I appeal to you, members of AKFF&#8230; please think about becoming a member of some organisation that is trying to ensure fish stocks for your grand-children and their grand-children. Perhaps they could keep up the good work as well!

Somebody has to bite the bullet and make a stand! Fisheries apparently can't or won't see the writing on the wall!

Jimbo


----------



## Barrabundy (Sep 29, 2008)

Not taking the piss but the good news is we're getting a full time local fisheries officer here rather than having them come down from Townsville. I think this is a great idea, I just hope they are allowed to work outside normal business hours because that's when the cowboys operate.

The commercial operators have been calling for this for the last 20 years because they are the ones who constantly come across old mate with his illegal nets strung across that creek where the commercial guys aren't allowed to get to.


----------



## goanywhere (Feb 22, 2011)

The biggest problem is corruption. In many countries bribery is just a part of doing business. Anyone who thinks Aussie fisheries officials are above such things is just grossly naiive. In SE Asia, India and Africa whole fisheries have been sold out to US and Russian fishing conglomerates for a few trinkets and decimated beyond recovery.

Unless we the recreational fishing public demonstrate a genuine concern for the environment in a politically effective way we will not just lose a passtime, we as a nation will join much of the rest of the world in poverty. A healthy fishery is just one key to securing a good living standard. Australia is seen as a soft target by unscrupulous and corrupt players around the world. Back in the late '80's and early '90's Russian trawlers all but gutted the Mulloway fishery in the Great Australian Bight. I have spoken to fishermen there who tell of schools of 100 tonnes at a time rounded up and netted in a single day, day after day. Only when it was no longer economical did they leave. Only recently has that fishery somewhat recovered. Must be just about time for a visit again. In the mean time the local fishery industry is cut to ribbons by being locked out of so-called marine reserves.


----------



## grinner (May 15, 2008)

jim, you're obviously a passionate and very sensible man.

therefore its extremely likely your views will be ignored  

i admire your persistence but i gotta say fishing is just nice to get away from the phone and i agree whole heartedly, it's an "I'm alright jack attitude"

its just exhausting worrying about this stuff and so i just zoned out and thought, these decisions are sooooooooo soooooo stupid, they will obviously never change .

to look at it in another way though. of the 4 million who fish, i'd say 3,900,000 are really just dabblers who wouldnt even know what a green zone or a commercial fisherman was.

of the 100,000 left about 50,000 are just blokes who want an excuse to drink grog with their mates and use fishing as a cover to keep the missus from banning them from the pub. they'd probably be just as happy at the pub.

what to do.

here's a few suggestions. i love fish, not to eat but i really like them, like some people like cats or dogs. i presume greenies like fish (in the way they probably like pandas and orangatangs)
greenies should be our friend , not our enemy. so the first thing to do is to form an alliance with the greenies.

passionate people like you understand the ecosystem and the greenies should be beating a path to your door for advice. we need to be their "eyes and ears"

secondly re commercials, taking away someones livelihood is going to cause them to become a lot more passionate than taking away someones hobby. so i feel they have to be dealt with in a different way.
the problem is really that bad practices make them rich and good practices dont. its simply in their own economic interest to take as much as possible and sell to the highest bidder. sort of like if you let farmers go and round up cattle anywhere. no incentive really to put stuff back. i sort of see the rediculousness of this when i watch the trawlers in the logan clearing there nets after tehy unload the prawns and tossing the bycatch into the river as they chug along with 200 angry birds swooping down on the poor little blighters. like i say, i feel bad for those little fellows.

just need a compulsory redundancy. paid for out of the following...

the ammount of income (gst and income tax) generated by the rec fishing industry is more than enough to compensate the commercial guys.. over 1,000,000 boats registered in qld at $300 to $1000 a pop. and you dont have to build road infrastructure on the seas or fill in potholes. mother nature does it all for you.

particularly with the fall in retail sales and the 2 speed economy, employing people in these areas for rec fishing has got to be better than any income from commercial guys.

i was at the airport friday nite and the place was abuzz with guys in blue overalls and flouro tops coming back from the mines for the weekend. now, the greens may listen to an arguement that getting a good rec industry in north qld and the pilbara may stop all these young single males flying back and forth to cities every weekend(to drink away their pay) and will also help the local indigenous fishing charter industries they should set up . win win.

anyway jim, gotta fly, interesting topic. never knew about the mullett roe and go anywhere, never knew about the russians.

i do know about the tractors pulling tailor off the beaches on straddie. $1 a kilo for cat food. amazing when 100,000 tourists visit fraser each year and are happy to keep the local economy afloat in harvey bay and a lot go there to target the tailor.

as for a political presence. maybe a fishing union. craig thompson used to run a union and he will be needing a job next year. we can all chip in $50 and that should keep him well looked after. really need our colleagues in canberra like brother wah to take this direct to julia. come on paddy, get her involved in fishing man.

i know you took dave taylor out fishing paddy , so he should have pre stretched the hobie seat to accomodate our glorious leaders generous booty.


----------



## koich (Jul 25, 2007)

I sometimes think it would be great to unite all fishos. Then I read fishnet or fish raider and decide that I don't want to be publicly affiliated with those people.


----------



## anselmo (Aug 26, 2008)

The answer is simple enough (in theory)

Institute a rec fishing licence and use the money to fund commercial buy backs and fisheries officers to police the waters

The difficulties lie in educating the hoi polloi in why a licence is not only valuable but required
Also getting a government with the balls ti actually implement then stand over the policy is ususally the first and biggest stumbling block ...

feel free to flame away!


----------



## Ubolt (Dec 8, 2009)

I agree we need to do something to protect our hobby and for some it is more of a hobby. Most of us diehard live and breathe fishing. A few points I'd like to bring up is the bream tournaments these generate hugely to the economy add up how much all the boats and kayaks and rods and reels and lures would cost. If this was taken away it would massively affect the economy. We Also need to get the professional sector on our side I was talking to an old pro who now helps out on fishing charters out of whyalla, he said on the opening week of the snapper ban he helped a mate on his pro boat and they caught a rediculous amount of snapper like over well over a five hundred kilos a day and he hated it doing it said it was wrong and all the other pros were doing the same. He said they would wave the rec guys over to where the fish were let them get there bag then in no uncertain terms told them to piss off. The worst bit was he said they were only getting like two bucks a kilo when they sold there catch. We definitely need a leader to stand up for the recreational guys and a fishing license would help fund more and better infrastructure. Just my two bobs wortH


----------



## Junglefisher (Jun 2, 2008)

Wow, lots of commercial fisherman bashing going on here.
So we institute a national rec fshing licence (means tested?) and use the money to buy out commercial fishermen.
Where do the non-fishing or occasional fishing fraternity get their fish?
That's OK, we'll buy it off foreign owned fishing fleets.
You know, the ones that don't have to meet Australian standards on mesh size, turtle exclusion etc.
I have no doubt that in some areas commercial fishermen are doing the wrong thing.
However, in my opinion, rec fishermen are responsible for overfishing areas way more than commercial guys.
I spoke to a commercial fisherman the other day, they don't even drop lines until they've gone 10 hours straight out so that they get out further than the rec and charter boats go.
For crabbing, they go up to shoalwater bay as the local creeks get way too flogged by the rec guys to be worth the effort for them.
Probably the nost damaging method of commercial fishing IMO is trawling for prawns in and arouns estuaries. Most of which are sold as bait to recreational fishermen.


----------



## shabby (Mar 24, 2011)

koich said:


> I sometimes think it would be great to unite all fishos. Then I read fishnet or fish raider and decide that I don't want to be publicly affiliated with those people.


Hahaha...so true!


----------



## Ubolt (Dec 8, 2009)

I'm not directly picking on the pros your right with out them people can't buy fresh fish. They are just doing it cause they can. Flooding the market with tons of snapper directly after the snapper ban doesn't make sense. Perhaps we need stricter quotas for the pros. They do here in south oz with tuna as stocks have increased so has quotas. Rec guys have a lot to answer for there are still many who do the wrong thing as well.


----------



## Beekeeper (Aug 20, 2011)

Well, I got some good resonses there...

However... I agree with most points, especially the one that says lots of rec anglers are doing the wrong thing... however, most that I see are OK... but there is a certain element that are extremely good fishermen, so good that they catch huge quantities of fish and bloody sell them!

That's the blokes who should be caught by the law and prosecuted until they hurt! not just a slap on the wrist... take their boat, all their fishing gear, the 4x4 they tow their boat with, fine the buggers big biccies, and let them see what the insides of gaols look like!

That might dissuade them from what they've been doing.

Pete... you mention mixing with the Greenies... In my opinion, all rec fishos have to have a tinge of green about them, but consorting with the hard-line greenies? (those who want to close complete fisheries to us so they can have complete green zones) not for this little black duck! Pete, they don't want us fishing at all!

Boat owners have been paying a levy in Qld for many years... this levy was originally there for rec fishos to supply the money for Qld fisheries to buy out the commercial fishermen, giving us Recreational Only Fishing Areas, or ROFAs. This levy has been taken from Queensland boat owners for over 10 years, and used by the Government for anything but buy-backs!

It is seen as money there for the taking when money's tight in other areas.

This has been a very sore point with Sunfish Qld for years. Millions of rec fishing dollars not used for the purpose that it was intended.

Also... apparently no Government in Qld appears to want the stigma of being remembered for creating a Qld Recreational Fishing Licence. I believe that they think it would get all fishos off-side for future elections... probably would, too, but if they had the balls, it would be there, just like other states in Oz.

That's enough from me for now...

Jimbo


----------



## FazerPete (Mar 10, 2009)

Maybe I'm just naive but why have they never figured out how to successfully farm fish in sufficient quantities? Fish is the only food source that still comes from the wild.

Quality? I've heard stories of it not tasting as good as wild but surely it's not as bad as the cheap crap from Asia that is sold in most supermarkets.

Cost? I can't imagine that it costs that much more to set up compared to land farms does it? Maybe the pro-fisherman could use any buy-out money from the government to form sort of co-op to spread the costs. It's always going to cost more than ripping it out of the wild but there's going to reach a point where the rarity of the wild fish is going to push to costs up to meet the farmed fish costs at some stage.


----------



## Beekeeper (Aug 20, 2011)

Here's a bit more...

Don't get me wrong... I feel that there is still a place for commercial fishos... the non-fishing general public relies on them for a feed of fish... I have no bones about that... however... the life-style is pretty well idyllic... not hard work, but sometimes unpleasant conditions... plenty of time for having a drink with other commercial fishos... when the fish are there, must work!

That's OK, but when a commercial fisher has several children, they grow up with seeing dad living the life of Reilly, and as he is the one they look up to, they want to follow in his footsteps... next thing, as they grow up and are able to join the work-force, the job they choose is often commercial fishing... working with dad for some time, then out on their own.

From one commercial fisho, we now have up to half a dozen!

One is OK and he will eventually fall off the tree, but the rest of them are young and will want to eventually feed families. The only way to feed their families is to take as much from the sea as they possibly can! You might think this is bull-shit, but it's true!

The biggest percentage of fish caught in OZ is sent overseas... they pay more for the fish than will will here... then our Government has the gall to allow inferior product to be imported back to us here! all in the name of economy!

Crap! No fish should be exported from Aussie waters!

Yes! have commercial fishermen... however, limit their numbers so that our fisheries can and will be sustainable!

Don't let all and sundry become commercial fishos at the expense of fisheries throughout our country.

Lots of people don't think much about mullet... that's the fish the commercials catch... not really a line fishing proposition...

Think about mullet as this... another link in the sea's food chain! Other fish eat them for Christ's sake! Just as the prawn is another vital link, the mullet is needed for other fish to survive... commercial fishermen have been raping the coast-line of this species forever... folks older than me have told me stories of mullet schools that stretched further than the eyes could see... you just don't see that in Qld now!

Trawlers have very little prawns these days to trawl... not like in the early days of trawling...

Can you see a pattern emerging?

I've gotta go... got to get the yak on the Suzuki for tomorrow...

Jimbo


----------



## anselmo (Aug 26, 2008)

FazerPete said:


> Maybe I'm just naive but why have they never figured out how to successfully farm fish in sufficient quantities? Fish is the only food source that still comes from the wild.
> 
> Quality? I've heard stories of it not tasting as good as wild but surely it's not as bad as the cheap crap from Asia that is sold in most supermarkets.
> 
> Cost? I can't imagine that it costs that much more to set up compared to land farms does it? Maybe the pro-fisherman could use any buy-out money from the government to form sort of co-op to spread the costs. It's always going to cost more than ripping it out of the wild but there's going to reach a point where the rarity of the wild fish is going to push to costs up to meet the farmed fish costs at some stage.


they have
but its not without its own set of problems and issues

see: http://www.amazon.com/Four-Fish-Future- ... =four+fish


----------



## Ubolt (Dec 8, 2009)

Fish farming seems to be reasonably successful here in SA. Tuna farming in port Lincoln kingfish at Arno bay, clean seas aquaculture breed and raise kingfish and have also successfully spawned blue fin tuna although have not been able to raise them to full size. However there is people who knock the aquaculture industry


----------



## Barrabundy (Sep 29, 2008)

Ubolt said:


> Fish farming seems to be reasonably successful here in SA. Tuna farming in port Lincoln kingfish at Arno bay, clean seas aquaculture breed and raise kingfish and have also successfully spawned blue fin tuna although have not been able to raise them to full size. However there is people who knock the aquaculture industry


There's a prawn farm here which the farmers love to hate because the tanks are unlined and the surrounding farmland is going salty from the leakage (according the farmers).

The thing is that these guys consistently produce first class prawns in an area which was pretty useless for any other industry. It looks ugly, there may or may not be issues with nutrient run-off into the nearby coastal environment but it must have taken a few trawlers out of the equation I'd imagine.

I don't think there'll ever be an easy answer when man and money are involved. These activities occur as a consequence of supply and demand and not as a result of people going out there to repopulate the oceans with fish because it would be a nice thing to do. If there was as much money in conservation as there was in rape and pillage then we'd all be walking around the jungle barefoot without needing to work.

Not having a go at anyone, I don't like the thought of that big sucker of a ship ripping the guts out of the fishery either but the decision makers obviously feel that it's the right decision to make. The operators are just taking the opportunity to keep the cash flowing until the next opportunity shows itself.


----------



## Junglefisher (Jun 2, 2008)

Occulator said:


> OK now here's a little test for you all. How many of you folk out there in states other than NSW (where we have had fishing licenses for years) would be prepared to pay say $50 a year for the priviledge. Come on let's see how fair dinkum you lot really are. Bet that raises a few hackles.


Not a problem as long as the money is put back into the fishery, through habitat or enforcment. 
$50 per licence (and pensioners should have to pay full price) would reap what.. $50million or more in NSW?
Can you tell me what NSW fishing licence money is spent on?
By the way, I have to buy a NSW licence even though I don't fish there as the Dumaresq river (border river) is considered to be NSW water.
I have also in the last 2 years had to buy a WA boat fishing licence, a WA cray fishing licence, a Tas freshwater fishing licence and a Vic fishing licence.


----------



## theGT58 (Nov 1, 2011)

On the back of Occy's comment I would add that I'm a NSW fisho and I think our fishing license fees are in fact too low. Double would be more appropriate and i'd happily pay it, so $50 a year is about right. I also think they should bugger off the current license types (2 day, 1 week whatever they are) and just have 1 year and 3 year licenses. Probably anger the once a year holiday fishos but stuff them. From what I've seen at times they are the worst offenders for taking undersize and over bag limit fish as they simply don't bother to find out that there are rules. On my last xmas holiday I walked about 3km of Newcastle harbour at one stage, being curious i was chatting to the fishos along the way and eyeballing their catch. Depsit e being appalled at the amount of fishing line, bait, bait packets and what not left lying around I noticed alot of the groups there who were fishing, had little idea how to actually fish and many had undersize fish in possesion.

As stated on the other thread, considering how much i love this hobby/sport and how much time I spend doing it, I'd also be happy to donate to the tune of around $500 a year to a charity/action group that protects anglers rights, promotes sustainable fishing and protects waterways. Correct me and please direct me if wrong but I have been trying to find one to donate to given it's tax time but cannot find one except Future Fish who only operate in Victoria. There is no use getting involved or donating to greenpeace/the greens etc as they appear to frankly hate our guts and see us a problem. They're too busy trying to feel better about themselves by being 'righteous' than actually considering the real world. So along Occys line i'd ask how many people would also donate to a NGO that protects our hobby and rights?

Unfortunately aligning with the Fishers and Shooters party appears to be one of the only real options for fishos, and like Occy I do not like some of the elements that are present in there (mostly the more 'extreme element' wallies from the SSAA). And for the record I also fall under the category of a 'shooter'.

As far as where the NSW fishing fees go there is alot of info on this on the Dpi NSW website http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/fees, some things from memory include: creation of artificial reefs, creation of FADS, stocking of various fish species, education, research, studies into impact on species and enforcement (i.e more fisheries officers). So the money DOES go towards things it should. Whether this has become an excuse for the state govt to cut spending in these areas I don't know. Probably.


----------



## cheaterparts (Jul 3, 2010)

Occulator said:


> Seemingly rational people spruiking bull shit about fat cat bureaucrats telling them what they can and can't do, and imposing restricted fishing zones (in areas they will probably never want to use) without any scientific proof they work. It's quite disturbing how many people in Australia think it's their birthright to go out and plunder and pillage the rivers and oceans wherever and whenever they like.
> 
> Fishing licenses are another case in point. If you even mention the idea in some states people go off their nut whining and winging about revenue raising and fat cat bureaucrats wasting their money.
> 
> OK now here's a little test for you all. How many of you folk out there in states other than NSW (where we have had fishing licenses for years) would be prepared to pay say $50 a year for the priviledge. Come on let's see how fair dinkum you lot really are. Bet that raises a few hackles.


I hope I'm a rational person but I have a problem with locking up any area with out any scientific proof thats it makes any difference one way or the other
we have a few local no fish no take marine parks quite close and have been there for some years. Part of the deal with these parks were that they would have on going scientific study 
in fact parks Vic that look after these marine parks have been paid $38 Million over the last few years to "monitor the marine parks and there has never been any studies done 
they were resently slammed for having no reports on any of the marine parks - of cause no studies no reports
I also dont beleve that rec fishos on the whole plunder and pillage with most staying with in the local states bag and size limits

as for fishing licences I have no problems with the cost atm here in Vic they are $ 24.50 per year or $ 66 for 3 years and a lot more of that has been going back into fishing since labour got knocked out her in Vic - and no I'm not trying to make this polictical but the vic lib gov has put more money back into fishing

as for doubling the licence fees I myself would have no problem with that if the money was going back into the sport

while on the subject of banding together here is another group just launched this month attemping to do just that
and lobby to keep Australia fishing and the utube link is a few of the punters getting behind it

http://www.keepaustraliafishing.com.au/ ... t_news.php

http://www.youtube.com/user/KeepAustral ... ture=watch


----------



## Giga (Jan 24, 2012)

Aquaculture sounds like a wonderful idea but there are some major problems to be ironed out before we start encouraging this practice too much. Any time you start to hold large numbers of animals in a small place such as a farm with cattle/sheep etc and also even the tuna and salmon farms etc. animal disease starts to impact. Most farmed salmon and tuna as a result had been pumped full of antibiotics for the entirety of their lifespans and these may then pass into us when we consume them. In addition to this, there have been a couple of salmon fisheries in Europe and North America that have been devastated by fish disease transmitted from aquaculture to wild fish stocks which I am sure is a prospect that sends shivers down the spine were such an event to happen over here. Most of the farmed fish are larger fish such as tuna and salmon that cannot eat plant based food and require a large amount of caught bait fish such as the humble pilchard to fuel their growth. This means that every farmed fish has eaten hundreds or thousands of baitfish over their life to get to a saleable size. Many of these fish (including pilchards) are already edible by humans and it would actually be far more sustainable to just catch these and eat them rather than feeding them to other fish to cater to the premium market.

As for farmed prawns, I did a study on these a few years ago and while some operations are ok, there are many that are horrendously destructive to the environment. In most parts of SE Asia where prawns are farmed such as Vietnam and Thailand, prawns are farmed underneath pigs. That is the pigslive on a structure over the water, shit into the water and the prawns eat the pig shit. This may be off putting enough in its own right though a handy form of recycling but there is a lot of stuff in pig faeces that is readily dissolvable in brine and simply flows straight out of the enclosure leading to largescale outbreaks of toxic algal bloom in surrounding areas.

What is the solution then if we are already overfishing our wild stocks and there are such serious hazards to overcome with aquaculture? I do not claim to know the answer but I suspect at some stage we will all have to greatly decrease our fish and seafood consumption through either attempting to regenerate stocks or because there is simply nothing left to harvest. I also suspect in the commercial markets a trend will come at some stage in the future for more consumption of fish such as whitebait and pilchards that breed quickly, and are easier to harvest in a sustainable fashion than the higher end fish such as tuna.


----------



## goanywhere (Feb 22, 2011)

This debate is like most debates dealing with human vs environmental issues. In the modern world everything is complicated. Things our forefathers did and we adopted as a 'right' without even thinking about it, are gradually being infringed upon. While it is easy to get upset and angry about it, it is just a result of increasing population and more competition for the same resources. I can see the importance of taking measures to keep the plunder of our fish resource to a manageable level. And I am not a marine environmental scientist, so I can't really bring much informed opinion to bear. But I do believe that the debate must involve all relevant parties and must be aimed at preserving the rights and priveliges of the general public wherever possible.

Having said that, taking a look at the map of the proposed 'no take' zones, it seems that they are going to take a sledgehammer to squash a fly. It seems to me that excluding almost all the area around Pt Lincoln is a bit harsh, and the prime fishing grounds around the bottom of Yorkes Peninsula being excluded is a real worry. It will certainly alter my plans for trips to these areas. I just hope that those in the know on 'our' side of the debate are given a chance to put their views in a full and balanced debate, rather than one side dominating at the expense of common sense. Otherwise, let's all resolve to make the government pay at the ballot box if they just choose to run rough shod over us.


----------



## spooled1 (Sep 16, 2005)

* Australia is NOT overfished - we are ranked in 1st place as hosting the most sustainable coastal harvest on the f#*#ing PLANET
* Australia are among the global LEADERS in fisheries management
* We DO NOT NEED fish farms and they are NOT a magic bullet - From an economical export perspective it's probably good to encourage them but in terms of sustainability they're idiosyncratic to their specialisation.

* Oceanic Aquaculture CANNOT and DOES NOT solve the problem of 429 harmful introduced pest species, diseases and pathogens that have been identified in Australian waters
* Sanctuary Zones/Green Zones CANNOT and DO NOT solve the problem of 429 harmful introduced pest species, diseases and pathogens that have been identified in Australian waters
* Sanctuary Zones/Green Zones CANNOT and DO NOT protect habitats from inappropriate coastal development 
* Any perceived threats of commercial fishing in Australia are far outweighed by the collective pollutive threats, diseases, pests, pathogens and toxins 
* Any perceived threats of recreational fishing in Australia are far outweighed by the collective pollutive threats, diseases, pests, pathogens and toxins
* We are selling off our non-renewable minerals to pay (via 72% seafood imports) for a renewable resource that is in abundance but either locked-up or underharvested for Australian dinner tables - In doing this, Australia is creating an unsustainable deficit from the outset. This defines RESOURCE MISMANAGEMENT (ahhh... yes, I know... a conundrum! The pollies are screwing us economically but the Jobsworth public servants who implement fisheries policy are doing what they do)


----------



## koich (Jul 25, 2007)

Tonystott said:


> Maybe what you meant to say was "pensioners should have to pay full price until I am one"


I have, most of them undersized.


----------



## Barrabundy (Sep 29, 2008)

I'd be one who would pay for a fishing license. I wouldnt like to but would do it if it was to be introduced. There would be a certain price point where casual fishers would not bother with a license, but whether they stopped fishing or just fished without one on those few times they fished remains to be seen. If the price became an issue I'd just fish without one from quiet land based sites.

How many people would pay $100/year for a licence? When does it get too expensive? I guess it depends on what result the bean counters want.


----------



## spooled1 (Sep 16, 2005)

Occulator said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but are you saying:
> - the threats commercial fishing presents to our marine environment are perceived (as opposed to real),
> - the fact significant collective pollutive threats, diseases, pests, pathogens and toxins are involved means we are incapable of doing anything about fixing the problem,
> - recreational fishing like commercial fishing is likewise only a perceived threat to our marine environment,
> ...


1) The perceptions are often overinflated compared to the actual threat itself. Good management measures can mitigate existing real threats but nothing can mitigate the negative and often uneducated over-inflations of perceived threats or attitudes toward flesh as a food source. 
2) It's not that we are incapable of doing anything about fixing the problem pathogen, pests and diseases, we are barely even addressing the issue. Seriously, how many ordinary people know that 429 of these nasties were counted in 2008? What can we do about runoff that leeches from a big fat mine on the edge of the ocean too?
3) As per #1
4) We harvest 28kg of seafood per square kilometre of coastline. New Zealand harvest triple the amount.
5) Sanctuary/Green Zones are effective when they embrace highly representative habitats and don't just seek to ban fishing as the primary motivation. When Sanctuary/Green Zones are placed on iconic beaches that attract millions of tourists every year, they fail miserably because the regulation itself pretty much bans just about all form of human interference but it's unenforcable. That includes building sandcastles, resting on rocks or sand, picking up rocks and shells etc, etc, etc.... Sanctuaries are a case of logic not lock-outs and in many cases, habitats can be shared with the fishing of finfish species.

On a different note:

* People love dredging up 60 years of history and making comparisons when we had a population of 8 million. Sure, it's obvious that there's recorded 'hot bites' and recorded rapes and pillages but at the same time, not every day was a commercial fishing rape day. Also, at that time fisheries science was in its infancy and elements of the industry were unregulated. With all the hurdles, Australia still led the way and adapted its harvest limits inline with the global science of the day. Sure, there were and always will be dumb policies and lawless exceptions. Today the cowboys risk massive fines when 60 years ago they didn't even raise an eyebrow. In terms of historical rape and pillage, that argument is no different to last year when those idiot Hervey Bay beach haulers took 3 ton of Permit and offloaded it for $2 bucks a kilo! An exploited 'hot bite' is and will always damage the reputation of fishing and will invariably be retained in the collective psyche. That said, it takes a lot more than a 20, 40 or 60 year old historical 'hot bite' story to create a viable argument for fishing closures or species bans. There are commercial activities that really annoy me that remain legal. At the same time people need to eat and that's the reality.

In a social sense the most important historical fisheries argument that faces our nation today is this: Many key Australian coastal towns were built on and because of fishing; Generations of Australians grew up with fishing and are now being denied access to thier traditional local harvest areas. Byron Bay for example has 170 years of fishing history. Up until the lockouts, locals openly shared iconic areas with generations of commercial fishers, SCUBA divers, snorkelers, spearo's, swimmers, surfers and families without issue. When the Marine Park came along, fishos were shafted without any consideration of five generations of fishing heritage. In the 1840's, the only access to the very first settlements of Byron was via The Pass. The local fishermen created the beach track and the local fishing club BUILT the boat ramp that is today licensed and controlled by a NPWS locked gate and used by a handful of keyholding recreational fishos, commercial dive boat tours, whale watch tours, NSW Maritime and the Marine Park Rangers that bust our arses. Historically there were no roads. The sea provided the food and the sea provided the only access to Byron Bay. This was a fishing community and because of a bunch of anti-fishing extremeists, the cultural history of an entire community is being systemically eroded in the hyper loose name of 'protection' (whatever that means). And with these compounding lockouts we're being forced to eat 72% imported, 2nd rate seafood that isn't quality controlled and certainly isn't fresh, wild or line caught. It also doesn't boast the lowest achievable food miles that we can get from the quality local seafood that can sustainably feed our frikken nation from our frikken doorstep. Settlements all around the coastline of Australia share similar stories and histories and this is what we are having stolen.


----------



## spooled1 (Sep 16, 2005)

OK, I'll be a little more specific - Chile and Norway. Similar sized coastlines but their collective harvest is in the hundreds of kilo's, not tens of kilos! Bangladesh and China - Now that's in the thousands of kilos, not tens! Hardly a clutch at straws mate!

As for the scallops, at what point did seismic testing become a fishing related threat to the species? In terms of old age or the scallop beds inability to re-spawn, I'd be more inclined to think that any added negative contributions could be pathogen, pest or disease based especially given the area was specifically allocated for ongoing assessment.

Historically we plundered at times, but we also developed strategies and continue to do so. Some strategies work well and some are miserable political failures.


----------



## Junglefisher (Jun 2, 2008)

Tonystott said:


> Junglefisher said:
> 
> 
> > Not a problem as long as the money is put back into the fishery, through habitat or enforcment.
> ...


You need to go north then mate. On a weekday, 75% or more of the people fishing are pensioners and most of them will take their bag limit or over if they get chance. 
Plenty of grey nomads filling their freezers well above possession limits.
Go out to the western dams and rivers any time but school holidays, plenty of pensioners there with their maximum number of lines in the water fishing for the freezer.
I'm fully aware that this is probably a small percentage of pensioners / retirees, but they are responsible for taking a lot more fish than the average.


----------



## Barrabundy (Sep 29, 2008)

Junglefisher said:


> Tonystott said:
> 
> 
> > Junglefisher said:
> ...


 :lol: You must come across the same ones I see! They seem to know all the spots and are a dead giveaway by the systematic approach they have. Turn up, hubby bangs pvc pipes in a equal intervals along the beach, wife starts making the coffee while hubby casts rods, hubby then sets up filleting board and has esky handy in back of vehicle. They fillet as they catch and move from spot to spot. Back at the van park they whack everything into their freezer and do the same thing again the next day. Ive even seen the more active ones with boats have a filleting board set up in the boat and one guy knocks the sides of anything that comes in, no ruler required!

Anyway, maybe its a statistical thing where people that age who fish and do the wrong thing are more visible because those who don't fish are less mobile.....that didn't make an ounce of sense did it!


----------



## Cuda (Sep 18, 2006)

Maybe we need to hasten their departure to the great big freezer in the sky Occy :twisted: :twisted: The shooters arm of the shooters and fishers party could arrange a cull of grey nomads and the fish stocks would be much healthier as a result :lol: :lol: :lol: 
I'm sure the locals at all the small towns around the coast would be pleased to see less G.N's too !
Not to mention the highways would be more free of them and their caravans putting along at 70 - 80 k's an hour.
A win win win situation I believe


----------



## kayakone (Dec 7, 2010)

Cuda said:


> Maybe we need to hasten their departure to the great big freezer in the sky Occy :twisted: :twisted: The shooters arm of the shooters and fishers party could arrange a cull of grey nomads and the fish stocks would be much healthier as a result :lol: :lol: :lol:


Cuda

I was 2 seconds away from reporting you post as offensive.

I hope you are joking, but maybe you are not. If not, you have tarred all grey nomads (GN's) with the same brush. You are accusing them all of taking undersized fish. If that is your intention, it is a sweeping statement that deserves no credibility. It is generally demeaning to older Australians, many of whom served in wars, worked their whole lives, and many of whom are active in community and charitable organisations.



Cuda said:


> I'm sure the locals at all the small towns around the coast would be pleased to see less G.N's too !
> Not to mention the highways would be more free of them and their caravans putting along at 70 - 80 k's an hour.
> A win win win situation I believe


Wrong! Many small towns welcome GN's, for both the money they spend, and the fact that they are reliable and often highly skilled workers (with grey hair and wrinkles). But reliable.

As for your frustation with 70 - 80 km/hr, get over it. Most are driving sensibly, knowing they have a heavy load, and most with awareness of the process of aging and impaired abilities in terms of reaction time, eyesight etc.

If I have misread your intentions I apologize.

Trevor


----------



## Barrabundy (Sep 29, 2008)

Yeah, the grey nomads are good. Many come up every year for the cane harvest season. One I still bump into after about 6 years of seasonal work was a police radio operator from Victoria, brought a lot of experience from his previous job with him which came in handy.

As for the ones who fill their freezers, they're no worse than the young local lads who stick nets across creeks, they're just easier to catch because they're past the stage of being covert about it.


----------



## Dodge (Oct 12, 2005)

Trev you can relax mate on 3 counts I feel mate.

1, as well as the dickhead GN's [and they certainly exist] there are plenty of us old farts and I believe in the majority, who have a sense of humour as well as following modern fishing practices using C&R as well as having a feed on occasion.

2, having met Cuda personally when he was on the GC am confidant there is a measure of tongue in cheek in his reply.

3, forums are not to be taken too seriously, so leave the mods in peace for more serious issues methinks.


----------



## kayakone (Dec 7, 2010)

Occulator said:


> :shock: Bloody hell, that's the last time I try and make a joke about old farts here. :? Well maybe. :lol:


You are an old fart Occy. And just wait till Beekeeper sees your 'joke'. :shock:

trev


----------



## Beekeeper (Aug 20, 2011)

Just borrowed a PC in Canberrrrrrra, and I'm watching you buggers!

Young whackers who can't fish very well will always cast green eyes at the canny ol' grey nomads who can.

We'll eventually fall off the tree and the art of angling will just fade away like the oldies.

That's sad... ;-)

Keep bendin'them rods and slidin' 'em back into the water...

Jimbo


----------



## Cuda (Sep 18, 2006)

Sorry if I offended you Kayakone - it was just a joke and was in no way aimed in a derogatory manner against the good ol grey nomads of this country ;-)


----------



## keza (Mar 6, 2007)

kayakone said:


> Cuda
> 
> I was 2 seconds away from reporting you post as offensive.


If only everyone fitted in a bit of sex before reporting a post, great to see it calmed you down Trev.


----------



## kayakone (Dec 7, 2010)

keza said:


> kayakone said:
> 
> 
> > Cuda
> ...


Who said I calmed down. Anyway, what's this sex thing? My memory's going.

trev


----------



## keza (Mar 6, 2007)

It was a reference to the 2 seconds


----------



## kayakone (Dec 7, 2010)

patwah said:


> Cuda said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry if I offended you Kayakone - it was just a joke and was in no way aimed in a derogatory manner against the good ol grey nomads of this country ;-)
> ...


Not so. Thanks Cuda for the explanation. Apology gratefully accepted. (It just didn't look like a joke to me, but then I've got a few things to worry about at the moment, one of which is being old).

trev


----------



## Cuda (Sep 18, 2006)

patwah said:


> Cuda said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry if I offended you Kayakone - it was just a joke and was in no way aimed in a derogatory manner against the good ol grey nomads of this country ;-)
> ...


Doesn't sound too appealing Paddy :shock: I can imagine Trev and a posse of angry grey nomads "gunning" for me now 

I would also like to thank my old mate Dodge for his kind words too 

and .................. it's all Occy's fault - he got me going with his comment about the Grey Nomads going to the big freezer in the sky whatever it was


----------



## Dodge (Oct 12, 2005)

Cuda said:


> I would also like to thank my old mate Dodge for his kind words too


Mark if you come to this side of the country again, it is nothing a schooner a word would not easily cover as a square up mate.


----------



## cheaterparts (Jul 3, 2010)

you got to love this - PEW one of the main green groups pushing for large lock out areas in Aust waters wont target USA water as it will upset 
to many US anglers and there economy
but its ok to target Aust our anglers and economies dont matter

http://www.fishingworld.com.au/news/pew ... t-us-alone


----------



## kayakone (Dec 7, 2010)

Occulator said:


> Some people here think I'm mad, or paranoid or something. But I'm not. It's just that I'm sick and tired of everyone picking on me. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: ;-)
> But I will be well again after I take my little white pill, which is more than I can say about the rest of you bastards.
> 
> PS Hey Trev, a little hint for a mate if I may. (sip) I've been keeping my meds in a little container (with a little AKFF logo on the top) and a glass of fermented grape juice to wash it down with (well actually it's a whole bottle but I won't go there) alongside my computer for some time now. (slurp) It really does seem to do the trick when some rather unkind people here (you know who you are ;-) )start picking on you. (glug glug) Not that I'm paranoid mind you. (guzzle) :shock: I'm actlly mich betta alrudy, after onnly one pell and sox glusses of wune. (burp) I thimk I miiiiight jost have one moor gliss acccccttuly. (belch) And iss unly just gawnnnn 3.22 pm woodya bulife. :lol: :lol: :lol: Huppy doys. (hiccup)


Loved it Occy. Having a couple of ports tonight too. And that's on top of 16 + km paddling today.

Fheelink a bit shleepy miself.

trev


----------

