How long is a piece of string?  I'm not for or against the dept, but personally I would prefer them to be proactive and restrict so that you can still catch 'lots' rather than be reactive and have to close it all when theres none left?  One could even say its good management on their behalf that has seen such good catches?  Even if their estimations are way wrong?  (Just putting it out there)

ahhh so we all eat golden goose today and ignore that there are no new eggs in the nest,!!!  but look folks hundreds of fat golden geese running around, who cares if they laying dud eggs or no eggs.... lets all eat goose for dinner!!!!

just cause we have bumper catches of adults now does not mean we have bumper juveniles growing up from puerulus to small kakkers!!!! and are they growing up in the right areas that will allow them to become adults????

It’s mighty easy to be fooled by high adult counts, it's a bit like the Australia aging population that will soon all retire and then who is paying the taxes, same goes for the lobsters! If the young aren’t there, then don't keep taking tons of adults, as the mortality rate of juveniles to adults may have dramatically changed for reasons still to be identified!

Don't be greedy, farm the sea for the future.

were talking about lobster? haha just kidding mate. its come to the point where we need these restrictions. i think the fisherman would rather a constant income for years to come than a big pay out now

We are all for a well managed industry, but the regs now enforced by the department only create hatred. for example the 50 percent pot reduction yet you still must pay the licence for all the pots you own plus the 50 percent that you have been reduced buy?? The list goes on and its well know the department wants to reduce catch rates. Its onlty until you go to a industry meeting you realize fisheries believe its there way or no way. They refuse to answer constructive questions and we all march out wonder why we  all came in the first place.  Its a tough a situation.

Hehheh  thats some out there sh!t.

was the low puerulus counts were due to a change in the current so the puerulus didnt actually come as close to shore this year and this is why alot of ameture crayfishers didnt get many whites! most of the whites started at the five fathom bank and left from there! yes we do need restrictions but in some places the fisheries have gone to far! ie pot reductions but still paying your licence for them! its become more like the fisheries are there to make money than keep our fish stocks safe!

The data is rubbish, they changed the material they were using to capture settling puerulus a couple of years ago and guess what, the count numbers plummetted - seems the new material doesn't work 

I am however concerned at the pro's focus on large male crays for the Asian market - we need the studs - it is that aspect that should be closely addressed and quickly  

the less the pros catch is more the avrage guy Or gurl can catch.. im for the the low catch rate applyed by fisheries... And yes i support the cray fisherman as i have crayfish in my blood as my grandad had 2 boats at one stage out of two rocks "many years ago"

tony ur points are very valid and are well backed up with catch rates this season and last!

especially at this time of the year/season. the boys are still killing the pig!!! ??

Is mister norman moore or whoever going to listen yeah well unfortunatley probably not..

U and me both and whoever has/was in the game knows these last few years have been

especially good for crays so it/quotas does seem unreasonable.. perilous count haha my arse!

It is definatley unfair to the gurus/good fisherman ( BTW totally unbiased opinion i wish i was one of them! hahaha)

who have invested their whole life time and generations of family into the industry!

Don't get me wrong im 100% behind cutting back on catch rates, be it crays or finfish no questions asked! 

If things are starting to look grim which in a lot of situations around perth metro they are!

For example i totally agree with the 2 month demersal ban etc..

but back on track yes i think personally fisheries have got it wrong..

and have to agree.....  "sunshine" has a valid point....

A lot of conspiracy theories floating around. From a change in currents to a change in the collection matts. But the current catched shouldn't really surprise and I would have thought it would have been predicted by the fisheries.

The low puerulus count was for the last 2-3 years. Puerulus take 4 years to reach size, and a lot longer to be the size that you find in deep water. The current record catches are the result of all the crays that have been left in the water for the past 3 years. Last years predicted catch was for about 10m kilos from memory and the fisheries restricted the catch to about 5.5m kilos. So that is a lot of crays left in the water. It was the same for the previous 2 years.

The recent fisheries management has been designed to leave crays in the water to compensate for those zero puerulus years and so far it seams to be working. The puerulus count has been an accurate predictor for the past 20 -30 years, or whenever it was introduced.

A more alarming sign from what I have seen this year is a complete lack of of crays in close. I hardly saw a white compared to other years. This would seem to back up record low perulus counts of the past few years!!

hey guys, there are some really interesting comments here.

Ive been working on crayboats for 5 season's now and the last 3 with the thommo's out of cervantes.

I completley agree with the cut down's in catch and completley agree with the quota system.

But i have to disagree with a few things like only keeping the big males and the low puerulus count.

We can catch our quota as quick or as slow as we like. But we only keep the good looking crays ie. the ones with all legs and feellers.

If a cray comes up with 2 feellers missing or more then 4 legs missing we chuck them back because we dont get as much money for them for example we are getting 35 bucks a kilo for premium crays and only 25 bucks for crays with legs missing or "rejects" as we call them.

As for the puerulus count well im not too sure that anyone knows what really went on because the fisheries told us that the count was through the roof again this year.

Hopefully these new rules will keep this great fishery going for many years to come

 check out the latest puerulus count , still not looking good at all in 3 areas , jurein is the only place that is showing good improvement ...down south here the cray season has been poor for several years now ..

personally id rather leave thousands of crays in the water here , to breed , than flogg them to someone overseas ,

the precautionary principle will be in the best interests of the whole wa community future resource that these crays represent imo

The puerulus stage of Panulirus cygnus settles naturally in seagrass beds or onto floating seaweed during the dark phase of the moon (new moon period). Artificial collectors mimic this habitat and thus provide a mechanism that allows relative settlement rates of puerulus throughout the fishery to be measured.

Each monitoring location contains five or six collectors, each of which are sampled every full moon period (five days either side of the full moon) over the settlement season (May to the following April). This sample is considered representative of the settlement over the last new moon period.

For each site a monthly average is determined; the total number of puerulus retrieved from each collector is averaged over all the collectors sampled. In April each year a seasonal average is also determined, the sum of the monthly averages from May to April.

In cases when a location was not serviced for a given month(s), perhaps due to bad weather, an estimate of settlement is determined based on the historical proportion that month contributes to the overall catch.

Not all the lobsters settling on the collectors are early stage puerulus. Some are slightly larger, about one month old, probably after settling late in the previous month. These lobsters are added to the previous months settlement tally. Also in most years a new moon will occur 13 times, resulting in one month having two new moons. In these months we record the puerulus settlement twice. In these cases we take an average of the two settlements to get just one measure for that month. These may cause the figures reported on this website to change slightly (for months with two new moons).

Note: In the figures below the grey areas with red borders represent the long-term average of settlement at each location. The blue lines show the actual average monthly settlement at each site in each month since May 2006. Vertical dotted lines represent the start and end of each settlement season (May & April). The new moon date prior to sampling determines which month's data is shown on the graph. For example, if the new moon occurred on the 25/04/09 and sampling occurred near on the full moon in May, it is recorded as the average settlement to April on the graph.

Click the chart above to view a larger version of the chart.

Click the chart above to view a larger version of the chart.

Click the chart above to view a larger version of the chart.

Click the chart above to view a larger version of the chart.

Click the chart above to view a larger version of the chart.