Seasonal closures are ok, but only when they are backed up by substantial evidence. E.g. snapper in the sound. Is there enough information to place them (location and dates) precisely, or is it going to be the equivalent of carpet bombing an area because they 'might' be there. I'm for better management, even at the cost of reduced fish limits, just as long as the reasoning is sound.

--------------

and i must say that the proliferation of just under limit pinks at Shark Bay ( 4 or 5 just under to each size )  indicates to me the combination of the single fish limit and inner gulf bans is working there. Better some short term pain for a long term gain.

After reading this post on thewest.com.au I'm a little concerned with the heading "WA anglers back bans to save species".I don't think this is a very accurate representation of the views of Fisher persons across WA. I don't know where Pat Shinnick resourced this info from, but I think he needs to re-address the issue of who he counts in his survey. How many WA anglers belong to the Australian Anglers Association of WA compared to the overall number of recreational fisher persons in WA. I'm all for conservation for this very special fishery we have in WA and we do need to put some really good measures in place, but only when all of the best information is gathered and only then can a sustainable solution be put into acton. Going off half cocked and with little or no accurate information from a hand full of people is not the answer. The minister needs input from across the whole Recreational sector, not just a hand full of people.In the post there was mention of 28 clubs from Esperance to the Pilbara and that this ban only apply to boats, not shore base anglers ??? This is a little bias and a very selfish attitude. Mr Shinnick also said the association also backed a fishing licence for anglers. It is amazing how Mr Shinnick can speak for the thousands and thousand of Recreational fisher people who are not members of the AAAWA.Also Mr Neville's report on this fishery is due to go to the state Government this month, so every one please put your submission into Norman Moore's office now other wise you will miss the boat to have a say in the future of this fishery, good luck people.

Yep the West heading could be misunderstood. We don't have any control over the media or the short descriptions they use in the headings for their articles.



Once you read past the heading, it's should be clear that this is only the Australian Anglers Associations summary of the majority opinion of it's clubs.



That came from boat fishing clubs which are affiliated with the Association which were involved in the discussions and put in their opinions.



Specifically, the boat angling sections of:-



Marmion Angling and Aquatic Club

Hillarys Yacht Club

Ocean Reef Sea Sports Club

Lancelin Angling and Aquatic Club

Mandurah Offshore Fishing Club

Offshore Angling Club Boating Branch

Quinns Rock Fishing Club



It does not claim to represent all recreational anglers, or even all recreational boat fishing anglers, or even all members of all of those clubs, just a majority view, as clearly stated by:-

Fishing for the v5,species not just the recreational people,also all professionals and charter operators,if not the I will not support it. jersey

Colin 1 Proud and co-founding member of the prestigious Colin's Club

Proud member of the Fishwrecked Old Farts

Make sure you have subscribed to:
http://fishwrecked-reeltime.com/

they should have fish restriction zones where no fishing is allowed what so ever, then after two years they should open up a portion off that area leaving a section closed.moving the restriction zone to another area and so on

Terry

I am all for it, sent a submission in last year to the previous minister. There still needs to be more understood RE Spawning times of the V5. I have personally found that up around Dongara-Geraldton the Dhuies are spawning around Xmas time, whilst down around Lancelin they are spawning around Sept-Oct.

I believe the closed season should be brought in ASAP (inc Pros) and then we can make ammendments as more info comes to light.

Once again a minority group thinking they can talk for the majority!

What a load of shit!

Thanks TerryF for the update!!

What if they DON'T know the details of where and when the V5 fish spawn?

What if they DON'T know the details of the where's and when's of when the V5 fish's prey species spawn?

What if the DON'T know the X or Y details??

should they/we wait until we do spend the millions (many millions) of dollars to find out these questions, so that a few rec and pro fisherman aren't inconvenienced by some kind of seasonal or spatial closure?? Remember that these millions required for marine research are the same millions required for more/better schools, health care facilities, roads, etc. I (and maybe also, you) believe we need more for the marine research, but perhaps the rest of WA wouldnt agree.

perhaps they/we should act on the best available knowledge and close, close, close, until populations are back to at least half of what they were, and then re-assess?

We are catching less fish than we used to (with the equivalent effort) because we are/have been catching too much. Nothing can rectify this, other than to reduce how much we catch.  To reduce how much we catch is going to be politically unpalatable, unless fishers wake up and get behind the idea. Otherwise we will have the status quo - yay! (sarcsam)

EVERYONE who has some kind of understanding of the status of the V5 in heavily fished areas must know that populations have been smashed in the last couple of decades.

These fish are old, grow slowly, and do not breed very much. Every one of them that we catch reduces the population of breeders.  Before the advent of humans with ocean-going boats, sounders, GPS, chemically-sharpened hooks and sensitive braided lines, their populations were in equilibrium with their environment.

We have changed this.

I believe that large, permanent no-take areas would be the best solution, followed by large, seasonal no-take areas in places and at times understood to be spawning times. My undertstanding of the research available confirms that these kinds of measures tend to have success in providing more, and bigger, target fish.

The problem with both spatial and temporal closures is that both co-incide with favoured fishing places and/or times. Hence you will always read on these forums that people favour no-take areas or seasonal closures "For the right reasons, in the right places", but those reasons and places seem to be never acceptable to those people if they result in those people not being allowed to fish those places/times.

What comes first, the chicken, or the egg? Why bother to 'protect' areas that arent under threat? Yes, fishing is a threat. Commercial, recreational - both. Ergo - we should protect against these threats.

It is up to the fishing community to think big, and to accept and even push for such measures, as a form of insurance for our fishing future.

Why do we see so much resistance to fishery or marine biodiversity management regulations, when new ports, mines and other developments are approved with little comment?  Something like 1% of WA waters are closed to fishing, due to no-take areas or seasonal closures.

I dont know the comparative figure, but I would hazard a guess that much more area is rooted for fishing due to over-fishing, ports, pollution, salinity or other land-use problems.

oh, but those kind of things are good for the 'economy;' aren't they...? yeah, that chicken, or that egg...

Cheers,

Ewan

Proud contributor to Fishwrecked-Reeltime:

http://fishwrecked-reeltime.com/

Ewan



I'm VERY tied up for the next 2 days, so may not be able to reply to some of your your points.



Meanwhile, worth a read and answers some questions:- http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/frr/frr187/index.php?0401



"Management and Monitoring of Fish Spawning Aggregations within the West Coast Bioregion of Western Australia"



Oh and BTW, Peter Neville's report on the Review of Recreational Demersal Fishing rules/proposals is due to be given to the Government by the end of May (or maybe earlier).



TerryF

=====

Beavering away in the background.......

 don't know the full details etc of the above.  I just go by what I see on the water and what people catch.  Two weeks before Easter & two weeks after we where in Leeman, and the boats that were up there over the Easter break (over 100 log on sea rescue over the 7 days)  Not alot was caught due to the tide.  But was told by one of the pro fisherman up there, a big Leisure cat went out one person on board, pro f/man was out this L/C pinged every spot  pro went to.  The pro fishing was wondering why he saw undersize/legal/bigger than legal dhuie's floating, he saw this L/C catching dhuies, not big enough, threw them over board.  the word is he caught 18 dhuies and came in with 4 very big dhuie's.  The pro took all his details of the L/C & has been reported to Fisheries.  This ar%$#@!hole did this all on his own, then have the cheek to brag about it around town.  I absolutely hate fisherpeople like this, this is why bans are coming in, this is why we need santuarys but how far do we go with the santuarys total ban or sections, I prefer sections.

ps ... those that did get dhuie's some females did have roe, when we brought our bait up to check (occie) Bob said the bait was warm??? tide was very strong (Leeuwin current maybe?)

SPEWIE LEWIE .. Ginger Tablets Rock

Cockburn Power Boat Member

thanks as always Terry, for keeping us in the loop with these things and providing the links etc - makes for good discussion!!

I would think that the majority of fishos would support new restrictions - any new form of restriction will reduce our catch by a fair bit, as it must to do what it needs to do. most people i know are certainly supportive. there are many different kinds of fisho out there though...

Cheers,

Ewan

Proud contributor to Fishwrecked-Reeltime:

http://fishwrecked-reeltime.com/