New Fishing Rules being considered in 2019
The 2019 Fisheries Reform process will include the introduction of a raft of amendments to the Fisheries Act, followed later in the year by an even larger list of changes to the Fisheries Regulations. This is supposed to be in line with the government's "Sustainable Fishing Strategy" document.
The above mentioned document includes the key target of rebuilding our fish stocks to around 60% of what they used to be before we started fishing them down. This is called their unfished biomass. So what does that really mean?
It means there is recognition that our fish stocks in general are not in great shape and must be significantly rebuilt. As we've said in other places on this website, actually counting fish is extremely difficult to say the least. So can this aspirational target be achieved? Of course it can. but it will take time, commitment and persistence.
No one will ever categorically know exactly how many fish were here before white colonization, but what we do know for sure, from anecdotal records, is that even just 30 years ago, our oceans supported vastly larger fish populations than they do today. If you the reader, are say older than 50 years of age and have fished since you were a kid, you will clearly know how much our fish stocks have declined in your lifetime alone. Trouble is, scientists are reluctant to consider this anecdotal evidence when trying to determine the extent of current and historic fish stocks - bless em.
Examples of species that most keen recreational fishers will know are in poor shape, include whiting, barra, mackerels, dart, queenfish etc. etc.
A lower high school student will tell you that to rebuild a natural population, you need to stop relentlessly killing them, ensure their habitat is conducive to reproduction and monitor their success. That isn't rocket science.You would hope that our fisheries managers might be taught this basic concept somewhere in their degrees wouldn't you? But do you realize that many of our our Public Servants responsible for managing our fisheries have no qualifications or experience in fisheries management? True story and it's been that way for decades. No wonder we struggle to get anything like world best practice introduced here. Many of them apparently have no idea what that actually is.
The only way we can begin to rebuild our dwindling fish stocks is to immediately reduce the quantum of the harvest. The 60% of unfished biomass target for the first time in the history of Queensland's fish management machinations, finally sets a tangible recovery target and should impose a high level of accountability on our fisheries managers. Sadly at this time, we are not seeing any effort being made to acknowledge this key target in the reform proposals and propaganda. Without this target set in stone, we are going to see just more of the same and the continuation of the steady decline in our fish stocks and ongoing conflict and heart ache between the competing users, community and government.
Oh, but if you are a recreational fisher, it gets even worse for you. There are far reaching intentions to further restrict your catches under these reforms, but senior Fisheries Qld officers told us that "the total commercial harvest will not be reduced, simply capped at the averages of the last 5 year harvest levels". What the????? How is that fair?
It clearly isn't. We strongly suggest you ask your local state member to explain the rationale and fairness to you. GOOD LUCK!
The above mentioned document includes the key target of rebuilding our fish stocks to around 60% of what they used to be before we started fishing them down. This is called their unfished biomass. So what does that really mean?
It means there is recognition that our fish stocks in general are not in great shape and must be significantly rebuilt. As we've said in other places on this website, actually counting fish is extremely difficult to say the least. So can this aspirational target be achieved? Of course it can. but it will take time, commitment and persistence.
No one will ever categorically know exactly how many fish were here before white colonization, but what we do know for sure, from anecdotal records, is that even just 30 years ago, our oceans supported vastly larger fish populations than they do today. If you the reader, are say older than 50 years of age and have fished since you were a kid, you will clearly know how much our fish stocks have declined in your lifetime alone. Trouble is, scientists are reluctant to consider this anecdotal evidence when trying to determine the extent of current and historic fish stocks - bless em.
Examples of species that most keen recreational fishers will know are in poor shape, include whiting, barra, mackerels, dart, queenfish etc. etc.
A lower high school student will tell you that to rebuild a natural population, you need to stop relentlessly killing them, ensure their habitat is conducive to reproduction and monitor their success. That isn't rocket science.You would hope that our fisheries managers might be taught this basic concept somewhere in their degrees wouldn't you? But do you realize that many of our our Public Servants responsible for managing our fisheries have no qualifications or experience in fisheries management? True story and it's been that way for decades. No wonder we struggle to get anything like world best practice introduced here. Many of them apparently have no idea what that actually is.
The only way we can begin to rebuild our dwindling fish stocks is to immediately reduce the quantum of the harvest. The 60% of unfished biomass target for the first time in the history of Queensland's fish management machinations, finally sets a tangible recovery target and should impose a high level of accountability on our fisheries managers. Sadly at this time, we are not seeing any effort being made to acknowledge this key target in the reform proposals and propaganda. Without this target set in stone, we are going to see just more of the same and the continuation of the steady decline in our fish stocks and ongoing conflict and heart ache between the competing users, community and government.
Oh, but if you are a recreational fisher, it gets even worse for you. There are far reaching intentions to further restrict your catches under these reforms, but senior Fisheries Qld officers told us that "the total commercial harvest will not be reduced, simply capped at the averages of the last 5 year harvest levels". What the????? How is that fair?
It clearly isn't. We strongly suggest you ask your local state member to explain the rationale and fairness to you. GOOD LUCK!
