North Australian FISH FINDER TM forums

Mabey we should plan an outing during the week Ghound you sound pretty desperate there to get out and away from the keyboard!!!

.[/quote]

Wat about if you own a GS and none of the above [/quote]

OK, and if you own a GS.

and maybe an ocean disaster, but only because I like Ghound & Southy cracks me up!

Dont you think Ghound has suffered enough

name the time and place AM

jimmy your booked allready

WHO CATCHES WHAT?

Hi everyone and happy new year.

In December there was a lot of discussion on the forum about catches of reef fish by the various sectors. It is important that we all understand who is catching what when we consider what if any changes are needed to recreational fishing size and possession limits. Some of you may not be aware that, in the case of reef fish in general and jewfish and golden snapper in particular, the recreational sector takes the biggest share of the catch. For golden snapper we remove more than three times the amount of commercial and fishing tour operators combined.

I have spoken to NT Fisheries and they have provided the following information for black jewfish and golden snapper.

Black Jewfish
The total average annual catch by all NT commercial fisheries is 179 tonnes (43% of total jewfish catch by all sectors).

The total average annual harvest by all Fishing Tour Operators is 24 tonnes and the average amount of jewfish released annually is 10 tonnes. Given the impact of barotrauma on released jewfish a high proportion of fish released will die but, for the sake of simplicity, let us assume it is 50%. That would mean that Fishing Tour Operators are removing an average 29 tonnes of jewfish per year from NT stocks (7% of total jewfish catch).

The total harvest by recreational anglers in 2000 was 157 tonnes and the average amount of jewfish released annually was 94 tonnes. As for FTOs assume 50% of fish released will die. That would mean that recreational fishers are removing 204 tonnes of jewfish per year from NT stocks (50% of total jewfish catch).


Golden Snapper
The total average annual catch by all NT commercial fisheries is 19 tonnes (13.5% of total golden snapper catch).

The total average annual harvest by all Fishing Tour Operators is 7 tonnes and the average amount of golden snapper released annually is 7 tonnes. Given the impact of barotrauma on released golden snapper a high proportion of fish released will die but, for the sake of simplicity, let us assume it is 50%. That would mean that Fishing Tour Operators are removing an average 10.5 tonnes of golden snapper per year from NT stocks (7.5% of total golden snapper catch).

The total harvest by recreational anglers in 2000 was 61.3 tonnes and the average amount of golden snapper released annually was 102 tonnes. As for FTOs assume 50% of fish released will die. That would mean that recreational fishers are removing 112.3 tonnes of golden snapper per year from NT stocks (79% of total golden snapper catch).

Now, to save some possible arguments these figures are as close to comparing apples with apples as we can get. Here is where the figures come from:
• Commercial catches are taken from actual log book records and are averaged for the years 1999 to 2008. The catch is stated in whole fish weight regardless of whether whole fish, trunks or fillets were actually landed.
• Fishing Tour Operator catches and released fish figures are also taken from actual log book records averaged for the years 1999 to 2008.
• Recreational fisher catches and released fish figures are taken from the data collected in 2000 as part of the National Recreational Fishing Survey. We will have results of the 2009 NT Recreational Fishing Survey shortly.
• Recreational and FTO catches are recorded in numbers of fish and these have been converted to weight using the average weight of fish actually recorded by commercial fishers. These average weights are 8.7 kg for black jewfish and 0.9 kg for golden snapper.
• The assumption of 50% fish dying from barotrauma impacts is most likely too low in the case of black jewfish as the vast majority of these fish are caught from depths greater than the 10 metres or so — and we know from local research that most jewfish taken from this depth or greater are highly unlikely to survive. In the case of golden snapper the 50% figure is justified even recognising that many released golden snapper may in fact be smaller fish caught inshore in shallower water where they have a reasonable prospect of survival.

I hope this puts things in perspective for you and I look forward to hearing your views on the issue.

Regards

Interesting figures Chris Makes rec fisho's look greedy

Would be interesting to know the following and break it down to kg's to get a more detailed look,
as the rec catch maybe larger but spread across a more substancial user base, and which one is the better
investment for the NT $ wise pro's or rec ?

eg: 204 tonne 20000 fisho's, is just over 10 kg of fish a year (not alot when broken down)

How many pro's ?
How many charter boats ?
How many rec fisho's ?

Neither for or against any changes but break it down some more and the figures may show a different story??



PS: Never seen an accurate log book kept by anyone (if it's in there own best interests!!!!!!!)

Lesson 1 dont quick reply with war and peice as if sombode posts in between it is lost, OK here we go again.

A few points Chris,
I am not surprised that amatures catch the most fish but question the split. How is this data collected and collated.
Looking at the charters first. I have been on a few, mabey 6, the skippers is usually pacing about feeling the pressure as skippers do, the decky is mosly a younster telling me how to do somthing I have done all my life just a bit differently just so his day will be a bit easier. The point is I have never ever seen a fish weighed, not one, no scales even. I have never seen a log book being filled in. If they are estimating weight how do they get to be good at it?.So how are these figures arrived at, mabey they do it after the punters leave from memory, I would hope not as the fish and the carcases are long gone and the issue seems to be getting cleaned up and ready for tommorrow. The realism is that they dont have much to gain by officially reporting accuratly and specifically if the catch is big. More on this later.
The commercial catch data has the most potential to be accurate being generally related hopfully too the sale of the catch through all legal channels. However I am still interested on the method of collection.
The amature catch is also of interest. Is it a small sample actually done on a creel survey, or is infomation volunteered by individuals or logbooks etc. All fishermen want to tell when they have had a good day not many do when they dont do well and there are the others that inflate their success to the point where they start believing their own shite. The amatures have the least to gain by anything other than accurate reporting, but human nature is what is.
In short the collection methods on these figures should go with them otherwise the will get a pasting thats for sure (Ghound , Doug step forward)

In relation to the charters, it seems nobody knows what to do with them, and by the figures (their own) they are not doing the damage anyway. I propose a regime be placed on them similar to that foisted on the Qld commercial line fisherman 6 or 7 years ago which in general terms could be modified to fit the NT charter industry. All commercial fishermen catching reef fish in the L1 and L2 areas in Qld are required to lodge accurate details numbers and estimated weight by phone onto a recorded service prior to landing them back at any port and an estimated time of return. They can and are checked and the records looked at (for sale fish comparisons to the receipts are made), fishos found to be substantially or repeartedly with discrepancys are prosicuted on the basis the fish were destined for sale in other than legal outlets. This has forced many less interested or shonky operators out of the system as it takes time, big time, and must be done as you catch not later on as the fish are away, but an accurate log book was the result. It was messy at the start but they have gotten used to it, if the charter operators were forced into it it would allow them to prove to the greater communitythat they are not at fault, rather than just put their hands up and say they are not doing any harm, give it 5 years mabey and reveiw if the catch data dosent change.
Over to you cuddlescooper

Is there such a thing as a spell check anywhere around this site Matt.

am we just fill in the box on fishing tour operator daily log ,there is no box for weight ,just how many caught and released ,so i dont how the weight thing comes up, we all know barra release well but reef fish not so good , so i think fisheries look at reef fish caught as all being dead by the sound of our last meeting with them ,also it is very beneficial to all of us to fill out our log books ,but you don't need me to rabbit on about that. im not disagreeing with you on anything ,some guides may fib a bit to keep the area where they wish to fish , give me a call can fill you in a bit.

AM said

Lesson 1 dont quick reply with war and peice as if sombode posts in between it is lost,

????????????????????
Sorry for Hijackin the post
Or please correct me if misunderstood!!!!

Whoa there Ernie, way missunderstood, no hyjacking from you at all. I only meant that by the time I had typed my war and peace responce to Chris's bit in the quick reply box you had added another post. I coundnt seem to post mine as a quick responce because it said I might want to rethink my addition in light of yours, and pppssstt disapearred into cyberspace. So I then hit the reply box and retype all that load into it again. Just a lesson learned unless it is a quick responce, dont use the quick responce box I just didnt know, sorta makes sense when you say it though. No problem this end Ernie.

That's good was starting to feel a bit precious

Thanks AM and BarraBase

The weight issue is resolved for both FTOs and rec fishers by multiplying the number of fish (derived from FTO log books and the rec fishing survey) by the average weight per fish calculated from commercial logs. I think that is statistically valid enough for this consideration, particularly as the majority of jewfish and golden snapper taken by commercial fishers are line-caught just like those taken by FTOs and rec fishers.

Log books (commercial and FTOs) may not be 100% perfect but there are legal requirements that they be completed correctly and I understand that action has been taken against fishers who have failed to do so. In any case, there are currently proposals to streamline the log book process for FTOs (see below).

I won’t go in to the intricacies of the National Recreational Fishing methodology here but I’d be happy to email a copy of the survey to you with full details of the methodology. (Just email me at [email protected] and I’ll get it to you.) The important thing is that the same methodology was used throughout Australia in 2000 and has since been (or is being) used in a number of other individual state surveys. It was used for the NT fisher part our latest survey in 2009/10. Short of the impossible task of tracking every fish that every fisher actually catches this survey method is as good as we can get. It’s not Mickey Mouse Club either — the 2009/10 survey for the NT will cost more than $400,000 by the time the final data is processed and analysed in the next couple of months.

Note that the figures provided assume 50% of jewfish and golden snapper released by FTOs and rec fishers survive capture. They do not assume 100% mortality.

AM I see your suggestions about FTO record keeping. As BarraBase knows, the issue is being considered by the industry in the discussion paper which has been posted elsewhere on the forum. There will be a public consultation on proposals to revise management arrangements for the FTO industry in the first half of this year and this will be one of the issues considered. Just for info, I believe that direct electronic transfer of data from operators to the Fisheries database is already under development for some commercial fisheries.

Regards

Thanks BB Like you said it would be easy with a days barra fishing but a lot less precise with 10 guys fishing for reef fish all day ,or three days for that matter. Just want to know how they do this, as I have seen no evidence of on the bigger reef charters that I have been on at all, and I reckon you can get a sence of the buisness of the day when on these things, and documenting the catch accuratly in only my personal estimation and observations would be very low. I am more concerned about the bigger boys figures with a swag of people on board. It would be a nightmare to try and do after the event ( if there was a penalty for getting it wrong, that is). It is something that they will have to address either now or when the bag limit comes in as if there not careful on extended charters they will be easy targets arriving back at the whalf. Imagine when you can have 5 of this 3 of that and a total of 20 each comprising no more that 10%of any one speices. Just lets be careful they dont grant somesort of margin to extended charters in the bag limit package when it does come in.


Could we have some info on where how fisheries came up with this data Chris surely they have to give a reference or some bibliography on when and by whom the data was collected for credibility sake.

Sorry Chris I type so slow that this post is changing between reply and submit I will have a look through your lastest stuff and think again. I just cant keep up , be glad when work gets going again.