Flawed science and outdated web-site

[wisdom 0]

But I don't use Red Herrings Brenton!

[CallopHunter 1]

It was necessary.

[fished out 0]

Reefs over previously unproductive land (eg large expanses of mud/sand) could only produce more food. Those reefs are like little pit stops for the fish, rest, recover, refuel. But when these reefs trample seagrass, natural formations like gutters, current lines etc they would disrupt the natural food.Just my view, seems logical to me.

[spinyeel 2]

This is hilarious. :laugh:Everyone knows that more FAD,s and artificial reefs attract more fish,that in turn attract more New Zealand Fur Seals,that eat more Fairy Penguins.

[Tacklebags 404]

TacklebagsDon't bother...... they were dragged to Melbourne three years ago to take part in a presentation by the person that brought out the Korean scientist in the company of the Victorian Fisheries.And were even invited before that to receive a delegation from other states on the issue. The answer was ...."get lost".That was three years ago' date=' whats happened since ?Does that answer your question ?quote']Didn't know that history wisdom? Anyhoo, I do think that in instances where closures have affected many productive fishing opportunities for local communities it makes some AR's a viable alternative opportunity for rec fishers.Perhaps for the rec fishers of PT Wakefield? They have a fair distance to go to escape the sanctuary zone up there.They have a military zone closed to fishing for safety reasons.They have two more sanctuary zones that would affect their range, one just north of the Goannas and the other off Ardrossan.The statewide snapper ban during November into December.The proposed spatial closures on snapper if implemented as at the last PIRSA meeting.Perhaps others think too bad, there are few fishers up that way so who cares I don't know? Maybe my concerns for what impacts them/could continue to provide sound access to productive spots for them isn't shared?Moreton Bay was a good example of AR's being used to replace lost fising opportunities for locals affected by closed natural reef systems.Are my concerns for rec fishing in the top of SV Gulf unfounded? Do I think too deeply about what effects rec fishers and should I be discouraged from do so?All I know is that I do care and if that makes me stupid then so be it....

[O2Catch1 170]

So a small artificial reef like a boat someone has towed out at night and sunk will eventually get mussels etc growing on it and supply food for snapper. So when you get a school of 1000 + snapper hanging around this structure just how long would it take to clean off all the growth - IF that is why they were there. After a few minutes all the edible growth could be taken then what is the school to do???? Move off to the next reef??The growth does not just get cleaned off in fact, that is because the fish are attracted to the structure for reasons other than just food.What does happen is that the school will hang around that structure off and on sometimes for weeks. Surely if they were there for the food that reef supplies they would be getting pretty damn hungry by now because it ain't going to feed a big school for long at all. Now don't come with the old "yeah but they eat the slimeys etc that are attracted to the reef". Every fish I have pulled on some artificial drop has had maybe a few crabs, prawns etc but most of the time they have munched up grit. And like I said, that is not all coming from the structure or the structure would be stripped clean pronto. It is just their general foraging. The facts are that snapper are attracted to structure, especially during the warmer months where they form large schools and become easy to catch. They sometimes will sit or move around a way off the actual structure. This is good for catching fish but not real good for fish stocks long term. My money is on PIRSA, these guys believe it or not, do actually have an interest in preserving fish stocks and whether or not some want to admit it, do have a reasonable amount of science behind their statements and decisions. Certainly a shit load more science than I and most fishermen will ever have. Just a lot don't want to believe it.

[Tacklebags 404]

Reefs over previously unproductive land (eg large expanses of mud/sand) could only produce more food. Those reefs are like little pit stops for the fish' date=' rest, recover, refuel. But when these reefs trample seagrass, natural formations like gutters, current lines etc they would disrupt the natural food.Just my view, seems logical to me.[/quote']There are many types of AR's, even ones that support seagrass regeneration. DEWNR have dabbled in this type of AR in our gulfs from memory.AR's are also specially designed for kelp regeneration as well these days.Tyre reefs etc are old school examples and often not good ones.

[Just Me 0]

02catch1"My money is on PIRSA, these guys believe it or not, do actually have an interest in preserving fish stocks and whether or not some want to admit it, do have a reasonable amount of science behind their statements and decisions. Certainly a shit load more science than I and most fishermen will ever have. Just a lot don't want to believe it."Hmmmmmmmm, then how did they get to this stage re Snapper stocks, increased catch rate fiasco?

[Tacklebags 404]

So a small artificial reef like a boat

Not the sort of AR I would be interested in promoting. I would rather see rock formations or seagass regeneration types 'more typical' of what is found naturally in the marine environment.

[wisdom 0]

Well bugger me....You mean those under threat seal immigrants from NZ eat our Fairy penguins.Don't tell the conservation zealots !

[Knackers 696]

seal immigrants from NZ

Ummmmm. They occur naturally around southern australia. We just clubbed too many of them until SFA were left. Then the whites declined because we killed them and they didn't have that many seals to eat. Because seals breed quicker than whites they are increasing in numbers. We are now thinking about releasing tigers on land/beaches where the seal colonys are as a control measure.

[CallopHunter 1]

Is it just me or is it becoming increasingly difficult to differ between sarcasm and actual facts and opinions on this thread anymore?

[Knackers 696]

In my last post I thought the fact and sarcasm were easily discernable

[CallopHunter 1]

Sorry, I was born sarcasm deficient!

[fished out 0]

As I said, over unproductive/barren land it makes sense. But why on earth would you drop a seagrass rejuvination reef on existing segrass beds?

[CallopHunter 1]

But i think that the point trying to be made my one side of this argument is that if new AR's are put in place and Snapper start schooling on them, then the fishing pressure on the schools will become greater since there every man and his dog will have the pick down and lines set, than if they were allowed to roam free among seagrass beds and offshore drops that are only frequented by recs once a week or so...

[O2Catch1 170]

02catch1"My money is on PIRSA, these guys believe it or not, do actually have an interest in preserving fish stocks and whether or not some want to admit it, do have a reasonable amount of science behind their statements and decisions. Certainly a shit load more science than I and most fishermen will ever have. Just a lot don't want to believe it."Hmmmmmmmm, then how did they get to this stage re Snapper stocks, increased catch rate fiasco?

Well from my understanding the amount of snapper that make up the biomass in our gulfs is not a constant number, it is highly dependent on successful breeding years and as such the fishing pressure needs to be constantly monitored and adjusted accordingly. Commercial fishers have over the years ( since netting snapper was banned) been able to become much more efficient with their long lines and advances in technology. I think the last couple of years were up there with the highest catch rates on record. Now if we all sat back and said well there ya go, shit loads of snapper in the gulf, lets just keep at it. But I think PIRSA's "science" suggests this is not sustainable. Then you have the Commercials some of whom have their own opinion and believe they know far more about snapper than any ol' scientist. They only see things from their own perspective ( well we all do actually ) and some can't see past next season and the $$$$$ I believe it is widely accepted that the vast majority of snapper that are taken commercially are from artificial reefs, particularly in Spencer Gulf. Hmmm, so much for increasing stocks on that one!! The Spencer Gulf snapper fishery is in a major decline - how is that possible, the gulf is absolutely littered with artificial reefs and that will just increase the snapper population, ( SARCASM BTW )As I said the situation is very fluid, and PIRSA / SARDI are caught between a rock and a hard place. They have to set rules and implement changes that will hopefully maintain a sustainable fishery, what a job that would be, bit like pulling a rabbit from a hat at times. The fact is that because the snapper stocks in out gulf are subject to so many influences that we all have little control of, such as successful breeding etc and the unknown of how much fishing pressure the stocks will be exposed to I think it is only fair to expect changes will occur. The goal is to try and for-see these changes and when a decline in stocks is predicted then take action to try and counteract it.

[wisdom 0]

Not sure that most commercially caught snapper are from artificial reefs, legal or otherwise but we likely will never know.Many long-liners know snapper travel pathways and set their longlines accordingly and these are not always near the habitat we are discussing.Prawn trawlers with their sophisticated sounding equipment often pick up large travelling schools of snapper but keep it quiet. ( an interesting piece of trivia for you )Also, longline technology hasn't changed fundamentally over the past 50 years. Still a piece of string with large numbers of hooks attached.

[Tacklebags 404]

Snapper have little to do with many of the AR's I am talking about.They are just one species of many and advocacy for not having AR's shouldn't revolve around a single species. While we reccies focus on the fish what about the wider marine biodiversity that can also benefit?

[fished out 0]

But i think that the point trying to be made my one side of this argument is that if new AR's are put in place and Snapper start schooling on them' date=' then the fishing pressure on the schools will become greater since there every man and his dog will have the pick down and lines set, than if they were allowed to roam free among seagrass beds and offshore drops that are only frequented by recs once a week or so...[/quote']Just don't reveal new AR locations. They will be found eventually, but it should take awhile.

[wisdom 0]

The type and pattern of artificial reefs I have in mind are large scale and form linked pathways not able to be kept secret.And shouldn't be because they would be reserved for anglers only.

[Tacklebags 404]

Here is an example of an AR for kelp. While natural conditions were favourable post implementation, the environmental benefits of this AR are a good example of regeneration style reefs that could be used here in SA. Hessian bag material has been used here in SA by scientists to regenerate seagrasses. As yet with limited success.http://articles.latimes.com/2011/may/07/local/la-me-kelp-reef-20110507http://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/mfr446-7/mfr446-74.pdf

[Tacklebags 404]

Our kelp/seagrasses could use some regeneration aids in our gulfs....http://www.int-res.com/articles/meps_oa/m360p063.pdfhttp://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/acws/ACWS_Technical_Report2.pdf

[O2Catch1 170]

Commercial fishers have over the years ( since netting snapper was banned) been able to become much more efficient with their long lines and advances in technology.

Also, longline technology hasn't changed fundamentally over the past 50 years. Still a piece of string with large numbers of hooks attached.

Glad that was clarified, I did not think that they were using space age long lines constructed utilizing the latest advances in nano technology, just suggested that they are using their longlines with greater efficiency through advances in technology, you know better electronics etc.

[Tacklebags 404]

The type and pattern of artificial reefs I have in mind are large scale and form linked pathways not able to be kept secret.And shouldn't be because they would be reserved for anglers only.

You mean these.For offshore pelagics....http://www.fishingworld.com.au/news/artificial-reef-draws-big-crowdsFor estuary and bays/gulfs....http://www.reefballaustralia.com.au/port_phillip_bay_artificial_reef_infosheet_vic_dpi.pdf

[wisdom 0]

Yes..... but they are only one small group of designs, there are many others.See also article in August / September 2010 issue of WildCoast, pp,s 74 &75.

[wisdom 0]

Well in the space of less than 24 hours there has been 5 pages of posts some for, some against and others come across that they could be swayed with the right data.Also some humour and sarcasm which is good, nothing wrong with balanced debate based upon solid data and supporting information.In analysis its quite remarkable to generate so much debate within 24 hours on a lazy Wednesday ( five pages ).My observations are:1. Anglers in SA are not united.2. Have no real strategy to better their recreation.3. Gives insight as to why South Australian angling management have fallen so far behind all the other states.4. Have no real advocate that is prepared to stand up and be counted without fear or favour.5. Based upon the above, there are no real prospects of change in the foreseeable future on this or any other issue.Sorry guys, but that,s the way I see it. Its been a very interesting exercise.I will go away and fall on my sword. Ouch ! ( maybe )

[urhookedfish 12]

Well in the space of less than 24 hours there has been 5 pages of posts some for' date=' some against and others come across that they could be swayed with the right data.Also some humour and sarcasm which is good, nothing wrong with balanced debate based upon solid data and supporting information.In analysis its quite remarkable to generate so much debate within 24 hours on a lazy Wednesday ( five pages ).My observations are:1. Anglers in SA are not united.2. Have no real strategy to better their recreation.3. Gives insight as to why South Australian angling management have fallen so far behind all the other states.4. Have no real advocate that is prepared to stand up and be counted without fear or favour.5. Based upon the above, there are no real prospects of change in the foreseeable future on this or any other issue.Sorry guys, but that,s the way I see it. Its been a very interesting exercise.I will go away and fall on my sword. Ouch ! ( maybe )[/quote']Wisdom, we have known this for ages. But this doesnt really effect the topic in my eyes.Im only interested in determining if additional artificial reefs will increase the BIOMASS of Snapper and what factors would ensure this result. Ie disclosing FAD Locations vs not disclosing FAD locations and types of FAD Structures etc?To be frank, Im sick of hearing you whinge or try and stir people up about not being united.The topic is flawed science and out of date website, not Un-united with no future.

[wisdom 0]

I am afraid you like many others are blinkered, its not about snapper. That seems to be the narrow view on many. Jumped to conclusions which is not what the debate is about.Warned you it was only a "maybe".

[urhookedfish 12]

I am afraid you like many others are blinkered' date=' its not about snapper. That seems to be the narrow view on many. Jumped to conclusions which is not what the debate is about.Warned you it was only a "maybe".[/quote']For me its only about the Snapper. I couldnt care if five whiting, 3 crabs and two squid gained a home out of it (as long as some snapper ended up eating the crab and two squid, or if working towards getting them united the fishing public. Firstly we have to figure out if they are needed before we do anything else. Theres already enough trye reefs for recs to fish, so its not even about having more locations to fish we are already doing quite well. This for me is about ensuring snapper stocks into the future plain and simple

[urhookedfish 12]

Wisdom, I do however want to apologise for saying that you where whinging in my previous post.I'm sure there would be many that might be sick of my stance on protecting snapper at all costs, and my unashamed Pro Snapper agenda.Please accept my apology for using those words as I do find your posts interesting and valuable.Brett

[wisdom 0]

Thanks BrettApology accepted, never took offence anyway ( kiss on the cheek ). We should all feel free to advance our views so long as they are balanced.Dealing with "B" grade and morally corrupt pollies and bureaucrats, a kiss on the cheek is far more honest than a blade between the shoulders.Honesty appreciated.

[Tacklebags 404]

Wisdom/URH and others,What I find difficult is that even when I put up links to successful AR structures that benefit biodiversity through regeneration of lost seagrass and kelp bed baselines similar to our gulfs, no one gives a crap outside of their anti snapper AR syndrome or other purely rec fishing perspectives on the matter.The greatest benefit (and the type of AR most likely to be accepted by conservation stakeholders) are the ones that imitate the natural rock formations/seagrass beds.So many, even our government departments appear lost back in the dark ages on said topic?Sure some grid structures to replace lost fishing opportunities have merit as I have already explained but to aid/enhance healthy oceans/gulfs we all need to look at this issue with the whole marine ecosystem as the utlimate goal.This will benefit all stakeholders not just fishers as evidenced through my links I put up on here.

[Just Me 0]

What's going on here????http://au.news.yahoo.com/video/sa/watch/92874e80-8223-32f9-a458-bfbb951acafa/big-machines-tackle-seagrass-at-glenelg/http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/xstd_files/Water/Report/seagrass.pdf

[wisdom 0]

Thanks TacklesI didn't respond to those two documents because I was part of the Coastal Waters Committee that produced the Coastal Waters Study)( there were several of them over time), and on the other I know and worked with the three principle scientists for many years. So I understood what you were trying to point out.Perhaps I should have said so, trouble is the more I say is often misconscrued' as arrogance.The tide is right this arvo and I want to go and catch a nice barra in the Fitzroy for tomorrows lunch. Can I have a leave pass ?But before I go can I leave you with this Quote by Niccolo Machievelli in 1815 " There is nothing more powerful, more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things".Now you have me worked out !