I have held my tongue on this issue for a very long time, but I am outraged by this back-down by the Federal Government in order pander to a very selfish, noisy minority group.
I am outraged by the blatant opportunism of Senator Colbeck and the Liberal Party on the issue.
And I am disgusted with the recreational fishers behind this. The Environment Minister offered recreational fishers the perfectly reasonable compromise of legal catch-and-release angling for Mako sharks. But oh no, that wasn't good enough. It would appear that there are some people out there so sick that they can't consider they're having a good time unless they're killing a mako shark, not just catching it.
That's disgraceful, considering these are one of the most magnificent creatures in the sea and one of the most impressive predators known to man.
As for proof, how's this for proof? In 2009 CSIRO released a book summarising scientific knowledge on the shark and ray species of Australia. This book reveals that female mako sharks do not breed until they are least 18 years of age and only have one litter of pups every 3 years. That is proof enough that they are very slow-growing, very slow-breeding, very vulnerable and need a C&R only regulation. Further proof is the catch data showing very significant by-catch of makos by longliners in Australia and tagging evidence to show that that population of southern Victoria which everyone hammers is a breeding aggregation area which therefore has an artificially high abundance of mako sharks not found anywhere in Australia.
This is a disgusting saga from start to finish.
The law should have been C&R only for Mako.
Anyone who has a problem with this because they feel they need to be killing these magnificent creatures before they are having "fun" are sick and need their head read. _________________ Upland native fish must have some trout-free habitat again
Fishermen must have some upland native fisheries again
Posted: Wed Jul 21, 2010 5:43 pm Post subject: Re:
goodoo wrote:
I have held my tongue on this issue for a very long time, but I am outraged by this back-down by the Federal Government in order pander to a very selfish, noisy minority group.
I am outraged by the blatant opportunism of Senator Colbeck and the Liberal Party on the issue.
And I am disgusted with the recreational fishers behind this. The Environment Minister offered recreational fishers the perfectly reasonable compromise of legal catch-and-release angling for Mako sharks. But oh no, that wasn't good enough. It would appear that there are some people out there so sick that they can't consider they're having a good time unless they're killing a mako shark, not just catching it.
That's disgraceful, considering these are one of the most magnificent creatures in the sea and one of the most impressive predators known to man.
As for proof, how's this for proof? In 2009 CSIRO released a book summarising scientific knowledge on the shark and ray species of Australia. This book reveals that female mako sharks do not breed until they are least 18 years of age and only have one litter of pups every 3 years. That is proof enough that they are very slow-growing, very slow-breeding, very vulnerable and need a C&R only regulation. Further proof is the catch data showing very significant by-catch of makos by longliners in Australia and tagging evidence to show that that population of southern Victoria which everyone hammers is a breeding aggregation area which therefore has an artificially high abundance of mako sharks not found anywhere in Australia.
This is a disgusting saga from start to finish.
The law should have been C&R only for Mako.
Anyone who has a problem with this because they feel they need to be killing these magnificent creatures before they are having "fun" are sick and need their head read.
So don't vote for them next month... _________________ "If it is to be, it is up to me".
Posted: Thu Jul 22, 2010 12:37 am Post subject: Re:
The Weapon is on... wrote:
Hey Dave.... Isn't Redneckville down around Portland somewhere..??
You're right, blanket bans aren't what's needed.... Bans on commercial harvest by Purse Seining or Longline must be stopped and would be a good start... Rec Fisho's being a little more responsible would be a good thing aswell..
SBT's are vastly different to other tunas.... They have a slow life cycle and don't even reach sexual maturity until they're 8 years old and it takes them 40 years to grow to 200kgs... A YFT on the other hand, reaches sexual maturity in a couple of years and only lives for 7-8 years growing to 200kgs...
So, an SBT has to dodge all the Seiners, Longliners, Polers, Rec Fisho's, etc for a full 8 years before it can spawn... No wonder they're (naughty word)...
Nath..
Here's your opportunity to have your say to those that actually CAN make changes (because they probably don't come to Fishnet to collect feedback)...
Quote:
SOUTHERN BLUEFIN TUNA FISHERY (SBTF)
Call for comment - Draft Amendments to the Southern Bluefin Tuna Fishery Management Plan 1995
In January 2010 AFMA commenced a consultation process with the Southern Bluefin Tuna Management Advisory Committee (SBTMAC) regarding an amendment to the Southern Bluefin Tuna Fishery Management Plan 1995.
The public comment period on the draft amendments commenced on 6 July 2010 and will conclude on 6 August 2010. AFMA encourages comments from Statutory Fishing Right (SFR) holders and other interested parties.
For a copy of the draft amendments, please visit the AFMA website.
Comments can be submitted to Stan Lui, SBT Manager, on (02) 6225 5487, via email stan.lui@afma.gov.au, or mailed to the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, Box 7051 Canberra Business Centre, Canberra ACT 2610.
_________________ "If it is to be, it is up to me".
Simon and Nath, the point of this whole debate seems to have gone sailing waaay over your heads. The BIGGEST problem with this whole issue was that it set an extremely alarming precedent that an overseas influence could impose fisheries restrictions on Australian anglers for NO scientific or rational reason. If this precedent were to stand, where does it stop? When an overseas 'treaty' states that; "we must have 30% of our coast line declared as 'lock up zones,' MNP's, marine sanctuaries, reserves, etc?"
You don't like eating Mako's, three cheers for you... I love a feed of Mako, I think they are one of the best eating fish in the ocean as do many many others, certainly of those available in Vic.
You say we should be happy with the compromise of C&R. Why??? There is absolutely no reason TO compromise, Mako shark numbers in Australia, according to all available SCIENTIFIC data, are healthy. Why all of a sudden should they be C&R only? Because you don't like the way they taste? Because some people in Europe said so?
Does that mean that all those who don't like the taste of blue-eye and such, should they be calling for a 100% C&R fishery for these species and that you should be satisfied with the 'privileged' of being able C&R? What about 'Joe' down the road that doesn't like any fish at all?
Claymore.... Do you think the GREENS will not come after the Mako's again..?? Probably loaded with a whole heap of evidence, scientific and otherwise, next time...
Rec Fisho's had a chance to be responsible, but made the choice not to....
You're obviously willing to risk the future of Rec Fishing all in the name of a feed...
Nath.. _________________ Back by popular demand...... Just a day out fishing with my mum...
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
