I suspect he followed me from one of the old fishing forums. There was a large group of angry old men trying to get me banned from the internet for my dangerous views.

Get off your knees & wipe your chin

freediver wrote on Jan 7^th, 2021 at 11:14am:


Well I didn't know you were old enough to remember when size limits were introduced.

pjb05 wrote on Mar 6^th, 2021 at 2:52pm:

Welcome back PJ
I might be having a mind-blank with your post, sorry. But can you clarify for this dummy?

freediver wrote on Mar 6^th, 2021 at 3:49pm:


Care to try again with something resembling an argument? And meanwhile you can have a look at this which draws similar conclusions. It has links to research which includes modelling. When the modelling and the real world experience says the same thing it's time to re think your beliefs:

https://theconversation.com/marine-parks-and-fishery-management-whats-the-best-w
ay-to-protect-fish-66274

Jasin wrote on Mar 6^th, 2021 at 4:22pm:


Well just google up The Conversation and use it's search function. Or here is the most relevant part:

"This is consistent with modelling of marine parks that shows they only increase overall fish populations when there has been severe overfishing. This generally means that if there’s already effective traditional fisheries management, marine reserves cannot benefit fish stocks and fisheries, or restock fish outside the reserve (spillover) (see also here).

In jurisdictions where fisheries management is lacking, any regulation, including through marine reserves, is better than nothing. But this isn’t the situation with Australia’s Commonwealth fisheries where harvest strategies are used and overfishing has been eliminated.

The conclusions from modelling of marine reserves mean that the areas of the reserves that limit fishing would be expected to reduce fishery production and harm our ability to contribute to global food security".

So you have taken in absolutely nothing from my article - eg why exactly would a 5 Island marine park be 'great' when marine parks don't do much?

Also how did you arrive at a 400% rise in recreational fishing since 2000? And why do assume there haven't been more restrictions when there actually have been well documented changes to bag and size limits?

St Georges Basin: trawled into nothing but a silt-dead bottom and became near empty of fish (except small).
Many years later after the Trawling was stopped. It has rebounded (mostly around the the shorelines) with much aquatic plant growth. Having dived and snorkeled around the Basin, the Plants have produced a Basin that has rebounded and even offered Aust Record Tailor and other species. There is a lot there now, to the point I could catch Flatheads with my hands as I snuck through the very tall sea grass silently. Still there are sections that are devoid of much besides passing fish to the more livelier sections. It still has a long way to go.
But lets say it was never damaged. Chances are that many species would come to the Basin for a better existence (as long as the Recreationals in their ever increasing numbers - don't hammer the place down as a replacement to Commercial efforts). Like I said, fish move away from stressful areas. They would come because other places surrounding are being hit hard and damaged, maybe even because of Urchin barrens because of all the Crays being caught to feed Chinese people for $$. There would of course be a great productivity of spill-over regardless.

Checker Board: Fish in the White Squares (where there is minimal effects of enhancing breedings, like a lack of Bommies, reefs, etc) and NO TAKE in the Black Squares (where there is more stimulus to produce more life and spillover).

A Hunter-Gatherer would just take from the Spillover.
Civilisation would take the whole lot just to feed the over-populated and make the over-indulged richer on the sale.
Sustainability with a possibility of extra production would be my push.

Also, as for Artificial Reefs: Well we know the dumping of Wrecks these days is more for Dive Tourism than to benefit Aquatic species as not all Wrecks attract and hold life. The 2 Tugs at Eden are good example. One with minimal life, the other with way more.
Also - to properly do Artificial Reefs, there must be better designs suited to fish. AR's with a lot of over-hang, in my opinion would provide 'more fish'. I say this after snorkling a few days ago under a wharf with Fishers up top and all the fish right under it. Until I flushed them out for a short time (to the cheers of those above), they remain directly under and hardly ever go the bait lines hung just outside that 'over-hang' boundary.