Category: Media Monitoring

USFA thoughts on the

Mulloway Harvest Strategy

• https://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fishing/harvest-strategies/have-your-say-draft-nsw-mulloway-harvest-strategy-and-management-options
• Mulloway are a species we all hold in high esteem & value. All of us want to see Mulloway recover to at least the 1990s level – what was that level, Fisheries?
• The information around Mulloway abundance is beyond poor. Yet Fisheries have access to data already, have had for decades.
• We have all been asked to do the survey, but we haven’t been given good data to provide valuable feedback, nor have we been given good options.
• USFA always requests good science, we want good science and wish to see good data used for our membership to make good decisions.
• The Recreational Fishing Alliance (the USFA are affiliated with the RFA) has sent a GIPA  (Freedom of information act) asking for all the unpublished data on Mulloway that Fisheries have not shared in this harvest strategy.
• This survey will not reach anywhere near the intended audience. There are fishers who do not use technology (don’t laugh, its real), nor does it reach out multi-culturally to the many fishers in the State who do not have English as a main language.
• Recreational fishers are not quasi-fish biologists; it’s not our job to record catches.  We pay a recreational fee for a licence.  We are taxed to enjoy fishing, (we are the only group that are taxed) yet the Department want us to do our work. 
• Mulloway are on a good pulse at the moment (good rains and climate assist Jewfish populations) so do we actually need this Strategy and form of governance?

• We only need relative abundance not an absolute abundance figure, which Fisheries are attempting to achieve.  They have more than enough data for relative abundance. 
• Example – Commercial catch at a reported tonnage of 70 tons of Mulloway in 2020 – Fisheries know this, yet they don’t have measurements nor the sizes, nor the sex of these fish.  They don’t need recreational fishers to do Fisheries work for them. Fisheries do some work!

Let’s look at the questions in the Survey

• 4. Do you support the approach outlined in the draft harvest strategy for managing harvest to rebuild the Mulloway fishery in NSW? 

NO

• 5. Do you have any further suggestions or comments regarding the Draft NSW Mulloway Harvest Strategy?

The Draft Strategy does not include plans to mitigate the negative effects of estuarine and river mouth trawling, set nets/meshing on juvenile mulloway. The stock assessment modelling does not appear to factor this in either.

6. Do you support establishing real-time reporting by commercial and recreational fishers to improve Mulloway data, stock assessments and effective management of harvest and stock health?

NO

USFA would support real time reporting for commercial fishers but not for recreational fishers.

8. What is your preferred option to manage annual recreational harvest of Mulloway?

•           Option 1a: Use the existing daily bag, possession and boat limits as the primary control, and implement a closure period based on estimated catch progression if needed to restrain catch further.

•           Option 1b: Use the existing daily bag, possession and boat limits as the primary control, and implement a closure period based on real-time reported catch levels if needed to restrain catch further.

•           Option 2: Introduce a new formal Recreational Total Allowable Catch supported by real-time reporting as the primary control, with cease of fishing (i.e. a closure period) if the total recreational share is caught.

This is a trick question with no option to “Use the existing daily bag, possession and boat limits as the primary control.” 

There should have been an option to retain current arrangements! This will get lots of recreational fishers to just select an option that closes recreational fishing for part of the year. Commercial fishers get to select Option1- Use daily take and possession limits as the primary control. These tactics undermine confidence in NSW Fisheries willingness to undertake genuine consultation.

In Summary

• Having recreational fishers keeping log books is inverse to the concept of “recreational” and is just another speed bump to discourage people from going fishing and connecting with nature.
• Possible negative effects on opportunity costs and public health benefits which is avoidable given there are better alternatives.
• Any harvest strategy going forward does need to be based on good monitoring and science and this should be the priority before we start to fiddle with any process other than the ones we know are the actual key threats.
• The DPI needs to do better and not use recreational fishers as scape goats for poor and non-existent data sets which they could have (and still can) captured.
• The lack of information is designed to deliver a pre-conceived outcome.

• USFA strongly suggests, if you are interested in seeing Mulloway further recover, to write to your local State MP & ask that this consultation process be binned & started again after the DPI use better methodology & produce updated abundance figures.
• USFA suggests rather than the entering a submission email your concerns and thoughts to [email protected] the link is found at the end of the online submission questions
• USFA will come back to its members once more information is received from Fisheries

Thank you to the many USFA members, RFA members and Marine Biologists who helped with the information provided.

Please note this is just a small part of the information and feedback that I have been provided by many concerned stakeholders involved with this fishery.

Simon Trippe

President USFA NSW

Link to your MP

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/members/Pages/all-members.aspx