Monday, February 06, 2017

Fish Size Failing Recreational Angling

Minimum Fish Size 

Argument Sustained 

Bruce Man (Page 32)

Fishery impacts on biodiversity

The linefishery itself has a relatively low impact on marine habitats in comparison to other fisheries. Impacts are limited to littering and disposal/loss of fishing line and tackle, and damage associated with legal (i.e. harvesting of mussels, red bait, sand/mud prawn, etc.) and illegal (i.e. mussel worm [Pseudonereis variegata]) harvesting of bait organisms. The major impact of this fishery on biodiversity has been the serial overfishing of larger predatory fish species resulting in associated changes in the fish community (Dunlop & Mann 2012). Levels of bycatch of undesirable species (e.g. evil‐eye puffer Amblyrhynchotes honckenii) are considered to be relatively low overall. However, the bycatch of sub‐legal sized individuals of preferred species can be substantial in the absence of adequate policing. Dunlop & Mann (2012) highlighted that the minimum legal size limits were more often violated for larger species such as dusky kob Argyrosomus japonicus and yellowbelly rockcod Epinephelus marginatus. There is an increasing tendency towards catch and release in the recreational shore fishery, particularly by organized competitive anglers (Pradervand et al. 2007). Although this practise should be encouraged and supported, post release mortality is still likely to be quite high in some more sensitive fish species (B. Mann, ORI, pers. obs.).


While total participation appears to have remained fairly constant, total annual angling effort in the KZN shore linefishery has declined substantially in recent years. This is important since KZN historically has had substantially higher levels of shore angling effort than elsewhere along the South Africa coast and was a fishery that was considered to be under great pressure (Brouwer et al. 1997). Analysis of overall CPUE, catch composition and total catch from three independent surveys conducted in KZN suggests that this fishery is currently in a relatively stable condition and that relatively little change has occurred over the past 30 years (Joubert 1981; Mann et al. 1997; Dunlop & Mann 2012). However, comparisons of species‐specific CPUE values from these studies suggest that some species (e.g. dusky kob) are overexploited (Table 1). Over the past few decades there seems to have been a gradual transition in landings from long‐lived, high trophic level, piscivorous fish (e.g. dusky kob) to more short‐lived, low trophic level species (e.g. karanteen). In addition, recent analysis of catch trends of shad, which is the most sought‐after species in the KZN recreational shore fishery, have shown a gradual decline in CPUE over the past 30 years (Maggs et al. 2012). The results therefore suggest that present exploitation levels may not be sustainable for certain fish species. Furthermore, in relation to the catches recorded during the early parts of the 20th century, current catch trends suggest that linefish resources have been fished down to very low levels which are only ‘superficially’ sustainable at current levels of fishing effort (Dunlop & Mann 2012). This has been highlighted by research fishing conducted in no‐take marine protected areas (MPAs) along the Maputaland coast where catch rates of more resident fish species are orders of magnitude higher than in adjacent exploited areas (Mann 2012)

Conclusion By Petrus Viviers

Very selective interviews are made and it is well know that Mr Mann only includes close friends and admirers in his sample studies. We, the recreational Angler, has fought for over 30 years for the maximum Size limit to be enforced. Larger fish are well established in self preservation and their reproduction heeled is far bigger than small fish. Smaller fish is undesirable for the hook and cook market due to low body mass to edible flesh ratio. Larger fish is not suitable for eating since the meat is already hard and filled with cartilages ... These Trophy Species are mainly taken purely for bragging rights. 

Smaller size Shad has a buffer zone restricted to fishable days due to weather conditions and tidal movement of the ocean that does not bring them inshore so they are in reach of the anglers. This is a huge problem to convey to the authorities and since my platform has made head way in The iSimangaliso Management saga I would like to use my little soap box to address this one sided conversation. Let us have a more transparent public participation and more input so we can exercise our rights to our very popular and lucrative Sport.

Local Crafts and Curious  

Mr Man also neglects to include in his reports the huge spin offs Recreational Anglers bring to lower skilled workers and their crafts. This was calculated in 1996 - 1997 financial year in the region of R65 000 000.00 rand compared to the R75 000 000.00 turn over off the formal sector in the immediate St Lucia Estuary financial hub. I understand that the impact on local indigenous resources is high but to put a handy cap on the customer base does not solve the poverty problem and is merely a Macro Management Style implemented by the previously Advantage to rid their work load of a micro management problem.

Skills development in these areas should have underway many years ago to teach crafters to establish their own resources to harvest and the importance not to harvest natural resources. This is a Hubris failure and not a man made flaw that should be corrected by lazy Government Officials looking for the next Kentucky Drive Through. 

Any Way that is my six pence and the angle I will keep on hammering over the next few months while I have the exposure created by Mr Zaloumis management style of The Greater St Lucia Wetlands Park and the lack of Empathy towards species and bio diversity protection.

    Petrus Viviers

Sunday, February 05, 2017

Moenie my kom Tos vertel nie

St Lucia Estuary

Mens Gemaakte Ekologiese Ramp 

Water Vlakke hoogste in lang ruk

Die eie ek ... mens mag mos niks in die dorp se nie dan word jy gekruisig. So lank die hoog heilige beskerm word. Ek is jammer niemand staan op en stap saam my die pad om verdere slagting te voorkom nie. Dus word dit nou my geveg. Wel ek het niks meer om te verloor nie. Aangesien die 'n Wêreld Erfenis gebied is kan ek in Hongkong gaan woon en nog steeds 'n mening hê. Die gesondheid en welstand van die gebied rus nie op 'n paar wanne bees se vermoeë om kak te praat nie. Ek het net soveel reg soos die volgende persoon.

St Lucia gaan gebuk onder droogte, maar die see het baie water. In 2000 was dit 'n mens gemaakte besluit om die mond toe te stoot. In 2007 was dit 'n mens gemaakte besluit om die mond toe te stoot. Die kanaal wat die Estuarium en die see verbind het in 2015 was 'n mens gemaakte kanaal en was nie volgens daai mens se voorgeskrewe bestuursplan, soos Dr Barry Clark aan ons voor gehou is in 2013, gegrou nie. Geen insette van MY kant af was aangehoor gedurende 2015 nie. Die aanloop van die ramp was voorspel. 

Deur die afsterwe van die See Lewe in die meer nou af te maak as n natuur ramp is kinderagtig en uiters onprofessioneel. As mense wat in beheer is ophou om Rekenaars Spelletjies met ons pragtige erfnis (As julle so wil ... my pragtige erfnis) te speel en bietjie meer op die strand kom sal hulle self kan sien hulle jaag kak aan en dan nie sluwe boelies huur om mense soos ek stil te maak nie.

Julle mors julle tyd en julle geld om te dink ek gaan ophou om julle aan die publiek uit te lewer. Daar is net een manier hoe die ding uitspeel. Gee die hengelaar sy reg wat hom toekom en hou op kak praat in n poging om die meer dood te maak....

Lionel Pretorius Net so in Zululand. Hluhluwe dam 19% vol. Lake St Lucia "world wetlands heritage site" vat 180 000 vierkante water en 30% vol alle selewe so te se uitgesterf. Ons bid vir oorvloed reen deur die land. Amen
Reply11 minsEdited

As jy jou gewete wil sus Lionel sal jy baie meer moet bid my vriend of begin die waarheid praat. Ek is nie dom nie. Ek gaan nie weg gaan nie. Die stryd vir die werkende Estuarium gaan nie ophou nie.  Hoe langer julle met julle mens gemaakte leuens aanhou hoe verder gaan die park in anargie verval .... Dis n onvermydelike politieke uitkoms. Dit word Demokrasie genoem. Ek skryf nie die toedrag van sake en die uitkoms nie. Ek lig net die feite uit vir die mense wat voor gelieg word.


         Petrus Viviers

Friday, February 03, 2017

Beware of overselling iSimangaliso - False Advertising

iSimangaliso Wetlands Park

The Status has changed in 2012

To Claim the 1999 World Heritage Facts is False 

Today is 03 February 2017. Back in 2012 the health status has officially changed from pristine marine ecosystem to Class E Estuarine, basically a mud bath. Lodge Owners, Advertisers and Tour operators can no longer offer the health status at time of World Heritage Proclamation as the point of reference in their marketing. People want to get their money worths. For domestic tourist it means a whole year of saving. For the International Tourist it mostly mean a once in a lifetime opportunity. 

Many people are deeply disappointed that they can no longer drink a sundowner on the beaches like way back then. Unfortunately it does not stop there. Back in 2012 The Scientist employed by Andrew Zaloumis has admitted to the degradation of the system healt. In 2015 a total collapse incurred when the Estuary dried up completely due to a sudden wind direction change. The Total Aquatic Marine Biomass was lost. Currently The St Lucia system no longer presents the functioning of an Estuary.

With this came a decline in the biomass off bird species that frequent the Greater St Lucia Wetlands Park. (iSimangaliso Wetlands Park). The road infrastructure and hides has impacted negatively on the sense of space. Prior to World Heritage Status you arrived at a mystical point. It was more about the journey than the destination. Today everything is so clinical First World Development. nothing is majestic or mythical any more. You see your destination a mile away and you drive on tar roads and cement highways to get there.

So people just a word of caution. Please inform you clients
  1. Reduced Parking Spaces
  2. No more Sundowners
  3. No more Marine Biomass
  4. Reduced Bird Biomass
  5. Non Functioning Estuary
  6. Random Mission Rocks Access Closure
  7. Elephant Road Blocks costing R500.00/vehicle
  8. Men in Camo Uniform searching private vehicles
The list may be longer. This is the key futures the public express their concern about.

    Petrus Viviers