SIP analysis - interesting stats

[Member]

Attached to this topic (see below) is a pdf file with some SIP statistics / analysis based upon the 2013 allocation of funds.

It shows locations with surface area. Based upon a 100 fingerlings / hectare recommended maximum maintenance stocking density by Qld Fisheries, it shows the number of fingerlings required by impoundment annually.

Taking an average cost of $0.25 average fingerling cost it shows how much $ it should take to stock each lake / annum & how much the SIP contributes towards this.

In some cases the impoundment appears to be receiving enough money to possibly over stock the impoundment, while others impoundment are not well supported by the SIP scheme being well below recommended stocking ratios.

The unknown in the equation is the angler preferences. These figures were not released with funds distribution data but are coming & will be added to the spreadsheet for more insight.

Across participating impoundments in Qld, it appears that the SIP is falling way short of maintaining the fisheries created, only being able to restock at 32% (across the board) of recommended maintenance fish stocking ratios.


What do you think?

Is the SIP distribution to the participating imoundments consistent and fair?

Should the SIP fee be increased to cover the inadequacies of the program Vs the expectation and intention of the scheme?

Is there a better way to distribute the funds? eg all on surface area or all on angler preference?

[Member]

Equal distribution based upon surface area alone with no surface area caps & no angler preference would look like this.
Barambah   $17,200.00
Boondooma   $14,520.00
Borumba   $3,840.00
Burdekin *   $176,000.00
Callide   $9,920.00
Cania   $6,080.00
Connolly   $400.00
Coolmunda   $13,160.00
Eungella   $6,784.00
Fairbairn *   $120,000.00
Glenlyon   $14,400.00
Gordonbrook   $1,888.00
Kinchant   $7,360.00
Dyer   $800.00
Gregory   $1,600.00
MacDonald   $2,080.00
Monduran *   $42,760.00
Lenthalls   $3,200.00
Leslie   $10,304.00
Maroon   $2,480.00
Moogerah   $6,616.00
Samsonvale   $17,600.00
Peter Faust *   $34,800.00
Somerset *   $33,680.00
Storm King   $560.00
Teemburra   $10,160.00
Teresa Creek   $2,400.00
Tinaroo   $26,560.00
Wivenhoe *   $86,400.00
Wuruma   $13,112.00
Qld total   $686,664.00


With no angler preferences and the cap raised to 5000ha the equal distribution of funds based on surface area would look like this:

Barambah   $27,950.00
Boondooma   $23,595.00
Borumba   $6,240.00
Burdekin *   $65,000.00
Callide   $16,120.00
Cania   $9,880.00
Connolly   $650.00
Coolmunda   $21,385.00
Eungella   $11,024.00
Fairbairn *   $65,000.00
Glenlyon   $23,400.00
Gordonbrook   $3,068.00
Kinchant   $11,960.00
Dyer   $1,300.00
Gregory   $2,600.00
MacDonald   $3,380.00
Monduran *   $65,000.00
Lenthalls   $5,200.00
Leslie   $16,744.00
Maroon   $4,030.00
Moogerah   $10,751.00
Samsonvale   $28,600.00
Peter Faust *   $56,550.00
Somerset *   $54,730.00
Storm King   $910.00
Teemburra   $16,510.00
Teresa Creek   $3,900.00
Tinaroo   $43,160.00
Wivenhoe *   $65,000.00
Wuruma   $21,307.00
Qld total   $684,944.00

[Member]

Another factor to be considered is that some stocking groups actively fund raise to augment the sip scheme whilst others just coast along with the SIP funds so it would also be interesting to see a list of total fingerlings released in each impoundment.
I am not denigrating the groups that do not fund raise .
Another factor to be considered is the potential increase of the number of dams in the sip scheme and will there be a lineal increase of sip permits sold with the number of dams.
Cost of permit?
About the only price rise that I would not be adverse to.
 If the permits had been pegged to inflation increases over the years they would probably be double the current cost.
A $50 cost would still be reasonable and would see a substantial increase in funds available to groups.
Another scenario could be the scrapping of the SIP scheme  and replacing it with a freshwater fishing license
but that is a real can of worms and everything would have to be clearly set out in the legislation and I doubt that I could trust any government to put the interests of the angling public above the potential fundraising that they would for see.
The NSW model appears to look ok on the surface but a lot of research would have to be done to see if it would work in QLD.
Cheers
Ray

[Member]

Some stocking groups are also able to "double dip" by charging anglers another fee to fish the waters they stock. 
SWFSA fund raise by running a fishing comp, but also stock Bremer River, Lockyer Creek and Atkinsons Lagoon outside of the SIP without charging anglers to fish there.

[Member]

 "SWFSA fund raise by running a fishing comp, but also stock Bremer River, Lockyer Creek and Atkinsons Lagoon outside of the SIP without charging anglers to fish there."
 The Prfma also stock Kurwongbah which is also outside the SIP.
 The preclusion of the PRFMA lease agreement prevent the running of any completions on the dam.
What is the difference between PRFMA running the boating access scheme ( Which only benefits the fishery in NPD) and fishing aqnd sailing clubs charging for access where the monies raised only benefit the members?
You appear to have no difficulty with this concept.
 Without the PRFMA there would be no fishery in NPD
 Ray

[Member]

 
We're never going to settle the lease Vs open to public debate here.... Anyhow I'm guessing the rec review will solve it for everyone...

This topic is about the SIP, the distribution of funds and what that does to actually maintain those fisheries it is supposed to.

[Member]

Sip's should be more geared towards angler preference then to the size of a dam, if groups don't put in good numbers of fish that the general public wish to catch or if the dam/s have strict condition's with boating or access etc then fisho's are always unlikely to support that dam/s.
I know at the last fish stocking workshop some fisheries staff were telling groups to be different and to promote there area's as this or that but common sense will tell you people just want to go fishing and catch a feed of fish. I think Bass are over rated and when you look at Leslie Dam and Glenlyn Dam neither of them have Bass but they are well supported more then NPD or Wivenhoe and except for Warrick which isn't a huge town both of them are hours from Brisbane and both Wivenhoe and NPD are always crying poor and are either in or on the doorstep of large population's, It has nothing to do with size it's how they have been stocked imo.

Mac

[Member]

I reckon the current SIP fee is way to low. I have mates who fly over every year to fish for one week with me in one of the barra dams. From memory their SIP fee for the week is around $8. I'm pretty sure I paid around $20 to fish for trout in Victoria for a week a couple of years ago. I think the fee should be doubled. Everyone is happy to spend thousands on fishing gear, boats, fuel etc so why not $70 a year on improving the actual fishery?

[Member]

Sip's should be more geared towards angler preference then to the size of a dam, if groups don't put in good numbers of fish that the general public wish to catch or if the dam/s have strict condition's with boating or access etc then fisho's are always unlikely to support that dam/s.
I know at the last fish stocking workshop some fisheries staff were telling groups to be different and to promote there area's as this or that but common sense will tell you people just want to go fishing and catch a feed of fish. I think Bass are over rated and when you look at Leslie Dam and Glenlyn Dam neither of them have Bass but they are well supported more then NPD or Wivenhoe and except for Warrick which isn't a huge town both of them are hours from Brisbane and both Wivenhoe and NPD are always crying poor and are either in or on the doorstep of large population's, It has nothing to do with size it's how they have been stocked imo.

Mac

That would work a treat.... Based upon preference only,  Somerset would probably get what is should be getting. The problem from my perspective, is that the SIP allocation of funds was flawed in the first instance and then changed to placate the Warwick group. This was only a half measure and in some ways made things worse. Neither the original allocation nor the updates allocation are equal and fair.

[Member]

I reckon the current SIP fee is way to low. I have mates who fly over every year to fish for one week with me in one of the barra dams. From memory their SIP fee for the week is around $8. I'm pretty sure I paid around $20 to fish for trout in Victoria for a week a couple of years ago. I think the fee should be doubled. Everyone is happy to spend thousands on fishing gear, boats, fuel etc so why not $70 a year on improving the actual fishery?

I agree.

I would also like to see crayfishing requiring a SIP. I had a state member respond that cray fish don't require restocking & therefore should not need a SIP to fish for them. However spangled perch, bony bream, snub nosed gar, tandans, forkies etc don't require restocking but you still need a SIP to fish for these in participating lakes.... And, crayfish HAVE been restocked in the past. Short memories or poor research.............??

[Member]

Be interesting to see what impact that the forthcoming ?? access fee that SEQ water is going to impose will have on the sale of SIP permits now that yaks will also have to pay for access to the dams.
 From ramp conversations that I have had there is a fair percentage that seem to think that they are exempt from all charges,
Cheers
Ray
 

[Member]

Be interesting to see what impact that the forthcoming ?? access fee that SEQ water is going to impose will have on the sale of SIP permits now that yaks will also have to pay for access to the dams.
 From ramp conversations that I have had there is a fair percentage that seem to think that they are exempt from all charges,
Cheers
Ray
 

I didn't hear anything about Kayaks and Canoes being charged a fee when I attended the Wivenhoe and Somerset meetings.  Can you give a link to the decision Ray?  Currently, anyone using a vessel transported on a trailer must pay a permit fee, can you confirm that is changing?

[Member]

Was a verbal response at the second BOD and Kurwongbah meeting.
No firm decisions or pricings untill all dam consultations finished next year.
 Cheers
Ray

[Member]

Can we quote you in our letters of complaint Ray?  That will mean that Mum and Dad who go out for a picnic with a kayak, blow up boat or maybe even a Lilo will have to pay a fee, but those who go out swimming wont!  I'll be writing my letter of complaint tomorrow, and I'll advise Somerset Council that this will be happening.  It wasn't mentioned at the Somerset Wivenhoe meetings at all.

[Member]

Did you ask the question ?
Well maybe the picnickers should also have to pay as they also use facilities and take up parking places.
That is why I initially stated that all facilities should be free for everyone and got talked down on this site.
Why should just one group have to pay?
Please also mention this in your letter of complaint.
Cheers
Ray