|
Kingies are a great recreational angling species. In Sydney Harbour, they are abundant. They fight very hard, are a great looking fish and, if you know how to prepare and cook them, they are sensational to eat. They willingly take lures and bait.
Towards the end of this season, it became obvious that they were taking a beating from both recreational and commercial fishermen. The commercial harvesting was far more devastating to the overall population, while the recreational damage was more in terms of individual fish.
Some of the more serious blows from the pros came in the form of two and a half tonnes netted out of Clifton Gardens. I was familiar with the particular school holed up there and can tell you that more than 50% of them were undersized.
In a separate incident, there was literally an acre of kingies working the surface in Rose Bay for weeks, before the pros wiped them out in three days with nets.
Towards May, about one in ten of the resident kings around the lower harbour structures wore evidence of encounters with anglers, in the form of hooks and line or battle scars. Most of the rigs that I retrieved from these fish looked like they were aimed at other species.
We caught one kingie with a face-full of holes. Protruding from six of the holes were inch long sea urchin spines. It appears that he had head butted an urchin, either during a fight with an angler, or while chasing food. We called him 'Old Urchin-head'. Quite a few kings also had popped eye balls.
In the old days of the traps, it was common to catch kingies covered in a skin fungus. Since the traps were banned, you hardly ever see this. I assume that these fish were the result of either being knocked around in the traps, or poorly-handled on release by the pros. I've personally seen pros removing undersized kings from their traps with a small hand gaff. I'm glad the traps were banned. It was quite obvious that the pros, at least those that I witnessed, had no concern for the future of kingfish stocks.
Since the traps were banned, the numbers of small kings has increased dramatically. This past season was quite incredible. Acres of kings in the 45cm to 65cm range were present throughout Middle Harbour, North Harbour and lower Sydney Harbour. This is by far the most kingies I have ever seen.
In past years, 20 kings in a session only happened a few times a year. This year it was common. Since the banning of the traps, the big fish, 6 to 15 kilos, are far less common in the harbour. My theory is that kingies were at the end of their tether and that we were seeing the tail end of the king populations, due to commercial over-fishing. Both big fish and small fish were on their way out.
If this theory is accurate, then naturally, it will be the small fish that make the first comeback appearances. If the trend continues, then in the years to come, we will see lots of small and big fish, as we did in the past. It's looking very promising, although the recent pro nettings are reason for concern and the problem should be addressed quickly.
Tagged kings
We caught two tagged kings from the Harbour this year. One had swum 50 nautical miles, after being tagged at Swansea 37 days before. The other had been tagged in the Harbour, only twenty days prior to us catching it again.
The incredible shrinking fish
So far, I've been involved in the recapture of about 10 tagged fish. Not all of them were kingies. In all cases, the size estimated by the angler was well over what the fish actually weighed and measured when recaptured. Jenny Craig fish no less! This may be why we hear stories of 'six-pound' bream but never actually catch, or see one.
The largest official recorded great white was about 19ft but sightings regularly come in of fish that are supposed to be 25ft, or even 30 ft. They have never captured a 25ft croc either but lots of people have seen them. In the same vein, lots of people catch 20lb flatties but nobody has any photos.
Lots of people have caught one-kilo whiting. Stinker instigated a competition offering a prize for the first authenticated one-kilo whiting but, so far, the prize remains unclaimed.
Magazine editors and writers contribute to the problem sometimes too. This is why we see pictures of 'six-pound' bream in fishing magazines, only to find a six-pound snapper a few pages later, in the same mag, that looks at least twice as big as that bream did. Bream and snapper are similarly proportioned fish and if they are the same size, they should look like they are too.
I think there's an unwritten law that allows us a 20% exaggeration on capture, a further 10% when we talk about it at work and, finally, another 50% by the time we get to the pub and seek to have it passed into folklore.
Overestimation and exaggeration are two different things. I think fishing mags should be more careful to get it right and, likewise, when the fish is being used for important research information, such as is the case in tagging programs.
I'm as guilty as anyone of a bit of bull around the campfire, or at the bar, but when it really counts, let's try and get it right. Buying some scales and a measuring tape would be a good start.
|
