Fish preservation - Is Malaysia Boleh?

1

I’ve just read some articles in the R&L 1996, talking about fish preservation, C&R, law to stop illegal fishing etc.

1996, so that is something people keep talking about for nearly 10 years. but until today, if you go to Tioman. the local boatman will still take you out fishing on coral reef. they will tell you “dont worry about the law lah. nobody care about it here”

It is to me, we are the minus people in MFN practicing C&R, and to be honest I doubt there are less than 5% of the anglers in MFN really do it.

take a look at the counter in this forum, we have only 1400 forumers and if only 5% doing C&R, that is only 70 anglers executing it. will it works?

I’ve been travel and fishing around Malaysia, and to tell you the true, I had never seen any anglers C&R, not even to those fishes which is not edible. I had ask one guy why he did not throw the catfish he caught from the canal back to the water, he said " if i throw it back the fish will come back to take my bait again"!!

Honestly, I am very dissapointed about what I have seen and heard. and to be honest, I dont think we can see the real fish preservation in our generation. because Malaysian do not care about it, I also doubt if the next generation can do it, because they are learning from us!!!

Sorry if I sound offensive, but let’s see what we really can do, if you really care about it.

Taiwan fishing style !!

2

todak,

Check this out discussion on PBs: http://www.fishing.net.my/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=5457&whichpage=1

Snakehead in US as far as I understand is totally different breed from our local haruan. Originally from Taiwan/Japan. Size can grow as big as toman. Check with Suzuki San of Redhot, he can show u how they catch those mega size haruan in Jap on video. I’m not surprised how distructive they are in US

3

Thanks poppercaster, i think it’s time to launch a “catch and fry Peacock Bass” campaign.. hehe!
Since they’re spreading fast in malaysian waters, we need to take a role as top predators in the food chain :slight_smile: in a way to control them.

“Fish for food, not food for Fish”

4

I think Michael Crichton’s book, state of fear is excellent reading material for this issue.

5

wonder what’s in the book, GOh? Would you like to share?

“Fish for food, not food for Fish”

6

You’ll like it. It shows Crighton’s viewpoint on a massive global lack of knowledge attempting to make policy and ecoterrorism in the environmental movement of the fanatical type.

7

The Nile Perch in Lake Victoria is said to be one of the world biggest blunders and disasters in the history of introducing alien species. It has caused hundreds of local species to become extinct, which in the past had helped manage the balanced ecosystem. It was all because some anglers loved sport fishing.

Nowadays in Malaysia most anglers use lures, fishy or meaty baits in order to catch a freshwater fish. It tells us something very unusual. If you have a good knowledge of fish and do not have nightmares, I bet you do not worry much about the ecosystem.

8

Goh,
I share your frustration. I take a stand that, whatever I can do, however ‘small’ I am, I will try to do. Yes, most governments get pulled from doing what’s right viz eco-conservation by business agendas. I can quote two cases where there were happy results (of course, how long they will last, we don’t know lah):

  • In Denmark, the Danish Fishing Association influenced the Govt to “un-straighten” the rivers; 200 years ago, many rivers were straightened for certain reasons (sounds familiar?). The lubuks disappeared, and so did the fish. Now, due to pressure from the fishing association (very strong, with 50,000 members!), the rivers are brought back close to their original state. Public education was also done (the association employs a fisheries scientist). Lo and behold, without any re-stocking, the fishes like trout, sea trout and salmon came back! The other European countries are now in awe of this success.

-Closer to home, the tagal system is now well known example of how a local community can manage their own rivers with great results, fish wise. But it must be remembered that they wouldn’t have succeeded without the support by the Sabah fisheries Dept (technical, policies, influence).

We have a right to be angry, but we have a duty to be hopeful, and do the things that we can and should do.

Keep warm, brother!

><<:>

9

JB,

Fully agree to your stand, we as anglers may not be contributing all too much at this time but the importance is that we are contributing. As it had been said ROME WAS NOT BUILT IN A DAY, hopefully with sustained efforts from a small group of anglers it spreads to otherds and together our efforts may lead to more positive results.

Our first steps to this long journey should be taken as the starting point. Yes there are many an “angler” out there who says we are the dumb ones and that taking the fish they had caught is their right and that the few they kill does not amount to much in comparison to the nettings and trawlers. We the so called “noble” ones are ‘self-serving’ doing it only to feel good to ourself and it does not and will not help. This is true in parts, we do derive self satisfaction from our actions but it is also the tought that there must be conservation and there should be no better time to start than NOW. We should not only start when the adverse effects are already in placed and with government forced legislative restrictions applied.

We are or atleast we like to think of ourselves as civillised beings that could decide our own fates. As such we should be civillised to act before there is legislative actions to dictates what is only logically to be done. In essence, we should begin to do what is right before we are to do the very same things because the Laws. In my view when the law does require an action it is often already too late.

10

As far as I have seen, the only way for anglers to have fish and angler friendly laws implemented anywhere in the world is to find an angle that involves the political help and might of the environmental groups like greenpeace. Angler associations have proven ineffective by themselves, but in tandem with environmental groups like greenpeace they’ve had some success. It was this working together that got longliner regulations changed to help the sea turtles. Being that Malaysia was already once hit by environmental groups to help the sea turtles, if a study could be found that endangered sea turtles are negatively affected by trawling or other popular and vast commercial fishing method in Malaysia, that would be what I call a start. Just my two cents.

11

Goh,

You have a very strong point there, to create an angle which involves the political help in the preservation and environmental issue in our country. Can the sport angling community in Malaysia be big enough? Can we create any impact or enough voters to unite together to support a trustworthy political party with the same manifesto. There was something I read years ago about the Conservative and Labour parties in the UK. The angling community were so big and united that they could decide which party to put in power if they have something to ammend in the fishing laws to incline in thier favour. Can those angling associations including PeMM and MFN in our country be united with more pro angler voters to be effective in our quest for environmental preservation??

Fish tight…fish right!!! Thomas

12

All I know is that when anglers worked with conservation groups and more and more groups joined the bandwagon, the government here was forced to listen. I don’t remember the forces involved, but I know that the banning of longliners brought back the swordfish in Florida. Also, Longline closures and extra restrictions of them showed marked effects on turtles and fish populations. The net ban in the southern coastal states led to the huge return of the redfish and seatrout populations to the point there are huge tournaments for redfish that are making huge money. If Malaysia had an enforced economic zone net ban, imagine the amazing resurgence of siakap and kurau?

13

The necessity for political support is vital to the preservation of recreational fishing, but the link with environmental groups is tenuous at best. Recreational fishing is under pressure from green groups all over the world, who generally consider angling for recreational purposes as little better than bear baiting, fox hunting and hare coursing. Angling is a blood sport and it is cruel is the official stance of many green groups. Make no mistake, when they have finished saving the whale and stopping the hunting of baby fur seals, they are coming after us! This despite the fact that preservation of fish stocks is the overall aim of both.

Australian anglers are currently suffering massive area closures. They pay license fees for the privilage of being able to fish at all and have to suffer bag limits and slot sizes, while commercial fishing continues pretty much unchecked. Meanwhile, ecotourism, in many respects just as environmentally unfriendly as any other activity where man interacts with his environment, is allowed to continue unlicensed and with little restriction.

Anglers certainly do need political support and do need to organise themselves with the aim of generating political support. However, the argument that will eventually win the day is a purely economic one. The value of recreational fishing to the economy and to local communities is generally very underestimated. Anglers will travel large distances, stay in hotels, eat at local restuarants, buy fishing tackle and generally spend money in the places they fish. The number of people directly or indirectly employed in supporting industries is large. Not only is the economic value of recreational fishing often far greater than any commercial fishing industry, the people involved are voters and their continued support is essentail to the survival of government. The two arguments combined are very influencial in politics, while environmental issues are actually a smoke screen or window dressing to disguise the true motivating factors.

It’s worth remembering that Greenpeace is a profit making organisation with executives who are on a salary. When money becomes involved, motives become clouded. Environmental battles are fought based upon their profile with the public and ultimately their financial value to the organisation. It’s trendy to save whales, but the lesser spotted warty slimy thing doesn’t get a look in.

It’s also probably worth mentioning that Catch and Release, whilst making good sense from our perspective, is actually counterproductive in the eyes of the non-fishing public and plays right into the hands of environmental groups who think fishing is cruel. A man fishing to feed his family is an understandable concept and an age old right. A man fishing for fun and releasing his catch is doing nothing more than torturing animals for his own pleasure.

At the end of the day, anglers need to get themselves organised to effecively lobby and become actively involved in policy decisions on environmental issues. The economic value of recreational fishing is huge. The power of the vote in the angling community is huge. As Vincent has in his banner, together we are many…

14

marlin,
I’m glad someone finally replied. I agree the green entities are a double edged sword, but as in the world of politics, you must know when to have whom as your friends. I watch very carefully for PETA members as they might be the worst type of green group out there. they actually promote violence against humans in order to achieve their goals! As ludicrous as this sounds, it’s happened. However, by owrking with certain green groups in limited venues, great things can be done. I believe that in Malaysia, it would be a very effective option for cutting the commercial fishing pressure as well as the illegal fishing activities in the economic zones such as the extremely visible but highly illegal netting in Port Klang, etc. Agreed that being the green groups are a doble edged sword, every movement forward must bring additional strength in the recreational fishing community or the risk of having what we in the US have faced known as MPAs or Marine protected Areas is a possibility. These are scientifically proven to not work, but certain green groups have had enough clout to push them through. the art of using fear is a very polished one. Just look at the mercury scare here in the states at fishscam.com. greenpeace took the report and only released 7 of the 12 pages that fit their issue the best. Brains are needed with solid action. Great discussion my man!

15

Marlin, good that you are coming into this thread to share your opinion, what you said is very true, we need full support from pro environmentalist government bodies to achieve our goal. What we fear is politically created smoke screen to ban this, ban that while massive, destruction is going on to tap multimillion $$$$$$$$ resources which appear in the eyes of the general public as something normal. Green Peace , Peta , the Demoncrats of OZ, do have some good points to gain support from those non fishos who are many folds bigger than fishos. As we all know politic is dirty, anything could happen and if they have the majority vote, could see the economy down fall from ecotourism and Recreational Sport Fishing. Countless enterprises and people will be affected including we sport fishos, what we gonna do?? Hopefully, our Malaysian Govt. can do something on the Environmental Preservation and to support Recreational Sport Fishing.

Fish tight…fish right!!! Thomas
www.jdartac.com

16

Gentlemen, this is a very sensitive issue and I have to be very respectful as a guest in a country which is not my own. My own country and other western countries have made many mistakes in environmental management, but I still believe all is not lost and the balance can be redressed. With regard to strategic alliances with groups that, lets face it, are better organised than recreational anglers and have much more sway than we do, I think both groups have to recognise that some of our goals are the same (preserve the environment and fish stocks as a managed resource), but that we may well diverge in our views on the use of that resource. I do not personally believe that our natural resources are something to be locked away so that no-one can have access, but one step at a time! No-one will have access if the resource is not there any more.

Despite the situation of major area closures in Australia, there have been very significant advances in managed fisheries in that country as well. Freshwater empoundments are fast becoming recreational fishing icons and these stocked waters are highly successful, preserve jobs and local economies and are generally socially acceptable to all but the most radical of green groups. Managed waters where fish stocks are maintained and certain rules or ethics are imposed on anglers in exchange for a license fee are actually the norm in many countries. Recreational fishing clubs are often tasked with managing their own waters. This is a natural progression from the pay pond concept on a much grander scale.

I wouldn’t go so far as to say that politics is a dirty business, but politicians unfortunately have self preservation as a major item on their agenda, whilst still trying to serve the people that elected them. I am very sceptical that environmental issues per se have any bearing on government policy. Economics and voting power are what sways politicians.

Here’s an example of what I mean. Don’t chop down the rain forest because it’s millions of years old and can never be replaced just doesn’t work. The value of the wood in the rain forest when its chopped up and sold will always override any romantic notions of preserving the environment.

What will win over governments (eventually) is an argument that says don’t chop down the rain forest because we have a better idea. Tourists from all over the world will come and see our rain forest, adding billions of dollars in foreign revenue to the economy and create thousands of jobs for local people, far exceeding the value of the wood if you allow it to be cut down. Oh and by the way, if you allow it to be cut down, we won’t vote for you in the next election.

Recreational fishing issues are no different to the rain forest problem. Forget romantic notions of environmental preservation. Think money, think votes and work with, rather than fight against, the organisations that manage fisheries.

17

Marlin,

Good of you to share your views, many of which are very pertinent. The fact of the matter is that Malaysia is still on the road to full development in so many areas, especially with regards to Integral Human Development issues. Not surprising therefore, that its always $$$ that counts first … either for economic reasons, eg.we need the money for development, have to clear the jungles for oil palm…etc..or just plain greed and corruption. “Sustainability” is always a very elusive word, unfortunately.

The thing we need to realise, like you indicated, is that its going to take time to change mindsets here. It certainly is frustrating, esp.in this day and age where we can get so much information on whats going on and what can and should be done, and yet we see the powers that be not doing what they should be doing. We must agree, however, that “if its going to be, its up to me” …however small and insignificant our individual action and contribution may seem.

<><ICHTUS><>

18

Marlin,
I agree that p[oliticians are more worried about their careers. i also think that they are mentally unable to truly add up numbers when regarding recreational anglers. I am sure you’ve read the articles about the longline closures and additional rule implementations on that fleet in the US due to political pressure by the RFA and greenpeace. Alliances such as those are what I’m referring to. they don’t always work. Everybody knows that. But the amount of monies waived in the politicians’s faces by organizations such as greepneace in the lobbying processes, etc., are near imposssible for many politicians to ignore, being that they are mostly only interested in their careers! In the past, it was an environmental group (if I remember correctly) that placed enough pressure on Malaysia to try to protect the sea turtle egg laying on the East Coast. Enforcement ain’t the best still, but it sure was a start. Recreational anglers historically haven’t been the best organized groups in the world, but we represent a major portion of money moving in many countries all around the world. The US has made its fair share of screwups and then some!!! That doesn’t mean that other nations should follow the same mistakes. By this I mean malaysia. Just my two cents.

19
quote:
Originally posted by thomas lee
Hi Bob, If God's willing you and I may live to see some good changes in the near future, THE KELAH SANTUARY, hope it will materialise to a world class venue for masheer enthusiasts, the wanton killing of sailfish be stopped and turn ROMPIN into a SAILFISH HAVEN to attract anglers far and near, the Spratlys specially reserved for sport fishing, all the water catchment areas free from poison, bombing, illegal netting,etc,etc We all want to see our effort and hope turn to reality, someday!!

i was reading through some older postings and came across what thomas lee said about the hope of the kelah santuary materializing into a world class venue for angling… well, the kelah santuary now has closed its doors… the fund’s are out and dry… 5 million or was it 6 million down the drain?.. sometimes i cant help but sigh on malaysian fishing… [V]

my personal sites:
http://www.tackle.com.my
http://www.guitar.com.my
http://www.pooskimboards.com

“My advice to you, is to start drinking heavily” - John Belushi

20

Art bro,

Is this true?

Fish & Fish yet catch & release.