This may be the author’s version of a work that was submitted/accepted for publication in the following source:

Frawley, Jodi (2015) Kissing fish: Rex Hunt, popular culture, sustainability and fishing practices. Journal of Australian Studies, 39(3), pp. 307-325.

This file was downloaded from: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/89206/

c Consult author(s) regarding copyright matters

This work is covered by copyright. Unless the document is being made available under a Creative Commons Licence, you must assume that re-use is limited to personal use and that permission from the copyright owner must be obtained for all other uses. If the docu- ment is available under a Creative Commons License (or other specified license) then refer to the Licence for details of permitted re-use. It is a condition of access that users recog- nise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. If you believe that this work infringes copyright please provide details by email to [email protected]

Notice: Please note that this document may not be the Version of Record (i.e. published version) of the work. Author manuscript versions (as Sub- mitted for peer review or as Accepted for publication after peer review) can be identified by an absence of publisher branding and/or typeset appear- ance. If there is any doubt, please refer to the published source. https://doi.org/10.1080/14443058.2015.1052834 1 Kissing Fish: Rex Hunt, popular culture, sustainability and fishing 2 practices 3 4 Abstract: 5 Natural resource managers and scientists focus on individual behavior to 6 understand environmental problems associated with recreational fishing. They 7 do this in an effort to identify ways to facilitate change to more sustainable 8 attitudes. This article takes a different approach by considering the change 9 from take-all to catch-and-release fishing as an emergent practice in diverse 10 fishing communities, rather than the responsibility of the individual. Using 11 practice theory, I trace this change in Australia by analyzing the texts of 12 celebrity fisher Rex Hunt, who was an advocate for releasing fish, and 13 combine this with testimony from recreational fishers in the broader Australian 14 community. The practice of catch-and-release fishing emerged through the 15 combination of socio-technical and historically specific elements present in 16 popular cultural activities, including the media. Paying attention to the way 17 different elements catalyse provides a rich account of changing modes of 18 sustainability in recreational fishing communities. 19 20 Keywords: sustainability, recreational fishing, catch-and-release, practice 21 theory, Rex Hunt. 22 23 24 Fish problems 25 The over extraction of fish by recreational fishers is identified as a major 26 threat to sustainable fisheries in Australia.1 Although regulations set bag 27 limits, banned certain kinds of fishing gear and fixed allowable size on 28 individual species, fish populations experienced a steady decline in the late 29 twentieth century. The cumulative effect of recreational fishing compounded 30 the negative impacts of commercial catch on aquatic ecosystems.2 As 31 scientific assessments of this phenomenon came to light in the 1990s, 32 concern surfaced amongst environmentalists, scientists and policy makers to 33 reduce river, ocean and estuary fishing. One option for management was to 34 close environments to protect species and allow populations to rebuild without

1 1 human interference.3 Such lockouts led to advocacy and outrage from 2 recreational fishers, who resisted these policies as top-down enforcements 3 they felt encroached on their rights.4 Over this same time frame, the catch- 4 and-release method of sustainable fishing emerged from within recreational 5 fishing communities. Catch-and-release was a technique where fishers 6 unhook a caught fish and return it to the water before it experiences death or 7 serious injury. This was in line with general concerns about over extraction, 8 but did not require specific regulatory frameworks or enforcement. 9 10 Over the 1980s and 1990s catch-and-release arose from a reconfiguration of 11 the take-all mode of fishing. Fisheries commentators articulated this as a 12 change in the attitude of fishers that led to a change in behavior through 13 individual choice 5– a classic case of ABC (Attitude, Behavior, Choice) 14 psychology.6 However, fisheries managers and scientists were baffled when 15 they could not translate this into the take up of other kinds of sustainable 16 behavior – such as stopping the release of fingerlings into degraded habitats 17 or halting game fishing for introduced species.7 Why did one behavior change 18 but others persist that have equally unsustainable outcomes? This 19 mystification demands a re-evaluation of the transition from take-all to catch- 20 and-release to identify other ways of approaching change for more 21 sustainable outcomes. I reframe these changes as a fishing practice 22 transformed by co-evolving range of relevant aspects of the sociotechnical 23 environment of fishing. Instead of focusing on individual behavior, I argue that 24 fishers were recruited to this practice because it foregrounds their 25 interrelations with fishy beings that can only be maintained by fisher presence 26 in watery places. 27 28 To develop this argument I trace this change from take-all to catch-and- 29 release in one prominent fisher in Australia. Rex Hunt promoted catch-and- 30 release fishing in his television programs Angling Action, Rex Hunt’s Fishing 31 World and Rex Hunt’s Fishing Adventures from 1991 to 2005.8 Here I am 32 going to do something paradoxical. I take a celebrity individual and show how 33 he came to symbolize a major change in fisher behavior in Australia, namely 34 the catch-and-release method. And though risking a hagiographic approach –

2 1 one that is likely to be contested given the number of fishers and scientists 2 who completely disavow Hunt’s influence on them – I will argue that the 3 change from take-all to catch-and-release is best understood as a multi-actor, 4 multi-species series of convergences. The shift in term that I use to articulate 5 this – behavior to practice – can be tracked through showing the various 6 enrolments that made Hunt’s own transition possible. 7 8 Rex Hunt gave catch-and-release a uniquely Australian inflection by radically 9 altering its form: he kissed the fish before he released them back into the 10 water. It was the proximity of living fish and loving fisher in televisual worlds 11 that marked a moment of environmental change. As Elizabeth Shove 12 implores, however, it is ‘useful to focus not on the people who do the enacting’ 13 [here Hunt], ‘but on the practice that they reproduce/transform’ [releasing the 14 fish].9 A close reading of Hunt’s popular texts shows how kissing fish was an 15 outcome of the interweaving of the specific history of catch practices in 16 Australia, co-learning in the social networks of fishing, experience of degraded 17 environments, and modifications in fishing technology combined with a 18 discourse about the future of fishing. As catch-and-release recruited 19 practitioners and was repeated, it ceased to be a spectacular behavior of a 20 celebrity fisherman, but instead became an everyday practice in recreational 21 fishing communities. 22 23 This is not to say that catch-and-release was some sort of panacea for 24 unsustainable practice. There is very good evidence that shows that 25 recreational fishers contribute in a myriad of ways to the degradation of the 26 environments that they used.10 Discarded nylon line, lures and plastics were 27 lost into waterways, the damage to banks from high powered boat use and 28 the pressure that volumes of fishers place on riverine environments through 29 camping and four wheel driving cannot be ignored.11 However, there were 30 other factors that also influence the decline of fish populations. Examples 31 include chemical runoff from farming practices,12 the draining of wetlands for 32 cropping that cause acid-sulphate soils,13 and the changes to hydrological 33 patterns from road and rail infrastructure.14 Additionally, this article is not 34 about Hunt’s advocacy in the marine parks debates, rather, I want to examine

3 1 how this fishing practice changed and the ways a kiss was transformed into 2 an everyday practice. 15 3 4 Observation of this change in everyday practice emerged during a recent 5 research project, Talking Fish, about the history of fishing in the Murray- 6 Darling Basin. In 2010-11, Heather Goodall and I, both historians, joined a 7 multidisciplinary team assembled by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority that 8 visited twelve different river communities and recorded over 120 hours of oral 9 history testimony about fishing and environmental change in this river 10 system.16 Participants relayed stories of an old mode of fishing best captured 11 as take-all fishing. This included the trays of utility trucks loaded with fish17; 12 fish left in piles to rot on the river banks;18 fish tossed out at the end of a days 13 fishing19; fish catch that could never equal the consumption habits of the 14 individual fishers who caught them. When asked, participants could not 15 explain these practices. This was not to say that all fish were wasted. A 16 parallel set of stories relay instances of sharing fish catch with family and 17 neighbours20, giving to hospitals21 and selling excess at the back door of the 18 local pub or fish and chip shop.22 In light of the subsequent recognition of the 19 effects of recreational fishing on fish populations, fishers were taking more 20 than they needed and more than was reasonable or sustainable. 21 22 One of the key findings of the Talking Fish project was that this aspect of 23 recreational fishing practice had changed.23 It was not clear from our evidence 24 when this change occurred. Everyday practices cannot be dated as readily as 25 significant events. Within the Murray-Darling Basin, it was clear that by the 26 1990s this mode was starting to gather momentum. Instead of fishers taking 27 everything that they caught, many of them exercised catch-and-release 28 strategies. Some like Jason Simpson from the Namoi River and Dwayne 29 Willoughby on the Darling River operated exclusively in this mode. While 30 others like Donny Richter on the Goulburn River, and Gary Daws on the 31 Ovens River in Victoria used catch-and-release in conjunction with retaining 32 some fish to take home to eat. In his youth during the 1960s and 1970s, 33 Donny, in particular, had been the quintessential take-all fisher. He regularly 34 travelled away on weekend trips with large groups of men, who caught and

4 1 killed more fish than they could possibly eat, leaving many of them on the 2 banks to rot. He attributed his move to catch-and-release fishing to a change 3 in his fishing companions, where he learnt the etiquette of fishing from his 4 older friend Noel that included a care for the environment. Fisheries Inspector 5 Greg Sharp ruminated with me that catch-and-release was present for some 6 fish, like Murray Cod in the Murray River system since the late 1990s. He 7 went on to say ‘If I was to pinpoint one thing it would be Rex Hunt.’24 Hunt’s 8 counter play to this older form of fishing was to promote catch-and-release 9 fishing, which was, at the time, growing in popularity in Northern Europe and 10 the United States of America25 and was already an emerging feature in trout 11 fishing in Australia.26 12 13 Sharp saw Hunt as a ‘flag bearer for kissing fish’, and as an important 14 influence on fishers of Victoria.27 There are two good reasons for using Hunt 15 to analyse these changes. Firstly, as a Sharp points out, he was popular 16 media figure who modeled this technique and relayed its social and symbolic 17 significance to a broad audience of fishers and non-fishers alike. 18 Representations of kissing fish by Hunt ‘are crucial for making key 19 associations’28 about the release of fish back into aquatic environments. But 20 as Shove cautions, and media studies would generally emphasize, Hunt may 21 have had a vital role in disseminating ideas, pictures and texts but this was no 22 guarantee that these would translate into the practices of the broader fishing 23 community. 29 Secondly, precisely because of his celebrity, Hunt has left a 24 body of textual material that can be analysed. 25 26 The Rex Hunt books, DVDs, television programs and now a web presence 27 distinguish him from others in the recreational fishing community.30 He left an 28 archive. In this way he provides one access point to understanding the 29 emergence of catch-and-release fishing in Australia. His form of catch-and- 30 release was both of the fishing community and exceptional to it because of his 31 media celebrity. In 1981 when he says he first kissed a fish on air,31 catch- 32 and-release was far from common amongst recreational fishers. In reflections 33 about his life, Rex Hunt articulates this as a formal program: his ‘kiss and 34 release campaign’.32 However, in reviewing his body of writing and other

5 1 texts, this campaign was not fully explained anywhere. There were no policy 2 documents, no management strategies, no memorandums of understanding 3 with peak government bodies and no personnel tasked to carry out a 4 program. Within ABC analysis, the idea of a program would be dismissed. To 5 say that therefore there was no campaign, however, does Hunt a dis-service. 6 Rather, it was the way he repeatedly performed this kiss across a range of 7 media platforms that ultimately made it a part of ordinary day-to-day fishing 8 culture. 9 10 It was important to bring life history and media spectacle together to examine 11 this as a change in practice. Shove et al argue that ‘theories of practice have 12 yet to make much impact on public policy’.’33 They focus on the way practices 13 emerge, recruit practitioners, and circulate or spread in a range of sites that 14 include climate change and obesity. Within this articulation of practice theory, 15 there are three elements that must come together to form an identifiable 16 practice: materials, meanings and competencies – all of which can be 17 identified in any of the catch practices present in Australian fishing. A practice 18 was only robust and enduring if the requisite elements hold together in a 19 Latourian actor-network of humans and non-humans.34 What practice theory 20 adds and what was helpful for sustainable fishing, was the doing, or the active 21 component in pursuit. To understand these changes, we need to be attentive, 22 in Tim Ingold’s framing, to the way skills and perceptions are utterly 23 grounded35 in fisher capacity as a set of embodied knowledges about fish and 24 aquatic environments. Critically, for understanding catch-and-release, practice 25 theory emphasizes that new practices emerge from older forms. In the case of 26 catch-and-release this older form was identified by fishers in the Murray- 27 Darling Basin as a take-all mode of fishing. 28 29 Fishers were but one group whose practices impact on fish populations, but 30 they were an important one, because of the way that their experiences of 31 estuaries, beaches, rivers and oceans connect them into a series of 32 multispecies interrelationships.36 They have a stake here. Given that take-all 33 practices contributed to the problem of overfishing understanding this change 34 was of critical importance to debates about sustainable fishing. It was this kind

6 1 of exploitation that leads Lewin et al to conclusion that if ‘ angling is not 2 properly managed it can negatively impact exploited fish populations’.37 3 Where fishers themselves had promoted the small size of individual catch as 4 negligible, this data showed that in accumulating catch figures, the extraction 5 rivaled that of the commercial fishing industry. This was a radical turning point 6 for fisheries science, enabling a move to consideration of fish and fish habitats 7 as intrinsically important to ecosystems, in contradistinction to the idea that 8 fishers had inalienable rights to take whatever they wanted from the water. At 9 the same time that fisheries scientists were establishing the data and 10 information that could effectively construct a valid and validated argument 11 about the impact of recreational fishing, the popularity of Rex Hunt was on the 12 rise through a range of different media outlets. 13 14 Textual Rex 15 Hunt came to the public view as an Australian Rules football player. He 16 played in the Victorian Football League (Richmond 1966-1974, Geelong 17 1974-75 and St Kilda 1976-78) in the Victorian Football Association 18 (Sandringham 1980-81). As Graeme Turner, Frances Bonner and David 19 Marshall point out, success in sport was a key pathway to celebrity status 20 where popular appeal can be translated into media purchase.38 He had two 21 parallel media careers. Firstly, he worked as football caller for radio from the 22 late 1970s to the present. His other media career was built around 23 recreational fishing. He wrote a column for Modern Fishing and Sunday 24 Press, and did a radio slot on Melbourne’s 3AW, where he also called the 25 football and hosted two television series.39 One, called Angling Action in 1981 26 was short-lived, and the other, an enduring fourteen year program, although it 27 changed its name from Rex Hunt’s Fishing World to Rex Hunt’s Fishing 28 Adventures during this time.40 29 30 Rex Hunt and his management tightly control his life history narrative that 31 takes its form as an Australian everyman in books, magazines, radio 32 broadcasting and television programming. There was a white settler colonial 33 rhythm to the continual reiteration of Hunt’s life story. This figure emerges 34 from a British history, where, as Adrian Franklin argues, in its Australian form

7 1 fishing ‘feeds on the mythology of a rural past (a sort of origin myth) with its 2 hard-wrought form of self provisioning, masculine identity and its social form 3 ‘mateship’.41 Hunt performs this mode of masculinity through displays of 4 physical strength, skillful prowess and tough talk in settings of nature. He 5 carried these dynamics in relay from the football field, to fishing zones and 6 back again.42 Each segment within his fishing programs includes mates who 7 share their knowledge of local places at the same time as reinforcing this kind 8 of Australian mateship that was a subset of modern male homosociality. 9 While Hunt’s story emerges from this history, there were many ways that he 10 also disrupts Franklin’s narrow construction. For example, like many of the 11 Murray-Darling Basin recreational fishers we met, Hunt counts his wife Lynne 12 as a fishing companion, and he learnt fishing in the highly urbanized 13 waterways in and around Melbourne – not some kind of idyllic rural utopia. 14 15 In these various media formats Hunt performs as a larrikin figure translated 16 into a fishing persona. Melissa Bellanta’s recent book Larrikins grounds this 17 sub-culture in the historical moment of urban street life in the nineteenth 18 century. She makes a clear distinction between this and the mythical figure 19 popular in Australian culture in the late the twentieth century. In Bellanta’s 20 terms, Hunt figures as a performer ‘of egalitarian Australianess, usually via 21 the exhibition of ocker vernacular and the anti-intellectualism this implies.’43 22 This vernacular was most evident in the language Hunt uses in his 23 interactions: ‘smooching up to a sweep’ or ‘puckering up … to a wrasse’ that 24 mobilises the language of larrikinism to promote care for the fish.44 In Larrikin 25 worlds, the stolen kiss, the wolf whistle and the leary gaze all operate to 26 reinforce the positioning of male dominance in gender hierarchies in the 27 space of play, whether or not those targeted experienced it as playfulness. 28 Kissing the fish was couched in humour precisely because it was a 29 transgression of interspecies relations that would otherwise be read as 30 undoing masculinity. Hunt moved in the homosocial worlds of fishing, at 31 once, filled with brutality of death of fish combined with larrikin utterances of 32 love and care. 33 34 Historically specific catch practices in Australia

8 1 2 Over the 1980s and 1990s catch-and-release arose from a reconfiguration of 3 the take-all mode of fishing practice. Take-all fishing was the merging of two 4 forms of earlier practice, so it was, in itself an emergent change. Where in the 5 nineteenth and early twentieth century, sport fishing was the purview of a 6 leisured middle class, for poorer communities fish was an important food. This 7 was a normal activity alongside places like Murray River as makeshift tent 8 towns grew up overnight in the inter-war period in places like the Riverland 9 and Mildura.45 But in the post war affluence of the 1950s, these two activities 10 merged. Increased leisure time, and changes in mobility associated with it,46 11 meant that sport fishing combined with sustenance fishing to form what we 12 now recognize as recreational fishing. Hunt himself was a child of this era, 13 regularly referencing his working class origins in his life stories. His first 14 encounter with fishing was articulated within the frame of fish for food, as 15 much as fishing for leisure. His first catch, Garfish, provided a much-loved 16 eating fish for his mother’s table.47 17 18 This was important because Hunt has never advocated that all fish should be 19 returned to the water. This was partly demonstrated in the title of one of his 20 books: Catch ‘em, Kiss ‘em and Cook ‘em. On his television shows, many of 21 the fish that Hunt catches were not returned to the water. When he kept 22 them, Hunt always made a point of talking about fish as food. He says: 23 24 I live by the golden rule of angling that I only kill what I or my family and 25 friends can eat. I do not kill for the sake of it and, in many cases, I have 26 caught fish only to release them for future sport. What is the point of 27 killing fish just for the sake of it? All anglers must be conscious of the 28 piscatorial environment and to kill fish you do not intend eating is 29 environmental vandalism. 48 30 31 In terms of overall catch, Hunt advocated for a mixture of keeping, releasing 32 and kissing of fish. 33

9 1 The importance of consumption of fish is underplayed or deliberately down 2 played in much of the commentary about fisher ‘behaviour’.49 The 3 experiences of being in the environment and self-provisioning, were 4 presented as hierarchical ‘motivations’, with eating fish dismissed as 5 comparatively irrelevant.50 Changing systems of food production clearly 6 undermined the importance of knowing how to fish to feed a family or 7 community. Additionally, increasing affluence across all classes in Australia 8 has circumvented the need to provide table fish. However, when asked, all 9 Murray-Darling Basin fishers interviewed provided a favourite style of cooking 10 fish, suggesting that this element continues in contemporary fishing cultures. 11 Hunt’s determination in sharing recipes, or talking about barbeque-ing and 12 frying fish in situ while fishing speaks to the persistence of consumption as a 13 central element in the reconfigured practice. 51 Eating the fish may not be the 14 only reason to go fishing, but the idea of going out without any practical 15 purpose (ie for the pure ‘aesthetic’ experience) would be an anathema to the 16 fishers interviewed in the Talking Fish project. Behaviourist models, which 17 imagine they can hierarchise motivations, rob us of the tools to say anything 18 about these multilayered approaches to the fishing experience.52 19 20 Co-learning in the social networks of fishing 21 22 Hunt’s first fishing encounter was on the Mentone Pier in the 1950s.53 His 23 explorations of the jetty environs, its winds and waters placed him into the bio- 24 social realms of older fishing men: Jack Hall and Alec Rowe were just two that 25 he names.54 In this set of relations he learnt to fish – how to read the water, 26 feel the sand for cockles through the soles of his feet, how to handle slimy 27 and slippery fish and the other entities used for bait, like maggots and garden 28 worms.55 These were intergenerational relations where the learning that was 29 valued came from both absence and presence of the fish. In discussing the 30 ways that learning may provide the means of change, Gibson-Graham and 31 Roelvink point out: ‘momentous as it may sound and mundane as it may 32 actually be, this learning is a process of co-constitution that produces a new 33 body-world’.56 34

10 1 This learning was not about bookish knowledge, but instead was an embodied 2 practice formed in open ways enabling Hunt to enter into relations with other 3 fishers at the same time he learnt how to respond to both fish and fishing 4 environments. One critical skill that Hunt emphasizes was stillness, quietness 5 and patience. Hunt had to learn to quiet his body to make it open to the 6 auditory and visual environments around him. In this state, other fishing 7 companions join Hunt in his quest for the elusive fish. Seagulls, pelicans and 8 kingfishers join in and Hunt’s watchful eye picks up the presence of fish 9 through the presence of other species. Dolphins and sharks represent another 10 group of companion fishers, signaling to the attentive fisher the presence of 11 other fishy beings in oceanic and estuarine zones. Acknowledging these 12 myriad interrelations signifies, as Elspeth Probyn argues, ‘the tacit knowledge 13 of the humans more closely involved in the more-than-human environment 14 that is fishing’. 57 15 16 Hunt and other fishers actively rework their bodies to fishing orientated to 17 particular sensibilities to the environment. This learning was about engaging 18 with the natural world in a sensual way.. The presence of the fisher in many 19 ways creates the specificity of a fishing environment which would otherwise 20 be simply an ecosytem. It was not just a fishing environment that was 21 produced here, however, but equally the combination of the elements that 22 create a set of fishing bodies. Icelandic ethnographer, Gisli Palsson found the 23 same thing when working with commercial fishing fleets in the North Atlantic 24 Ocean. This is not simply about having knowledge about fish or knowing 25 about special kinds of skills. In Palsson’s view it is an active interaction 26 between shared teaching between practitioners, the proficiencies acquired 27 through hands-on learning, the presence of a range of technologies, the 28 existence of the animals themselves and experiences of the places of 29 fishing.58 Although for Hunt this was formed in one place, Port Philip Bay, with 30 a familiar set of teachers and learners, he carried these embodied 31 dispositions into all subsequent fishing practices.59 The earlier experiences 32 shape later understandings and practices. 33

11 1 Through these processes Hunt built a repertoire of skill for catching fish, at the 2 same time he developed a respect for them as beings he came to love. His 3 texts abound with the effusive emotional descriptions of fish being caught – 4 ‘you little beauty’, lovely, lovely, lovely’ and ‘you bloody ripper’.60 This affective 5 language embraces fish, regardless of whether they will be kissed or killed. 6 But as Tess Lea argues: ‘caring does not erase the threat, even if one kisses 7 the fish before dropping it back in the water.’61 Rather, the kiss signals an 8 unequal relation between human and non-human. The image of hulking man 9 towering over the defenseless fish reiterates the dominance of man over 10 nature, and betrays Hunt’s affectionate words. The technology and embodied 11 skill that ensured the catch also entangled the fish in this uneven exchange. 12 This was a kiss that could not be returned, no matter how this love was 13 enacted. 14 15 All of these things naturalise the fisher in fishy worlds, along with the right kind 16 of fishing gear, boats, and a requisite mate or two. But they also speak Hunt’s 17 broader appreciation of the places that he fished too. Returning fish was 18 always as much about the whole environment as it was about the affection for 19 any individual fish. Here we can see the way that Hunt’s practice is formed 20 through the combination of material, meanings and competencies present 21 within his fishing community in their fishing environment. In this bio-cultural 22 geography Hunt and his companions shape the kinds of relationships of value 23 here: proven anglers, who understand the experience of the art of fishing; 24 correct methods in the use of fishing gear and the consistency of catch that 25 this distinguishes good fishers from others. For Hunt the outcome of this 26 learning was his willingness to teach others in a way that acknowledges fisher 27 responsibility in aquatic environments, even when he could not see himself as 28 a hazard within such environments. 29 30 31 Experience of degraded environments 32 33 The 2003 national survey of recreational and indigenous fishers made much 34 about the association between fishing and the way that it makes particular

12 1 kinds of environments available to individuals in the fishing community. Gary 2 Henry and Jeremy Lyle placed the ability to ‘relax or unwind or be outdoors’ 3 as a key motivation for fishing. 62 Access to fishing environments emphasises 4 the ways that fishing was positioned, like hunting, as both anti–urban and 5 anti–modern.63 Words like pristine, sublime and wilderness are used to 6 articulate a counter urban experience that serves to hold the two realms 7 separate. William Cronon argues that ‘idealising a distant wilderness too often 8 means not idealising the environment in which we actually live.’64 One 9 outcome of this conceptualization of fishers as people who seek wilderness 10 was to indicate that recreational fishers generally do not live within the 11 environments they fish. But for Hunt this could not have been further from the 12 truth. He grew up on Port Phillip Bay, which was the environment of his first 13 writing and media work about fishing. We don’t often think about urban 14 waterways as fishing environments, but as the multiple works of the Georges 15 River project show, they were hybrid places in which cultural attachment was 16 always grounded through repeated use and activity.65 Georges River, in the 17 highly urbanized Sydney region, like Port Phillip Bay and Melbourne, has a 18 long history of fishing cultures functioning in parallel with the ecological 19 consequences of industrial and urban development. 20 21 Hunt fished in Port Phillip Bay throughout his life and experienced the 22 changes to urban environments through its effects on fish habitat. The effects 23 of the 'green revolution' and its chemical runoff; the draining of wetlands for 24 urban development, especially canals, need to be understood here as 25 historical privileging for human dwellings over fish habitat. Hunt’s observations 26 of these changes were not focused on the loss of fish, but on their revival 27 once some of these effects were tempered. In discussing the Yarra and 28 Maribyrnong rivers he said: 29 In the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, if anyone had told me that I would 30 be writing about the colossal fishing in these two streams, I would have 31 laughed. Both rivers are now running relatively clean and with good 32 catchments and strict control on the material that is emptied into them, 33 continued good conditions for fishing prevail.

13 1 However it wasn’t simply that he could see that the water was cleaner, his 2 understanding of the return of fish extended to what happened out of sight. 3 The bottom has always been muddy with a great deal of coral base, 4 but the tiny microorganisms that add so much to an estuary were totally 5 overpowered by the pollution problem. Now that the pollution problem 6 has eased, weed beds, barnacles and other marine life has 7 regenerated, reviving, once again, a reasonable fish habitat. 8 What was important here was not just that he observed a change, it was also 9 critical that Hunt could translate this kind of experience into an understanding 10 that human influence can cut both ways – he saw degradation, and he saw 11 restoration. This was important for the issue of over-extraction, because past 12 practices that were harmful could be directed differently. 13 14 Modifications in fishing technology and infrastructure 15 The technologies of fishing changed enormously over the 1960s and 1970s – 16 boats made from lightweight aluminum along with trailers changed the range 17 of places that fishers could access. Hunt was to say in 1987: ‘Naturally, with 18 the advent of fast trailable boats, the increase on angling pressure has been 19 evident over recent times.’66 Whether in saltwater, estuary or freshwater 20 places, these boats, along with the cars and trailers, increased mobility and 21 range. No longer were fishers restricted to the local spot – in Hunt’s case the 22 Mentone Pier, or Port Phillip Bay. Instead, weekends and holidays meant 23 moving along coastlines or into rural places once difficult to reach.67 Murray- 24 Darling fishers Mick Hall, Donny Richter, and the Seymour Anglers, all young 25 men in the 1960s, talked of the way mobility meant access to different fishing 26 places. Mick Hall lived in the outer suburbs of Melbourne and as a teenager in 27 the 1950s he says: 28 29 I had a car and couple of mates and we’d do the typical thing. Camp 30 on the river, drink too much, fish too much, stay up all night, drive back 31 home the next day, go to a disco or something, then off to work on the 32 Monday morning. But every weekend we used to come away fishing.68 33

14 1 The car on the road and the boat in the water changed what was possible for 2 Hunt and these other fishers. It expanded their fishing horizons. 3 4 The 1960s and 70s bought a set of changes to other kinds of technology of 5 fishing too. According to Bryan Pratt in Canberra, lures originally developed in 6 the US came into Australia in the 1960s and subsequently Australian brands 7 like stumpjumper lures developed gear that responded to local conditions.69 8 Nylon line replaced the degradable cotton of earlier years, and this meant that 9 different weights of line could be used to chase particular species, while also 10 responding to weather, and local conditions. Up to this point rods had mostly 11 been split cane. These required highly specialized skills, even if this was only 12 ever cottage industry at best, or created in circles of localized fishers. The 13 post-war period also saw the rise of cheap rods made from fiberglass and 14 graphite composites that enabled flexibility and strength. These replaced the 15 split cane rod allowing fishers to own many different kinds of rods that were 16 specialized for particular conditions. The combination of all this technological 17 and infrastructural upscaling led to the capacity for increased catch. 18 19 Within these bio-cultural ecologies, the infrastructure helped to shape 20 recreational fishing. Public boat ramps, caravan and camping sites all 21 increased from the 1950s and improved roads facilitated mobility on the land. 22 Many of Hunt’s books were guides to fishing places and he includes 23 photographs and information about where ramps and jetties were located. 24 This infrastructure was provided by the public purse, and was key in shaping 25 increasing pressure on fish stocks. Motors, channel marking and boat 26 licenses shaped the competencies and technologies needed by fishers to 27 move in estuaries and rivers. Piers and jetties can also be included as 28 elements in these kinds of practice – that need the support from the state. 29 These were ‘mundane technologies’ that facilitate access to fishing places. 30 31 A changed practice requires a new set of materials and the know-how to 32 produce competencies about them. There is evidence that the early use of 33 catch-and-release did not decrease the overall death rate of fish.70 Many fish 34 did not survive the removal from the water and being thrown back. In order for

15 1 catch-and-release to take hold two new elements emerged. Barbless hooks 2 that facilitate the removal of hooks from the bodies of the fish were combined 3 with a higher use of landing nets, and pliers that detached the hook from the 4 mouth, which Hunt used extensively in his show.71 And, secondly, an 5 increased emphasis on the competencies around handling the fish to protect 6 from spinal damage associated with vertically holding fish.72 One way to track 7 this change is through a review of trophy photographs. Fish held by their gills, 8 or the fishing lines are now replaced with the fishers holding fish under the 9 body or horizontially. Care also extended to the way that fish, big fish 10 particularly, were placed back into the water. The closeness of fishers and fish 11 were altered to perform what Hunt and his colleagues call the ‘ethic of 12 fishing’.73 13 14 15 The future of fishing 16 17 In Hunt’s fishing world, these technological changes were welcome, but had 18 to be balanced by an understanding of human impacts. For Hunt, the ‘future’ 19 was evoked as another new element in fishing practice. The capacity to 20 extract more fish, and the exponential growth in the recreational fishing 21 community were counterbalanced by a requirement for understanding the 22 needs of future generations of fishers. Without fish stock and or fishing 23 environments, Hunt understood that fishers would be scrutinized as 24 environmental vandals. Acknowledging the ‘future’ gives fishers a political 25 voice in current debates about marine parks legislation and recreational 26 fishing zones. 27 28 Fish populations are required in order to maintain cultures of fishing, and one 29 of the important symbolic meanings attached to the catch-and-release 30 practice was that by becoming practitioners, fishers contribute to that future in 31 a meaningful way, grounded in an everyday practice. Each fish released was 32 also a symbolic contribution of fisher responsibility to the fish themselves and 33 these environments. This future, where rivers, estuaries and oceans are full of 34 fish in thriving fish habitats is, of course, exactly the same outcome that fish

16 1 scientists and conservationists of this generation also desired. New South 2 Wales State Fisheries officer, D J Dunstan was to implore in 1973: 3 If we are to preserve our heritage we must adjust our thinking and 4 ensure that sufficient intertidal mangrove and marsh areas are 5 preserved that ensure future generations can enjoy fishing not too far 6 distant from population centres.74 7 8 This idea of the future was a central trope of environmentalism in the 1970s 9 and 1980s. Drew Hutton and Libby Connors argue that grassroots 10 environmental campaigns of this era, including saving Fraser Island, Great 11 Barrier Reef, and Kakadu, had widespread popular support.75 The Franklin 12 over Gordon dam controversy in Tasmania became a national issue in the 13 1983 federal election. Here, the future of wilderness, protected for its intrinsic 14 value, was pitted against development for short-term gain. At the same time, 15 many Australian states introduced heritage legislation that also used the 16 language of protecting built, natural and cultural environments for future 17 generations.76 At a global scale the Report of the World Commission on 18 Environment and Development released by the United Nations in 1991 was 19 more commonly referred to by its sub-title: Our Common Future. This report 20 defines sustainable development as ‘development that meets the needs of the 21 present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their 22 own needs’.77 23 24 This environmentalist discourse was made meaningful to these practitioners 25 within their own specific set of elements. Hunt’s 2001 book Rex Hunt’s Fishing 26 Australia was dedicated to the future of fishing.78 In his 1993 book he devotes 27 a chapter to ‘The Future’ claiming that by caring for environments, minimizing 28 pollution, reducing overall catch, more restrictions on commercial fishing and 29 to exercise of catch-and-release practices, fishers contribute to continuing 30 capacity to fish in the future.79 By invoking the future Hunt articulates fishers 31 as more than present for individual self-interest or the immediate gratification 32 of the death of a fish. Instead, they were positioned as stewards with rights, 33 whose credentials were shaped by their presence alongside fish in river, 34 estuary and oceanic environments.

17 1 2 Conclusion 3 In this article, I have traced the emergence of a practice that was replicated 4 across the recreational fishing community: catch-and-release fishing. I have 5 shown how it was dependent on the interplay of a range of elements that 6 included modeling in the media by a significant popular figure in Australia, 7 Rex Hunt. He took this action, kissing fish and used it to make catch-and- 8 release an ordinary part of the everyday practices of recreational fishers. He 9 crafted a set of embodied practices from his own learning that demonstrated 10 his appreciation of fish and fishing environments. Through his ‘smooching up’ 11 and ‘planting one on’ the fish, he provided a model for others. In the end it 12 didn’t matter if they kissed the fish or not, what mattered was that they 13 abandoned the take-all practice and instead released fish back into the water. 14 Shove identifies abandonment of practices and their reconfiguration as an 15 important aspect of sociotechnical change. This was a practice to which Hunt 16 became a carrier, contagiously and infectiously spreading an affective relation 17 to the future of fish. 18 19 This complexity demonstrates the way the choices of individual fishers are 20 better understood within a broader sociotechnical environment than within a 21 behavourial choice model (Shove’s ABC). The individual or their behaviours 22 cannot be separated from the other elements at play here. Understanding that 23 take-all fishing was linked to improvements in technology, and sat alongside 24 circulating discourses about the future of fishing, for example, were valuable 25 in showing the way that seemingly disparate and unconnected elements can 26 come together. The link between the upscaling of technology and the self- 27 regulation of reducing catch were not obviously causal. It was only in the 28 practice of catch-and-release that these elements adhere to one another in a 29 meaningful way for recreational fishers. Rather than attitudes, behaviours and 30 choice, this practice depends on a range of catalyzing elements that include a 31 captivating media image and its relationship to practice infectiously spread by 32 Rex Hunt. 33 34

18 1 For kissing fish to recruit practitioners it had to emerge from the common 2 experience of fishers across the very disparate nature of the fishing 3 community. 80 Not just those cast in the image that Franklin describes, where 4 Hunt would be right at home. 81 Some of the people captured in the 2003 5 fishing survey reported only fishing once in the previous month, but still 6 identified as fishers, suggesting a far more complex fishing community than 7 the trope of ‘fisherman’ implies.82 As an everyman figure Hunt also related to 8 this broader group: women, aboriginal fishers, children, family groups, and 9 non-fishing club members, inland fishers, coastal fishers and once-a-year 10 holiday makers who also make up Australia’s fishing community. In this, 11 practices were spread within these diverse social networks. What was 12 important here, was not that practitioners communicated in a traditionally 13 social way, but instead through the repetition of this embodied practice that 14 embodies the complex interrelations of fishers and fish in fishing 15 environments. 16 17 18 19 20

1 Lintermans, M, Fishes of the Murray Darling Basin: An Introductory Guide, (Canberra: Murray Darling Basin Authority, 2009): 6. 2 McPhee, D., D. Leadbitter and G. Skilleter, "Swallowing the Bait: Is Recreational Fishing in Australia Ecologically Sustainable?" Pacific Conservation Biology 8.1 (2002): 40-51. 3 Robinson, K. I. M. and D. A. Pollard, "Marine and estuarine reserves in Australia with particular reference to New South Wales." Wetlands 2 (1982): 17-26. 4 Voyer, M., W. Gladstone and H. Goodall, "Understanding Marine Park opposition: the relationship between social impacts, environmental knowledge and motivation to fish" Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 23.3 (2013): DOI.10.1002/aqc.2363. 5 Arlinghaus, R., S. J. Cooke, J. Lyman, D. Policansky, A. Schwab, C. Suski, S. G. Sutton and E. B. Thorstad, "Understanding the Complexity of Catch-and-Release in Recreational Fishing: An Integrative Synthesis of Global Knowledge from Historical, Ethical, Social and Biological Perspectives" Reviews in Fisheries Science 15 (2007): 75-167, Wallmo, K. and B. Gentner "Catch-and-Release Fishing: A Comparison of Intended and Actual Behavior of Marine Anglers" North American Journal of Fisheries Management 28.5 (2008): 1459-1471. 6 Shove, E. "Beyond the ABC: climate change policy and theories of social change." Environment and Planning - Part A 42.6 (2010):1273-1285. 7 Pers Comms with natural resource managers and scientists involved in the Talking Fish project over 2010 and 2011. 8 The bulk of the people we worked with on this project were science trained: and suggesting to them that Rex Hunt played any part in this change was an anathema to them – in fact more often than not it provoked intense reactions. Comments ranged from ‘don’t be ridiculous’ to the bodily disgust displayed by one fish scientist – who literally walked out of the conversation when I suggested that Rex Hunt may have had an influence in this change. But lest we think that this reaction to the idea that there might be something interesting about Rex Hunt was confined to scientists, reactions to my interest him in a carrier and vector of sustainable

19 practice from colleagues, family and friends has most often drawn an array of negative comments, from ‘how ho hum’ to ‘beastly wretch of a man’ with one person taking this view to the extreme by stating that he was a member of the Klu Klux Klan. 9 Shove, E., "Putting practice into policy: reconfiguring questions of consumption and climate change." Contemporary Social Science (2012): 4. 10 McPhee, D. P., D. Leadbitter and G. A. Skilleter, "Swallowing the Bait: is recreational fishing in Australia ecologically sustainable?" Pacific Conservation Biology 8.1 (2002): 40-51. 11 Lewin, W.-C., R. Arlinghaus and T. Mehner "Documented and Potential Biological Impacts of Recreational Fishing: Insights for Management and Conservation" Reviews in Fisheries Science 14.4 (2007): 337. 12 Middleton, M. “Estuaries - their ecological importance” N. S. W. Department of Agriculture, Division of Fisheries. Sydney, (1985). 13 White, I., M. Melville, J. Sammut, B. Wilson and G. Bowman (eds.) “Downstream impacts from acid sulphate soils” (Brisbane: Department of Natural Resources, 1996). 14 Parker, V. “Listening to the Earth: a call for protection and restoration of habitats” in J. A. McNeely (ed.) The Great Reshuffling: Human dimension of Invasive Alien Species. (Gland, Switzerland, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, 2001): 45 15 Urry, J. "Holiday-Making In Britain Since 1945" Contemporary Record 5.1 (1991): 32-44, Clarsen, G., Eat My Dust: Early Women Motorists. (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2008). 16 Frawley, J., H. Goodall, S. Nichols and E. Baker Talking Fish: making connections with the rivers of the Murray-Darling Basin. (Canberra: Murray-Darling Basin Authority, 2011) accessed 18 March 2014, http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/habitat/publications/historical- accounts/talking-fish-in-the-murray-darling-basin. 17 Richter interview, Talking Fish Collection, Oral History Collection, State Library of NSW. 18 Murray interview, Talking Fish Collection. 19 Fox interview; Bain interview, Talking Fish Collection. 20 Seymour Anglers interview, Sim and Yelland interview,Talking Fish Collection. 21 Willoughby interview,Talking Fish Collection. 22 Sullivan interview, Talking Fish Collection. 23 Nichols, S., “Final Report, Contract MD1489, Collecting Oral Histories and Engaging Recreational Fishers within the Basin” (Wollongbar: Department of Industry and Investment New South Wales, 2011). 24 Sharp transcript Talking Fish Collection: 19 25 Hunt, R., Rex Hunt's Catch 'Em, Kiss 'Em and Cook 'Em. (Melbourne: Ironbark Pan Macmillan Australia, 1997): vi. 26 27 Sharp transcript, Talking Fish Collection: 20 28 Shove, E., M. Pantzar and M. Watson, The dynamics of social practice: everyday life and how it changes (London: SAGE, 2012): 55 29 See for example: Cunningham, S. and G. Turner (eds) The Media in Australia: Industries, Texts, Audiences 2nd edition (Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 1997), Dine Young, S. "Movies as Equipment for Living: A Development Analysis of the Importance of Film in Everyday Life." Critical Studies in Media Communication 17.4 (2000): 447-468, Bruhn Jensen, K., “Contexts, cultures and computers: The cultural contexts of mediated communication” in K. B. Jensen (ed) A Handbook of Media and Communication Research: Qualitative and quantitative methodologies (London: Routledge, 2002): 171-190. 30 I would like to emphasise that I do not therefore think that Hunt was representative of this community – he cannot stand in for others. Many identify with him, but the recreational fishing community was and is an extraordinarily diverse group – in terms of gender, culture, class and geography. 31 Cooper, D. “Rex Hunt” Talking Heads with Peter Thompson. Australian Broadcasting Corporation (2008): 10 mins. 32 Hunt, Catch 'Em, Kiss 'Em and Cook'Em, vi 33 Shove, E., M. Pantzar and M. Watson (2012). The dynamics of social practice, 2. 34 Latour, B. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005). 35 Ingold, T., The Perception of the Environment: Essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. (London: Routledge, 2000).

20

36 Henry, G. W. and J. M. Lyle “The National and Indigneous Fishing Survey” (Canberra: Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, 2003). 37 Lewin, W-C., R. Arlinghaus and T. Mehner, "Documented and Potential Biological Impacts”, 305-367. 38 Turner, G., F. Bonner and P. D. Marshall, Fame games: the production of celebrity in Australia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000)., Turner, G. "Approaching Celebrity Studies." Celebrity Studies 1.1 (2010): 11-20. 39 Hunt, R., Rex: My Life (Sydney: Pan Macmillan Australia, 2002): 156 40 Hunt, Rex, 173-192. 41 Franklin, A., "Neo-Darwinian Leisures, the Body and Nature: Hunting and Angling in Modernity" Body and Society 7.3 (2001): 57-76. 42 See Bull, J., "Watery Masculinities: Fly-fishing and the Angling Male in South West of England" Gender, Place and Culture 16.4 (2009): 448. 43 Bellanta, M., Larrikins: A History. (Brisbane: University of Queensland Press, 2012):182. 44 Hunt, R. Rex Hunt's Fishing Australia (Melbourne: Pan Macmillan, 2004): 106. 45 Garner, W. “Land of Camps: The Ephemeral Settlement of Australia” PhD, (Melbourne: University of Melbourne, 2010)., Frawley, J., H. Goodall, S. Nichols and E. Baker Murray: Talking Fish: making connections with the rivers of the Murray-Darling Basin (Canberra: Murray-Darling Basin Authority, 2011): 10 46 This was not an experience limited to Australia, but was a trend that emerged across ‘western’ societies – Europe, Americas, parts of Africa and Asia, in addition to the experience in Australia. See: Featherstone, M., N. J. Thrift and J. Urry, Automobilities. (Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage, 2005), Cresswell, T., On the move: mobility in the modern Western world (New York: Routledge, 2006). 47 Hunt, Rex, 28 48 Hunt, R., Rex Hunt's Fishing World (Jolimont, Victoria: Crossbow Publishing, 1993): 177 49 Adams, M. "'Redneck, Barbaric, Cashed up Bogan? I don't think so': Hunting and Nature in Australia" Environmental Humanities 2 (2013).: 43-56. 50 Henry, G. W. and J. M. Lyle, “The National and Indigneous Fishing Survey” (Canberra: Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, 2003). 51 Hunt, R., Rex Hunt's Fishing: Adventures and Fact Book. (Sydney,: Ironbark by Pan Macmillan, 1995). 52 Thank you to Adam Gall for helping me to draw this point out. 53 Hunt, R., Fishing Port Phillip Bay (Norat, Victoria: Lawes Publishing,1987): 7 54 Hunt, Rex: My Life, 26 55 Gibson-Graham, J. K. and G. Roelvink, "An Economic Ethics for the Anthropocene" Antipode 41 (2010): 320-346. 56 Gibson-Graham, Economic Ethics, 322. 57 Probyn, E., “Listening to fish: the more-than-human politics of food” in P. Vannini (ed) Non- Representational Methodologies: Re-envisioning Research (New York: Routledge, 2014): 170 58 Palsson, G., "Enskilment at Sea" Man 29.4 (1994).: 902-905 59 These ideas synergize with those of Bourdieu, who conceptualized these set of relations and experiences formed and reformed in everyday life as ‘habitus’. See Bourdieu, P. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste (Hoboken: Taylor and Francis, 2013). 60 Force Entertainment, The Best of Rex Hunt Fishing Adventures, (Melbourne: Force Entertainment, 1991-2004). 61 Lea, T., ‘Swampies, Chromies and the Kindness of Strangers’ in Darwin (Sydney: NewSouth Publishing, 2014): 55. 62 Henry, National Fishing Survey, 95-6. 63 I am loath to conflate fishing and hunting, but there are clear cross-overs in the arguments for an appreciation of the environment garnered through these activities. See for example, Mackenzie, J., Hunting: Themes and Variations in The Empire of Nature: Hunting, Conservation and British Imperialism (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1988): 1-24, Loo, T. "Making a Modern Wilderness" The Canadian Historical Review (2001): 92-121. 64 Cronon, W. “The Trouble with Wilderness; or, Getting Back to the Wrong Nature” in W. Cronon, (ed) Uncommon Ground: Rethinking the Human Place in Nature (New York, Norton paperback, 1996): 85. 65 Byrne, D., H. Goodall, S. Wearing and A. Cadzow "Enchanted Parklands" Australian Geographer 37.1 (2006): 103-115, Goodall, H. and A. Cadzow (Rivers and Resilience:

21

Aboriginal people on Sydney's Georges River. (Sydney: UNSW Press, 2009). Goodall, H., S. Wearing, D. Byrne and A. Cadzow, “Fishing the Georges River: Cultural Diversity and Urban Environments” in A. Wise and S. Velayutham (eds) Everday Multiculturalism (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), Cadzow, A., D. Byrne and H. Goodall Waterbourne: Vietnamese Australians and Sydney's Georges River parks and green spaces (Sydney: Department of Environment, NSW, 2012), Goodall, H. "Remaking the Places of Belonging: Arabic immigrants and the urban environment along Sydney's Georges River" Mirades en Movimento (2012): 52-81, Goodall, H., D. Byrne and A. Cadzow, Waters of Belonging: Al- Miyahu Tajma'unah: Arabic Australians and the Georges River parklands (Sydney: Department of Environment, NSW, 2012).. 66 Hunt, Fishing Port Phillip Bay, 8. 67 Hunt, Rex Hunt's Fishing World, Hunt, R., Fishing Around Melbourne (Melbourne: Sportfish Australia,1995)., Hunt, R., Rex Hunt's Fishing: Adventures and Fact Book (Sydney, Ironbark by Pan Macmillan,1995)., Hunt, R. Rex Hunt's Fishing Australia, (Melbourne: Pan Macmillan, 2004). 68 Hall interview, Talking Fish Collection. 69 Pratt interview, Talking Fish Collection, Pratt, B. The Canberra Fisherman (Canberra: Australian National University Press,1979). 70 Bartholomew, A. and J. A. Bohnsack, "A Review of Catch-and-Release Angling Mortality with Implications for No-take Reserves" Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 15.1 (2005): 129-154, Gruenefeld, G. "Dead fish swimming: when catch-and-release fishing can do more harm than good" Outdoor Canada 33.1 (2005): 34, Fabrizio, M. C., F. S. Scharf, G. R. Shepherd and J. E. Rosendale, "Factors Affecting Catch-and-Release Mortality of Bluefish." North American Journal of Fisheries Management 28.2 (2008): 533-546, Broadhurst, M. K., P. A. Butcher and B. R. Cullis "Catch-and-release angling mortality of south-eastern AustralianPomatomus saltatrix" African Journal of Marine Science 34.2 (2012): 289-295, Kerns, J. A., M. S. Allen and J. E. Harris "Importance of assesing population-level impact of catch-and-release mortality" Fisheries 37.11 (2012): 502. 71 Force Entertainment, The Best of Rex Hunt Fishing Adventures. 72 Taylor, M. J. and K. R. White "Response: Trout Mortality from Baited Barbed and Barbless Hooks" North American Journal of Fisheries Management 17.3 (1997): 808-809, Tony, L. "From Plate to Plaything" Alaska 70.3 (2004): 34. 73 Hunt, Catch 'Em, Kiss 'Em and Cook'Em, vi. 74 Dunstan, D. J. “Estuaries: their value, their vulnerabilities, their future” Our Vulnerable Estuaries (Sydney: New South Wales State Fisheries,1973): 3 75 Connors, L. and D. Hutton, A history of the Australian environment movement (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999). 76 Davison, G., C. McConville and Monash Public History, A Heritage handbook (North Sydney, Allen & Unwin,1991), Spearritt, P. and J. Rickard Packaging the past?: public histories (Carlton, Vic: Melbourne University Press, 1991). 77 Brundtland, G. H. “Our Common Future” (New York: United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987): 41 78 Hunt, Rex Hunt's Fishing Australia, forward. 79 Hunt, Rex Hunt's Fishing World, 207-209. 80 Shove, E. et al The dynamics of social practice, 52-4 81 Franklin "Neo-Darwinian Leisures”, 57-76. 82 Henry, “National Fishing Survey”

22