656 
Fishery Bulletin 95(4), 1 997 
whiting, red spot whiting, and retained red mullet 
(where there were sufficient numbers) were plotted 
for each port and compared with two-sample 
Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests (P=0.05). 
Results 
Compared with the control codend, the composite- 
panel codend significantly reduced the weights of 
discarded bycatch (means reduced from 23.5% to 
41%) at all four ports and significantly increased the 
catches of prawns at Port Stephens, Yamba, and 
Ballina (means increased by 14%, 5.5%, and 6%, re- 
spectively) (Fig. 3, A and B; Table 3). Although not to 
a significant degree (4%), the composite-panel codend 
used at Southwest Rocks also retained, on average, 
more prawns than the control codend (Fig. 3A). There 
were no significant reductions detected in the num- 
bers and weights of commercial species retained by 
the composite-panel codend at any of the four ports 
(Fig. 3; Table 3). 
The mean numbers and weights of discarded red 
spot whiting and stout whiting were reduced by the 
composite-panel codend at all locations where there 
were sufficient numbers to enable meaningful analy- 
sis (means reduced by up to 73%) (Fig. 3, F-G; Table 
3). At Port Stephens, the composite-panel codend sig- 
nificantly reduced the numbers and weights of dis- 
carded john dory (by 50% and 57%, respectively) and 
blackeyes (by 45%) (Fig. 3, H and M; Table 3). There 
was a significant reduction in the numbers and 
weights of flutefish at Southwest Rocks (by 37% and 
34%, respectively) and in the numbers and weights 
of red bigeye at Yamba (by 38.5% and 44%, respec- 
tively) and Ballina (by 35%) (Fig. 3, L and K; Table 3). 
There was also a significant reduction in the numbers 
and weights of leatheijacket (by 17% and 31%, respec- 
tively) and gurnard (by 41.5%) with the composite-panel 
codend at Ballina (Fig. 3, J and N; Table 3). 
