Jump to content

question on snapper fishing techincallities


neal82

Recommended Posts

if it's in your possession, your busted. simple as that. as they dont know where you been or where you caught it, that is why it is in possession. makes it clear and simple. if you have a snapper caught from whyalla in south australia, and your pulled over by fisheries in qld, your busted. because it was in your possession. no if butts or maybe's.

also note nsw waters extend north of the qld, nsw border, i am led to believe, by this i mean you might be led to think your fishing in queensland when in fact you are still in nsw waters!

rob.

not sure by how far though. sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately it's true. You will get done. If you return to port (boat ramp) and the boys/girls check your catch, they must assume that the catch was caught in the state the ramp is situated.

The laws really suck, cos one can get busted for fishing in nsw waters if you don't have a nsw permit when directly off qld coast, but if you legally catch a fish in nsw and return to port in qld you get busted for qld laws...that's what we have to put up with when puppets run the country...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Normally I would say that is why they have rules of 'in possession' as that way there is no need to assume where the fish was taken as assuming something is going to fall a long way short of the required tests in court.

HOWEVER

The DPI website says as follows.

Snapper

Snapper is overfished in Queensland. To help protect the sustainability of snapper stock an interim 6 week closure has been put in place. This closure applies to all of Queensland´s east coast waters and means that snapper cannot be taken during this period. To efectively reduce fishing pressure, this also applies to the other main co-caught species of pearl perch and teraglin.

Starts: 15 February 2011

Finishes: 31 March 2011

During this time snapper, pearl perch or teraglin cannot be taken by recreational, charter and commercial fishers and should not be targetted.

Therefore it says that snapper cannot be taken from Qld East Coasrt Waters.... it does not mention anything about possessing a snapper caught in NSW waters and transported back to QLD by boat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just aon another note about what was written by these so called experts who decide for us what we can fish for and what we can't. they say that snapper are overfished, along with this n that. let them do a survey on how many legal snapper were tossed by the way side due to ppl upsizing their catch, and mostly dead fish too. i know this happens a lot, and probably moreso than ppl think. that has been a problem since the bag limit of 5 was introduced, and the stocks are still depleting ? hmmmmm, food for thought there ppl. and yet they think this 6 week closure will work, I DONT THINK SO!!! not a hope.just take a look at the wombles that be, they up'd the size limit of jew, fair enough, but you get caught with a school jew and your almost gunna be busted these days, if they up the size limit of snapper, to say 45, and believe me they have up sized to some silly limits like the red emperor, oh, but look at how many are now being caught by all unsundry up off fraser , hmmmmm.so ok, we can up the size limits but unfortunately snapper start to taste south when over a certain size, unlike the so sought after reds, which is why so many people are spending big dollars and goin looking for them. just look at the rigs going up the coast these days.the fishing off brizzy is almost a waste of time these days to go and catch a really good fish, yeah there are spots around but they wont be for long. with these new stupid rules or not. well thats my banter.

rob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have any snapper,trag Jew,pearl perch in you possession it does not matter if there frozen or caught in NSW, you will be issued a fin ( fisheries infringement notice) and possibly a fine.

And the snapper at raptis will be of legal size from where they are bought from( Sydney markets), QBFP do random checks on fish co-ops and do so regularly, the only way they could get busted is not having the paper work thst goes with the purchasing and selling of fish, crabs and other seafood..No paper work = big fines and loss of licensing. And with raptis having one of the biggest fishing fleets in the northern prawn industry I'm sure he'd have everything above board..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Normally I would say that is why they have rules of 'in possession' as that way there is no need to assume where the fish was taken as assuming something is going to fall a long way short of the required tests in court.

HOWEVER

The DPI website says as follows.

Snapper

Snapper is overfished in Queensland. To help protect the sustainability of snapper stock an interim 6 week closure has been put in place. This closure applies to all of Queensland´s east coast waters and means that snapper cannot be taken during this period. To efectively reduce fishing pressure, this also applies to the other main co-caught species of pearl perch and teraglin.

Starts: 15 February 2011

Finishes: 31 March 2011

During this time snapper, pearl perch or teraglin cannot be taken by recreational, charter and commercial fishers and should not be targetted.

Therefore it says that snapper cannot be taken from Qld East Coasrt Waters.... it does not mention anything about possessing a snapper caught in NSW waters and transported back to QLD by boat.

2nd this. so imo one can safely argue that the fish's caught/bought/obtained in a legal manner while it's in possession. don't think they can say much about a fish bought in a market cuz i know jame's market still got snapper for sale on the 25th when i was there;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will still be done for possession, its your word against the patrolling officers..Stupid I know but that's how it goes..

I would vigourously defend myself in court against this if this was the case against me, as the legislation does not mention 'in possession' but only taking and at the end of the day it is the 'black and white' interpretation rather than 'supposed' interpretation.

In broad terms it would be like talking on your mobile while driving as opposed to talking on your mobile while parked on the side of the road.... Yes you are in charge of the vehicle in both situation, but one is against the law and the other not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will still be done for possession, its your word against the patrolling officers..Stupid I know but that's how it goes..

I would vigourously defend myself in court against this if this was the case against me, as the legislation does not mention 'in possession' but only taking and at the end of the day it is the 'black and white' interpretation rather than 'supposed' interpretation.

In broad terms it would be like talking on your mobile while driving as opposed to talking on your mobile while parked on the side of the road.... Yes you are in charge of the vehicle in both situation, but one is against the law and the other not.

i thought it did not mention possession just take or target! cheers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will still be done for possession, its your word against the patrolling officers..Stupid I know but that's how it goes..

I would vigourously defend myself in court against this if this was the case against me, as the legislation does not mention 'in possession' but only taking and at the end of the day it is the 'black and white' interpretation rather than 'supposed' interpretation.

In broad terms it would be like talking on your mobile while driving as opposed to talking on your mobile while parked on the side of the road.... Yes you are in charge of the vehicle in both situation, but one is against the law and the other not.

i thought it did not mention possession just take or target! cheers

Haha, everyone watch for the snapper report tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The markets can prove threw paper trails where the fish came from, ring the QBFP or search the legislations..

yup, and that leads to the point that the snapper ban doesn't mean that one can't have one in possesson. one can legally be in possesson of snapper as long as the fisheries can't prove that he/she physically caught it within SEQ waters. in the court the fisheries must prove the assumption that he/she catching the snapper within seq waters is beyound reasonable doubt. so if the person insists that the snapper's bought or caught before the ban started he/she will be fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...