Jump to content

Gold Coast Barra Fail


tomca

Recommended Posts

We all take photos of fish. I would have taken a photo of the Barra if I had caught it. People target regulated fish to take photos but you do not see everybody jumping down their throats when the take a picture. The issue for me is that the fish was kept in closed season.

I agree there should be a license in Qld - Prob $50 - $100

Yes we all take photos of fish, but please do not include me in the 'we' quote when it comes to obviously undersized or oversized or regulated fish that should be returned to the water immediately.

And yep, I knew it was closed season till midday on the 1st as I will be arriving in cardwell at 12.01pm

your quote is not quite in context Greg. I stated we to the fish pics and I to the barra pic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply
We all take photos of fish. I would have taken a photo of the Barra if I had caught it. People target regulated fish to take photos but you do not see everybody jumping down their throats when the take a picture. The issue for me is that the fish was kept in closed season.

I agree there should be a license in Qld - Prob $50 - $100

One member who rarely posts now copped a real flogging over a fish he caught in the Coomera during closed season last year.

I have it in writing from the DPI Ray so that is good enough for me.

As a rec fisher,you can do no more than ask for a clarification and ruling on the law and then go by what you are told.

The inconsistency within the department especially the call centre.is really something to worry about

Cheers

Ray

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is a difference between taking a photo in your boat or at the bank where you catch the fish and then releasing it, and taking a photo of an obviously dead fish somewhere that appears to be well away from the water. I agree with others that he should be fined but make it reasoble because it was obviously done in ignorance so the punishment should fit the crime, not be a knee jerk reaction to public opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let’s face it if you had to spend $30 or even $50 a year for a license knowing that it would massively improve the fishing practises in your area surely most people on this forum would agree it’s a good idea.

Can of worms opened, almost certainly not for the first time and definitely not the last. :P

'massively improve fishing in my area' don`t think so, those who obey the laws/regulations will continue to obey the laws/regulations.

Those who do not obey the laws/regulations, would still not obey the laws/regulations, probably the moses and co types (if they got a license that is) would fish more to make up for the outlay.

As per usual the answer is penalise the lawful so the unlawful can keep on keeping on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess 'massively' could be an exaggeration. However the theory that a licence fee improves enforcement makes perfect sense to me, not to mention it could be used for marketing the correct practises. More patrols and better information/education, money well spent in my book. Since living in QLD for 3 years I've seen extremely little official presence on or around the water, perhaps I don't get out enough :) . Does anyone have any better insight as to the effectiveness of licencing in NSW?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's wrong to charge a struggling family of mum dad and three kids a fishing licence being 50 a piece or whatever the price may be because a few idiots break the rules. And I really do not think that there would be enough licenses purchased to make an adequate difference in fisheries presence.

Fishing shouldn't be a purchased right, it should be free to enjoy by all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not think the license is that intrusive in NSW - If you just want to go fishing for a day or a week you can purchase that at an appropriate rate. At the very least it would mean that everybody will be aware of their requirements.

$6 for 3 days. And you only have to have a licence if you are over 18. And not an aboriginal or pensioner. I 100% support licencing as it will bring much needed revenue which would hopefully be put back into the industry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$6 for 3 days. And you only have to have a licence if you are over 18. And not an aboriginal or pensioner. I 100% support licencing as it will bring much needed revenue which would hopefully be put back into the industry.

Wish i had of remembered to get one a few years back when i went fishing with Rodrick Walmsley. I ended up with a $200 fine :(

Maybe i should of tryed the "i'm half aboriginal" :whistle:

cheers tim :)

The Qld government has just taken $4.3 million of boaties annual RUF and put into general revenue, cutting funding to rec fishing education, stocking, research etc,cut Boating and fisheries numbers and you want to give more :huh:

W"ish i had of remembered to get one a few years back when i went fishing with Rodrick Walmsley. I ended up with a $200 fine".... good testimonial for bringing in fishing licenses :dry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fine him $10000.00 for the fish out of season and fine him $90,000 for being an absolute knob.....

I have no issue with taking a picture of a fish as long as it's done quickly and the fish returned to the water with care.

I understand the importance of tagging fish, the researchers obviously feel that the time a fish spends out of the water for tagging and research is acceptable so I feel comfortable if I have a fish out of the water for 30 seconds while I take a pic as long as I handle the fish with care and return it to the water with a minimal amount of stress...

I'm happy with the way I fish, I practice catch and release and I take care when I handle the fish I do catch, I'll continue to take pics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly don't see Licencing fees making enuf of a financial gain to see real changes in fisheries. And it will not stop people braking the law. If that is the theory behind it, drivers wouldn't be braking the law everyday with speeding etc

Imagine the costs to put one extra fisheries officer in per year. Say at very least 50k a year salary, plus another car for that person to drive from place to place, peterol etc...the cost would be huge!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Population of QLD is 4.5 million according to wikipedia. If 300,000 people (6.7%) spent $20 on an annual licence that's $6 million. Pretty conservative estimates in my mind. And admittedly that much money wouldn't go very far. But surely $6 million would fund some excellent documentation on rules regulations and best practises that would be handed out with each license. And as previously mentioned I can't think of a better way of making everyone inexcusably accountable for their behaviour when fishing. Far, far too easy to take the mick as it stands.

Education is the key as opposed to stupid fines, would be nice if the maximum fine for not possessing a licence was a 5 year fishing licence, so you could see getting caught as an investment :). Ok I'm dreaming. :whistle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does not matter how much you regulate or licence any given activity Wether it be weapons, cars, bikes, boats, jet skis, building licenses etc there will still be people who brake the law.

Yes education is the key, forcing fees for information that is more than easily accessible seems strange

The only benefit of Licencing will be more money to fund projects such as boat ramp upgrades, more artificial reefs etc its not gonna stop bogans doing the wrong thing like this barra guy, which is what brought to topic this whole Licencing thing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plus if the licence was only say 30 a year, by the time a new booklet is produced for each licence holder, which has to be actually made some staff which costs money, to the distribution of those booklets, then the issuing of an actual piece of paper or card which is your licence, there would not be much of that 30 bucks left for real world changes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion the government is so top heavy and mismanaged that if any money making initiative was though of by state or local government they would have their hands out. I dont think it would make a great deal of diference. Insted how about common sense. We live in a state with fantastic fishing, lots of people fish, spend some of the revenue they already get from boaties and fishermen and spend it on education starting in primary school. Hold free education seminars, have fisheries (trainees or whatever) handing out educational stuff at boat ramps ext.

Theres got to be a better way. I believe this country has turned to much towards being a business and we just accept that what is ours anyway should have to be paid for

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Post by a fisheries employee on another forum on sililar subject.

Can I just point out section 12 of the Fisheries Act and you can make up your own minds as to how you wish to approach the issue

12 When Act does not apply

This Act does not apply to—

(a) the unintentional taking of regulated fish or marine plants if the fish or plants are not intentionally or recklessly injured or damaged and are immediately put back; or

(B) the unintentional possession of regulated fish or marine plants by a person if the fish or plants are not intentionally or recklessly injured or damaged and the person can not, because of circumstances beyond the person’s control, put the fish or plants back immediately they come into the person’s possession; or

© the use of a hand net to lift from water fish taken by other fishing apparatus; or

(d) the use of a gaff to secure fish taken by other fishing apparatus.

I wonder if the Magistrate would understand the excuse in respect to s.12(B)..."I couldn't put the fish back imediately because I had a camera in my hand!!!"

BTW....... the responsible agent of the Act is the Chief Executive of Fisheries (section 20 Fish Act 1994) not the Department, not the Minister, Not the Premier or parliament, not even the Fishos.

Dont see how you can gaff a fish without injuring it.

Also another post in same thread saying complete review of freshwater scene coming up in June with fishos being able to make suggestions.

Bring it on.

Cheers

Ray

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imposing a fishing fee is only going to penalise the honest fisho. The rules are already there, the regulations are already there,. I can't see any correlation between taking money off people and telling them what they can't and can't do. It's there already and is free. It's up to tie fisho whether they choose to be well informed and fish responsibly or to tie contrary.

The rules are there in black ink on white paper, there is no 'grey areas'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regards to fishing permits/licenses, the profit gained from the fee's generated are divided into restocking, research as well as governing fisho's.

IMO NSW is leading Australia in restocking of estuarine species such as mulloway etc. This purely due from the funds gained from fishing permits going into breeding and restocking programs.

I annually purchase permits for NSW fresh and saltwater and QLD impoundments and would be more than happy for QLD to bring in a state wide fishing permit that covers both fresh and saltwater as NSW has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reckon this could easily make a new thread, but I’ll chip in a little more.

Plus if the licence was only say 30 a year, by the time a new booklet is produced for each licence holder, which has to be actually made some staff which costs money, to the distribution of those booklets, then the issuing of an actual piece of paper or card which is your licence, there would not be much of that 30 bucks left for real world changes

$30 a licence, now we’re talking, 300,000 licences and we have $9 million, definitely going to improve the quality of those booklets and laminated licence cards ;). With any booklet you would spend most of your money on an initial outlay, after that you would just be making minor adjustments every couple of years. Should be relatively cheap after 5 years. Then you can spend your money on restocking, habitat improvement, enforcement and further education.

I have no idea what the NSW licensing generates each year but surely it would be in excess of $15m given their larger population?

"spend some of the revenue they already get from boaties and fishermen and spend it on education starting in primary school. Hold free education seminars, have fisheries (trainees or whatever) handing out educational stuff at boat ramps ext.

Totally agree this would be a great help . However licencing money, money specifically gathered with the focus on fishing would surely improve matters even further. $30 for an entire year of fishing for people over the age of 18 isn’t a huge expenditure. The minimum wage is $16 an hour, 2 hours’ work for a years’ fishing = bargain :).

And I really think you’ll never stop the tools and fools from breaking the law, but licensing can only make it more difficult than it already is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So would buying any fishing tackle require you to show your licence? Could people under 18 buy fishing gear without a licensed adult?

Thats just silly.

We are talking about adding a licence to catch fish in order to raise revenue that would hopefully be put back into restocking programs etc. We aren't talking about bringing in a whole heap of legislation to lock down the entire industry based off weather you are licenced or not.

The term licence is used loosely here, it should be referred to as permit so people don't confuse it with something you need to be tested to receive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So would buying any fishing tackle require you to show your licence? Could people under 18 buy fishing gear without a licensed adult?

Some purchasing gear in NSW does not need to produce a permit or license. It is not in the interest of tackle shops to audit licenses.

I remember when NSW brought in the licensing there was a massive backlash from recreational fisho's, now majority wouldn't think twice about purchasing their license.

I doubt that any government will ever be able to rid a minority from conducting illegal activities on the water or in any situation.

People need to look at permits as a good thing, not that your freedom to go fishing is being taken away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/recreation/fishing/31497.aspx


/>http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/recreation/fishing/106771.aspx

In the Uk, we have to buy a rod licence, if you want to fish a lake or rivrer then you pay to do so, if you want to fish for salmon, you pay for an additional licence. Basically nothing is free, I used to be a kind of baliff on a mates carp lake, if you have not paid to fish there then you are asked to leave.

We think nothing of it about buying a rod licence for the year. Not to many things are free these days.!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was only going on the terminology of other members...

And don't get me wrong, I clearly see the benefits of issuing permits for the greater good, more money for fisheries related projects. BUT like I said, it isn't fish stocking and fisheries related projects that is the problem being discussd in this thread, it's about the taking of undersized and regulated fish. Which I do not think will be majorly impacted on by permits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So would buying any fishing tackle require you to show your licence? Could people under 18 buy fishing gear without a licensed adult?

Thats just silly.

We are talking about adding a licence to catch fish in order to raise revenue that would hopefully be put back into restocking programs etc. We aren't talking about bringing in a whole heap of legislation to lock down the entire industry based off weather you are licenced or not.

The term licence is used loosely here, it should be referred to as permit so people don't confuse it with something you need to be tested to receive.

Could be on to something there.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NSW I believe have done a good job putting some of the revenue collected to good use, you only need to look at their boat ramps, good facilities, cleaning tables (with taps that work), toilets, plenty of parking at the major ramps, unlike ours up here, one or two ramps are ok and the rest are poo especially when you need to. I would be more then happy to purchase an all round fishing permit each year IF I knew the majority of the revenue collected was put towards upgrading boat ramp facilities and other fishing related activities such as education etc, but more then likely the revenue collected would be put else where (probably waisted) and our ramps/past time will continue to be neglected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s interesting, the UK licence requires your name and address. Not sure the same is required in NSW? But everywhere you look on the NSW licence page it’s referred to as a licence and not a permit. This seems to be a technicality that makes no difference to the outcome?

Name and address are useful pieces of information on an official document.

My main point in terms of licencing / permits in relation to this out of season Barra topic is that it's immensely easy to not know the exact rules at a given time. When fishing the bay I have almost no idea what the exact (to the cm) bag / size limits are for every single species. I generally release most of what I catch so it doesn’t worry me. But for those that aren't regular local fisherman better information and presentation of regulations can only help improve practises. Looking on a website is sadly too hard for most, and who wants to pull out their smart phone to check the fisheries website while their catch is flopping in the net or on the floor? A license would make this information mandatory to those wishing to fish which means infringements are completely inexcusable, and as such fines are all the more warranted for those that are incapable of following them. Not to mention (and this might be taking it too far) better identification of fish, including differences between juveniles / adults will also be useful in the protection of vulnerable species.

I’m not envisaging the encyclopaedia Britannica hanging round your neck but a concise booklet that has photos of key species both salt and fresh and their respective bag/size limits along with relevant close season dates (preferably water proof). And a big statement saying ‘If you don’t know what it is don’t keep it!’ :).

I know there are such books in existence, but they are not mandatory :(.

edit: Just read about the differences in license (verb) and licence (noun),
/>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licence

Learn something new every day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...