Wa Fishing Licences Are In

[russ81]

Hows it going guys

This probably wont apply to most however it has been announced that come Oct all persons fishing from a boat will require to have a licence.
http://fishwrecked.com/node/23530

WA has charged anglers to fish the fresh for yrs but they have now gone one step further and will be charging an annual fee of $30 for the pleasure.

Just one more thing the Gov charges you on, so far I have been slugged to the hilt when i got here i had to pay $55 to have my HIN verified just to have the boat registered here then i had to pay the rego $110 for the yr plus another $33 to have my boat licence swapped over and i still havent dared to swap the car and trailer rego over yet. Sorry bout the rant


Anyways I just thought Id give you guys a heads up just incase anyone decides to come over for a fish.


From what i have read in the above link and other info on the matter Charter boats are not exempt so if you wish to go out on a charter you will have to get the licence prior and have it checked prior to stepping onboard the vessel.

Where will it end????

Russ

[groverwa]

New recreational fishing licences, greater restrictions to protect stocks, boost research

Date: Thursday, 2 July 2009

The State Government has announced significant new rules to protect Western Australia’s most popular recreational fisheries, including new licences and further restrictions.

Fisheries Minister Norman Moore said more restrictions on popular demersal (bottom dwelling) scalefish and some nearshore species as well as changes to the recreational licence system were needed to ensure the sustainability of WA’s fish stocks.

Mr Moore said there was wide recognition in Government and the community that significant parts of WA’s fisheries were at risk of collapse and needed greater protection.

He said revenue raised from the new licensing system would be quarantined in a recreational fishing trust and only spent on matters related to recreational fishing.

“The Government will not reduce its current level of funding for recreational fishing to offset the rise in funding from the new fishing licenses,” the Minister said.

“We want greater protection for our fish stocks. This new management regime is crucial to ensure WA maintains a high quality and sustainable recreational fishery.

“Scientific evidence overwhelmingly indicates that our fisheries are at risk unless immediate action is taken. The commercial sector has already addressed this issue and now it is time for the recreational fishing sector to do its part.”

Mr Moore said that in the past decade, population growth and the greater use of equipment such as global positioning systems and echo sounders had made a huge impact on fish stocks.

He said experts agreed that the Department of Fisheries had to provide more rigorous compliance, greater research and better management measures to help maintain the sustainability of the fisheries.

Independent management and science reviews of West Coast demersal scalefish had led to the State Government’s latest decision.

“The independent reviews that I commissioned on becoming Minister for Fisheries have confirmed departmental advice that stocks of popular demersal species, such as dhufish, pink snapper and baldchin groper, are over-fished,” he said.

“The experts agree that a demersal scalefish catch reduction of at least 50 per cent is required by the recreational fishing sector.

“Management changes to take effect from mid-October this year see the introduction of two new recreational licences.

“From mid-October, people fishing from a boat anywhere in the State (including those fishing from charter boats) will need a $30 licence and people targeting demersal scalefish will need an additional, specific, demersal licence.

“Therefore, anyone fishing for demersal scalefish from a boat in the West Coast bioregion will need both a boat fishing licence and a demersal licence.

“This new West Coast demersal licence will cost $20 for one day, $60 for a fortnight or $150 annually to fish for any of the listed species. (See attached list in frequently asked question sheet or check Department of Fisheries website).

“The current 50 per cent discount on all licences for pensioners and children under 16 will continue to apply.”

The Minister said that a two-month ban on recreational fishing for species on the West Coast bioregion demersal scalefish list would also apply from October 15 to December 15 each year.

“Information obtained from licence holders will help the Department of Fisheries improve its capacity to monitor and manage the fisheries,” he said.

“However, to make it clear, the licences only apply to individuals fishing from boats. People fishing from beaches or jetties and shore-based crab fishers will not need a licence except where existing licences already apply.”

The recreational boat fishing licence will apply State-wide for any form of fishing where a boat is used, including:

line fishing (handline, rod, squid jigging)
catching crabs
spearfishing
octopus trapping
dip netting for prawns
any wading, diving or angling to catch fish, crabs or shellfish, where a boat is used to access the fishing location.The new West Coast demersal licence will apply in the West Coast bioregion which extends from Black Point, east of Augusta, to the Zuytdorp Cliffs north of Kalbarri.

Mr Moore said new precautionary measures were also needed to address the way changes to demersal scalefish arrangements would be likely to shift the recreational fishing focus onto nearshore fish species like herring and tailor.

“The new mixed bag limit for lower risk category three fish in the West Coast bioregion will drop from 40 per angler to 30 and for medium risk category two fish from 16 to 12,” he said.

“Increased research is vital in monitoring the sustainability of all species. Revenue raised by the new licences will help fund this research and support more compliance, enforcement and education programs.

“The State Government will continue to apply a fee to each of the following existing licences: rock lobster, abalone, marron, freshwater angling and recreational netting - but the fee will rise to a standard $45 for each type of fishing.

“This will provide consistency in fees between different recreational fishing activities following the removal of the existing ‘umbrella’ licence and provide for improved data collection for the purposes of additional research and management.”

[mudrunner]

New fees for recreational fishers in WA

2-July-09 by Rebecca Lawson

Recreational fishers from boats will need to pay for a licence under new rules to protect the state's most popular fishing spots, with the additional funds to be placed in a trust.

Fisheries Minister Norman Moore today unveiled a new licencing system, where funds would only be spent on matters relating to recreational fishing.

The new system follows a review of the state's fish stocks which Mr Moore said were at risk if no action was taken.

"The Government will not reduce its current level of funding for recreational fishing to offset the rise in funding from the new fishing licenses," Mr Moore said.

"We want greater protection for our fish stocks. This new management regime is crucial to ensure WA maintains a high quality and sustainable recreational fishery."

From mid-October, people fishing from a boat will need a $30 licence while fishers targeting demersal (bottom dwelling) scalefish will need an additional, specific licence.

Popular demersal scalefish species include dhufish, pink snapper and baldchin groper.

"This new West Coast demersal licence will cost $20 for one day, $60 for a fortnight or $150 annually to fish for any of the listed species," Mr Moore said.

"The current 50 per cent discount on all licences for pensioners and children under 16 will continue to apply.

The West Coast demersal licence will apply in the West Coast bioregion which extends from Black Point, east of Augusta, to the Zuytdorp Cliffs north of Kalbarri.

There will also be a two-month ban on recreational fishing for species on the West Coast bioregion demersal scalefish list from October 15 to December 15 each year.

Mr Moore said new precautionary measures were also needed to address the way changes to demersal scalefish arrangements would be likely to shift the recreational fishing focus onto nearshore fish species like herring and tailor.

"The new mixed bag limit for lower risk category three fish in the West Coast bioregion will drop from 40 per angler to 30 and for medium risk category two fish from 16 to 12," he said.

Currently, a licence is needed for recreational fishing of rock lobster, abalone, marron, freshwater angling and netting.

Today Mr Moore said the fee for that licence will rise to $45.

[TimiBoy]

What Recreational Fishing bodies exist in WA? Why don't we hear anything about them?

Cheers,

Tim

[trout1105]

>:( What pack of ratbags decided to introduce this. For me my missus and my young bloke to go fishing it'l cost me $540 to fish for 10 months of the year, plus all the taxes on fuel fishing gear and the boat/trailer lcences fees.
GREEDY BASTARDS.
I hope all their chooks torn int emu's and kick their dunny doors down.

[FNQCairns]

It's not greed it's straight up fundamentalism, attacks of this nature do not even need to be veiled these days it's perfectly acceptable for it to be seen for what it is as the people are now well meek, silenced and kept easily at arms length......no better way to decrease amenity than to use a weapon in this case tax it out of existence..... this new regime against angling will work toward the totalitarian aim of keeping out new players who would have done no harm in a free country from joining the pastime forever (lessening total stakeholder rights/expectations of democratic treatment....... by any definition) and increase attrition rates from those already involved in the pastime in real time, QLD fishery's is still working determinedly through phase one/two of their 15 year plan as we speak, a resounding success so far....given their textbook copy cat of previous WA fishery's behaviour throughout the snapper stock debacle/con job we have very much more now to look forward to...the best predictor of future behaviour is always past behaviour.

Ahhh an anglers lot!, with the semi recent loss of any competent advocacy when the QLD fishing party went south and now back to the future lock, stock and barrel to moderate appeals comprising hat in hand, eyes down shoe shuffling relations to those in power.... the fat lady has already sung.

Anyway with the fog that blocked the sheeples comprehension of what was easily forewarned many years ago slowly clearing with each new unjustifiable attack by covert card carrying zealots in departmental/public positions we seriously do deserve all we will get.

cheers fnq

[finding_time]

The only good part of that artical is that the funds raised through the fees were to be placed in a " Trust" Hopefully this way anglers will be able to see how there fee will be spent to benifit fishers! As long as this is transparent i have less of an issue with the fees as the long term benifits for the angler should be huge! If the fees were to be placed into consolidated revenue your fishers would recieve no benifit for you expenditure!

Ian

[TimiBoy]

It's only a matter of time before the Trust fund gets emptied by Government. It's easy, and it's a con.

FNQ, I hope I can come up with an encouraging response for you, clearly what has gone before was not successful, because of the political crap that went with it. I really believe Ecofishers Qld will be different.

I don't have any stated role on the Committee, I really haven't the inclination. If I have a role it's to continually bang on about how the Qld bit means QLD, not the SE. Ecofishers Qld wants your support, and for many up North that will mean we have to demonstrate the desire to support you first. That will happen, soon I believe.

The challenge first up is to build membership. To do that we must get ourselves out there. Then money comes in, and we can start taking on the various challenges presented. There is a collective will to do this, and there are similar voices all around us. It's not just one sector getting done over here.

Please join up, it's 10 bucks. The membership form is on another thread. We will repay your faith. NO POLITICIANS HERE!!!

Cheers,

Tim

[straddie]

Several points of interest,

It's a Liberal National coalition government in West Aussie isn't it?

A once a year fisho has to fork out $50 for the day to fish the bottom. $150 for a day trip for a family with 2 kids.

Another state falls to an RFL but not by evil green preferenced labor, just so we know who are friends are (we have none)

Wonder which states' recs will be next to be blind sided. It's not like any of them are looking for money is it.

I'm sounding like a broken record so I am not going to say it.

[TimiBoy]

Several points of interest,

It's a Liberal National coalition government in West Aussie isn't it?

A once a year fisho has to fork out $50 for the day to fish the bottom. $150 for a day trip for a family with 2 kids.

Another state falls to an RFL but not by evil green preferenced labor, just so we know who are friends are (we have none)

Wonder which states' recs will be next to be blind sided. It's not like any of them are looking for money is it.

I'm sounding like a broken record so I am not going to say it.

Spot on Straddie, and exactly why Ecofishers is not running any candidates, anywhere. Only interested in what's good for Rec Angling, don't care which party's in.

Cheers,

Tim

[honda900]

"demersal (bottom dwelling) scalefish"

We here in QLD will cop it soon enough, per species licences.. You WA blokes need to get organised and start protesting.

Heres an argument for you... Sharks are in decline, sharks dont have scales, no 150 needed for that.

Short sighted view of the fishery..

Regards
HOnda

[Angla]

It stinks and it doesn't even smell fish. It just blatantly is wrong.

The point about it being easy to pass a rule because we accept it is showing how scared we are of the governing bodies of the day.

Surely the Charter industry would feel the brunt of this new fee scheme unless they are appeased with a relaxation or reduction of these fees for paying customers.

I hope that the fishing industry, as a whole, in WA can fend off this cruel fee.

Cheers
Chris

[swabio]

I think the sheer cost of the WA licence is ridiculously high! I am all for paying a reasonable fee for fishing if the money goes back into supporting the rec fishers..... ie the NSW fee structure.....

But $150 per person a year is ridiculous, if that was per boat then that would be slightly better, however not much!

[russ81]

There used to be what was called an umbrella licence which covered all the various licences for one fee i think it was $81 a year they have now removed that and all different types of fishing have there own individual charges now I personally think its a crock of shit they have just slugged boaties trying to push the passtime out of reach of the average joe if they were serious about the sustainment of the fisheries it would be an across the board licence covering land based fishos aswell.

[Jurkyjj]

What a load of bollocks.
Bad luck for the people in WA.
As stated above, won't be long and it will head our way too.

[Scott nthQld]

Sucks to be in WA, and to think I was going to head over there next year for a big fishing trip, but to hell with that now.

Yes I am expecting it for QLD, but Sure as hell I won't be getting one. I'm not paying for something where I don't see a return on it. i figure if I don't get one and get done, I just don't pay the fine, go to court get slugged with court fess and file for bankruptcy when they slug me with an even bigger fine, plus court costs. Once a fe people do that and the GOvt has spent a few mill just trying to police the scam, they might figure out that its costing more than they gain and people are still fishing. Either that or someone high up will be paying, and dearly.

The times that I think its good having Government, law and order are very few and far between now, its starting to look more and more appealing to just say 'the hell with it' and go out in style, taking plenty with me. Right now I'd much rather everything be open slather on everything, it won't be long until the human raxce works out some sort of pecking order, and I'd much rather live as a neanderthal than be told what to do by a bunch of crooked slimy peices of crap that somehow, people have chosen to run this place

[Luc]

Given the sheer size of WA and the relatively small number of people living there, I fail to see how the fish stocks could be in danger.

Those fees are a crock of s..t.

As for the trust fund, who decides how the money is to be spent, not the anglers I bet.

Luc

[Black_Rat]

New fees for recreational fishers in WA

2-July-09 by Rebecca Lawson

Recreational fishers from boats will need to pay for a licence under new rules to protect the state's most popular fishing spots, with the additional funds to be placed in a trust. The need for a licence to "protect the state's most popular fishing spots" sounds like a tax to me. Question? Doesn't size limits and bag limits dictate this ? What requires protection?

Fisheries Minister Norman Moore today unveiled a new licencing system, where funds would only be spent on matters relating to recreational fishing. Research ? By whom ?

The new system follows a review of the state's fish stocks which Mr Moore said were at risk if no action was taken. I'd like to see the information to suport this claim?

"The Government will not reduce its current level of funding for recreational fishing to offset the rise in funding from the new fishing licenses," Mr Moore said.

"We want greater protection for our fish stocks. This new management regime is crucial to ensure WA maintains a high quality and sustainable recreational fishery." I agree with this statement in principle :) Again I have to ask protection from what ?

From mid-October, people fishing from a boat will need a $30 licence while fishers targeting demersal (bottom dwelling) scalefish will need an additional, specific licence.

Popular demersal scalefish species include dhufish, pink snapper and baldchin groper.

"This new West Coast demersal licence will cost $20 for one day, $60 for a fortnight or $150 annually to fish for any of the listed species," Mr Moore said.

"The current 50 per cent discount on all licences for pensioners and children under 16 will continue to apply.

The West Coast demersal licence will apply in the West Coast bioregion which extends from Black Point, east of Augusta, to the Zuytdorp Cliffs north of Kalbarri.

There will also be a two-month ban on recreational fishing for species on the West Coast bioregion demersal scalefish list from October 15 to December 15 each year. A 2 month ban on recreational fishing from boats ? What are the consequences for local industries, local bait shops, local tackle stores, local chandelry stores, the economy or your favorite holiday accomodation ? :(

Mr Moore said new precautionary measures were also needed to address the way changes to demersal scalefish arrangements would be likely to shift the recreational fishing focus onto nearshore fish species like herring and tailor.
What stocks are under threat that requires these measures?

"The new mixed bag limit for lower risk category three fish in the West Coast bioregion will drop from 40 per angler to 30 and for medium risk category two fish from 16 to 12," he said.

Currently, a licence is needed for recreational fishing of rock lobster, abalone, marron, freshwater angling and netting.

Today Mr Moore said the fee for that licence will rise to $45.[/quote]

I've replied in a genuine interest to study what's hapening in the recreational angler scene around the country.

Damo.

[russ81]

I personally think this is a joke from what I can see WA has the most difficult and over micro managed regulations in Oz the document for the average rec fisher requires a university degree.
From one of the reports I was reading Charter operators are now going to have to check that people have a current licence before they are allowed onboard if i didnt know any better i would have picked this for one of those Nigerian internet scams


Russ

[Dezzer]

Am a temporary West Aussie at the moment and am very surprised at the lack of a "stink" over all this.

[Volvo]

"She'll be Right mate", so long as we can still afford a stubby n a packet of fags, she'll be right:)..
Unless people get off their perverbial(dunno if i spelt that correct lol) an stand up for their rights it'll keep comming thats fer sure..
Another means to a tax and a reduction in peoples impact to the Fishery:P ..
between rises in petrol, Insurances,Electircity, rego n such you wont be able to afford ta go Fishing so why worry about a little ole added cost to allow you to enjoy the passtime lol.
Whats that Ditty we used to once upon a long time ago rant when we marched ??
"United, United, we'll never be divided":-/ ::) ...
Oldtimers memeories lol..

[Last Cast]

Think of the Pensioner that goes out fishing for a feed of herring etc now has to pay also. The Dads who want to take their kids, or the bloke who doesnt go out too often or too far & rarely gets the big one, now has to pay for the "chance" of one. The high end of town wont batt an eyelid at the fees but it will price out the average family or the average bloke. I agree with saving fish stocks & fish for the future all the way but this is purely revenue raising & i for one will not pay. I cannot believe this is australia & this is the best we can come up with! If fishing stocks are depleted what exactly are we paying for? Also what about reducing bag limits if things are so dire??? Anyone knows of anything that is happening to stop this farce let me know, i will be happy to throw some bait around the "leader" that introduced this. I for one will be writing to the Liberal & the Labour party with my "suggestion" & will also state that i & i hope that all others in WA refuse to pay this extortionate rate for a "hobby". Save the fish? Yes but look at the bag limits.

[Pero]

Several points of interest,

It's a Liberal National coalition government in West Aussie isn't it?

A once a year fisho has to fork out $50 for the day to fish the bottom. $150 for a day trip for a family with 2 kids.

Another state falls to an RFL but not by evil green preferenced labor, just so we know who are friends are (we have none)

Wonder which states' recs will be next to be blind sided. It's not like any of them are looking for money is it.

I'm sounding like a broken record so I am not going to say it.

Liberal or not it doesn't matter. I saw this coming. Its just a matter of time before we get the same treatment from Anna Blight. In the name of protecting our Stocks we will recieve the same treatment. It won't make any difference, the Government will follow the WA lead. And force us to be licensed .Think of that extra revenue- how can they resist!.
The speil will be that stocks are decreasing and zones will need to be enlarged. Meanwhile the professionals can still harvest the catch and export overseas (to feed other countries)as long as they too pay licensing fees.

[bondy99]

Yeah, gives a different meaning to bounty of the sea!!

Pero, sent you a pm on redlcaw.

[FNQCairns]

Liberal or not it doesn't matter. I saw this coming. Its just a matter of time before we get the same treatment from Anna Blight. In the name of protecting our Stocks we will recieve the same treatment. It won't make any difference, the Government will follow the WA lead. And force us to be licensed .Think of that extra revenue- how can they resist!.
The speil will be that stocks are decreasing and zones will need to be enlarged. Meanwhile the professionals can still harvest the catch and export overseas (to feed other countries)as long as they too pay licensing fees.

Wrong word! Their take fits fully the word preserve (preserving) but they use protection as a front. Stock protection fits fully a sustainability model, stock preservation fits fully amenity loss, tax's, zealot zones etc etc etc, QLD is well the industry leader, WA got one up again...not for long as QLD fishery's will loose face in the eyes of their environmental extremist not for profit mates who's policies they aspire to emulate/regulate.

cheers fnq

[TerryF]

What Recreational Fishing bodies exist in WA? Why don't we hear anything about them?Recfishwest http://www.recfishwest.org.au/ Possibly the same reason we in Western Australia don't hear much about Eastern States fishing things - your media doesn't report it.

The West Australian paper had these articles:-

Fishing licence hikes open a can of worms http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuId=77&ContentID=152760

Recreation groups condemn fish fees http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuId=77&ContentID=152547

Recreational anglers to pay for prize catches http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=77&ContentID=152424

Lots more info in the links in Dept of Fisheries page http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/pub/RecFishArrange/index.php

Recfishwest issued a media release on these proposed changes http://www.recfishwest.org.au/MediaReleaseWestCoastRuleChanges2009.htm


Strong reaction expected to West Coast Recreational fishing changes.

Recfishwest has predicted a public outcry over the latest measures announced by Fisheries Minister Norman Moore.

Recfishwest executive director Frank Prokop said that despite recognising the benefit of a recreational fishing licence system, his organisation did not support Minister Moore's new fee structure.

"Fees for different activities such as fishing for rock lobster, abalone, marron and fresh water species have been raised and standardised to $45 each," Mr Prokop said.

"The addition of two new licences - $30 for anyone fishing from a boat and an additional demersal fishing licence costing between $20 a day to $150 annually - means that keen anglers who want the complete suite of fishing activities will have to pay $405 per year.

"This is in stark contrast to the previous umbrella licence which cost $81."

Mr Prokop said that despite flaws in the previous umbrella licence system, Recfishwest believes at the very least, that a discount for fishers who undertake multiple licensed fisheries must be included in the new management structure.

"We agree with the plan to quarantine funds raised through the new licence system into a recreational fishing trust account," he said.

Recfishwest will be steadfast on ensuring any revenue is managed by the recreational sector for enhancement and management needs of the fish resources we access.

"Our preferred licensing model would be for a much lower fee shared amongst all recreational fishers," Mr Prokop said.

Recfishwest supports a state wide boat fishing licence, but as a step towards a general angling licence. This would spread the financial cost, allow for the needs of all fishers to be met and provide data across all recreational fisheries.

"The extremely high fee structure is obviously aimed at helping to make the recreational West Coast Demersal fishery cost recovered and we are concerned this cost will act as a financial disincentive to fishers who wish to target these species."

The commercial West Coast Demersal fishery harvests 50% of the resource, but its fee structure is not even close to being cost recovered.

However, Mr Prokop believed that there are some good elements to the package.

We support the moves to introduce new bag limits on category 2 and 3 inshore species and to fund new research into the status of these stocks.

Recfishwest strongly supported the change to the tailor slot limit to become two fish larger than 50 cm instead of two fish over 60 cm which will provide additional protection for larger tailor.

Recfishwest supports a two month closure as opposed to the four month closure proposed by the previous government.

We believe that it sends an important message to anglers that we have a part to play in managing stocks of species such as dhufish. Recfishwest believes that the government has seriously under-estimated the impact the closed season combined with extremely high demersal licence fees will have on reducing recreational participation and catch.

"The performance measures for the fishery must be developed such that they allow the recreational sector to benefit from a stock recovery. We also urge an independent assessment of the impact of these management reforms and ongoing review." Mr Prokop said.

Recfishwest is also pleased that the government did not pander to the irresponsible demands for area closures from radical marine conservation groups.

"One of the benefits of licensing is that it allows the recreational sector to have greater influence on management reforms. Recfishwest is also calling on the government to apply the same risk and cost recovery principles to Marine Park management where proponents contribute nothing financially to management."

Mr Prokop expected strong opposition to these proposals in a number of areas, especially given the extremely high cost of fishing and the contribution it already makes to the economy.

"The money MUST be used responsibly with the benefits of management being returned to recreational fishing.

After all, this is a $750 million industry and an essential component of the Western Australian way of life." Mr Prokop concluded.

ENDS Media Contacts

Frank Prokop, Executive Director - Recfishwest ph. 9246 3366 or 0419 949 118
Kane Moyle, Policy Officer - Recfishwest ph. 9246 3366 or 0403 898 432 TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background.......http://www.recfishwest.org.au/LogosRecfishwestLogo.gif

[Gazza]

Terry , were RFW involved in the discussions , that lead to these decisions :-/

Poor effort if they were :'(

[Dick Pasfield]

Given the sheer size of WA and the relatively small number of people living there, I fail to see how the fish stocks could be in danger.

Those fees are a crock of s..t.

As for the trust fund, who decides how the money is to be spent, not the anglers I bet.

Luc

Easy to see why there's such a perception but the collapse of snapper stocks in Shark Bay a few years ago clearly demonstrates that some fish stocks in WA are extremely vulnerable to over fishing.

Whilst there are many that strongly disagree with the license cost associated with catching demersal fish in the west coast bio region its widely accepted that those fish stocks in parts of that bio region are under a good deal of pressure and there needs to be a reduction in catch to protect these fish.

As for how the money will be spent, I understand that it will be administered by a trust fund. How that fund is managed is not clear to me at the moment but I understand that recreational anglers will form the backbone of the management group.

Additional to the added licence fee asociated with the West coast bio region there will also be a closed season on fishing for those fish deemed vulnerable.

It should be noted that the standard fee for WA is only $30.

My take on the issue, living outside the west Coast region I'm happy to pay a $30 licence on the basis that the money will be invested back into the region. I'm not sure what my views would be if I lived within the affected region. Certianally demersal fish sit low on my priority list, chances are that I might not bother to target them and not have to pay that component of the licence fee.

[Dick Pasfield]

Terry , were RFW involved in the discussions , that lead to these decisions :-/

Poor effort if they were :'(

Think the media statement in Terry's post gives some insight into that Gazza

[Dick Pasfield]

Sucks to be in WA, and to think I was going to head over there next year for a big fishing trip, but to hell with that now.

With respect Scott.... That's fine we're full ;)

[TimiBoy]

With respect Scott.... That's fine we're full ;)

Bah. We need more people in SEQ. Come on over! Soon it will be quicker to walk to work, so all the imports will be making us fitter!

Cheers,

Tim

[TerryF]

were RFW involved in the discussions , that lead to these decisions

Poor effort if they wereJust so that everyone understands that the decisions on the $150/ $30 /$45 licence costs were made by the Government and the Cabinet and the Fisheries Minister, not by Recfishwest, see Recfishwest Media Release http://www.recfishwest.org.au/MediaReleaseWestCoastRuleChanges2009.htm



Strong reaction expected to West Coast Recreational fishing changes.

Recfishwest has predicted a public outcry over the latest measures announced by Fisheries Minister Norman Moore.

Recfishwest executive director Frank Prokop said that despite recognising the benefit of a recreational fishing licence system, his organisation did not support Minister Moore's new fee structure.Can't be much clearer than that.

Many people from other parts of Australia don't realise the vast difference between the east and the west coast.

The WA West coast is low nutrient, low productivity, leading to lots of specialised, long lived, slow growing species living on the edge and waiting for that occasional good year to get good recruitment of replacement fish.

These fish can't take heavy fishing pressure. WA West Coast sustainable catches of some species is measured in a few hundred tonnes, compared to thousands or tens of thousands of tonnes of fish in other parts of the world.

Dick, Thanks for the posts.

TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background.......http://www.recfishwest.org.au/LogosRecfishwestLogo.gif

[billfisher]

The WA West coast is low nutrient, low productivity, leading to lots of specialised, long lived, slow growing species living on the edge and waiting for that occasional good year to get good recruitment of replacement fish.

These fish can't take heavy fishing pressure. WA West Coast sustainable catches of some species is measured in a few hundred tonnes, compared to thousands or tens of thousands of tonnes of fish in other parts of the world.


TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background.......http://www.recfishwest.org.au/LogosRecfishwestLogo.gif

The same claim (low productivity) is made for Australian fisheries in general and used to justify restrictions. Actually we are about average in productivty for warm/ temperate continental shelves.

Here's part of a review on the Northwest WA fisheries:


The Northern Demersal Scalefish Fishery

A review and recommendations

Walter Starck

Executive Summary
The Northern Demersal Scalefish Fishery (NDSF) is a small but valuable demersal trap fishery based primarily on species of snappers (Lutjanidae), emperors (Lethrinidae) and groupers (Serranidae). The existing fishery is restricted to an area of about 220,000 km². The fishing zone covers an irregular shaped area extending about 1000 Km in length off the Kimberley region of Western Australia from S.W. of Broome to the Northern Territory border and lying between about 40 and 300 km offshore. Bottom depths are mostly between 50 and 200 m
The existing fishery is limited to 11 licences permitting the equivalent of 20 traps per day for an allocated number of days for each license each year. A larger number of traps may be used with proportionate reduction in the number of fishing days permitted. The fishery began in 1990 and in recent years has consisted of 5 - 6 boats each fishing more than one license for economic viability. The total allowable catch (TAC) deemed sustainable is 800 t annually. Fishing effort is regulated by an allowable number of fishing days set each year by the WA Fisheries Department. It amounts to about 100 days per year. The gross value of the fishery at point of first sale is currently about $5-6 million.
Like virtually all Australian fisheries, the NDSF faces an uncertain future, not from a decline in the resource but because of ever increasing costs, requirements and restrictions imposed by management. Although catches remain excellent, two quite different pictures of the sustainability of the fishery appear in the literature regarding it. One depicts it as well managed and certifiably sustainable. The other expresses ongoing concern that it is being quite heavily overfished. The well managed view has been presented to state, national and international agencies where recognition for good management would be desirable. The negative view in which overfishing is emphasized has appeared in a context where this would be in accord with environmentalist sentiments, regulatory aims and funding needs.
From consideration of the number of traps used and fishing days permitted it can be estimated that only about 0.2 of 1% of the primary fishing zone is actually fished each year. In other words, at the currently mandated level of effort it would take 500 years to fish this entire zone just once. From the total annual catch and size of the fishing area one may also estimate the annual harvest rate to be 9 kg/km2 or 90 g/ha. This is less than 1% of the global average for fisheries and less than half of !% of the sustainable yield for beef on moderately good grazing land. The claims of overfishing seem unlikely.
The estimate of virgin biomass used to determine the TAC was based on experimental trawling by the CSIRO between 1978 and 1980. The total catch of the principle species in the fishery was only a fraction of a single day’s catch in the current fishery. A similar estimate based on the catches of the fishery itself results in a biomass and TAC some 20 times larger than that derived from the CSIRO trawl figures. Even then, this would still only amount to a harvest rate of just over 2 kg/ha. Trawling is simply an inappropriate method to determine the abundance of these fishes.
Additional methodologies used in ongoing assessment of the stocks in this fishery include a half-century old population model of questionable applicability and age determinations for limited samples of the catch with no analysis of variance between
2
samples from different locations and over time to indicate whether the observed age structure may be the result of the fishery or is only natural variability.
To explain the continuing good catches despite over a decade of ongoing claims of overfishing the hypothetical possibility of "hyperstability". has been suggested. The idea is that these fish form aggregations which the fishermen target so that catches will remain good right up until the last fish enter a trap. This, however, is only unsubstantiated speculation and it is refuted by two important facts. One is that excellent catches have been made in hundreds of different widely scattered locations throughout the fishing zone, not just in a few locations. The other is that similarly good catches have resulted on research trips when fisheries personnel, not the fishermen, have chosen where to fish.
In this fishery, as in many others, the precautionary principle has been improperly applied. Although its proper application has been clearly determined to be when there is a threat of irreversible or significant damage. It has been widely invoked where the threat is not apparent but only a hypothetical possibility and the putative harm neither irreversible nor significant but easily reversed should it actually develop.
The management issues raised here are unfortunately not unique to the NDSF. Around the nation Australian fisheries are in widespread decline in terms of production, profitability and participation. Our fishing industry is in decline in every important respect save the resource itself. With the largest per capita fishing zone in the world, Australia has the lowest harvest at only 1/30 of the global average. We also have the world's most restrictive and costly management. The AFMA budget alone amounts to over $100,000 per vessel each year. Huge increases in expenditure on management have delivered only declining production and profits.
Australia has the largest remaining underexploited potential for fisheries and aquaculture in the world. Properly developed it could be a major drought-proof food producing sector, a significant contributor to the health and wealth of the nation and a wholly renewable resource. This is a matter of national importance and government is being badly misadvised by office based agenda driven management claims bearing little resemblance to the actual resource. Genuine science is based on evidence not opinions. Our marine resource management has come to be dominated by claims of scientific authority based on unverified theories and models plus a generous misapplication of the precautionary principle with scant empirical evidence.
There is clearly a much more substantial resource in the NDSF than has been estimated. Implementation of a more experimental, empirical and less restrictive approach to management with improved data collecting and monitoring could be undertaken with no risk of any significant damage. Management that reverses the downward trajectory in Australian fisheries and results in increased production and productivity would be a major achievement well deserving of all due recognition for those who might achieve it. Effecting this would require good co-operation between management and fishermen with some degree of compromise on both sides but it is eminently doable. It is an approach worth serious consideration.

[TerryF]

The same claim (low productivity) is made for Australian fisheries in general and used to justify restrictions. Actually we are about average in productivty for warm/ temperate continental shelves.

Here's part of a review on the Northwest WA fisheries:

The fishing zone covers an irregular shaped area extending about 1000 Km in length off the Kimberley region of Western Australia from S.W. Of Broome to the Northern Territory border....I said:-


The WA West coast is.... The WA West coast is thousands of kilometres from the area covered by that report. That area is called the Kimberley coast. Chalk and cheese.

Read

http://www.westernangler.com.au/forum/fb.asp?m=193277 Recreational catches from 2005/6 boat survey West Coast. 186 tonnes of West Australian Dhufish needs to be cut to 100 tonnes recreational

http://www.westernangler.com.au/forum/fb.asp?m=195936 Commercial Demersal Fisheries Management West Coast (posted a year ago

WA State of the Fisheries Reports, http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/sof/index.php?0706 latest 2007/8 Note. Only has catch data up to 2006/7.

WA Fisheries Management Paper 224 http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/mp/mp224/index.php?0706 "Outcomes of the Wetline Review -The Minister for Fisheries' decisions in relation to the future management of the West Coast and Gascoyne commercial ‘wetline' fisheries"

WA Fisheries Research Report 163 http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/frr/frr163/index.php?0401 "Spatial scales of exploitation among populations of demersal scalefish: implications for management."

Fisheries Occasional Publications 65 - A Review of Management Arrangements for the Recreational Fishery for Demersal Scalefish in the West Coast Bioregion. (June 2009) http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/op/op065/fop65.pdf

Fisheries Occasional Publications 66 - Scientific review of the West Coast Demersal Scalefish Fishery, Western Australia. (June 2009) http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/op/op066/fop66.pdf

Fisheries Occasional Publications 67 - Review of Fisheries Research Report (177). (June 2009) http://www.fish.wa.gov.au/docs/op/op067/fop67.pdf

TerryF
=====
Beavering away in the background.......http://www.recfishwest.org.au/LogosRecfishwestLogo.gif

[billfisher]

I said:-

The WA West coast is thousands of kilometres from the area covered by that report. That area is called the Kimberley coast. Chalk and cheese.



Yes I'm aware the West Coast is a different part of WA than the Northwest, but Walter Starks article is useful as background and raises some credibility questions. Ie it's the same fisheries department that is further restricting fishing in the Northwest is it not?