What are your thoughts on the idea of a General Recreational Fishing licence ? [Archive] - Ausfish fishing Australia, Australian Angling Forums

Scott Mitchell

04-09-2009, 01:47 PM

What are your thoughts on the idea of a General Recreational Fishing licence ?

If In Favour I suggest we would model it on the NSW example along the lines of :-

1) ALL money raised goes into two transparent Trust accounts – One for Freshwater ( taking over from the current SIPS program – This would be kicked off with a minimum of the average funds raised under the current SIPS over the last 3 years as a starting guide for allocation ) Plus a New Saltwater Trust – where All remaining fund would be held. No funds can be spent without written approval from the management committees.

2) Administration costs to manage the program would be capped at 10% from License contributions – This employs government staff to administer & manage the program.

3) The 1st priority would be to establish a selection of Recreation Fishing havens ( RFH's ) throughout Queensland in Key recreational angling areas IE: Great Sandy Straights – where ALL commercial fishing would be brought out of the designated areas– with no exceptions.

4) All remaining funds would be managed by a selection of committees consisting of recreational anglers from ALL zones with-in the state IE – Freshwater Committee – Saltwater Committee & a Head Committee – consisting of recreational anglers with expertise with in their areas.

5) What are your thoughts on costs ie:-

3 Days = $6.00
1 Month = $12.00
1 Year = $30.00
3 Years = $75.00

6) More back ground can be viewed @ http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/licence-fee (http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/licence-fee)

Should be an interesting debate - Scotto

Lucky_Phill

04-09-2009, 02:04 PM

Scott,

This very subject is being considered by ECOfishers Qld and been brought up in discussions with various Gov bodies and committees recently.

Here is one part I personally do not like:-

2) Administration costs to manage the program would be capped at 10% from License contributions – This employs government staff to administer & manage the program.

Trust me, there are ample people already within the department that could do this job and not impinge of their current work load.....:-X That was a nice way putting it. ;D

I personally believe that there is sufficient funds collected through GST and taxes on recreational anglers to buy out all neccessary commercial licences in Queensland and have plenty left for research.

Having said that, the importance of recreational fishing in not only Queensland, but the whole of Australia, far outweighs the benefits provided by current commercial practices.

This is where Qld Tourism, State Development and DPI&F need to step up to the plate. You simply have to look at what has happened in the NT in recent years to know that one fish can contribute many thousands of dollars to an economy, whereas if it gets caught by commercial fishers, it provides very little.

Queensland is on the brink of either establishing one of the worlds best recreational and tourism based fisheries or seeing it collapse under misguided government policy.

Thanks for this post and it has been discussed before. I just hope people see the big picture and are not lead to believe that a recreational fishing licence would be the saviour of the recreational fishery in Qld. I know the NSW model has provided some great outcomes, in particular " estuaries ", but we must be aware of what happened recently in the Moreton Bay Marine Park licence buy-back scheme, where many licences were bought back only to see the " effort " reduced by about 2%. That was one hell of a stuff up. Even the commercial operators told the gov this would happen.

Cheers Phill
.
.
.
.
.
.

Lucky_Phill

04-09-2009, 02:07 PM

I like and endorse this:-

4) All remaining funds would be managed by a selection of committees consisting of recreational anglers from ALL zones with-in the state IE – Freshwater Committee – Saltwater Committee & a Head Committee – consisting of recreational anglers with expertise with in their areas.

Cheers Phill
.
.
.
.
.

Chimo

04-09-2009, 02:10 PM

Scott Mitchell

04-09-2009, 02:14 PM

John Mondora's “Notes from a cranky old bastard" in the latest Barra Bass & Bream issue 26 is a good read - The Great Fishing License Debate !

It will be on the table sooner, rather than later & I suggest the wider recreational angling community seriously looks at supporting a system that we CAN have control over - based on the NSW model. Otherwise we'll end up with an alternative that the government COULD implement on their terms http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/shocked.gif

OR we could run with an alternative - like those suggest here http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/huh.gif

United we'll take control of our fisheries - Divided we'll leave it up to the government & whinge around the chat boards & boat ramps http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif

Regards Scotto

Scott Mitchell

04-09-2009, 02:29 PM

Yeah more money for general revenue to be spent on political whims.

About as clever as increasing registration fees to make things better on the roads etc

Simple, naive, idea from an individual who may not have had the benefit of forty five years working to earn money to give it to govt to spend on things to get polies re-elected but not to improve fishing or boat ramps etc

If your not catching enough fish take a course (at your own expense!) or go out with a skilled fisho who can give you a few clues about fishing and maybe other things too.

Cheers
Chimo

Please READ the proposal / proviso THAT IF we where to introduce a general recreational fishing license in Qld IT WOULD BE based on the NSW model - Which address these concerns http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/wink.gif

Otherwise I'm keen to see how we can achieve similar results with out one ?

Regards Scotto

STUIE63

04-09-2009, 03:06 PM

yeah well everytime they raise the rego's they tell us it is for better ramps and I haven't seen any for a long time so ,a big NO for me
Stuie

Noelm

04-09-2009, 03:18 PM

I guess in an ideal world, it would be great, (not too sure how far you will get with a buy out of all pros from any area though) but seeing as we live in a far from ideal place, then funds will be used to build "stuff" that will be of little benefit to those that paid the fee, Scott, you are familiar with Shellharbour ramp, just recently they spent god knows how much on "improvements" and what we got was some gardens, lost a pile of parking spots, some gates that are locked to the parking lot (to keep out the hoons) but they are locked from 7PM untill 6AM, during which time the early fisherman/boaties have to park elsewhere, how the money is spent is only half the battle, it needs to be spent on things that will benefit the fisher people as a whole, and not gardens and stuff.

Chris Ryan

04-09-2009, 03:20 PM

Hey Scott,

Interesting post and a good one for open discussions. I'll be in touch very soon to have a natter on this with you.

FNQCairns

04-09-2009, 03:34 PM

Scott Mitchell

04-09-2009, 03:47 PM

I was there at the start of the NSW one and what a crock that was, nothing was achieved that couldn't have been otherwise and then the proceeded to lock out vast angling areas.... quality value for stolen money, nothing was achieved that couldn't have been otherwise.

Outside of a water and power grab the licence adds another aspect ...a money grab! Fair dinkum we are all dumbos belly up no matter what state we live in.

The NSW model had very little support from general fishers but that never matters it's the self obsessed or professed elite that push these things to serve themselves first as usual.

Couldn't vote as the model was too grossly typical of a multiple choice one would see from government anyway, far from happy with current management but I know throwing more free money at them will not make matters better, quality angling fishery management will and that will come from departmental character and responsibility, which is lacking in spades ATM.

cheers fnq

FNQ - So would you say that the fishing in NSW has not benefited from have a user pays general recreational angling license ?

I am not say it is a perfect system - rather that I believe it is a better system which WILL give the wider general recreational anglers of Qld better control over our fisheries.

Including payments towards recreational angling generally from with-in your rego payments is fraught with grey areas - no transparency - who knows where your money will end up http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/huh.gif?

I still see that your rego money should go towards better boat ramp facilities & roads generally - a general fishing licence WITH A TRANSPARENT TRUST ACCOUNT - that is audited annually & can only have money spent from it with the approval of committees made up of recreational anglers - IS THE ONLY way you'll know exactly where your money is going - you may even have a say in it http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/grin.gif

We need people out there talking about it - how could we even make it better - How do we get our government to GIVE US CONTROL http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/wink.gif

Regards Scotto

deepfried

04-09-2009, 03:54 PM

From a NSW point of view it is now normal to pay my fee. Its not dear for a years fishing. At Ballina we have just had the ramp improved ( No new gardens ) and a good cleaning table was put in a while back. The Richmond River has also benefited from some of the money with improvements to cane drains. I would bet that nearly none of this would have been done without the license fees that are being paid. This state has troubles getting anything done so to see real improvements is a good.

I dont however like the rec money being used to buy out pro licenses that involve fishing in an over fished fishery ( eg longliners ), using pracitices that should be banned anyway and in areas that pro fishing should not be practiced ( ie rivers ) as i think the state should have already bought these licenses out or closed down the fishery at the state coffers expense not the fishing publics as it is a state / national and environmental issue not just a rec fisheries issue. Dont get me wrong i want these pros bought out but it should have already happened, if the only alternative is the use of rec money then i guess i can live with it though. If on the other hand the pros being bought out are from areas that can sustain the pro fishery but without them improves the rec catch then i have no probs with rec money being used for it. Does that all make sense.

There are real positives from the license down here and i cant see why it would be different for Qld. Qlders would also have the benefit of seeing what has been down down here and make any changes needed to make it an even better system.

Scott Mitchell

04-09-2009, 04:06 PM

There are real positives from the license down here and i cant see why it would be different for Qld. Qlders would also have the benefit of seeing what has been down down here and make any changes needed to make it an even better system.

It's great to get some real feedback from anglers who can see the benefits in NSW - while no system will be perfect - just having one is better that what we currently have in Qld ;)

Regards Scotto

mylestom

04-09-2009, 04:08 PM

When the introduced the licence in NSW. They bought all the commercial fisherman out of the Bellinger/Kalang system, now when the fish head out to sea to breed (Mullett,Mulloway etc) the beach haulers sit at the mouth and round them all up.

Now they are breeding Mulloway to restock some of the river systems in NSW, well why let them take the breeding stock in the first place. Seems a bit of chasing the tail.

There has been some small gains for the recreational fisherman, but personal opinion is a lot of red tape to get anything done, and the beach haulers are not involved (They just write the rules themselves with the blessing of fisheries). Been down that track and from the minister down they won't interfere with the status quo.

It all sounds good but don't believe it is really value for money, also loss of trade for local tackle shops, corner shops. Nobody just decides to fishing at the drop of the hat. Too much hassle getting a licence. See it all the time with the community and holidaymakers around here.

Regards

Trev

FNQCairns

04-09-2009, 04:18 PM

What I am saying is that Angling needs no committee overview or direct taxation. The fish do not know they are somehow richer neither does the waterscape. What is needed is a vast voter block that will promote from grass roots all the way up to the controlling elite.

For instance SIP on what was once free (as in freedom) water, it still cost the public tax dollars, is a tax, very few areas where not populated by anglers in the act of angling very few do now, the vast majority has been excluded, the majority couldn't care less if they catch a stocked fish and certainly wouldn't traditionally pay to do so, so they no longer participate (my family included).

The licence is a great long term tool for attrition even the environmental zealots couldn't hope for a better system than they have in NSW, it was a failure from the start as was Victoria, nothing achieved that couldn't be achieve anyway with low level and basic political will, simply a tax on healthy recreation that they get away with because of a lack of education, angler apathy and no voter block.

There was nothing or is nothing democratic in fishing licences just fisherys riding roughshod still, no change here or there, the stacked panels, threats of forcing option B, unless you take 'voluntarily' option A, with no competent C option allowed.

The only way to have a say as an Angler is through a voter block but that's too hard for most. I have zero interest in joining through regulation a government controlled fishing union and paying my dues for them to 'not actually represent me', just as was the case for me in NSW with the licence and is the case here in QLD through Sunfish althoug no fees but governement grants.

cheers fnq

Scott Mitchell

04-09-2009, 04:49 PM

It all sounds good but don't believe it is really value for money, also loss of trade for local tackle shops, corner shops. Nobody just decides to fishing at the drop of the hat. Too much hassle getting a licence. See it all the time with the community and holidaymakers around here.

Regards

Trev

I owned a tackle store in NSW when the license was brought in - And our figures improved over time as the fishing was improved. It can be a drag for tackle stores to administer - BUT brought more anglers in as we did our best to make it a hassle free process.

I am all for another system if it provides No-Strings-Attached funding to improve our fishing & gives us better control over our fisheries in Qld , I just do not see a better answer :-/

Remember - "I" am only suggesting a General License IF IT IS MODELLED on the NSW example - as "I" see it as the best one on the table at present ,with a proven track record.

Again while not being perfect "I" believe it is better than what we currently have in Qld.

Regards Scotto

FNQCairns

04-09-2009, 05:26 PM

PinHead

04-09-2009, 05:42 PM

Scott,

This very subject is being considered by ECOfishers Qld and been brought up in discussions with various Gov bodies and committees recently.

.
.
.
.
.
.

why would anyone bring this up with the Govt...there is nothing to gain from a fishing license..just more taxes to pay to a pathetically performing Govt.
If anyone thinks those funds would go anywhere other then consolidated revenue they are kidding themselves.

By bringing it up, the powers that be will then think that fishos that a license is a fait accompli and set the wheels in motion to implement it.

treasury would be rubbing their hands with glee.

NO fishing license in saltwater in Qld..use what taxes we already pay a lot better and no extra should be needed. Why would you even discuss it with them..if the Govt raised the subject then the response should be nothing but an emphatic NO..IN CASE THEY ARE DEAF..NO. then just leave the discussion table.

If discussing things with any Govt body just ask them what has happened to all the money the Govt has already raked in..where is it...they are broke now..where did all the money go????

STUIE63

04-09-2009, 05:43 PM

the last time I talked to the so called people that wanted my feedback on fishing it cost me 30% of my fishing areas will I ever talk to them again ? I don't think so ! the last bloke said to trust him as well . it might work in the south but don't bring their bull$hit up north
Stuie

Scott Mitchell

04-09-2009, 06:05 PM

If anyone thinks those funds would go anywhere other then consolidated revenue they are kidding themselves.

Unfortunately Pinhead - You are wrong. If we modelled a Qld general recreational Fishing license on the NSW model - IT IS LAW / LEGISLATED that ALL of the money raised via the license fees goes into a transparent trust accounts - that is managed by committees made up mostly from recreational anglers http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

I believe the admin fee is still capped at 10% of the total license fees to cover admin in NSW - payable to DNR&F. I have asked Jim Harnwell ( Editor of Fishing World mag ) for an update which I hope to have shortly. I understand that the current SIPS program pays 25% to DPI&F to cover admin currently. I believe this is too much & would suggest that we work on 10% under a new general license system.

For those who have concerns with the current SIPS program - I propose it is kicked off under a new freshwater trust account - with initial funds based on the highest average amount raised over the previous three years as we did in NSW with the former freshwater license. This means that you pay out at least the highest average SIPS allocation over the former 3 years to get things started & review the figure in future once you have an idear on total funds available from the new general license program.

I do not believe it has anything to do with what DPI&F current have on their agenda, as I propose this new license system is IMPLAMENTED due to overwhelming support from the recreational angling sector - ON OUR TERMS !

This is a User pays system - BUT NEEDS TO BE CLEARLY IMPLAMENTED BASED ON THE NSW MODEL !

There are NO GREY AREAS with this - It is either imposed by the wider angling community sooner - rather than later OR we will wind up with another system under on the governments terms http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif

I believe the ball is rolling & now is the time for Queensland recreational anglers to take control of their fisheries http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/rocker.gif

Regards Scotto

mylestom

04-09-2009, 06:38 PM

I owned a tackle store in NSW when the license was brought in - And our figures improved over time as the fishing was improved. It can be a drag for tackle stores to administer - BUT brought more anglers in as we did our best to make it a hassle free process.

I am all for another system if it provides No-Strings-Attached funding to improve our fishing & gives us better control over our fisheries in Qld , I just do not see a better answer :-/

Remember - "I" am only suggesting a General License IF IT IS MODELLED on the NSW example - as "I" see it as the best one on the table at present ,with a proven track record.

Again while not being perfect "I" believe it is better than what we currently have in Qld.

Regards Scotto

Live at the beach and estuary and it stops repeats stops the legitimate partime angler who just thinks hey I want to go fishing. I am involved with the angling scene down here and talk to people on a daily basis. Yes it does cut down on the casual angler, just looking at the stock at the local shop will tell you that.

I do have a reasonable idea of the fishing in my region, and belief if you speak to anyone, including fisheries you would understand that I am involved. It is not working, it does restrict the casual angler and tourist dollar. It is not and will never be the silver bullet. Why pay for something that is currently free.

Yes I do impoundment and estuary fishing in Qld as well. The cost for the travelling angler is getting excessive. How many licences does one angler need in a year.

Vote no to something you don't need.

Trev

PinHead

04-09-2009, 06:43 PM

Unfortunately Pinhead - You are wrong. If we modelled a Qld general recreational Fishing license on the NSW model - IT IS LAW / LEGISLATED that ALL of the money raised via the license fees goes into a transparent trust accounts - that is managed by committees made up mostly from recreational anglers http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

I believe the admin fee is still capped at 10% of the total license fees to cover admin in NSW - payable to DNR&F. I have asked Jim Harnwell ( Editor of Fishing World mag ) for an update which I hope to have shortly. I understand that the current SIPS program pays 25% to DPI&F to cover admin currently. I believe this is too much & would suggest that we work on 10% under a new general license system.

For those who have concerns with the current SIPS program - I propose it is kicked off under a new freshwater trust account - with initial funds based on the highest average amount raised over the previous three years as we did in NSW with the former freshwater license. This means that you pay out at least the highest average SIPS allocation over the former 3 years to get things started & review the figure in future once you have an idear on total funds available from the new general license program.

I do not believe it has anything to do with what DPI&F current have on their agenda, as I propose this new license system is IMPLAMENTED due to overwhelming support from the recreational angling sector - ON OUR TERMS !

This is a User pays system - BUT NEEDS TO BE CLEARLY IMPLAMENTED BASED ON THE NSW MODEL !

There are NO GREY AREAS with this - It is either imposed by the wider angling community sooner - rather than later OR we will wind up with another system under on the governments terms http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif

I believe the ball is rolling & now is the time for Queensland recreational anglers to take control of their fisheries http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/rocker.gif

Regards Scotto

I am not wrong..I am talking about Qld..I don't give a rats what NSW does or has done. I would not trust this current Govt with $5 to go and get a litre of milk..does the name Nutall ring a bell..or how about or the pay for meeting dinners...anyone that trusts this Govt also sits back and waits for the tooth fairy.

I am sick and tired of this user pays crap..it is nonsense. If user pays is the way to go then I objest to any of my money going to schools or public hospitals..i do not use them so why should I pay for them.

Stuff any more taxes..if you think it is such a great idea then pay mine and anyone else that disagrees with it .

If you think this irritates me..you are so right..agreeing to any more taxes is just bending over and taking it from the Govt. I pay enough taxes thanks and also stupid license fees . When someone can tell me where all the money has gone I might change my thoughts...until then the Govt can go and ..well you know the rest.

Do you get a vote on which rec anglers are on those committees??
Do you get a vote on how the money is distributed?

Chimo

04-09-2009, 07:16 PM

As I said earlier some very naive thinking here!

No way should this even be considered in Qld

We pay far too much for far too little and to volunteer for this is just crazy.

What is the real agenda of the proponent?

Trying to drum up business?

Looking to get into politics or just a stirrer.

Anyhow like others have said, its very hard to trust this govt so basically forget it and move on.

Cheers
Chimo

Blusta

04-09-2009, 07:37 PM

Could I trust this government not to change the rules? No! Eventually we would see the funds return to consolidated revenue. What percentage of our current fees (regos etc) are returned to us in services and facilities now? What promises were made about boat rego when they were first introduced decades ago...
Perhaps someone knows.
Perhaps we will see the Government increase facilities by the same percentage as our registrations have gone up in the last two years.
I'm dreamin'.

FNQCairns

04-09-2009, 07:50 PM

Seriously without a long term full Royal commission into corruption in QLD with terms wide enough to allow the general public to participate on entrenched departmental behaviour and the ability to bring officially into line what IS the new definition of corruption for the millennium trusting any government department in QLD is for the gullible.

Money may go into trust as the most appropriate but it will then go through stacked committees and/or terms and corrupt fishery's management/moderation/control at every level (identical to now) into increasing their own power base with more jobs for the boys, longer contracts, rewards of further grant money to research arms which have no scientificly trusted stature outside of other government and environmental zealot organisations/universities etc (their brothers in arms). Corruption at all levels reigns supreme here in QLD. Our money will be squandered, fishery as now has no legitimate lawful responsibility to ensure good value for dollar spent or that fair outcomes are to be expected.

That 10% administration fee does not take into account what we think it does, this is government we will be lucky if 20% is left to put to real work, the rest will end up in gross numbers of employees/corporative/management or professors bank accounts as funds from grants from stacked and most often personally elite committees with not one single grass roots angler represented.

cheers fnq

Bowser

04-09-2009, 08:16 PM

Beattie and Bligh have bankrupted the state! Do you think they will pass up any opportunity to channel funds in to consolidated revenue?

You are living in wonderland if you think that fishers will have any say or control over any funds raised by a licence, We have just been slugged mega with increases in rego and have nothing to show for it. Licence fees would go the same way.

If we lived in a utopian state I would support this idea, unfortunately we live in a state where the Labor government needs the support of green preferences and spending any money that can be seen to be used to assist in the killing of sea kittens will not happen.

Johnm

04-09-2009, 08:26 PM

A definite NO if introduced provision need to be made to buy all gear from recreatonal anglers who give up because of the tax no argument on the price just pay up what is asked.
It would all be spent south of the Caboolture fault line like most of the roads etc.

TimiBoy

04-09-2009, 09:03 PM

The correct model has the money placed in Trust and administered by an independent-of-Government group. But folks are correct, eventually the money will be seen and nicked by Labor, and there will be nothing to be done about it.

So the initial solution is to get rid of these Green idiots (I mean Labor). Unfortunately we can't get rid of them forever, so the same grubbing, money wasting committee loving tree hugging koala-leg-humping idiots will get into power again, and everything set up under the Conservatives to get the money right will be raped again.

The answer? Benevolent Dictatorship. Won't happen. So, unfortunately, I don't see a long term solution. I really don't. That really, really depresses me...

Tim

Laurie Schulz

04-09-2009, 09:57 PM

Don't put idea's into their heads!

With what we pay in rego and nothing is going back to support Rec/Fishing. The Polies are over paid and are just trying work out another way to rip more money out of us.

NO, NO NO, NO NO, AND NO FROM ME.

Cheers

Laurie

Scott Mitchell

04-09-2009, 10:01 PM

.

What is the real agenda of the proponent?

Trying to drum up business?

Looking to get into politics or just a stirrer.

Anyhow like others have said, its very hard to trust this govt so basically forget it and move on.

Cheers
Chimo

No personal agenda & not looking to get into politics - just sick & tired of having our rights as anglers taken away , restricted access , marine parks & unsustainable fishing practises :-X

Yeah so we'll all just sit here and sob http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/cry.gif http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/cry.gif http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/cry.gif

I still do not see any constructive alternative to a general recreational fishing licence ( Based on the NSW model as disclosed ) http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/huh.gif?

ALL of those who have voted NO must be happy with the way our fisheries are being managed ?

A general recreational fishing licence WOULD clearly show how many serious recreational anglers you had in the state - as you would ALL now be "Financial stake holders" . You would have a louder VOICE in political circles - You would have capital to invest in campaigns against recreational angling - IE: green zones & marine parks , WE would have a data base of ALL the SERIOUS recreational anglers - to communicate with, in an effort to gaining better support to protect the recreation that we passionately enjoy !

Or we can continue to whinge & complain about how hard done by we are http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif

Just a thought - Scotto

STUIE63

04-09-2009, 10:15 PM

Black_Rat

04-09-2009, 10:48 PM

I voted NO

I have complete faith in the managment of QLDs fisheries it's the other goverment orginisations that allow pollution, mangrove destruction and industries into our fish habitats that we should be worried about >:( They are destroying the fish breeding grounds ! make them get a bloody licience to pollute !!!!!!!!!!

It's the political back door deals that I can't stand !

Our recreational pastime should be preserved without political favour nor a new tax !

Unless this this is managed by rec anglers, as it is a rec angler tax I want nothing to do with it and will appose the concept ! >:(

Damo

TheRealAndy

04-09-2009, 10:52 PM

jason p

04-09-2009, 11:03 PM

i would have to say no no no to any more taxes, fees, to the goverment as they are already stripping to much monies away from us all in a hundred other ways, i cant see how it could help in the managment of our fish stockes. personaly i think its just another revenue maker for the government. sad thing is its going to happen sooner than latter.>:(

Paul007

04-09-2009, 11:06 PM

If this proposal was to be implemented there is no way that the levels of funding that is currently applied to rec fishing would continue. The funding that is currently being applied to rec fishing would be either reduced or it would not be increased and would eventually be not sufficient to pay for the boat ramps and so on that our registrations currently are supposed to contribute for.
So we would end up still paying our regos but that money would not contribute to rec fishing facilities and policing and on top of that we would be paying our licence money in to the Transparent fund and that would be providing the money for the boat ramps and so on.

Damned67

05-09-2009, 01:12 AM

I'd be all for it, if the model posted was to be maintained (in a perfect world).
With what I spend on the boat, bait, lures etc in a month, the 'proposed' cost of a fishing license is a drop in the bucket, so to speak.

Sure, I can't help but be weary of what the current government might end up doing with our dollars, and as a scientist (professionally speaking), I'm disgusted with the so-called science that lead to the implementation of the green zones (or what i've read about it)....

But even if only 50% of the license fees ended where they should be, I feel we'd be much better off than where we are now. Plus, as previously mentioned, it would show some sign of solidarity. As it stands, do the pollies really know how many serious, amateur fishermen/women there are in the state? Wouldn't that give us a stronger voice?

Lovey80

05-09-2009, 05:21 AM

I think we have to try, I believe that ECO is our best shot at it. If ECO and it's members were the ones that administered the cash then I would say absolutely yes! This is our best chance to take control. It has it's risks certainly but right now were looking down the barrel.

If it were implemented, the longer an organisation like ECO held and managed the funds the harder and harder it would be to take away.

As Rec Anglers start to see the benefits of it like the tailor returning in masses to Fraser as an example (if the beach netters were bought out). The bigger the momentum will be. More data collected by Rec Anglers from Rec Anglers to provide irrefutable evidence to Gov't of what the data actually says the harder it will be for them to screw us and get away with it.

The tourism minister would have to eventually see how much benefit it is to his portfolio too.

At the end of the day ladies and gents a fishing license is coming. Like it or not it's coming. Look what has just happened in W.A. it is outragous. For those of you out there saying "Don't give them an idea" you are the ones being naive. You don't think some slimy polly hasn't already considered it?

It's easy to sit back jadded already by such bad treatment in the past and say it's going to happen again. Well it IS going to happen again, you can bet your bottom dollar. If we don't do it they bloody well will! Why not have a crack??????Give it a real good shot at taking control for the benefit of all. If it lasts 10-15 years it will be super hard for them to change it. The power will be with us and it will be us putting the major pressure on DPI-F for policy changes because we will have the lions share of data, we will have the lions share of lobby money and we will be the ones that will show EPA that we are the major stake holders in this whole fight. We don't actually need 5000 or 10000 anglers to drive through the city to show our might. There will be a small band of Rec Angling brothers devoting their spare time with fists full of Dollars doing it for us.

Imagine if it was implemented tomorrow and a body like ECO (I keep saying ECO because they IMHO are the only truely viable solution right now) were managing it for 10-15 years and the majority of Rec Anglers were super happy with things like fishing havens, beach netters being bought out, resulting in the fibreglass forests returning to Fraser, inshore netting ceased or at least curbed considerably and things were looking good? Then they tried to make motions to change it so it went into consolidated revenue..... imagine the uproar if ECO used some of those funds to make a TV appeal to stop it happening? (I dont think we Rec Anglers would mind some of the cash being used to inform us we were being screwed to kick us into action)

The whole US system revolves around lobby groups. They are so powerfull they are even influencing our Gov't (PEW).

LETS BE THAT POWERFULL LOBY GROUP!

Just my thoughts.

Cheers

Chris

P.S. hey FarNQ, if this were to take place and we did get a win in the early stages would you consider putting your hand up as an ECO rep to have a say in where the NQ portion of the money was spent??? Your exactly what ECO would need in the NQ arm IMHO! Maybe ECO could change the constitution so that the Vice President has to be a member from NQ?

Lovey80

05-09-2009, 05:33 AM

Oh and I forgot, I would leave the licence fee's for fresh and Salt separate. I'm no expert but the Fresh Water guys got off thier backsides to get thier Scheme started and from all reports are going well, no need to involve them in our fight in the early stages. Sure have the salt and fresh as allies and lobby partners but things seem to be sailing nicely for them no need for us to potenially muddy their waters in our fight.

Cheers

Chris

Scott Mitchell

05-09-2009, 07:36 AM

When the NSW license was introduced some 15 years ago it was $25- per adult - per year , It is now $30- Per adult per year. This is the sort of increase that you would expect over that time period. As far as where does the money go - the trusts are transparent & audited annually, You can get a copy of the annual budget from NSW DPI&F. ALL the money spent is approved by the trust committees - which consist of recreational anglers from each zone with-in the state.

Not sure what NSW Fisheries expenditure was prior to the licence - BUT I am pretty sure they never had the same amount of funding as they do under the current license scheme They even employed more inspectors with money from the trust which was another long debate - but voted worth while in the end. We did not want to become employers - rather stake holders with a voice !

Or we could ask the Government to just provide more funding for recreational angling because we believe we need it. I am sure they would review this favourably after public health , roads & infrastructure :P

REMEMBER - The PROPOSAL is to SUPPORT a general recreational angling licence BASED ONLY ON THE NSW MODEL :-

ALL money raised MUST go into transparent trust accounts - audited annually.
There MUST be trust account committees in charge of the expenditure - made up from recreation anglers who have key communications from with-in their zones across the state.
Administration costs to DPI&F must be capped at 10% - to aid in administration of the program. SIPS is currently 25% I believe ?THE BIG SWEETNER in getting this across the line ON OUR TERMS will be the commitment to create RFH's - Recreational Fishing Havens - where ALL commercial effort will be brought out from key recreational angling area's across the state. I am not that familiar with suitable Queensland waterways - but these must be spread across the entire state to provide true value to the wider recreational angling community.

The first step however is to get people talking about it.

Regards Scotto

honda900

05-09-2009, 08:07 AM

No personal agenda & not looking to get into politics - just sick & tired of having our rights as anglers taken away , restricted access , marine parks & unsustainable fishing practises :-X

Yeah so we'll all just sit here and sob http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/cry.gif http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/cry.gif http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/cry.gif

I still do not see any constructive alternative to a general recreational fishing licence ( Based on the NSW model as disclosed ) http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/huh.gif?

ALL of those who have voted NO must be happy with the way our fisheries are being managed ?

A general recreational fishing licence WOULD clearly show how many serious recreational anglers you had in the state - as you would ALL now be "Financial stake holders" . You would have a louder VOICE in political circles - You would have capital to invest in campaigns against recreational angling - IE: green zones & marine parks , WE would have a data base of ALL the SERIOUS recreational anglers - to communicate with, in an effort to gaining better support to protect the recreation that we passionately enjoy !

Or we can continue to whinge & complain about how hard done by we are http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif

Just a thought - Scotto

Scott,

if you think that the introduction of a licence in any way shape or form will have any impact on your "rights" you are kidding yourself.

Have a look at what is proposed for NSW where they have licensing.

Wake up, the government is only looking to make more money on the increases they have imposed upon us already, ask your self why, "bad management", Inefficient public sector delivery of key infrastructure project and plain old incompetence.

NO to Licences;

Catch cards and the like will be bad enough, we are just about to cop it from the changes to the RRFF review, watch and see how we are screwed over.

Regards
Honda.

PinHead

05-09-2009, 08:09 AM

there is only one group the Govt would have controlling anything like Scott's proposal and that is Sunfish..just the thought of that should start some laughter.

Scott..do you really think this Govt would leave funds in any sort of trust account? They need every cent they can get. I am afraid you are dreaming if you really think this could work with the current Govt we have.

A few examples of how they are trying to save money:
Attempting to lower the surveillance time periods for sex offenders from 15 years to 5 years.
close a wing at Woodford maximum security prison and put those prisoners on prison farms.

The only reason for any of this is to save money.

You mention buying out commercial fishermen..have a look at the system where they are supposedly buying out pros after the implementation of the green zones..that is another farce.

krazyfisher

05-09-2009, 08:56 AM

before I give up more money where is the increased boat and trailer rego going??? and GST on bait and fishing gear I pay enough money to the goverment on fishing and boat stuff for FA!!

Black_Rat

05-09-2009, 09:13 AM

A recreational fishing licence = a new tax

Every licence I have in my wallet has been assessed by an authority and granted as being competent, I know how to fish !

Hence just another tax

Dicko

05-09-2009, 09:40 AM

I voted the alternative, as NO meant I was happy with the current management.

Why are we looking towards the NSW model for guidance ?

Why not look to the NT model ?

The NT is probably the best managed recreational fishery in Aus. With no ficence and/or fees required.

It can be done.

"Us" coughing up extra to manage "our" fishery and associated facilities when we are already paying for it, (it many forms) is not the correct approach in my view.

05-09-2009, 10:07 AM

While our indigenous brothers and sisters have the RIGHT to fish irrespespective of zonings, bag limits, size limits and gear regulations the is no way in hell I will pay for the SUPPOSED PRIVILEGE of being able to wet a line.

The system already has enough inequities towards rec fishos. I will not support any more.

Sheik

05-09-2009, 11:16 AM

I would like to dispute suggestions that we have to adopt a licence model before one is pushed on to us. Labor is the only party that would consider introducing one and I think the Qld government is well aware of how unpopular such a move would be. If we let em know the repercussions of shoving a licence on to us, they will probably be smart enough to stay away from it, at least this term when they are on the nose across the state. I reckon suggesting a licence is a done deal is just giving in. To me a licence is just another nail in the coffin of my personal freedom. Whether you like it or not, gun licences at least have a social imperitive. Fishing licences are all about revenue collecting and centralising the control of a resource. I will NEVER support having to pay to fish in my own creeks and rivers. Bugger em.

Jeremy

05-09-2009, 11:31 AM

Jeremy

05-09-2009, 11:32 AM

If we let em know the repercussions of shoving a licence on to us, they will probably be smart enough to stay away from it.

You really were born yesterday weren't you::)

Sheik

05-09-2009, 11:48 AM

You really were born yesterday weren't you::)
Actually Jeremy, I have spent quite a few years working as an electorate officer for an Australian Government Minister so I do know a little about how politics work. And I reiterate my "informed" opinion that the Qld Labor party is the only one that would look to introduce a licence, and that they are currently scared of doing anything that would lose them more votes. No need to be snippy, it's only my opinion, not right or wrong.

Lucky_Phill

05-09-2009, 12:02 PM

I think to persuade the Qld rec anglers there would have to be very open and independent committees, managers and information.

The current ( or funds from 2 - 5 years ago ) expenditure by the State gov has to be held in place and must rise with at least CPI. ( or pollie wage rise %'s )

Any increases in boat rego, trailer rego, boat licence fees or taxes imposed by the state government MUST be directed into the " Fishing Licence " trust fund.

Monies held in trust are not only for boat ramp improvements, pro licence by-backs, arti reefs, etc, but must be channeled into independent research and information collecting to further the sustainability of the fishery.

The current level of spending on recreational activities and infrastructure by the state government is appalling, in respect to the level of funds collected from rec anglers.

I repeat, recreational fishing is one of the largest economic resources the state and federal governments has, yet funds collected from this industry are diverted to many other areas.

What is needed is a strong representative voice. This voice must be politically independent and truely represent the recreational fishers of Queensland.

It is even thought that recreational fishing in qld or aust is a big enough industry to have it's own portfolio... food for thought there people !!!! WA has one .

As mentioned earlier, the current DPI&F appear to be doing their job in relation to providing a sustainable fishery, but with the interference from the EPA ( who hold a stronger position within government ) our fishery is being strangled by the extreme green side of politics.

I have said earlier, that Scott's post is important and also has merit, as seen in NSW, but I too feel that Qld is different. What makes us different.

Well, the GBRMPA zoning off central to far nth qld for a start.

Scott's question is what are our thoughts, and a lot of good replies, for and against.

My retorical question would be... what exactly would the trust fund spend the money on ?

I mean, there was the multi million dollar payouts in NQ from general revenue, there were the commercial licence buy backs from Pumistone passage, Fraser Island, Moreton and Straddie, Hervey Bay ring netters, MBMP zoning buy backs and much much ,more. All this from general revenue, so why the licence?

I will admit that the GBRMPA zoning buy backs cost the fed gov many times what they expected and the state MBMP buy back was a disaster and a complete WOFTAM !!!!! It is not the money in general, but HOW it is spent and WHERE.... that's the current problem I see.

Can anyone imagine what the 220 million dollars spent in the GBRMPA zoning debacle could have bought in the way of independent scientific research ?

I understand there is a need for a commercial fishery, but at what expense ?

The NT are going gangbusters with tourism based recreational fishing. I would like to see Queensland remove their crown, but this can only happen with a truly transparent government, sensible policy, stakeholder regional management, independent trust fund managers and a concerted effort by the vast majority of recreational anglers to do what they can to provide a sustainable fishery for the future.

What is also needed is people like Scott, who has the drive and passion to do something about what he loves to do and wants to continue to do. We have to harness recreational anglers into a force that will see Queenslands recreational fishing future, secure and sustainable .

All IMO…….

Cheers Phill

As per a moderator, please try to not get personal, simply offer opinions, facts and thoughts……

.
.
.
.
.

Scott Mitchell

05-09-2009, 02:55 PM

Scott,

If you think that the introduction of a licence in any way shape or form will have any impact on your "rights" you are kidding yourself.

Have a look at what is proposed for NSW where they have licensing.

Wake up, the government is only looking to make more money on the increases they have imposed upon us already, ask your self why, "bad management", Inefficient public sector delivery of key infrastructure project and plain old incompetence.

NO to Licences;

Catch cards and the like will be bad enough, we are just about to cop it from the changes to the RRFF review, watch and see how we are screwed over.

Regards
Honda.

Do you "Disagree" that NSW anglers are better off now than they where prior to the licence ?

If you are serious about understanding alternatives to what is currently on offer - you really should do some research. In NSW they borrowed $20,000,000 from treasury to buy out ALL of the commercial effort from the designated RFH's to proved an IMEDIATE benefit to NSW recreational anglers - this was a loan & will be paid back in time - while still allowing a reasonable surplus to allow other beneficial activities to be paid for ie: research , more inspectors etc

The NSW license has been in place for many years now & I do not believe recreational angling has dropped off or become less popular in that time - if anything the evidence is of the contrary !

Again - How could YOU provide better infrastructure/ management to preserve our fisheries in Qld ?

Regards Scotto

Johnm

05-09-2009, 03:02 PM

A general recreational fishing licence WOULD clearly show how many serious recreational anglers you had in the state - as you would ALL now be "Financial stake holders" . You would have a louder VOICE in political circles - You would have capital to invest in campaigns against recreational angling - IE: green zones & marine parks , WE would have a data base of ALL the SERIOUS recreational anglers - to communicate with, in an effort to gaining better support to protect the recreation that we passionately enjoy !

Or we can continue to whinge & complain about how hard done by we are http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif

Interesting thought using licence funds to "invest in campaigns against recreational angling". I would have thought of it would have been to campaign in favour of recreational angling, hope this was a typo.

Database would not be available, information about those paying would be held by the Department collecting the licence money and cannot be released to anyone, so how would anybody be able to use it to communicate with anglers.

The issues would be who would administer the funds, Ecofish - know nothing about them and their web site is bare. Sunfush - no way.

Scott Mitchell

05-09-2009, 03:03 PM

well I will continue to whinge and complain as you put it and not suggest to the government another tax . and if they really want to know the financial stake I and other rec fishers have then why not add up what we spend on boats , bait and gear . the thousand I spent on a rod and reel one month ago is more of a stake than $30.00 a year

Stuie

Now if we're already paying for improved fisheries management via our rego - how do we keep track of the revenue raised - and how do we have a say in where it is spent http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/huh.gif?

No matter which way we raise the revenue - it has to be placed in a TRANSPARENT trust account - audited annually - and managed with the input of the wider recreational angling community with-in Queensland .

Now if there is a way to do this with out introducing a seperate license fee from scratch - with the template clearly outlined before it was implemented - I would be all for it. So all we need to do now is ask the Government to seperate ALL of the revenue raised from our regos & any "surplus funds" they may have available & put it all in a NEW transparent trust account & ask the wider angling community how we would like it spent !

I think we're onto some thing - I know sarcasm is the lowest form of wit !

Regards Scotto

Scott Mitchell

05-09-2009, 03:11 PM

I voted NO, and I am not happy with DPI.

Why should I pay for my recreational activity. I already pay tax, I pay rego on my boat and car. They get tax on my insurance premiums. For what? I pay a licence fee it ends up the same as NSW, still get shut out of fishing areas and where does the money from licence go? Forget it, unless the money goes into a trust to be spent the way rec fisho's decide then its just a joke. It will never be that way, it will just feed some political party.

As for DPI management, I think that deserves a topic on its own. There is no shortage of capable talented people in DPI but at the end of the day its still a government department, choked by government process.

The Model being proposed here is based on the NSW one which allocates ALL of the money raised from the license into 2 trust accounts - one for freshwater & one for saltwater. These accounts are managed by committees - consisting of recreational anglers from all over that state. Money is allocated towards research , angler education, habitat rehabilitation , possibly more buy outs etc etc etc - BECAUSE IT IS MANAGED BY RECREATIONAL ANGLERS http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

The Government CAN NOT just spend the money from the trust accounts - WITH OUT the majority of vote from the TRUST FUND COMMITTEES - which are made up of RECREATIONAL ANGLERS http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

These arguments against the current government will continue to hinder progress until the wider recreational angling community in Qld stop coming up with excuses as to why it won't happen & start voicing & support the motion THAT IT CAN HAPPEN with support from the MAJORITY of the recreational angling community in Qld. Take control of YOUR OWN DESTINTY & ACT or You will still be winging about how hard done by we all are when OUR fisheries are taken from us !

I love change - You go 1st http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/grin.gif

Regards Scotto

PS: The marine park shafting cannot be attributed to licenses & I am not sure how we better deal with these issue in future - although having accurate numbers of paid stakeholders has got to be better than guess work ?

PinHead

05-09-2009, 03:12 PM

A lot of old hard heads on here with stubborn mindsets about how things should be. Tunnel vision is rife and the goggles are firmly in place.

'No' is the easy answer isn't it, but surely there must be a way to get better outcomes for recreational fishers in decisions affecting the fishery. A licence would be equivalent to 'buying' a stake in the fishery which we a not currently recognised as having, and consequently we would have more influence on management decisions.

Honestly, the way some of you are going on you would think you are broke. How much does a new outfit cost you? A single fishing trip out in the boat? A nominal figure of say $30 would be a drop in the ocean compared to what most of you already spend, so why does this bother you so much financially?

Jeremy

you can call me old..you can be me a hard head and you can call me sstubborn..do I have tunnel vision..absolutely not.

Your attitude is one of the new age pinky types..do you think you need to pay a fee to have a "stake"..no way..we are the citizens..we already own it...how many times do you want to pay for something you already have. The Govt are our employees..they are there to look after what belongs to all of us.

It has nothing to do with the $30..it is the principle..nothing more than a money grab if it was introduced. Did you complain about the rego increases? the fuel subsidy etc etc..I know I sure did.
My local member cannot tell me where all the money has gone..this Govt has had the biggest increase in income of funds from when the GST was intriduced than at any time in the history of the State..where has it gone?

How about we add some more taxes onto the price of of fishing rods..another $5 each..$10 extra on all reels..another 25% on all tackle..how about it jeremy..only 5 or 10 bucks here and there and let the Govt have it...they do such a great job with OUR money.

I have never seen people so keen to give money to a totally corrupt and inept Govt as this one.

PinHead

05-09-2009, 03:14 PM

The Model I am proposing is based on the NSW one which allocates ALL of teh money raised from teh license into 2 trust accounts - one for freshwater & one for saltwater. These accounts are managed by committees - consisting of recreational anglers from all over that state. Money is allocated towards research , angler education, habitat rehabilitation , possibly more buy outs etc etc etc - BECAUSE IT IS MANAGED BY RECREATIONAL ANGLERS http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

The Government CAN NOT just spend the money from the trust accounts - WITH OUT the majority of vote from the TRUST FUND COMMITTEES - which are made up of RECREATIONAL ANGLERS http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

These arguments against the current government will continue to hinder progress until the wider recreational angling community in Qld stop coming up with excuses as to why it won't happen & start voicing & support the motion THAT IT CAN HAPPEN with support from the MAJORITY of the recreational angling community in Qld. Take control of YOUR OWN DESTINTY & ACT or You will still be winging about how hard done by we all are when OUR fisheries are taken from us !

I love change - You go 1st http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/grin.gif

Regards Scotto

surely you do not honestly believe that..a Govt can change the rules any time they feel like it..plain and simple.

Scott Mitchell

05-09-2009, 03:18 PM

surely you do not honestly believe that..a Govt can change the rules any time they feel like it..plain and simple.

Hasn't happened in NSW as yet - because it is LAW & LEGISLATED !

Let's stick to the facts - Scotto

Scott Mitchell

05-09-2009, 03:24 PM

There is only one group the Govt would have controlling anything like Scott's proposal and that is Sunfish..just the thought of that should start some laughter.

The management committees should actually be made up from key recreational anglers across the state in specific zones ;)

But On the Sunfish Note :-
Divided we fall - And all we need now is another fragment group http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

To Quote Warren Steptoe from his Sunshine Connection column in Modern Fishing Jan 09'

Like other fishing "umbrella" organisations in this country. Sun fish hasn't been doing too well lately. Among rank & file people who fish, they lack credibility , and criticism that they're not making an effective stand against various ills assaulting recreational fishing is common.

What ever you think about them though . doing away with Sunfish and starting over is probably not the best way to gain effective advocacy for recreational fishing. It has taken a long time and a lot of effort by sincere people to get Sunfish to where it is today and to set up an alternative is almost unthinkable.Being realistic , it's just not going to happen in today's world. Not in any kind of short term anyway. END quote

Sunfish has a great new Chairman in Barry Pollock at present & I believe we NEED to support Sunfish - before we head off with "another" splinter group that divides our numbers again.

Until such time as our advocacy body has enough No-Strings-Attached funding to operate effectively - how it is , is how it's going to stay !!!!!

Regards Scotto

Jeremy

05-09-2009, 03:55 PM

Your attitude is one of the new age pinky types

you got me there LOL::)

Johnm

05-09-2009, 04:07 PM

Black_Rat

05-09-2009, 04:35 PM

Sunfish has a great new Chairman in Barry Pollock at present & I believe we NEED to support Sunfish - before we head off with "another" splinter group that divides our numbers again.

Regards Scotto

I have no faith in Sunfish after the Morteton Bay saga, they are funded by Government funds hence they are puppets

Splinter groups like ECOfishers QLD stand up for the recreational angler without political flavour, it's an orginisation formed by and for recreational anglers.

Are we a threat ?

Damo

PS: divided we fail .. Yes

ECOfishers QLD and ECOfishers NSW are working together ..... Unity !

PinHead

05-09-2009, 05:12 PM

Hasn't happened in NSW as yet - because it is LAW & LEGISLATED !

Let's stick to the facts - Scotto

sorry Scott..you are niaive..who makes the Laws? a law is only a law after the legislation has passed.

Answer..the Govt makes the laws...who has the power to change the laws..the Govt.

Sunfish..Govt flunkies..hardly said BOO about the green zones.

PinHead

05-09-2009, 06:54 PM

Scott..where can I see the latest NSW annual financial report..from the license fees?

bigjimg

05-09-2009, 07:37 PM

I just learned there are rules for us and some other rule for select others in the charter industry.A licence for us as well you have to be kidding.Sorry if i sound a bit cynnical but these buffoons are running around in government makiing stupid decisions passing rediculous laws while we pay their outlandish salaries.And who knows where the money will end up.I for one have had a gutfull of fees,permits,bullshit water restrictions,speeding cameras,potholes and just about everything else this govt has put out.Blah Blah Blah.Bloody heck that feels better.NO FISHING LICENCE RUN BY THESE CLOWNS.Jim

PinHead

05-09-2009, 07:47 PM

some food for thought:

NSW scheme from their 2007-2008 figures:
Total available - $8.4 million dollars.
The total available was made up of allocations from the trust and amounts carried forward from the previous year.

Now NSW has a population of approx 7.04 million people.
Qld has a population of approx. 4.34 million people.

So..the NSW fishing fee equates to approx 84 cents per head of population
Then we use that figure for the Qld population and we have a total of $3.65 million available...less than half what NSW has.

NSW has a total coastline (including islands) of 2137 kilometres.
Qld has a total coastline (including islands) of 13347 kilometres.

NSW fees then equate to $3930.74 per kilometre of coastline
Qlds approximated fees would equate to only $273.47 per kilometre of coastline.

Now how big would a license fee have to be to equal NSW's? We would have to pay $1.93 for every person in the state as opposed to NSW's 84 cents and that would still only give us $629.00 per kilometre of coastline.

(This is based on the figures from the summaries of NSW DPI)

( I think my maths is correct but it is Saturday night and I should be away fishing)

Blusta

05-09-2009, 08:03 PM

PH, if those numbers are right, the amount of money in NSW trust accounts is a miniscule amount and if that is all that is needed to cause real change then it goes to show what a woeful job government agencies are doing; assuming the NSW rec fishing scene is actually improving..
I wonder how much the increase in this year's rego will add to Qld Govt coffers : ..that might actually be an amount to make real change. I am not whingeing about money. I can afford it at present.
I just DON'T TRUST GOVERNMENT. I wonder how cheap rego was when it was first introduced.
Does anyone know what percentage od SIP fees is returned to impoundment infrastructure and fish stocking?

PinHead

05-09-2009, 08:19 PM

Blusta..the only figures I could find was from a trust fund report showing total amounts avaialble so i would presume this includes the license fees etc.
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/277755/trust-fund-report-2007-08.pdf

even if that is incorrect my point is that..with a much smaller population and a much larger coastline there is no way known we could have a system whereby we pay the same as NSW and be able to achieve much at all.
If the license fee is too high the the once or twice a year mums and dads will not take their kids fishing at all..just leave them home to play on the playstation etc

Sea-Dog

05-09-2009, 08:20 PM

The biggest problem that I see is that the government act as our rulers, rather than acting as a part of the machine.

What role does a governor have in an engine - to prevent the engin from destroying itself by running faster than it is safe to do so - Management.

What really controls the engine is the throttle.

Apparently the government is trying to throttle the lot of us...

and the machine is spluttering because the choke is on. :-[

My vote is no to licenses - unless there is full accounting for the funds, and that those funds are fully used in the management/improvement of the fisheries and related resources.

TheRealAndy

05-09-2009, 08:39 PM

The management committees should actually be made up from key recreational anglers across the state in specific zones ;)

But On the Sunfish Note :-
Divided we fall - And all we need now is another fragment group http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

To Quote Warren Steptoe from his Sunshine Connection column in Modern Fishing Jan 09'

Like other fishing "umbrella" organisations in this country. Sun fish hasn't been doing too well lately. Among rank & file people who fish, they lack credibility , and criticism that they're not making an effective stand against various ills assaulting recreational fishing is common.

What ever you think about them though . doing away with Sunfish and starting over is probably not the best way to gain effective advocacy for recreational fishing. It has taken a long time and a lot of effort by sincere people to get Sunfish to where it is today and to set up an alternative is almost unthinkable.Being realistic , it's just not going to happen in today's world. Not in any kind of short term anyway. END quote

Sunfish has a great new Chairman in Barry Pollock at present & I believe we NEED to support Sunfish - before we head off with "another" splinter group that divides our numbers again.

Until such time as our advocacy body has enough No-Strings-Attached funding to operate effectively - how it is , is how it's going to stay !!!!!

Regards Scotto

Sounds like you are somehow involved with Sunfish?? You are the first person I have heard say such a thing. Problem with Sunfish is that damage has been done and I doubt they will ever regain credibility, certainly not in my eyes anyway.

bigjimg

05-09-2009, 08:41 PM

Also what happens to those of us that pay to be in a club.And have the benefit of the facilities that they provide us with because of the fee we pay.Would we get a discount on our licence fee.I think not.We're better off to dig a canal to our driveway and put in a ramp with all the trimmings.We already pay premium rego's for our rigs so where is that money going.The list is endless.Fishing Licence just shut up.Jim

FNQCairns

05-09-2009, 09:34 PM

Talk about jumping the gun, once a fishing licence is introduced it will be game over just as it is in NSW, the fishery's will forever have a non democratic stranglehold on Angling. Voices of dissent are fire walled, nothing changed, fishers now deal with even more lockout zones and more to come + casual and grass roots the 70% anglers voices are entirely dismissed.

Ever since the NSW fishing licence (licences are no higher than a privileged bestowed to those who need controlling) introduction.

Nothing has been accomplished (definition of) with the licence that was not simply and easily possible without......nothing (definition of).

The political will is not evident from government until they see a monetary and personal bank account return or a democratic imperative, why do we need to bribe them with power further statutory control and money to achieve basic treatment.

All financial stake holders in NSW had large areas of once free (as in freedom) areas removed completely from their pastime.

Buyouts using Anglers money occurred.....why? because fishery management was for so long so fully incompetent that they needed an ignorant patsy to bail them out.
QLD fishery has for a long time now been far over zealous siding with the extremist's in regulation choice as befits and parallels what the labor party on environment has become.

State government is happy to spend money to unjustifiably take away with QLD fishery's blessing hugely vast areas of fish able water without a licence (tax) requirement from any environmental extremist group in an effort to achieve or facilitate those aims.

Taxing a pastime that is healthy and socially responsible and has done no justifiable damage to the environment can never be justified at any rational level. nop matter what the twist of logic expressed.

What will happen as did happen is NSW was the committee got stacked, needs to go hat in hand to fishery for all ok's, is traded with and against. Pays to fund what is solely fishery responsibility.

Fishers who only fish plastics and will not eat there catch, have no one they think highly enough to give their catch to or will not on poor principle....get stacked onto committee's, as was the case in NSW on it's introduction. These type we hear from on ausfish every now and then, the fully blinkered but just like a mad aunt harmless in their self interested ramblings........until they land on a committee and can actively do lasting damage to what fishing was naturally and freely is. Just look at incoherently long and scientific strangled list of fishery bag and length limits in QLD, our godlike and appointed representatives did that with fishery's blessing/pushing...then look at those individuals placed, not elected to represent onto committee seats, individuals often repressing at best 2% of Anglers.

It get worse, those without free (as in freedom) personal stake int Angling get onto committees, people like business owners with a view to profit not Angling and get to vote on behalf of the only pure anglers out there...those that fish once a quarter or less on the spur of the moment with the kids for whiting of a jetty/shore closest to home on kmart rods with super thin mild steel hooks instead of telling the kids to just shut up and watch a DVD.... one here needs to look no further at what the elitist SIP did to the pure and most often the vocal proponents self interested low moral stuff everyone else justification of why that was ever ok.

Seriously we have gotta be smarter than this, why take a fascist's best offering as the only crumb available and seriously for what end?go into hock to save the government the fiscal responsibility......it's scary but not unexpected these days where inward looking self interested individuals run all of the games in town.

I ask for anyone to give just one +ve aspect of this tax that is not obtainable without it, stocks are good, participation is simple ATM, access sucks due to lockouts...will the licence change this? What will it actually do? outside of fuel the fishery machine and their zealot hangers on for funding?

Just one valued +ve outcome that couldn't be achieved otherwise?, QLD anglers face first and foremost problems outside of the scope of any fishing 'paid for privilege' (licence).

Thank god NSW did it first, one of the problem with it's non democratic introduction was there was nothing not already a balls up to compare it with, if NSW is even 50% of how good it can be or why they needed it, we simply do not want or need it.

cheers fnq

NAGG

05-09-2009, 10:02 PM

Having fished & seen the benefits of the NSW model for a number of years ...... I would be more than happy to see the same model adapted in Qld .
ATM many might not see the benefit - as the population increases - you will. The buyout of commercial fishing licences has meant a boon to recreational anglers in the more populated areas ( & even the lesser so)
if funds are funnelled into the fisheries - ie fish stocking & facilities - we can only see benefits ( The SIP scheme has been a resounding success in Qld) .
OK there is a bit of a pain $30pa - but every visitor will be required to buy a licence ( Qld would have the highest level of visiting interstate & OS anglers) .

BRING IT ON & IMPROVE THE FISHERY

Chris

Lovey80

05-09-2009, 11:50 PM

FNQ,

There is a positive mate, the things we want changed about how we are being treated as stake holders can possibly change. Right now what you are suggesting is that "we should just go get a better government to do it for us" unless I have read your text wrong.

Well unless you have been living under a rock the majority of stupid Queenslanders continue to vote these fools into power!!! The QLD labour gov't is a joke when it comes to RecAnglers I agree but thats what we have and if history is any guide it will not change until we do something to make it change..... the majority of the poulation isn't going to do it for us are they? Under these or similar terms we can get better outcomes no matter who is in government.

The thread starter is losing credability in even sugesting sunfish in any way shape or form as our voice. The second they publicly backed MBMP they were dead in the water. New Chairman or not they are shot and need to be replaced sooner rather than later.

Cheers

Chris

dogsbody

06-09-2009, 06:47 AM

If it was based on the nsw model and actually was given the tick I may be pursuaded. BUT and a big BUT is your only as good as your last win.

The only problem with this is how the fisherman has been done over in previous battles. How can we be expected to try something as a licence, then get an outcome in our favour. I feel something has to be done but the big question is what. We as a spieces are not getting what we pay for now,,, why?

Trust is the biggest hurdle we face, and anglers have #*&$ all of it.

I believe will will have a user pays system that's the way things are going no matter how much jumping up and down you do. Will it benefit us? Time will tell.

Dave

Scott Mitchell

06-09-2009, 06:51 AM

Members of committees are government appointees or approved by the government.

How would you propose that the independent members be appointed.

Legislation can be changed very easly.

Not worried anout the $$ although expect increases if introduced.

Governmemt will shift as much of its current expenditure for research, inspectors etc to the fund so we would be unlikely to be better off. The cost of running the fund and the committee would also have to come out of the monies raised.

Lets stick to the ORIGINAL PROPOSAL ;)

Would you suypport a reneral recreational angling license in Queensland IF IT WAS BASED ON THE NSW MODEL :-

1)ALL money raised goes into two transparent Trust accounts – One for Freshwater ( taking over from the current SIPS program – This would be kicked off with a minimum of the average funds raised under the current SIPS over the last 3 years as a starting guide for allocation ) Plus a New Saltwater Trust – where All remaining fund would be held. No funds can be spent without written approval from the management committees.

2) Administration costs to manage the program would be capped at 10% from License contributions – This employs government staff to administer & manage the program.

3) The 1st priority would be to establish a selection of Recreation Fishing havens ( RFH's ) throughout Queensland in Key recreational angling areas IE: Great Sandy Straights – where ALL commercial fishing would be brought out of the designated areas– with no exceptions.

4) All remaining funds would be managed by a selection of committees consisting of recreational anglers from ALL zones with-in the state IE – Freshwater Committee – Saltwater Committee & a Head Committee – consisting of recreational anglers with expertise with in their areas.

5) What are your thoughts on costs ie:-

3 Days = $6.00
1 Month = $12.00
1 Year = $30.00
3 Years = $75.00

6) More back ground can be viewed @ http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/licence-fee (http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/licence-fee)

Let snot get bogged down in - what if's & I recons - Stick with the facts :)

It's a debate worth having - Scotto

Scott Mitchell

06-09-2009, 06:55 AM

Thank god NSW did it first, one of the problem with it's non democratic introduction was there was nothing not already a balls up to compare it with, if NSW is even 50% of how good it can be or why they needed it, we simply do not want or need it.

cheers fnq

So your happy with the way Queensland fisheries are current managed ?

Or your proposal on how it can REALISTICALLY be improved is ?

Regards Scotto

Scott Mitchell

06-09-2009, 07:00 AM

Some stats :-

49,818 registered Ausfish members
1045 Views on this thread since posting
75 replies - quite a few multiples ;)

Total of 60 Votes so far :P

Come on - get off the fence - Scotto

PinHead

06-09-2009, 07:11 AM

NAGG

06-09-2009, 07:41 AM

you don't seem to get it Scott:
This Govt has wasted money everywhere with bugger all to show for it. What makes you think they would leave money in a trust fund? They make the laws and they can change the laws.
A buy back of licenses..what a joke...please have a look at what is happening in Moreton bay in this regard.

Once again..how much income did the NSW system get from licenses only in 2007?

it appears you are very trusting of this current Govt...I know I am not.

I would be happy with the way Qld fisheries were managed if:
1. Everyone has to abide by the same size and bag limits.
2. Any closures are based on actual research and results on the specific areas not on so called worlds best research and guesswork.

This idea that by paying a fee we then become stakeholders in the fisheries is ludicrous. We are all stakeholers now..whether you fish or not..all citizens own it now.

With your proposed model who would control these trust funds? Who would select the so called experts to be on these boards? What would constitute an "expert" to be able to be part of these boards? Would the "stakeholders" get a vote for them or would they be appointed by some faceless beaucracy?

I really don't need any more jobs for the boys thanks...and if I become a "stakeholder" by paying a fee would I have access to these boards to voice my concerns. or do we just have to follow along and abide by what they decide. Just more rules and regualtions in our lives..as if there are not enough already.

I think you would need to start at a minimum of $100 per annum for any fee to have any benefit in Qld.

Hi Pinhead

Take the time to look at the NSW fisheries website - http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/licence-fee/trusts/acorf/about-acorf
you will get a much better idea of the facts ...... you should be also able to find how much money was raised & how & where it was distributed.

Be aware that the funds do not go into consolidated revenue

There are no jobs for the boys ...... Its actually run by fishoes

Fishing Clubs or groups can apply for funding for worthwhile projects Cleaning tables , habitat regeneration , creation of artificial reefs etc

Anyhow ..... As per what Scott has said - If we stick with the how the NSW model works - Its not open to conjecture.

Finally , I will say - The immediate benefits will be difficult to see . However after a few years they will be significant ( particularly licence buyouts)

Chris

PinHead

06-09-2009, 07:53 AM

NAGG

06-09-2009, 08:01 AM

PinHead

06-09-2009, 08:07 AM

I have read that previously..still does not answer any of my questions..it tells who the members are ut who selected them?
No mention of total income from license fees either.
No one seems to be able to answer my questions.

TimiBoy

06-09-2009, 08:17 AM

I'm sure I read recently of a similar licensing trust fund being folded into CR in Victoria.

That is the issue. I'm for a license (on our own model, form of which to be arrived at with extensive consultation with QLD stakeholders) but there is no way to protect the content of that trust fund from some rampaging thief like, oh, say, Anna? How can it be properly protected?

And should Anglers trust our Government, or a roll over patsy that rubber stamps Government policy because if it doesn't it might not get it's fat salary next year, like... say... Sunfish?

And as FNQ said, we are paying top dollar now. Our rego fees, the stamp duty skim on our insurance, and a bunch of tax $ from our fuel usage should be paying millions into an account for the benefit of the fishery.

So let's just roll over and pay a little more? A little more, a little more... one last straw and the camel will fold.

You can take the NSW license idea and... well... how do I say this nicely... scarper.

Tim

Lovey80

06-09-2009, 08:20 AM

you don't seem to get it Scott:
This Govt has wasted money everywhere with bugger all to show for it. What makes you think they would leave money in a trust fund? They make the laws and they can change the laws.
A buy back of licenses..what a joke...please have a look at what is happening in Moreton bay in this regard.

Absolutely right I agree 100%. To simply say, lets just base it off the NSW model is crazy!

Once again..how much income did the NSW system get from licenses only in 2007?

Dunno, but from what I heard for the first few years it went into consolidated revenue before people got pissed.

it appears you are very trusting of this current Govt...I know I am not.

Me either, but whats the alternative? Sit around winging about the Government that the sheep/stupid masses keep on voting in?

I would be happy with the way Qld fisheries were managed if:
1. Everyone has to abide by the same size and bag limits.
You mean pro and charter too?
2. Any closures are based on actual research and results on the specific areas not on so called worlds best research and guesswork.
Thats what we all want. It has nothing to do with this debate.

This idea that by paying a fee we then become stakeholders in the fisheries is ludicrous. We are all stakeholers now..whether you fish or not..all citizens own it now.

Your right we are already stake holders but are we treated like it? Do you feel like you own it? I know I don't!

With your proposed model who would control these trust funds? Who would select the so called experts to be on these boards? What would constitute an "expert" to be able to be part of these boards? Would the "stakeholders" get a vote for them or would they be appointed by some faceless beaucracy?

My minority backed opinion is that ECO manage it (different to the author) but then the ECO members would decide who is part of the commitee. Screw having government decide on who's on the commitee that defeats the point.

I really don't need any more jobs for the boys thanks...and if I become a "stakeholder" by paying a fee would I have access to these boards to voice my concerns. or do we just have to follow along and abide by what they decide. Just more rules and regualtions in our lives..as if there are not enough already.

If I had my way and ECO was that solution, then yes. Join ECO and your a member of the organisation with a full voice at any metting or AGM. Those are the sort of meetings where stakeholders get to voice thier opinion on where funds get spent and where the fishery needs to go.

I think you would need to start at a minimum of $100 per annum for any fee to have any benefit in Qld.

Slowly but surely the fee's would add up and we would see the benefits. I would be prepared to spend much much much more if everyone also would do the same to have the changes happen much more quickly but we cant ask that of everyone so it has to be a gradual progression.

Mate I'm not having a go at you and I am in difference with Scotty also on some areas also. But sitting back and saying that we have a crap government that should be doing better is not going to achieve anything. There are so many issues we need to sort out in our fishery right now and this could solve a lot of them giving the body a lot more time and leverage to fight these guys on the issues of Marine Parks and polution etc.

Cheers

Chris

Lovey80

06-09-2009, 08:25 AM

Oh and Scott, having 10% going to admin costs to GOVERNMENT employees is just stupid...... I am happy with 10% admin costs but to even contemplate that they go to any sort of Government run anything is just asking for trouble. Allow the commitee's to use 10% sure but to allow our money to be used to finance inefficient government employees is just crazy!

Cheers

Chris

Poseidon

06-09-2009, 08:25 AM

Hi Scott,

Great to see this topic raised again and can't wait to see a recreational licence scheme introduced into QLD based upon the NSW model.

I would be more than happy to contribute to a scheme clearly aimed at improving recreational fishing in QLD, the same as it has done in NSW.

$30 a year would go along way and would be a great start.

Regards Cameron.

Lovey80

06-09-2009, 08:37 AM

nagg...I have looked at their website..I could not find actual income from license fees..appears not to be all that transparent to me.

The funds go easily go into cons rev by a stroke of a pen by Cabinet...have a look at what this Govt here did with regards to FOI.

back to my previous question...and how do these fishos get on these boards? appointed or elected?

I would like to know this also but my altenative solution solves this.

The NSW model will not work here unless the fee is ridiculously high.
Personally if just the beach netting was bought out that would be a positive. I dont even chase tailor but would see the benefits. This could solve the problem from the border to the tip of fraser in just a few years. I know there are a crapload of problems that these funds could be used for but hey its a bloody good start,

License buyouts,,they aren't working here so why would the introduction of a fee make it work?
The license buy outs aren't working in the favor of rec anglers because rec anglers arent determining the grounds for which they are implemented right? Assume you were the person charged with the responsibility of making it happen would we see the same outcome?

I vote after we get this through we appoint Pinhead the chair of Pro fish buyouts in SEQ? Do I have a second?

PinHead

06-09-2009, 08:37 AM

Forget the $30 a year..that is nothing...based proportionally (sp) the fee would start at about $300 per annum. Still want a license?

PinHead

06-09-2009, 08:40 AM

honda900

06-09-2009, 09:19 AM

Do you "Disagree" that NSW anglers are better off now than they where prior to the licence ?

If you are serious about understanding alternatives to what is currently on offer - you really should do some research. In NSW they borrowed $20,000,000 from treasury to buy out ALL of the commercial effort from the designated RFH's to proved an IMEDIATE benefit to NSW recreational anglers - this was a loan & will be paid back in time - while still allowing a reasonable surplus to allow other beneficial activities to be paid for ie: research , more inspectors etc

The NSW license has been in place for many years now & I do not believe recreational angling has dropped off or become less popular in that time - if anything the evidence is of the contrary !

Again - How could YOU provide better infrastructure/ management to preserve our fisheries in Qld ?

Regards Scotto

Scott,

to answer your question with a question. Since the introduction of the fishing licence in NSW and the buyout of the commercial licences, what research has been done to validate any conservation information to say that the reduction in commerical / recreactional activities has had an impact on the fish stocks? Where are the scientific facts and where are the study methods?

So the licence has done great things for our NSW brothers, Just explain to me how " taking control" of our own future by going down the licensing path helped the NSW guys, Like the proposed green zone stretching for 50% of the coastline, what does the licence fee do for them.

Nothing not a thing. what use are cleaning tables in a green zone?? So they pay there licence fee to fish while the goverment and the greenies lock up more areas in green zones. Where is the justice in that?

Have a look at the consultitive process that has gone on for Nth QLD or Moreton bay for that matter and explain that?

I am not opposed to green zones, based on true scientific research as opposed to the garbage the DPI have provided the QLD people.

You seem to be pressing a very specific agenda here and I am keen to understand who and why you are pressing your argument so hard when there is no evidence to suggest that "taking control" and "being proactive" will have any other effect than revenue raising for the government, it certainly will not help rec fishos in any way shape or form.

PS. we already are one of the most heavily taxed countries in the world, we pay for the infrastructure already, if we could streamline our government bodies we could truly put the taxation money to proper use, not for political and personal gain as goes on in every goverment department Australia wide.

Regards
Honda.

Poseidon

06-09-2009, 09:20 AM

Forget the $30 a year..that is nothing...based proportionally (sp) the fee would start at about $300 per annum. Still want a license?

Hi Pinhead,

Great to see you have not lost any of your 'Anti Govt' venom on this subject over the years however the $300 a year is a ridiculous figure conjured up to exagerate your position...and you know it.

Sure, if you work on 'Pinhead Maths 101' the figure could be stretched to somewhere near the $300 however you base this entirely on coastline length, population and creative accounting. You conveniently neglect to consider the vast length of coastline from Cairns to the Northern Territory populated by relatively few that would significantly impact your equation.

I am no expert however believe a figure somewhere in the vicinity of the $30 would be acceptable to the average person and a starting point for the debate.

Regards Cameron.

Scott Mitchell

06-09-2009, 09:21 AM

Scott Mitchell

06-09-2009, 09:25 AM

Forget the $30 a year..that is nothing...based proportionally (sp) the fee would start at about $300 per annum. Still want a license?

Based on your in depth discussion with the power to be I take it :P

Lets stick with THE FACTS & Original Proposal crew http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

Regards Scotto

PinHead

06-09-2009, 09:36 AM

how about you provide some facts then Scott..i have asked many questions yet you have provided no answers.

Okay Poseidon..let's have the coastline length...that should bring us back to about $150 per annum.

anti Govt venom..you better believe it..they are corrupt and incompetent.

I would be happy Scott if their actions have been based on true scientific research .

If you think $30 a year from every fishos pocket would achieve much I suggest you think again...and don't use NSW as a model..more people and smaller area...not comparable.

Scott..if you feel so strongly about wanting a rec fishing license then write to your local MLA and suggest it to him/her. See what response you get from him/her.

FNQCairns

06-09-2009, 09:46 AM

two differnt states with 2 totally different fishery management regimes and climes, NSW for years had died in the wool and outspoken pro commercial fisher ministers.
QLD by contrast has had pro environmental extremist ministers.

When drawing a line and placing fully sustainable fishery's management in the centre of that line each state was at opposite ends in culture...still as always in NSW independent reviews place fish stocks as doing well.

Still no one outside of the magic of paying money can give one advantage and still ignores all the proven disadvantages...why??, we are already stake holders, financial stake holders......where is the legislation offering this to any citizen as a higher marquee? you will not find it, where is the benefit in powering up fishery's and giving more to their mates while as Anglers having no higher say in Angling management??

Lots of magic flying around but nothing solid becoming yet.

Want to be a stakeholder without using the word as a con job??, pay the licence into a full corporation (not for profit NGO) with all of the gross lawful rights that befits them, before doing this gain under legislation the right for the NGO to be managed toward Anglers basic rights and access, regulations etc fisherys still involved but they must stay behind within reasons all moves and now actually present scientific argument against the NGOs (Anglers) reasoning not just re-word their personal shaft them all extremist beliefs or as seen recently with snapper and the world wide roving mercenary for hire computer program that allows FOR A FEE anyone to drive their square pegs into it's round holes .......relegate fishery's environmental anti Angling Zealotry to second string and watch how fast fishery backs away from that! loss of absolute control, less money, serious harm done to the card holding environmental Zealots personal aspirations inside department.

An angling licence with basic rights, lawful protection and fair and proper control over their Angling future?? yeah right what planet is that on.

QLD fisherys/government departments cannot even call us by our proper name without choking on their tea and biscuits, they continue collectively to lump us into fishing so as to keep the tar and feathers happening. How many here do not call us as Anglers first? Freudian in the extreme.

Still awaiting one singe advantage that is not shrouded in smoke and mirrors?

Curiously also what will become of to the precautionary principle legislation and the legislated definition of 'fishing' under this special licence??? fishery's culture/corruption?, not to mention present multi disciplinary ruling government culture and corruption. Sooooo many state Angling reforms needed across departments that money (a licence) CANNOT achieve but simply cover deeper under more useless ink.

Still trying very hard to view any real world advantage , change for changes sake as seen a hundred times under enforced regulation rarely succeeds outside of a propaganda coo to initially fool the great unwashed, then more tougher punitive regulation to bandade yet again.

QLD fisherys dropping their self serving firewall culture against the common Angler be a better first step.

cheers fnq

sagair

06-09-2009, 10:50 AM

Based on your in depth discussion with the power to be I take it :P

Lets stick with THE FACTS & Original Proposal crew http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

Regards Scotto

It does not sound to me that he is the one in bed with them.::)
Why is a fee needed for the government to run it better?
Maybe the wise Government should just privitise the fishery straight off and then it could be run better still, seems to work better that way with everything else.;)

deepfried

06-09-2009, 11:37 AM

Some food for thought:

NSW scheme from their 2007-2008 figures:
Total available - $8.4 million dollars.
The total available was made up of allocations from the trust and amounts carried forward from the previous year.

Now NSW has a population of approx 7.04 million people.
Qld has a population of approx. 4.34 million people.

So..the NSW fishing fee equates to approx 84 cents per head of population
Then we use that figure for the Qld population and we have a total of $3.65 million available...less than half what NSW has.

NSW has a total coastline (including islands) of 2137 kilometres.
Qld has a total coastline (including islands) of 13347 kilometres.

NSW fees then equate to $3930.74 per kilometre of coastline
Qlds approximated fees would equate to only $273.47 per kilometre of coastline.

Now how big would a license fee have to be to equal NSW's? We would have to pay $1.93 for every person in the state as opposed to NSW's 84 cents and that would still only give us $629.00 per kilometre of coastline.

(This is based on the figures from the summaries of NSW DPI)

( I think my maths is correct but it is Saturday night and I should be away fishing)

Yeh pinhead the math is wrong based on the figures you have put in unless you have another figure other than the $8.4 milllion. I am guessing you divided NSW rev by population then multiplied by it the Qld population. If so when Qlds popualtion is over half of NSWs how did your end figure come out less then half of the NSW rev figure. Needs a rework that one i think. Also if you then take into account that Qld has a higher percentage of rec fishers per capita than NSW it will boost the figure again. After that you could add in the extra revenue that Qld would collect as it attracts a higher amount of tourist based fishing than NSW. Getting an acurate estimate of fees would have to include these points. Also why does it have to equal the NSW figure anyway and why does it have to be broken down to a dollar figure per Km of coastline ? are you wanting boat ramps etc where people dont live or fish. Much of the Qld coastline is lightly fished or even not fished, another large percentage falls under native title which is unfished by recs or only very lightly with consent of the native land owners therefore not under threat and in need of improving. Its not about dollars per km of coastline is it, its about providing benifits for rec fishers in the areas that are most highly fished and for improving areas of rec fishing where there is going to be the most benefit.

Anyway check the math.

Lovey80

06-09-2009, 05:21 PM

read this Chris: http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25800046-3102,00.html

sell your license..then buy one at a cut price because it was not being used and back fishing you with a pocketful of cash.
The Govt could not even get this right and people want them to implement a rec license scheme..haha

I read about it a while ago mate, but I'll read it again th renew the venom. I not sure why you directed it at me though you are preching to the converted. I am vehemently opposed to a gov't department in charge of this. I agree 100% that they are too incompetent to manage such a thing because there is no accountability in QLD gov't we have seen this by labor getting re-elected.

An NGO like Eco on the other hand could be different. Setting up 5-10-15 year plans to be voted on by the members/stake holders and having the elected comitttees keep us up to date and informed will be requirement to remaining elected to the board.

FNQ, as time goes on your writing gets harder and harder to read. It's the fishing equiv of reading Shakespeare in grade5. Love your zealotous oposition to the zealots though;).

Cheers chris

TheRealAndy

06-09-2009, 06:22 PM

PinHead

So your happy with the way Queensland fisheries are current managed ?

Or your proposal on how it can REALISTICALLY be improved is ?

Regards Scotto

The problem is that we now have two state government departments managing the fisheries, one that is capable, one that is based on the green vote. The one that is based on the green vote got the support from sunfish. Explain to me how two seperate departments who work completely independantly from each other can effectively manage a fishery. To further complicate issue up north we not only have two state based departments, but a federal one as well. Its a joke. How do you think this mess of governemnt departments can deal with a licence?

The solution is simple, one department and one voice for all groups...

FNQCairns

06-09-2009, 06:50 PM

Yeah that is true Chris, Today I cannot be bothered, have learnt it's a total waste of time countering the moderates dumb us all down argument on their home turf and terms, better to cut to the chase of what they are are most often hiding or working hard to remain unsaid.

Sometimes it takes a few posts to uncover the hidden zealot like content behind that moderate post, sometimes it can be nothing more than gullible innocence.

Just read it slower to allow a fuller comprehension, it's a public forum so not saying it will then make any more sense or even needs to:)

cheers fnq

bigjimg

06-09-2009, 06:50 PM

wayno60

06-09-2009, 10:43 PM

I voted NO

Scott Mitchell

07-09-2009, 06:46 AM

Sounds like the NSW licence has been a dazzliing success with a fishery that is astounding and facilities to match.Congratulations.Lets all roll over and take one for the team QLD.I would like to know how many Forums this debate has been posted on and if any information this post has created is being utilised for any other purpose.Am i paranoid or not,but these days nothing surprises me.Jim

I have no agenda - other than I am sick of seeing recreational anglers shafted continually !

As an exercise for my own interest I have posted this same poll on the following two web sites & It is interesting to see the different view points :-

* fishntales.com (http://fishntales.com)

* Saltwater Fly Fishing Aud

What I am really interested in is NOT the issue of do we want a license or not - BUT rather are we all currently happy with the current system for recreational fisheries management in Qld ?

Otherwise - How can it be managed better ?

"I" personally do not see the Qld government providing No-Strings-Attached funding to improve the quality of recreational angling in our state ?

So how do we raise enough capital & support to manage our fisheries better & possible buy out commercial effort from specific key recreational fishing area's in the aim of creating recreational fishing havens ( RFH's ) ?

I was involved in the NSW system from the beginning and owned a tackle store for 17 years - I sat on the head advisory council in NSW ( ACORF ) for over 10 of those years. I have heard ALL of these objections before - AND seen what can be done if a general recreational angling licence is implamented with the same frame work as NSW.

While not perfect it IS a LOT better than what we currently have in QLD currently & I believe it is not a matter of IF - BUT WHEN a license is imposed on us !

So IF we had a choice - wouldn't it be great to have the majority of control over how it is implemented & run ?

The first step is to get the wider angling community to discuss th topic & then gain support for a system that WE CAN have a say in - OR we can stick our heads in the sand & complain about all the reasons why the governement won't do it ?????

Again - this is only a POLL to guage opionion :-

Yes - If implemented on the NSW Model

No - I am Happy with the current Qld Fisheries management

I will post my Alternative Below

Regards Scotto

PinHead

07-09-2009, 06:50 AM

Scott..it would not make a cracker of difference with this mob if there is a license or not..you will still get shafted..end of story..ask anyone who deals with the BSA..complete waste of money.

Scott Mitchell

07-09-2009, 07:08 AM

Scott..it would not make a cracker of difference with this mob if there is a license or not..you will still get shafted..end of story..ask anyone who deals with the BSA..complete waste of money.

With that sort of attitude Pinhead - that is exactly what will happen http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

It can't be done , It can't be done, It can't be done - Hey look it didn't happen ::)

Who would have thought !

Regards Scotto

NAGG

07-09-2009, 07:22 AM

A Question for those that oppose a Qld general fishing licence :)

Is the Queensland SIP scheme working ?????? (a freshwater licence)

So why wouldn't a general licence work ( with modifications) ??????

I bet there would have been the same opposition to the SIP during the introduction phase ......... As there was when the NSW Licence was introduced.

Chris

PS ..... I certainly dont think there is a conspiracy going here as these questions have been raised several times by different people over the years. Fishing is not going to get any better in Qld in the years to come - unless a proactive approach is adopted.........

The one thing you can be confident of - A QLD government will not be dipping into consolidated revenue to start these various programs :( .

Tangles

07-09-2009, 08:13 AM

A fee to pay for the right to throw in a line???

NO... its un bloody australian and wrong in principle

I wonder what the Anzacs would think now? they didnt fight for user pays,

What a soft bend over lot we are if people think we should pay to exercise a basic freedom...

The right to fish is not a privilege, its a freedom, a right...and to support a tax/licence or whatever you want to call it Scott is selfish as you want that money to do good for you ( ie the rec fishers)... This is money over principle. Also this accepts that our elected representatives shouldnt provide facilities for all fishers with all our taxes?

Your proposed tax further erodes what is most important about our rights and freedoms..what about the casual family who wishes to take their kids for a days fishing on the bank? you propose to exclude them as they wont pay or cant afford to pay? You propose to make fishing exclusive and on every level I have an issue with that.

The basic right of choice for every Australian to enjoy nature is already under immense pressure from extremists, a licence only serves to make a basic fundamental right more exclusive.

Its irrelevant if its a dollar or 100. Its the principle. Just because other States have is irrelevant. I thought the sheep where over horizon?

Mike

FNQCairns

07-09-2009, 09:06 AM

I have no agenda - other than I am sick of seeing recreational anglers shafted continually !

As an exercise for my own interest I have posted this same poll on the following two web sites & It is interesting to see the different view points :-

* fishntales.com (http://fishntales.com)

* Saltwater Fly Fishing Aud

What I am really interested in is NOT the issue of do we want a license or not - BUT rather are we all currently happy with the current system for recreational fisheries management in Qld ?

Otherwise - How can it be managed better ?

"I" personally do not see the Qld government providing No-Strings-Attached funding to improve the quality of recreational angling in our state ?

So how do we raise enough capital & support to manage our fisheries better & possible buy out commercial effort from specific key recreational fishing area's in the aim of creating recreational fishing havens ( RFH's ) ?

I was involved in the NSW system from the beginning and owned a tackle store for 17 years - I sat on the head advisory council in NSW ( ACORF ) for over 10 of those years. I have heard ALL of these objections before - AND seen what can be done if a general recreational angling licence is implamented with the same frame work as NSW.

While not perfect it IS a LOT better than what we currently have in QLD currently & I believe it is not a matter of IF - BUT WHEN a license is imposed on us !

So IF we had a choice - wouldn't it be great to have the majority of control over how it is implemented & run ?

The first step is to get the wider angling community to discuss th topic & then gain support for a system that WE CAN have a say in - OR we can stick our heads in the sand & complain about all the reasons why the governement won't do it ?????

Again - this is only a POLL to guage opionion :-

Yes - If implemented on the NSW Model

No - I am Happy with the current Qld Fisheries management

I will post my Alternative Below

Regards Scotto

Thankyou for filling in those large gaps, i was wondering when the acronym would surface, reminds me a little of years ago when the acclimatisation committee or whatever felt they need trout, fox's and rabbits.

Now at least everyone with some reading time can have an informed say, I just googled and picked 2 early results an Ausfish one and an ecofishers one, I ask anyone who could be bothered to read a few then read my posts again...........

here is alink tothe ecofishers one http://www.ecofishers.com/fishing-board/index.php?topic=759.0

Mr Mitchell, what was from the start your responses to the majority of Anglers who where never even close to happy with the heightened, pandering to fisherys, stacked and elitiest committes, corruption, money for indentured mates etc etc that got called from the vast majority of anglers?? Can we see those responses? in detail or where any voices simply consiired desent and ignored.

Anyway cutting the crap as you have just done above what expressly do you want to achieve? and why is yet another arm of fisherys control needed to achieve it?

now is a perfect opportunity for you who was on the inside and a stalwart it seems, to express to us why the committee suited your particular style of politics but firewalled the majority of forced to pay anglers into mute silence??

cheers fnq

Scott Mitchell

07-09-2009, 09:37 AM

Mr Mitchell, what was from the start your responses to the majority of Anglers who where never even close to happy with the heightened, pandering to fisherys, stacked and elitiest committes, corruption, money for indentured mates etc etc that got called from the vast majority of anglers?? Can we see those responses? in detail or where any voices simply consiired desent and ignored.

Anyway cutting the crap as you have just done above what expressly do you want to achieve? and why is yet another arm of fisherys control needed to achieve it?

now is a perfect opportunity for you who was on the inside and a stalwart it seems, to express to us why the committee suited your particular style of politics but firewalled the majority of forced to pay anglers into mute silence??

cheers fnq

I don't get called Mister very often - unless I'm in the #$@! ;D

I have no idea where your heading with this & It is obvious that your more than happy with the way the Qld recreational fishery is being run - and that is all I was after ;)

Regards Scotto

PinHead

07-09-2009, 09:45 AM

With that sort of attitude Pinhead - that is exactly what will happen http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

It can't be done , It can't be done, It can't be done - Hey look it didn't happen ::)

Who would have thought !

Regards Scotto

see..I disagree with you and you want to debase anyone with a different opinion to yours. Did you do that when you were on that committee also and not give what the rec anglers wanted but only what the committee wanted..that is on of my concerns. Werew you elected by rec anglers to that committee? Did you receive ANY funds for being on that committee?

1. I have no problems with green zones if they are based on area specific research.
2. I have no problem with size and bag limits, once again based on research as above.

I cannot see a beaurecrat who currently has his own little power base stepping asied and letting what he would refer to as a bunch of amateurs take over his power base...not in this Govt.

Why should i pay for something that I currently own and have the right to use..if the NSW system is so damn marvellous then go back there and fish under that system.

Lots of things can be done if you want it done..I don;t want a fishing license therefore I will not be doing anything to try and get one.

Have you approached your local MLA yet to try and get him/her to introduce one? It could be interesting how far he/she would be willing to go..could be a pth to poikitcal suicide in some marginal seats.

No good whining to us that you want a license system..whine to your MLA..they are the only ones with the power to do anything.

Scott Mitchell

07-09-2009, 10:01 AM

see..I disagree with you and you want to debase anyone with a different opinion to yours. Did you do that when you were on that committee also and not give what the rec anglers wanted but only what the committee wanted..that is on of my concerns. Werew you elected by rec anglers to that committee? Did you receive ANY funds for being on that committee?

1. I have no problems with green zones if they are based on area specific research.
2. I have no problem with size and bag limits, once again based on research as above.

I cannot see a beaurecrat who currently has his own little power base stepping asied and letting what he would refer to as a bunch of amateurs take over his power base...not in this Govt.

Why should i pay for something that I currently own and have the right to use..if the NSW system is so damn marvellous then go back there and fish under that system.

Lots of things can be done if you want it done..I don;t want a fishing license therefore I will not be doing anything to try and get one.

Have you approached your local MLA yet to try and get him/her to introduce one? It could be interesting how far he/she would be willing to go..could be a pth to poikitcal suicide in some marginal seats.

No good whining to us that you want a license system..whine to your MLA..they are the only ones with the power to do anything.

To answer your questions -

I am not currently a member of any committees or Qld based recreational fishing lobby groups. I am the president of the local Fraser Coast Fish Stocking ass.

Yes I was voted onto that committee ( ACORF ) for my zone - Southern NSW. I applied for the position as a public tender each term & communicated with my customers ( I owned a tackle store , contribute to a number of forums & magazines etc ) .

Yes we were paid for our daily meetings & travel to attend meetings ( approx 4 a year ) . I believe this is only fair , when each committee member dedicates a LOT of their time at no cost to communicate with the wider angling community when required in these rolls. This money came from the trust accounts.

Again - I have no agenda - Just interested in what the wider angling community thinks of the current state of play in Qld?

You are obviously more than happy with the way Qld fisheries is currently being managed - and that is what the poll was intended for.

Thanks Scotto

Sheik

07-09-2009, 10:06 AM

I voted no to a licence. I would like to bring up my experience with qld farming agripolitics, which had similar problems back in the ninteies to what the rec fishing confraternity is facing now: a resource of great value with a government working to take access away from that resource due to that government's political manifesto.
What happened was that a single farming lobby group was formed (Agforce) from a number of smaller orgs (UGA, CU, QGGA).
What we have now is a multi million dollar organisation (Agfroce) that does bugger all for your average farmer because it's now a professional org whose top echelons are beaurocrats that mix in the same circles that politicians, CEO's and lobby groups do. Agforce is now a professional lobby group. Does it do any good? Perhaps so, in political manipulation, getting favours done, putting pressure on here and there, but has it made any difference to your average farmer/grazier?
No.
It's just another layer of funding for farmers to pay for so they can do another stupid three day course at a discounted rate to achieve another level of certification put forward by Agforce itself. It's just more layers of control.
I reckon any fishing party is great in theory, but will end up like Agforce, that is a top heavy beaurocracy that does little for its members except join in the government's need for control number crunching. Trying to control it only puts more constraints on those who do the right thing anyway. THe abusers ignore the rules whatever you try to do to stop them.
Leave me out of it.
FOr God's sake, can't i just go fishing without having to pay someone or ask someone's permission, or account for how i do it?

FNQCairns

07-09-2009, 10:13 AM

Yeah your lucky I usually get just a "Hey you!"

You don't read much on ausfish, far from happy but entirely unhappy to try and butter my bread from the underside in the belief i can change the laws of gravity by doing so.

With respect you do know where I am leading it's exactly the same place the majority of Anglers are in NSW have tried to go for gross years but have no voice under the licence....couldn't you hear them?? If so why not?

So far all we have heard is this 'utopian recreational fishing licence', surly there was an understood flip side to the coin, one devoid of propaganda, you where a stalwart by your own admission....was it really utopia on that committee and for Anglers state wide?, why has since ever since the licences forced legislation (ministers toy?) has there been a ground swell of Angler groups and numbers looking to improve their lot like never before, what have they lost so much amenity, basic rights, assess etc since the licence came in....

i know all this is not what you want to hear but there is not the legislation in force to silence these voices ....yet!

Why Oh why would any model that respected grass roots Anglers ever consider the NSW model as having anything to offer.

You can answer or ignore but be understand there are no stacked committees, firewalls, elite seats mandated under regulation here in this public domain so you can speak freely in reply to any common angler without fear of whatever you feared you would personally lose if you did while holding a seat.

Little secret here, I was gaining a NSW fisherys conservation paycheck before and after the licences introduction, i know what it was designed to be from an internal standpoint and I was before and after this paycheck a grass roots angler so knew what it was from a 'common' Anglers point of view also, the two it seems are still from the little I have read this morning, at opposite ends of what Angling actually is and has stayed solidly just another arm of governement to fight against.

cheers fnq

PinHead

07-09-2009, 10:14 AM

sorry Scott but my belief is that anyone that stands for these type of committees do so at no cost...as soon as you get paid anything you then become part of the system. Sunfish is a perfect example.

Chimo

07-09-2009, 10:36 AM

Sheik makes perfect sense and has relayed experience suffered by many in another field (pardon the pun) In that arena, those landholders way back before it was fashionable, adopted farming systems to conserve their soil, water, energy and labour resources and maintain their profitability and care for the environment without a licence or even much input from government. They shared information about what did work and what didn't and stopped wasting their time constantly "re-inventing the wheel"

Others have highlighted concerns based on our rights as citizens to use our resources in a sensible fashion without mining them.

We dont need a licence, we need one or both of the govt depts who dabble in the fisheries scene to get their act (s) together and deal with the rapers and pilligers be they pros or not.

We need the taxes we already pay used efficiently and effectively.

We need those who want to be on paid committees to do their thing in locations other than the State of Qld and if any of the current crop of politicians wants to support a fishing licence let him or her let us know their thoughts so we can give them proper consideration at the next poll.

In the mean time carry on with the discussion ............

Cheers
Chimo

TheRealAndy

07-09-2009, 10:48 AM

PinHead

07-09-2009, 12:33 PM

To answer your questions -

I am not currently a member of any committees or Qld based recreational fishing lobby groups. I am the president of the local Fraser Coast Fish Stocking ass.

Yes I was voted onto that committee ( ACORF ) for my zone - Southern NSW. I applied for the position as a public tender each term & communicated with my customers ( I owned a tackle store , contribute to a number of forums & magazines etc ) .

Yes we were paid for our daily meetings & travel to attend meetings ( approx 4 a year ) . I believe this is only fair , when each committee member dedicates a LOT of their time at no cost to communicate with the wider angling community when required in these rolls. This money came from the trust accounts.

Again - I have no agenda - Just interested in what the wider angling community thinks of the current state of play in Qld?

You are obviously more than happy with the way Qld fisheries is currently being managed - and that is what the poll was intended for.

Thanks Scotto

I don't know where you got that assumption from..I thought it was very obvious in my previous posts where I stand.

TimiBoy

07-09-2009, 01:20 PM

From the ECOfishers NSW website. Excerpt of a post by user Maniak, Nov 6, 2007.
"Just checked the last ACoRF meeting minutes and saltwater trust expenditure for current year.
Interesting to note where the vast majority of your license money goes - DPI inhouse research.
So the government appointed reps send the trust (your license) money to the DPI bureaucrats and get reappointed and send the trust (your license) money to the DPI bureaucrats and get reappointed and send the trust (your license) money to the DPI bureaucrats and get reappointed and send the trust (your license) money to the DPI bureaucrats and get reappointed and send the trust (your license) money to the DPI bureaucrats and get reappointed..........."
Excerpt from Ken Thurlow, CEO ECOfishers NSW Dec 17 2008
"Fisheries Minister announces the closure of Gaden Trout Hatchery, a core government responsibility. Macadonald apparently considers it a liability. Maybe he has caved in to the greenies yet again. Greenies consider trout a feral (introduced) fish in our waterways and would love to get rid of them and leave highland fishers with no fishery at all in those places.
ACoRF does a deal with their Minister (he appointed all of them!) whereby ACoRF uses at least $417,000 of our licence fees (at the moment) to "rescue" the governments trout hatchery. And Macdonald laughs all the way to the bank! No widespread consultation or negotiations with the states recreational fishers who dutifully supply the funds, the ministers ACoRF fiddles with - just a panicked response and throw some more of our money Macdonald's way."

Well,

Doesn't that just hit the nail on the head. That's how a Government nicks the money, without even putting their dirty little hands on it. I bet the ACoRF people crowed about the victory they had pulled off, too.

If you can't smell sh!t, you nose isn't working.

Tim

Scott Mitchell

07-09-2009, 03:21 PM

With respect you do know where I am leading it's exactly the same place the majority of Anglers are in NSW have tried to go for gross years but have no voice under the licence....couldn't you hear them?? If so why not?

I was a member of ANSA - NSW , GFAA & dealt with a LOT of anglers in NSW through the fishing media - And I have to say MOST "grass root" anglers I dealt with were "mostly" happy with the license system after we all got used to the system & started to see & catch the benefits. I believe this is still the case today with the majority of anglers in NSW - as I still have plenty of mates down that way ;)

Like I have stated from the beginning - I am interested in what the wider angling communities opinion is towards how the Queensland recreational fishery is currently managed ?

Yes - If implemented on the NSW Model

No - I am Happy with the current Qld Fisheries management

I will post my Alternative Below

Regards Scotto

07-09-2009, 03:44 PM

The problem with the actual poll question is the supposition that either we are happy with the current management:-[ or we choose the NSW system:'( or what other views we have....post here

While the NSW system has some supporters and clearly some positives it also has plenty of knockers.

What is missing is what happens to fishing when it becomes a privilage as oppossed to a right.

What will, and has happened every time a recreational fishing license is implemented is that participation rates fall.

Over regulate something, make it difficult, take away the spur of the moment element and people just don't bother. Is this what we want?

Mentally picture "hey dad, will you take me fishing? (Bugger, need a license, not sure...too hard)....Sorry mate, I can't...how about a new game for your playstation instead"

SIP is by any measure a success(for those who fish the dams) but I know from personal experience that a lot of fishos don't bother fishing the dams BECAUSE their permit is out of date/don't have one/can't be bothered.......and I'm one of them. I'd rather go in the river/out front despite living less that 30 minutes from Prossy dam.

I have always personally oppossed a rec fishing license because I see it as the beginning of the end for rec fishing as a simple, easy, high participation rate form of recreation for the masses. Anyone can sit on a jetty or river bank and have a go. The number of old people I see in van parks who fish once or twice a year, on holidays, just because it is an easy and cheap form of social activity and entertainment and a license, potentially, removes that sector.

Yes it may improve the fishing, reduce poor commercial practices and result in benifits in terms of facilities BUT at the cost of actually harming the sport long term.

If and a big IF a rec fishing license gets up and that money pours back into rec fishing (after the assummed leakage to the bureaucrats) the fishing may actually be better, but only better for those who still participate....then in 20 years time when the actual number of people who still fish, and pay a license, falls to such a low level as to be of no consequence....what then?

Despite all the potential positives and management models and rational carefull reasoning put forward by people whose opinions I generally respect I think a rec fishing license is abhorant and the death knell for an iconic Australian freedom. The simple bloody right to just "go for a fish" without all the bureaucratic crap we have to put up with in just about every other facet of our lives.

To digress a little it is wrong to be negative about a way of improving the lot of rec fishing without offering an alternative solution,

At the last election something amazing happened. Both "sides" had photo opps playing to the "fishing vote".......just like every US president candidate has a photo opp with the "good old boys NRA", guns an all.

Why?

It had never happened before. It happened this time because the press had coined the phrase "The Fishing Vote" and "The Fishing Vote" was a quantified number. It was 7%. It was quantified because TFPQ had quanitified it in 4 electorates at the last state election.

Scott rightly worries about the future of rec fishing and how to secure its funding. Its easy. Make fishing politically important. Do you see any talk about needing a license to hug trees (figuritivly speaking). The Government finds lots of money for "environmental" projects because they know there are votes in it.

It is, IMO, the fundamental flaw in the ecofishers position. Lobbying, with nothing to offer in return, is just begging. Offering votes for favour, is, for better or for worse, how our system of government appears to work.

Having "had my go" and promising to stay out of politics it is not my place to stir this up again but TFPQ and AFLP are going through a rebirthing stage right now after some seriuos legal issues were cleared up and maybe, just maybe, the new team will pick up the ball and give the "fishing vote" some teeth again.

IMO apolitical is code for "sitting on the fence and not wishing to upset anyone". For what its worth the WWF, Greenpeace, Wilderness Society, PETA, etc, etc, will all try to tell you they are "apolitical"...what a crock......they are empowered and emboldened by the green vote.........ironically, a vote of just over 7%.

Governments don't listen to you because you are , rational, reasonable and "nice"............they just don't work that way. They listen to environmental lobby groups because they have a stick to wave. Organised, measurable votes.

KC

Scott Mitchell

07-09-2009, 03:48 PM

From the ECOfishers NSW website. Excerpt of a post by user Maniak, Nov 6, 2007.
"Just checked the last ACoRF meeting minutes and saltwater trust expenditure for current year.
Interesting to note where the vast majority of your license money goes - DPI inhouse research.
So the government appointed reps send the trust (your license) money to the DPI bureaucrats and get reappointed and send the trust (your license) money to the DPI bureaucrats and get reappointed and send the trust (your license) money to the DPI bureaucrats and get reappointed and send the trust (your license) money to the DPI bureaucrats and get reappointed and send the trust (your license) money to the DPI bureaucrats and get reappointed..........."
Excerpt from Ken Thurlow, CEO ECOfishers NSW Dec 17 2008
"Fisheries Minister announces the closure of Gaden Trout Hatchery, a core government responsibility. Macadonald apparently considers it a liability. Maybe he has caved in to the greenies yet again. Greenies consider trout a feral (introduced) fish in our waterways and would love to get rid of them and leave highland fishers with no fishery at all in those places.
ACoRF does a deal with their Minister (he appointed all of them!) whereby ACoRF uses at least $417,000 of our licence fees (at the moment) to "rescue" the governments trout hatchery. And Macdonald laughs all the way to the bank! No widespread consultation or negotiations with the states recreational fishers who dutifully supply the funds, the ministers ACoRF fiddles with - just a panicked response and throw some more of our money Macdonald's way."

I believe these are "observations" - I can confirm this is NOT how it happens ::)

The general anglers who sit on ALL of these committees genuinely want to see improved fisheries for ALL the anglers in their state. These positions are NOT - jobs for the boys >:(

I'm not up to speed with Gaden - BUT if the trusts paid to buy out the Hatchery - I would take it that it is now owned by the anglers of NSW & will now provide stocking for the state. Why would this be a bad move - particularly if the trusts owned the real estate ? I'd say that the anglers of NSW now have complete control over that resource - because THEY OWN IT ?

In regards to the research , most of the best people for the job work for the department. The research requests are made via the trust account committees & finalised by ACORF. This is great work to have done & would not be possible with out the license.

Regards Scotto

TimiBoy

07-09-2009, 04:10 PM

STUIE63

07-09-2009, 04:22 PM

You're all over it Tim this question reeks
Stuie

Scott Mitchell

07-09-2009, 06:02 PM

A point on the question as posed - elaborating on what has been said previously. We have 3 options:

1. Like the NSW model, or
2. Like things as they are, or
3. Somehow have the knowledge, training and foresight to be able to detail an entirely new system for Qld, without consulting the stakeholders. In short, I am capable of presenting a complete solution, which is normally botched by a whole department.

So really, you've set it up so that anyone who disagrees with the first two is a whinger, because they are not providing a solution.

Yet that solution is something that will necessarily mean that a great deal of consultation, time and energy will have to be expended to get it right. In short, no one person can answer it.

Sounds like the sort of question that might be posed by a Politician to generate the ammo to discredit their opposition, but not to resolve anything.

Tim

Alright Tim - How would you like the Poll to be questioned ?

To set the record straight :-

* I do not believe Queensland fisheries are being sustainably managed from a recreational angling view point.
* I understand that it costs money to buy out commercial licenses & that there is room to remove these from SOME key recreational angling areas ie: Great sandy Straights etc
* I do not believe the government is going to provide no-strings-attached funding to buy out commercial effort from key recreational angling areas ?
* I do not believe the government is going to provide funds to improve research for key recreational angling species.
* I do not believe the government is going to provide funding for better angler education & communication projects across the state ?
* I do not believe the government is going to help fund saltwater stocking & assessment projects ?
* Plenty more @ http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/your-fees

So if the government has not / can not provide funding for these types of projects - How do we get the funding ?????

Based on what I saw & was directly involved in - in NSW I am in favour of pay a license fee BASED ON THAT MODEL - Transparent TRUST ACCOUNTS where ALL the money goes & is accounted for !

Just my view - Scotto

TimiBoy

07-09-2009, 06:28 PM

Alright Tim - How would you like the Poll to be questioned ?

How about

3. Would you support a Queensland License if the method with which it was administered was determined through the use of a proper, transparent and public consultation with all stakeholders?

Seems a bit of a no brainer, really...

Tim

PinHead

07-09-2009, 07:19 PM

No Scott..i would not support the NSW model where people get paid to sit on the board.

transparent trust Accounts..in Qld..let the tooth fairy administer them then

borisdog

07-09-2009, 08:12 PM

Jesus Wept.

When will we wise up.

Recreational fishos volunteering to pay money to fish, having already contributed considerably in various forms is, in my humble opinion, about as smart as playing Russian Roulette.

The Pollies must love it when the unwashing volunteer to pay money for an activity that is free, particularly given they've already got their huge wedge in all the stuff we buy to go and do that "free" activity.

Absolute madness.

Most governments couldn't manage a packet of Weeties at Woolie, even if you told them what aisle to look in. If we believe that giving them cash to manage the natural fishery will make it better, or that other great line of tripe trotted out - give us a say, then there are some seriously delusional issues we have with our thought processes.

Darryl

mangomick

07-09-2009, 08:20 PM

Scott,

I personally believe that there is sufficient funds collected through GST and taxes on recreational anglers to buy out all neccessary commercial licences in Queensland and have plenty left for research.

Having said that, the importance of recreational fishing in not only Queensland, but the whole of Australia, far outweighs the benefits provided by current commercial practices.

This is where Qld Tourism, State Development and DPI&F need to step up to the plate. You simply have to look at what has happened in the NT in recent years to know that one fish can contribute many thousands of dollars to an economy, whereas if it gets caught by commercial fishers, it provides very little.

Queensland is on the brink of either establishing one of the worlds best recreational and tourism based fisheries or seeing it collapse under misguided government policy.

Thanks for this post and it has been discussed before. I just hope people see the big picture and are not lead to believe that a recreational fishing licence would be the saviour of the recreational fishery in Qld. I know the NSW model has provided some great outcomes, in particular " estuaries ", but we must be aware of what happened recently in the Moreton Bay Marine Park licence buy-back scheme, where many licences were bought back only to see the " effort " reduced by about 2%. That was one hell of a stuff up. Even the commercial operators told the gov this would happen.

Cheers Phill
.
.
.
.
.
.

Well said Phill. My thoughts exactly.

honda900

07-09-2009, 09:58 PM

We (the taxpayer) have well and truly paid for the small joys in life like driving a car on a public road to which we the "public" have paid for.

As per the boat ramps, pontoons and the rest that we "the taxpayer" have paid for several times over.

Scott,

reading between the lines of this thread, you have posed yourself as a wannabe politician to represent the masses, unfortunately your agenda is not right. perhaps you should consider turning to the dark side and supporting the No vote.;)

Just so we have some clarity I have worked with politicians from the highest level of government in Aus to the lowest over the the last 30 odd years, so I have seen and understand some of the Idealism and self promotion that goes on and the pure and utter disgraceful behavior and waste.

Regards
Honda.

sleepygreg

08-09-2009, 12:39 AM

My summation of the responses so far.

The governement is corrupt and incompetent and cant be trusted to manage the states fisheries.

There is no way anyone is going to pay a fishing licence fee.

It is our god given right to rape an pillage our waterways.

We dont trust anyone to manage our fisheries.

Anyone who wants to try to improve our fisheries must have another hidden agenda.

Never trust politicians (well that a bluddy given)

Lets bag out anyone who even thinks about trying to start a discussion about how to improve things.

While we have this splinter mentality of infighting amongst ourselves.....the greenies/PETA/WWF have us snookered.

I the ideal world we would have a Political party that unifies the fishing/4wd/camping/boating fraternity.....but I doubt that is going to happen. We seem to be passionate about our sport, but not passionate about fighting for it. We confine ourselves to arguing with each other about which state has a better method........bloody hell....its ok with a game of football........swings and roundabouts.......but we are talking about our favourite passtime here....and that of many AUSTRALIANS....many of whom see Qld as the mecca of their persuit.

I prefer to relate to Scotts 3rd question.....WHAT IS A BETTER WAY TO TO ACHIEVE WHAT WE WANT (my wording not his).

If any of you think that Scott is promoting something that hasnt been thought of by our beloved pollies, then you are living in a fools paradise. It has been on the agenda of every State and Territory Government for as long as I can remember.

Lets take the emotion out of the debate and look at the practicalities of what could be....on both sides. What can WE, as a recreational body (if in fact we have one ) do to ensure we have a say in how our resource is managed.

mangomick

08-09-2009, 01:32 AM

i've just read Fish and Boat magazine and a reply on the subject by Emmanual Theodosiou from Townsville Marine is spot on. Good on you Emmanual . Your dead right in everything you have said.

Lovey80

08-09-2009, 01:36 AM

Ok so it's almost unanimous that QLDers or those that have posted here, would not support a Rec Fishing licence. So after 9 pages of Bickering we see the results show that in fact 42% in fact voted yes at this stage...... I am not sure wether they really voted yes to a fishing licence or yes to a licence the same as the NSW system. Going by the ones that actually took the time to voice an opinion I would think its safe to say that those that voted yes found it's easy to just click yes because they aren't oposed to 30 bucks a year if they see the benefits of it.

Now a similar portion voted no also at 43%. It is easy to also assume due to the lack of writen responses that the 43% may in fact just be oposed to the license but are infact not happy with the way the fishery is managed currently.

I was one of the 13% that voted I have an alternative but one of the few that actually presented one. That being said its hard to assume what people want in that category without further info.

The problem with the poll is it was asking 5 questions and giving 3 options of answers. Like timmy said for those that are unhappy with the current structure but don't want a Licence-period or one on the NSW model they have to have an educated or at least somewhat well thought out plausible plan of thier own or they would have got flamed by all and don't want to sound stupid.

I like the comment here from LuckyPhill

"This is where Qld Tourism, State Development and DPI&F need to step up to the plate. You simply have to look at what has happened in the NT in recent years to know that one fish can contribute many thousands of dollars to an economy, whereas if it gets caught by commercial fishers, it provides very little."

These are very very wise words and yes the above mentioned departments do need to step up to the plate. QLD in some ways really is a Fishing Mecca. It should be treated like it and promoted as one.

The problem is, the current political climate we have in QLD puts next to NO pressure on these departments to do so. They can sit around being incompetent as they like with regard to this with no one to answer to. Politically the fishing vote held a little say last time round but no where near enough to make the short term changes that are drastically needed.

3 Questions to you that have responded.

1) So, if it is decided by those few of you out there that have the balls to actually voice your opinion in writing, that we don't need a licence and (your right) have paid through the nose in taxes already to have the rights to a better fishery....... What can we do to raise the funds needed to take control as the largest (by far) stake holder in this debacle??????

Lovey80

08-09-2009, 01:44 AM

2) Is even attempting to raise the funds a waste of time and we should just wait and hope to change the polititians in power and let them make the right choices for us.... Possibly taking generations?

3) Is it possible to work with what ever government of the day we have and slowly get the upper hand over the greens and this is the approach we should take..... Also possibly taking generations???

Cheers Chris

Cheers

Chris

PinHead

08-09-2009, 02:54 AM

Chris..why does there need to be a viable option?
Why not have the current system operating but with actual research for size and bag limits and green zone research.

There is no need to reinvent the wheel...just grease the bearings.

Greg...when does any organisation have everyone in agreement? Wow...how ineffectual that organisation would be without listening to all concerns of its members.

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 06:16 AM

1) So, if it is decided by those few of you out there that have the balls to actually voice your opinion in writing, that we don't need a licence and (your right) have paid through the nose in taxes already to have the rights to a better fishery....... What can we do to raise the funds needed to take control as the largest (by far) stake holder in this debacle??????

2) Is even attempting to raise the funds a waste of time and we should just wait and hope to change the polititians in power and let them make the right choices for us.... possibly taking generations?

3) Is it possible to work with what ever government of the day we have and slowly get the upper hand over the greens and this is the approach we should take..... Also possibly taking generations???

Cheers Chris

This will be interesting reading ;)

Regards Scotto

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 06:20 AM

Scott,

reading between the lines of this thread, you have posed yourself as a wannabe politician to represent the masses, unfortunately your agenda is not right. perhaps you should consider turning to the dark side and supporting the No vote.;)

Regards Honda

Nothing could be further from the truth - BUT I will stand up for my rights to protect the resources that I enjoy more than anything else !

Never been one to sit around chat boards & boat ramps whinging & never afraid to voice "my" opinion :P

Regards Scotto

Lovey80

08-09-2009, 06:26 AM

Basicly Pinhead your asking for option 3 right? If your happy for it to take a few generations to grease the wheel under this current climate then sure. I say a few generations because we have already shown we are the whipping boys when it comes to the EPA and Gov't policy.

Cheers

Chris

P.S. Scott my previous post was a total hijack sorry. Or at least turning it in a new direction. If you want ill start a new thread.

TheRealAndy

08-09-2009, 06:37 AM

This will be interesting reading ;)

Regards Scotto

The first thing that needs to be done is by disolving any political department (state or federal) involved with fisheries other than the one originally designed to manage the fisheries. This means getting rid of EPA and the GBRMPA initially and channeling those funds into the department that actually does do research. ie the DPI&F. It may not solve the problem, but its a good starting point.

FNQCairns

08-09-2009, 08:05 AM

A fishing licence remind's me of a clunker, visit supercheap buy some bling (pay money) fit the neon, SS peddles and some fluffy dice...yoo hoo a clunker that now emotionally appeals, good for him!, but it's still a clunker because the bits or the whole that make it a clunker where ignored.

i have no large stake in going fishing the rot already cast upon us has decreased what was once fishing (amentiy) to this degree, it's deliberate and the ideological aim behind fisherys management (GBRMPA and EPA yes they do, and Fisherys), if fishing went away so be it, if it becomes relegated toward the staus of a 82 model bling mobile so be it.

How will a fishing licence deal with the militancy and despotic attitude of GBRMPA and what return will the licence fee see from the EPA.

Until at it's MOST BASIC a licence can deal with GBRMPA, EPA and Fishery's on the same footing the concept can never be more than ignorant drivel or more usually in recreational circles, self serving drivel!

cheers fnq

yellowbeard

08-09-2009, 09:21 AM

As a NSW Cockroach I totally agree with all the 'nay' voters. Like we've been just reeling in bucketloads of fish since they introduced the NSW fishing licence, just like we've been winning the State of Origin series. Meahwhile we in NSW trust our state government and we're more than happy to help them through their bankruptcy and corrupt property development dealings by paying even more fees, land taxes, stamp duty and various licences -- as long as no more whistleblowers get whacked. And maybe the states could introduce more airport and travel taxes like the Feds if that helps. Like the last time I flew overseas my 18-month-old daughter was privileged to only pay 10% of the Qantas airfare as long as she 'lap-sat', which was about $100, and the govt put $215 tax on that so we had to pay $315 for her ticket -- no seat. And as there was little turbulence on the flight I put that down to the extra fees and taxes that we paid so I didn't mind. More fees and licences? Aarr me harties, pull the other leg, it's made of wood!

Chris Ryan

08-09-2009, 10:06 AM

Hi all,

FYI - a state based license won't have any influence on the federally managed GBRMPA. That zoning and management is the key difference between NSW and QLD that there are two levels of Government involved in managing the fishery in our salt waters.

As for the Departments in QLD managing fisheries, don't forget we have SEQ water now involved in the management of freshwater with their idea for boat permits as well as their non consultation with rec fisherman completely in the new dam down Beaudesert way and thus no infrastructure for boating at that location.

We have stayed out of this debate for a while now but think it is time for an ECOfishers response. QLD is not going to have a license this year or maybe next but there is a program of regional management test projects being looked at which may or may not include any licensing in the future. ECOfishers has been invited to be a key stakeholder on this project. If the Government of the day says it is a done deal and we are getting a license system after the research has been done, then we need to be the holder of the keys to the safe; that part I agree with. I also agree that DPI&F should be funded properly to do its job and get support from other Departments such as tourism to assist rec fishing grow in QLD as it is massive dollars to our economy and needs to be respected as such.

I personally have an issue with user pays being the first answer though as we don't see cyclists paying for licenses to use our roads or footpaths. We don't see dog owners paying for off leash park areas, kids playgrounds don't have a paybox at the gate either. Their infrastructure is covered off in other income the Government receives. I think Governments have been negligent for too long in providing not only facilities but also research funding into fishing as it has always been the little bit on the side of primary industry.

That is why we need to have a multi focused plan in place. One to be on the committee's and let Sunfish know they are under pressure to deliver to Rec fisho's or get out of the way, two to lobby the Government to review their spending habits in relation to rec fishing, three is to be part of the bigger group of fisherman and work with pro/charter as well as tackle, boat makers etc and four to get individuals to assist in spreading the word and do the right thing by the environment and the fishery.

That is why we set up ECOfishers in QLD. Yes the website is low on info and we have a team working on that but most of us have spent more time in meetings with key players in this industry and within Government than writing of late and we are getting somewhere. I am happy to say if you guys that are passionate about this license issue want to join ECOfishers QLD and work together on a plan as the working group for this, please get in touch with us. We need for's and againsts to work on all aspects so IF we need to address this WE have already got one written in the best interests of our members - which is YOU the recreational fishing community.

grumpy santa

08-09-2009, 10:46 AM

The way the present government seems to be thinking is that if you have a tourist resort, charter business or at least an ABN you're worth listening to.

Money talks and they listen.

Rec fishers don't pay so they think 'who cares'. If rec fishers pay for use of a resource (fish) they will need to be listened to. If paying for a fishing permit is what it takes for the government to get off its arse and listening to rec fishers, then I'm all for it.

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 11:49 AM

The first thing that needs to be done is by disolving any political department (state or federal) involved with fisheries other than the one originally designed to manage the fisheries. This means getting rid of EPA and the GBRMPA initially and channeling those funds into the department that actually does do research. ie the DPI&F. It may not solve the problem, but its a good starting point.

And how would you propose this is implemented ?

Regards Scotto

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 11:54 AM

P.S. Scott my previous post was a total hijack sorry. Or at least turning it in a new direction. If you want ill start a new thread.

Cheers Chris

Thanks Chris - I would like this poll to run it's coarse as started. Although I sometimes wonder - 10 pages in & the same handful are still rambling on about the sames issues :P

Rec fisho's wonder why we continually get shafted - We can't ever get a consensus to pull in ANY direction at the same time - BUT look out if it ever happens ;D

Regards Scotto

Tangles

08-09-2009, 12:10 PM

STUIE63

08-09-2009, 12:11 PM

PinHead

08-09-2009, 01:00 PM

rambling are we scott? well how about answering the many questions I have asked or does that make it too difficult to back up your plans.

and you are still whinging on a chat board and rambling on about adding another Govt tax.

Scott..tell me any one group that does all agree..if so they must just be a bunch of brain dead lemmings. Or perhaps you are looking for a part time job..get a few bucks from the Govt???

so once again..how much comes in from licenses in NSW ???

recreational salt water fishing license = another tax.

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 01:10 PM

Well Scott,

In your view they are obviously rambling as they dont agree with you? great way to have a discussion isnt it.? you asked for opinions, asked people to put up their views and get off the fence and whine about those who beg to differ.

I didnt vote as the questions where all loaded.

I do not see how the questions can be viewed as loaded ?

And if you read through all that has been said - It's the same arguments ,worded differently each time .This can't be done because the government cannot be trusted, is corrupt , mismanaged etc,etc ?

I am not happy with how the current state of play is geared towards recreational anglers in Qld. I do not see the government offering to give recreational anglers more money for better management - I could be wrong here ?

So if we can't get funding from the current system - how do we raise it ?

I am a realist - NOT a Pessimism :P

Regards Scotto

TheRealAndy

08-09-2009, 01:17 PM

And how would you propose this is implemented ?

Regards Scotto

Well I suggest we do the opposite to what was done to create these departments, and that is lobby the government for change. Will it happen? Well I dont know. But the greens lobbied for it and got it, so you cant say its impossible.

PinHead

08-09-2009, 01:20 PM

there we go again..if we disagree we are pessimists..amazing debating skills.

How about joining a lobby group that may make them spend some of the money they already get from us.

I am a realist also and adding another tax is definitely not the way to go.

here are some examples:
If we make everyone pay an ambulance levy we will have a great service...yeah right!!
If we let competition into the electricity industry the consumer will get lower prices..yeah right!!

There are only 2 examples of the crap we have been fed by this Govt..let alone the water grid..that is another good one...and you honestly believe they would be forthright with fees from a license..hahahaha...look out..pigs are about to take off.

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 01:46 PM

There we go again..if we disagree we are pessimists..amazing debating skills.

I believe a license/user pays scheme CAN be implamented because IT HAS BEEN DONE in NSW ;)

You say it can't be done - because you don't trust the government based on their track record :o

If I believed the Government would provide no-strings-attached funding to improve our position - I would be all for it. There's no question it can be done - look at what the NT has achieved . But then you need to review your point above ?

Only time will tell I suppose ?

I love change - You go 1st ;)

Regards Scotto

Regards Scotto

honda900

08-09-2009, 02:35 PM

I believe a license/user pays scheme CAN be implamented because IT HAS BEEN DONE in NSW ;)

You say it can't be done - because you don't trust the government based on their track record :o

If I believed the Government would provide no-strings-attached funding to improve our position - I would be all for it. There's no question it can be done - look at what the NT has achieved . But then you need to review your point above ?

Only time will tell I suppose ?

I love change - You go 1st ;)

Regards Scotto

Regards Scotto

Scott.

1. why when we already pay for this as a public service?
2. the money we are already spending is going where?
3. you cannot trust the government they have a proven track record of being inept and incompent. Truly if you ever get to meet these people, very few are actually trying to help the people, the majority are in it for personal gain (well and truly proven).
4. you have not described in any way shape or form that your / our "rights" as fisherman will in any way be held in a better regard / political positioning / barganing position.
5. The licence scheme in NSW has done nothing for closures green zones etc.

6. Just because it has been done, does not make it right. Agreed some of the funding has been put back into the fishing community, but what has been spent on infrastructure staff - new departments to support this?

7. Change Management well that is probly my specialty and I can assure you that the public service are not able to cope with change, so old habits continue into the future. I.E, at the end of each financial cycle the government departments need to spend the remainder of their allocated budgets, now this happens because if they dont spend the money their budget allocation for next year is reduced accordingly, not wanting to do this they go "literally" on a shopping spree at the end of each financial year.

You want a place to find money, simple offer high ranking public servants a bonus for saving money on their budgets. do it right and the money you are looking for could be found 10 fold.

Consider the hear and now aspect of your agument, wonder what it will cost for your son or daughter in 20 years to have a fundamental pleasure of going fishing please let me know of any taxes that you know have been recinded and not replaced with some other type of revenue raising.

Ps. I dont hide behind my computer either, I dont winge about the facilities we have or the service that we get, and quite willingly stand up for my rights not to be railroaded down a path that will cost me for the rest of my and my childrens life.

Regards
Honda.

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 02:42 PM

isn't that funny we are not pulling in any ONE direction as you so put it but you are another person with an agenda that wants us to go the way you want and if we don't then we don't pull in any ONE direction .
I am so over the suggestion that we have to pay to use what we already own do you get it we already OWN IT why should we pay
and I thought Andy was making sense instead of having DPI ,GBRMPA and EPA or DERM as it is now called just have DPI
Stuie

Stuie - I DO NOT have an agenda :'(

Rec fisho's - nationally have a bad track record to needing to do everything themselves - better than teh next / last bloke. Rather than collectively & decisively running with one team to get the majority of support. I do not have an answer for this - and I have been frustrated by outcomes from Recfish , Sunfish etc - BUT did these groups ever have the majority of support to provide real clout ?

One of the best rallies I attended was the "save our slimies rally" at parliament house. Over 3 months of national media attention & how many boats turned out - about 20 ! The ACT game club had about 200 at the time - but did they come out ::)

Have a look at how many submission there have been on any major issue effecting rec anglers - we're our own worst enemies :o

Regards Scotto

honda900

08-09-2009, 03:00 PM

Scott,

Truly how many boats are in canberra.. ::) The game club have there boats where?

Regards
Honda.

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 03:03 PM

I'll answer this to best of my ability :-

1. why when we already pay for this as a public service?
* Yep agree - mismanagement from the government - & what chance have we got this improving over public health , roads etc ?

2. the money we are already spending is going where?
* Yep - See above ?

3. you cannot trust the government they have a proven track record of being inept and incompetent. Truly if you ever get to meet these people, very few are actually trying to help the people, the majority are in it for personal gain (well and truly proven).
* Haven't been in Qld that long - but will take your word on it ?

4. you have not described in any way shape or form that your / our "rights" as fisherman will in any way be held in a better regard / political positioning / bargaining position.
* In NSW we ( ACORF ) used the figures from the license system to show how many anglers would be effected each time we had a threat to our fisheries. This did not aid the end result in every case - BUT it is a great tool to be able to say precisely how many anglers will be effected with any changes in a given area based on license sale numbers. If you also have a look at what has been achieved directly from license funding - that would not have been possible with out it - "I" believe NSW anglers are far better off today than prior to the license system.
PS:What about all the free loaders ( I say this in gest ;D ) that come across the border to enjoy the fishing in Qld - shouldn't they contribute as well ?

5. The licence scheme in NSW has done nothing for closures green zones etc.
* Again it definitely helps having accurate figures on the amount of anglers who will be impacted on these areas to lobby with - but I am not sure how we move forward on reducing these impacts in future ?

6. Just because it has been done, does not make it right. Agreed some of the funding has been put back into the fishing community, but what has been spent on infrastructure staff - new departments to support this?
* I have been out of the "loop" in NSW for over 4 years - but believe the general feedback from the grass root anglers is still quite positive towards the license & the way funds are being managed. You will never please all of the people all of the time.

7. Change Management well that is probably my specialty and I can assure you that the public service are not able to cope with change, so old habits continue into the future. I.E, at the end of each financial cycle the government departments need to spend the remainder of their allocated budgets, now this happens because if they don't spend the money their budget allocation for next year is reduced accordingly, not wanting to do this they go "literally" on a shopping spree at the end of each financial year.
* If ALL of the funds are allocated to transparent trust accounts - I believe that fixes these issues.

You want a place to find money, simple offer high ranking public servants a bonus for saving money on their budgets. do it right and the money you are looking for could be found 10 fold.
* Would be great if it worked ?

Consider the hear and now aspect of your argument, wonder what it will cost for your son or daughter in 20 years to have a fundamental pleasure of going fishing please let me know of any taxes that you know have been rescinded and not replaced with some other type of revenue raising.
* If the fisheries collapse to such a point that it is not viable to spend the money to enjoy our pass time - you won't need a license

Ps. I don't hide behind my computer either, I don't whinge about the facilities we have or the service that we get, and quite willingly stand up for my rights not to be railroaded down a path that will cost me for the rest of my and my children's life.
* I'm right here with you

Regards Scotto

PS: Again - These are just "my" views ;)

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 03:07 PM

Scott,

Truly how many boats are in canberra.. ::) The game club have there boats where?

Regards
Honda.

I don't have the membership numbers BUT believe there where more than 20 members at the time who had their boats based in the ACT. There where at-least 10 from out of the area including myself & some mates from Cooma, Bushy from Pambulla ,Starlo from Gerringong, Ian Miller from Ulludula etc

Point is - it was a very disappointing turn out - once more :(

Regards Scotto

STUIE63

08-09-2009, 03:17 PM

Stuie - I DO NOT have an agenda :'(

Rec fisho's - nationally have a bad track record to needing to do everything themselves - better than teh next / last bloke. Rather than collectively & decisively running with one team to get the majority of support. I do not have an answer for this - and I have been frustrated by outcomes from Recfish , Sunfish etc - BUT did these groups ever have the majority of support to provide real clout ?

ask yourself did these groups ever listen to the average fisherman I know I was never asked .

One of the best rallies I attended was the "save our slimies rally" at parliament house. Over 3 months of national media attention & how many boats turned out - about 20 ! The ACT game club had about 200 at the time - but did they come out ::)

were they ever asked did they want to participate in a rally or were they just told to turn up

Have a look at how many submission there have been on any major issue effecting rec anglers - we're our own worst enemies :o

I have made one submission in my life to the GBRMPA debacle ajnd will never make another one

Regards Scotto
just my thoughts if you want people onside then they have to have ownership of the idea not told they have to support another tax which is what is happenning here
Stuie

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 03:45 PM

just my thoughts if you want people onside then they have to have ownership of the idea not told they have to support another tax which is what is happenning here
Stuie

Stuie - I am not telling any one what to do - I am interested in the wider rec anglers view point on how they see their fisheries being managed in Qld ?

I will argue my case - because I believe our fisheries are in trouble & we need a solution ?

But maybe the fishery is fine & we should all just go back to our fishing ;)

Regards Scotto

Sevric

08-09-2009, 04:32 PM

You are a very patient man Scott Mitchell. The general fishing licence idea has a lot going for it. After having lived all my life in NSW; seen the introduction of the general licence fee there and the resultant improvements i have to wonder what all the fuss is about. Living now in sunny Queensland i would gladly pay a general fee rather than living through the alternative of not doing any thing other than relying on Governments to fix the problem. We have to do some thing positive and constructive not just sit back and whinge. Unfortunatly this costs money and the user pays system is the fairest system. Governments can not be trusted any more to do what they are elected to do so following the NSW system ensures equality for all. It is very plain to me that over many generations that Queenslanders have been spoilt with some of the best fishing the world has had to offer. Times are toughning up on the fishing scene and Queensland is falling back to the field. It is time for a grip on realism for us all, pay up, force governments to spend the money with the best possible outcome for all fishermen.

Keep taking the well intentioned barbs, you have my support in this contentious issue.

Best breezes to all Sveric

Chris Ryan

08-09-2009, 04:40 PM

Can I ask what makes you think our fisheries are actually in this much trouble Scott? That is probably the key question to this whole debate. I am asking for scientific proof of what has happened to make you put this point below?

* If the fisheries collapse to such a point that it is not viable to spend the money to enjoy our pass time - you won't need a license

Or is this just a personal viewpoint that fisheries are not managing the resource? What is the driving force behind this statement

"because I believe our fisheries are in trouble & we need a solution "

Not one person on here would not want to sustain the fishery but from what I am reading many here do not think it is at the brink of collapse either. The major factors affecting the majority of recreational fisherman is water quality and pollution which is taking a toll on ecosystems and thus fish stocks. This is out of the hands of fisheries management completely; this is an EPA issue which they have to manage and it is one that even the greens concede is still not improving.

Chimo

08-09-2009, 04:41 PM

Change Management well that is probly my specialty and I can assure you that the public service are not able to cope with change, so old habits continue into the future. I.E, at the end of each financial cycle the government departments need to spend the remainder of their allocated budgets, now this happens because if they dont spend the money their budget allocation for next year is reduced accordingly, not wanting to do this they go "literally" on a shopping spree at the end of each financial year.
The above is absolutely true and correct and applies both the State and Local Govt. It has not changed one little bit in the last 40 yrs that I can refer to when I too and all the others around me had to do the same thing or not have the funds allocated in the next years budget. Trust a/c? You jest sir.

7. Change Management well that is probably my specialty and I can assure you that the public service are not able to cope with change, so old habits continue into the future. I.E, at the end of each financial cycle the government departments need to spend the remainder of their allocated budgets, now this happens because if they don't spend the money their budget allocation for next year is reduced accordingly, not wanting to do this they go "literally" on a shopping spree at the end of each financial year.
*" If ALL of the funds are allocated to transparent trust accounts - I believe that fixes these issues. "
Sadly another case of extreme naivety!

What is needed in charge of all this is a keen fisherman / benovolent dictator with PR and environmental and fisheries research skills to resolve to issues of concern in the Qld Fishery.

We dont need to duplicate expenditure on licences as we all pay sufficient in taxes and charges and gst etc to cover what needs doing.

Anyhoo .......... carry on::)

Cheers
Chimo

Chimo

08-09-2009, 04:52 PM

Chris

As you correctly put it
"Not one person on here would not want to sustain the fishery but from what I am reading many here do not think it is at the brink of collapse either. The major factors affecting the majority of recreational fisherman is water quality and pollution which is taking a toll on ecosystems and thus fish stocks. This is out of the hands of fisheries management completely; this is an EPA issue which they have to manage and it is one that even the greens concede is still not improving.'

The issue is in fact about land use and catchment management. The EPA is but one small part of the solution. Landholders, land managers and residents within the catchments all have to pick up their game and this applies to grazing management, cropping system modification, chemical and fertilizer use and application, road constuction and maintenance processes and then there is the matter of discharge from sewage treatment, septic systems industry etc etc

How many depts have reponsibilities in all the above and the unlisted non point sources that impact on the watercourses and coast of Qld not to mention the reef?

And a fishing licence (not to mention a few green zones) is going to fix the "problem"??

Cheers
Chimo

Chris Ryan

08-09-2009, 04:58 PM

You nailed it Chimo.

08-09-2009, 04:59 PM

I know it's a hard task bucking the trend Scott but the very fact we fishos are bait/lure/fly/game/ fresh/salt water means we are always going to have different views and priorities.

I bet if you added a single question to your poll. i.e.

Would you like to see the Queensland Government treat recreational fishing like the NT Government?

I recon you would get above an 80% yes vote.....no rec license....a Government which lives in mortal fear of "the fishing vote", a well organised politically active lobby group in AFANT and a huge tourism industry based on recreational fishing.

I sit in a rather unique position....heavily involved in tourism, rec fishing, commercial fishing and politics and see all the games getting played......this state is missing a golden opportunity and the NT Government are laughing all the way to the bank.

We have put up the "no fishing signs" and slice by slice, cut by cut, killing off recreational fishing and the industry which lives of it. If you believe a new tax will fix this then I think you are mistaken.

It may improve the actual fishing if the buy-outs and management is well handelled (for those who still fish) but it will not enhance the passtime, nor its future as part of our way of life. I am firmly of the belief, and again I have no problem with those who disagree, that the introduction will have dire consequences for the future of recreational fishing, both in terms of participation rates and the impacts on business which rely on our disposable income.

When all the GBRMPA green zones rules, propoganda and anti fishing retoric swept NQ during 2004 the official Qld Government survey showed a reduction in participation rates of 42% and the effect on the industry, on jobs, on peoples livelihoods was horrendous.

Clearly the NSW model is one case study with both supporters and detractors but the NT model is another,and I have never heard anyone bag that one.

KC

KC

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 05:32 PM

Can I ask what makes you think our fisheries are actually in this much trouble Scott? That is probably the key question to this whole debate. I am asking for scientific proof of what has happened to make you put this point below?

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh296/Scott0/Scottos%20Photos/Nettingshot2.jpg
http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh296/Scott0/Scottos%20Photos/Nettingshot1.jpg

Daily sight around the Great Sandy Straights - And I have been fortunate enough to have travelled extensively & seen plenty of worrying sights in the Gulf & up the Cape as well.Out of sight - Out of mind !

Quote "The major factors affecting the majority of recreational fisherman is water quality and pollution which is taking a toll on ecosystems and thus fish stocks."

I am afraid that unsustainable Commercial fishing should be on your list as well - at the TOP ;)

How do we know if it is sustainable ? We don't - because there is not enough research ! How about we put a "trigger" on it once it has dropped to such a point that the commercial operators see it as unviable ???????

Now we're getting somewhere - Scotto

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 05:42 PM

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 05:49 PM

We dont need to duplicate expenditure on licences as we all pay sufficient in taxes and charges and gst etc to cover what needs doing.

Anyhoo .......... carry on::)

Cheers Chimo

So you voted NO - because your happy with the way our fisheries are managed in Qld ?

Which is fine - Scotto

08-09-2009, 06:41 PM

Mrs Ronnie H

08-09-2009, 07:23 PM

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 07:32 PM

HI all
Just came across this thread.

Its a big NO From me.
We pay 3 car rego's a boat and trailer rego and what do we get in return-- lousy roads and Green zones.

How will $30 bucks a year to fish benefit me.

Can't say i am happy with the way things are managed but how will charging me thirty bucks a year to fish make things any better or have qld fisheries managed any better. Seems to me that fishos keep paying while nothing improves.

Ronnie

Ronnie - You NEED to read the details of the proposition - which is based on the NSW model - more details @ http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/your-fees

Believe it or not - this stuff actually happens :P

Regards Scotto

Scott Mitchell

08-09-2009, 07:38 PM

You have to admit Scott it is an interesting prospect. If "we" had put as much effort into "winding up" the tourism industry as we had fighting the anti fishing forces we may just have had a major employer/cash cow fighting for us.

The closed seasons on reef fin fish is an example. Desite all our whinging it was direct lobbying from the tourism industry which got last years Christmas closure knocked on the head.

It is rec fishing which fills and van parks all along the coast, it is rec fishing which actually put Cairns on the map....maybe a whole lot of effort getting these variuos organisations to start lobbying, using the NT model as an example, might just be a battle worth fighting.

Nothing gets a desperate tourism operator "going" like a poor season....particularly if NT or some other destination is booming....throw in a few snippets about fishing in Vanautu, Fiji, Thailand, Pucket, Papua......all while poor old Qld is missing out..................I'd even wear a bikini and say "where the bloody hell are you" or sing a Monkeys song.::)

Food for thought?

KC

KC - Theres' no question that the government should do all these things - it's just that they don't ::)

As frustrating as it is - I believe we're better off lobbying to take control of the situation ourselves - on our terms; via a User pays system as proposed. I'm happy to be swayed if I can be shown a viable alternative ?

Or maybe I'm just living in denial ( Not the river in Egypt ;D ).

So many fish - so little time - Scotto

PS:I'm in for the bikini if you are 8-)

Jeremy

08-09-2009, 08:00 PM

I personally have an issue with user pays being the first answer though as we don't see cyclists paying for licenses to use our roads or footpaths.

Off topic, but as a cyclist I have to take you up on this Chris. I know you quoted other examples too, but why should cyclists pay a fee to use roads or footpaths?

I can give you a few reasons why not...
1. pedestrians do not pay a fee to use footpaths so why should cyclists
2. most cyclists who use the road are adults who also own a motor vehicle ie they are already paying a fee towards road maintenaince
3. using a bike is a form of exercise which should be encouraged
4. using a bike creates no pollution or greenhouse gasses (what a crock that is)
5. bicycles cause no damage to the road surface
6. each bicycle on the road is one more car off the road

Hope you get the idea.

Jeremy

bigjimg

08-09-2009, 08:01 PM

As Chimo stated,we are taxed we pay our boat rego we pay our GST.Why would there be a need for a licence fee.We are already paying but not receiving the management that should be applied to our fishery.We want our hard earned that has been paid out to be used and managed correctly.Is that TOO much to ask.Jim

PinHead

08-09-2009, 08:39 PM

Off topic, but as a cyclist I have to take you up on this Chris. I know you quoted other examples too, but why should cyclists pay a fee to use roads or footpaths?

I can give you a few reasons why not...
1. pedestrians do not pay a fee to use footpaths so why should cyclists..you shouldn't be in the FOOTpath..LOL
2. most cyclists who use the road are adults who also own a motor vehicle ie they are already paying a fee towards road maintenaince..road maintenace from rego..really?
3. using a bike is a form of exercise which should be encouraged..not much exercise when some dope in a car hits you
4. using a bike creates no pollution or greenhouse gasses (what a crock that is)..lmao..just destroys everything when they mine the minerals to make the things
5. bicycles cause no damage to the road surface..they just clutter the roadways
6. each bicycle on the road is one more car off the road..crap..and they don't stop at lights or use signals either. Bloody treadlies..should charge em $500 rego for being nuisances..PLUS..how much is spent on bloody unused bikeways everywhere.

Just pulling ya leg jeremy.

Hope you get the idea.

Jeremy

.................................................. ........................................

PinHead

08-09-2009, 08:40 PM

Under a fair and just "user pays" system..who pays for what and what benefits are involved???

ramps??
parking areas?
cleaning tables?

they will never buy out all pros..too big an industry

Lovey80

08-09-2009, 08:54 PM

So you voted NO - because your happy with the way our fisheries are managed in Qld ?

Which is fine - Scotto

Scott this type of thing is exactly what others are refering to as a loaded question.

Why do they have to say no AND have it because they are happy with fisheries?
Can't they say no because of 100 other reasons???

There can be no debate that it is loaded, it's loaded-fact! Don't bother saying it isn't because it is.

I am unhappy with the way fisheries (as a whole) are managed. I guess my personal beliefs are probably close to Andy's. But I also differ in that I wouldn't mind a license if it meant that Rec Fishing havens were created.

Maybe, ECO could lobby the tourism minister to supply the funds for a Fraser coast beach netting buyout and then promote Fraser and the north of Noosa area as a fishing Mecca? That's one possible solution that may work but can it be duplicated many times over?

I would like to know exactly what tourism is worth to QLD each year?

Cheers

chris

Chris Ryan

08-09-2009, 09:07 PM

Chris,

Domestic overnight visitor expenditure in Queensland totalled $12.4 billion in 2008, an increase of 2% over the year to December 2008.

Lovey80

09-09-2009, 12:13 AM

Scott Mitchell

09-09-2009, 05:35 AM

Chris.

that is a stagering figure, $12.8 Billion is huge! Well there is a certainly viable option for that particular issue. If what Slider says is true then I can't see where there would be much opposition to it if they could be convinced.

Maybe you don't want to detail plans to tackle other area's on a public forum right now but do you concieve that its possible to tackle many of the other locations/issues with a similar approach?

Cheers

Chris

Chris - I have been referred to as "naive" on a few occasions in this thread - Unfortunately if you believe you have more chance of lobbying government departments to part with consolidated revenue to improve recreational angler - You see where I'm headed ;)

What are the recreational angling contributions in that figure ?

Sorry ,I just don't see it happening - BUT hey it's an alternative.

Regards Scotto

Scott Mitchell

09-09-2009, 05:53 AM

Scott this type of thing is exactly what others are refering to as a loaded question.

Why do they have to say no AND have it because they are happy with fisheries?
Can't they say no because of 100 other reasons???

There can be no debate that it is loaded, it's loaded-fact! Don't bother saying it isn't because it is.

Cheers chris

Sorry Chris - BUT it isn't loaded http://www.fishntales.com/forum/Smileys/default/headbanger.gif

You vote NO - If you are happy with the system & have no problems with the way our states fisheries are being managed currently.

You vote Yes - If you are not happy with the way our fisheries are currently managed & believe a general recreational angling license fee BASED on the NSW model WITH TRANSAPRENT TRUST ACCOUNTS & SIMULAR FEE STRUCTURE - WOULD IMPROVE OUR POSITION.

OR You post what you believe to be a VIABLE & REALISTIC alternative to how you believe the fishery can be managed better.

I am NOT interested in ALL THE REASONS WHY YOU DONT BELIEVE THE NSW model WONT WORK IN QUEENSLAND ;)

Thanks Scotto

PinHead

09-09-2009, 06:13 AM

Scott Mitchell

09-09-2009, 06:31 AM

Viable and realistic alternative:

Conduct proper and region specific research before any green zones are implemented.
Conduct proper and region specific research prior to altering bag or size limits on species.
No licence fee.

There is no such thing as a fair and equitable user pays system.

Did you manage to attend any of the public meetings for the In-shore fin fish review over the last 6 months - along with your own submission paper ?

I attended the Hervey Bay meetings - along with about 50 other anglers :P

And we wonder why we get shafted !

It's that numbers game again - A license gives you pretty accurate numbers ;)

Regards Scotto

PinHead

09-09-2009, 06:41 AM

there is my alternative..like it or lump it. No I did not attend any meetings so what difference does that make..the majority of anglers did not attends.

You want to pick my alternative apart..you have not answered the many questions I have asked about your tax idea. So back up your idea with some answers or are they not available.

What sort of accurate numbers do you get from a licence system..only how many people have bought them..not actually how many use the resource.

AND..once again..how much per annum does a licence bring in in NSW.
What is a fair user pays system?

TheRealAndy

09-09-2009, 06:43 AM

Did you manage to attend any of the public meetings for the In-shore fin fish review over the last 6 months - along with your own submission paper ?

I attended the Hervey Bay meetings - along with about 50 other anglers :P

And we wonder why we get shafted !

It's that numbers game again - A license gives you pretty accurate numbers ;)

Regards Scotto

While this has nothing to do with the licence, the reason people dont turn up to the public meetings is probably because they dont know about them. The same reason I have to warn half a dozen people out of the new green zones every weekend. People dont know about it because the government has not done enough to let people know.

Imagine if you apply the same principle to a licence.;) Only half the anglers in queensland would know about it...

TimiBoy

09-09-2009, 07:11 AM

While this has nothing to do with the licence, the reason people dont turn up to the public meetings is probably because they dont know about them. The same reason I have to warn half a dozen people out of the new green zones every weekend. People dont know about it because the government has not done enough to let people know.

Imagine if you apply the same principle to a licence.;) Only half the anglers in queensland would know about it...

That is absolutely correct, Andy. I attended the RRFF meeting at Vicky Point because it was pushed here, on Ausfish. I had not otherwise been made aware. The Government does not do enough to advertise the meetings, they implement whatever they want, and then they claim they consulted widely.

Bunch of lying cheats.

Scott, the dissent shown here clearly demonstrates that the options you are providing do not satisfy enough people to be called a majority. Indeed many who voted on the NSW method would now be pulling their vote if they could, once they've read the discussion.

So if you care so much about getting it right, why not embark on a consultative process and do something creative, instead of bagging everyone who doesn't agree with you or like your options.

Tim

Scott Mitchell

09-09-2009, 07:22 AM

There is my alternative..like it or lump it. No I did not attend any meetings so what difference does that make..the majority of anglers did not attends.
* Hence we get shafted every time

You want to pick my alternative apart..you have not answered the many questions I have asked about your tax idea. So back up your idea with some answers or are they not available.
*I am not picking your idea apart - rather questioning how they can be achieved. The NSW model I have suggested from the beginning IS IN PRACTICE ;)

What sort of accurate numbers do you get from a licence system..only how many people have bought them..not actually how many use the resource.
* I believe the majority of regular anglers would purchase a license - BASED ON THE NSW model - So long as ALL the money goes into transparent trust accounts & we get the true benefits of those funds. Again this appears to be the case in NSW.

AND..once again..how much per annum does a licence bring in in NSW.
*I will chase this figure up & report back.

What is a fair user pays system?
*Golf

Regards Scotto

Scott Mitchell

09-09-2009, 07:25 AM

Scott, the dissent shown here clearly demonstrates that the options you are providing do not satisfy enough people to be called a majority. Indeed many who voted on the NSW method would now be pulling their vote if they could, once they've read the discussion.

Tim

The bulk of the conversation here has been - How the NSW model will not work in Qld. This has nothing to do with the POLL.

I am not against other alternatives - BUT if your going to state how the NSW system won't work in Qld - I want to know how your alternative will ?

It's a debate - Scotto

PinHead

09-09-2009, 07:40 AM

well tell us how the NSW system will work..we have a smaller population...much larger coastal area so your $30 per annum would go nowhere. I am against paying anyone that volunteers to sit on any board or whatever you want to call it.

You keep saying user pays...how does this work in NSW? ramps?

My alternative HAS been working in Qld except they neglect to conduct the proper research here.

STUIE63

09-09-2009, 08:21 AM

I am not saying it wouldn't work even though I don't know if it will work but what I am saying is why should we pay for something we already own . money doesn't fix anything . I wouldn't mind a dollar for every time I hear a government say that by increasing taxes they will provide a better service .
by taxes I mean - taxes
- licenses
- charges
- levies
- stamp duties
- fuel excises
- and all the other names governments have for taxes
add all these up as to what the average fisherman spends in a year do you really think that $30.00 will change the fishery compared to the thousands that is already spent
Stuie

Jeremy

09-09-2009, 08:25 AM

well tell us how the NSW system will work..we have a smaller population...much larger coastal area so your $30 per annum would go nowhere.

Pinhead, I believe QLD has among the highest rate of participation in rec fishing in Australia, was more *numbers* of rec anglers than in NSW. Don't know the source of this or the numbers unfortunately. I don't think the total population is relevant to this discussion, more the number of anglers.

Jeremy

yellowbeard

09-09-2009, 08:35 AM

Don't forget it's not a lone Qld issue. When any Australian crosses any state border we are also crossing into the ridiculous predicament of checking all our fishing licences and park permits etc to avoid breaking tax-grab laws.
Personally, I just love seeing aspiring grass-roots fisho politicos getting involved in these issues and offering bipartisan support to the state and federal pollies
for the greater benefit of us all...something like Peter Garrett did -- yeah!

PinHead

09-09-2009, 08:39 AM

Jeremy..when actual numbers are not really known then percentage of population is the norm.

TimiBoy

09-09-2009, 09:05 AM

The bulk of the conversation here has been - How the NSW model will not work in Qld. This has nothing to do with the POLL.

I am not against other alternatives - BUT if your going to state how the NSW system won't work in Qld - I want to know how your alternative will ?

It's a debate - Scotto

It's not a debate when one side doesn't listen Scott.

As I said before;

Stating that people have to provide an alternative is beyond unrealistic. I do not know the minds of the fishing public. Nor am I an expert on fishing or on policy. I therefore am neither willing nor qualified to propose an alternative, though I am happy to put in my two bits worth, which I believe I have done already.

But you state that if I cannot provide an alternative, then I'm just whingeing. That statement is crap, and it signifies a particularly smug and self righteous attitude.

This "debate" is a waste of time. You lambaste everyone who disagrees with you. You have been asked for specific information regarding this NSW system you seem to be in love with, and you have finally said you will find it. Bet you either don't, or you'll place some rubbishy spin on it, then complain black and blue when you get bagged for it.

I say again, start the consultative process to find a plan that will work for Qld. Obviously that's the outcome you want, isn't it?

Tim

FNQCairns

09-09-2009, 09:57 AM

QLD government alone has gone greatly overboard in the act of preservation (definition of) against Anglers, not entirely true because the Commonwealth had a major hand in this and still actively does.

What we keep hearing in QLD every now and then is individual Anglers (who have little understanding of what is and why we have the current Anglers lot in QLD) voicing an opinion/outrage, this voice is based every single time on their personal local observations (the observations that matter most to them only and rightly so at his level), local net use/hauling is often the eliciting culprit.

They get fired up and just dam well want to see it gone from their local, this is entirely reasonable as is the mental search for any way to accomplish this aim - which in our democratic system that operates no higher (because of the above individual types) than no value, or voice as an individual ......... It is then rightly assumed THEY NEED OTHERS TO HELP ACHIEVE THEIR RIGHTEOUS AIM.

Hence every now and then we have a Licence or some other HELP ME by helping YOURSELF emotional discussion around their gripe of choice in an attempt to nirvana the goal empowering pathway toward saving/renewing all our fish stocks somehow - "so I can be rid of what pisses me off nearby".

As Anglers we need to cut out this crap, sit a shelf or two higher than the above, recognise the one sided game the Zealots in Government and brother NGOs play with their eyes closed against us and do something about this and only this, if we can make this and only this real difference every single disgruntled individuals localised issue will then be a crap shoot to address by the MACHINE created.

ATM professional fishing is the LEAST of the MAJORITY of Angler problems.

The only competent option/alternative to right all the extremist wrongs done to all ANGLERS has been known and understood for many years now, it's been a no brainer for at least 6 and it has no environmental downside, or social downside or quality of life downside, only upsides for every single QLDer even the exremists, and is so very simple..... too simple and unemotional, here lies thus far it's achilles (sp) heal.

cheers fnq

Chris Ryan

09-09-2009, 12:49 PM

Ok some numbers.

From the FRDC survey on Rec fishing performed in 2001 (funding project 99/158 "The national Recreational and Indigenous Fishing Survey") this is the latest figures available too; Queensland had just under 800,000 recreational anglers (785,000). We spent heavily which made up 17% of the national expediture on rec fishing in QLD. The National figure was $1.8billion dollars. Recreational fishing in QLD made $306m to the state economy.

To put that in perspective Commercial Fishing added $190m and Aquaculture added $81m. So combined the commercial operations bought in $271m or only 89% of the total expenditure attributed to rec fishing.

So, if money talks, we already make more than the professional sectors and we should be treated as such and receive the share we deserve. That is what we are chasing at ECOfishers.

It could be expected that this could remove 20% effort from bringing in a fishing license too due to people just not participating anymore and that reduces the number of fishos to around 630,000 and at $30/yr/each that equates to roughly $19m in revenue or 6% of what we currently already return to the economy.

The QLD Labor Government promised $35m at the last election to rec fishing and I for one plan to make sure they keep to that promise - considering it is twice as much as what would be raised from a license fee. I think that makes it worthwhile lobbying the Government at all levels.

PinHead

09-09-2009, 01:13 PM

well said Chris

Scott Mitchell

09-09-2009, 02:20 PM

It's not a debate when one side doesn't listen Scott.

As I said before;

Stating that people have to provide an alternative is beyond unrealistic. I do not know the minds of the fishing public. Nor am I an expert on fishing or on policy. I therefore am neither willing nor qualified to propose an alternative, though I am happy to put in my two bits worth, which I believe I have done already.

But you state that if I cannot provide an alternative, then I'm just whingeing. That statement is crap, and it signifies a particularly smug and self righteous attitude.

This "debate" is a waste of time. You lambaste everyone who disagrees with you. You have been asked for specific information regarding this NSW system you seem to be in love with, and you have finally said you will find it. Bet you either don't, or you'll place some rubbishy spin on it, then complain black and blue when you get bagged for it.

I say again, start the consultative process to find a plan that will work for Qld. Obviously that's the outcome you want, isn't it?

Tim

Tim - Please do not take anything I write personally as it not intended that way ?

I have gone back to NSW DPI&F and requested the total revenue raised over the last three years through the license system - I should have these figures in the next day or so. I am not aware of any other questions I have missed ?

It is a debate - BUT if the Government committed to funding 35 Million towards recreational angling in Qld at the last election , we don't need this conversation ;)

Regards Scott

PinHead

09-09-2009, 03:22 PM

they did promise that Scott..BUT...will they spend it or not is the big question.
Same as if there was a fishing license..would the funds go where it is supposed to??

TimiBoy

09-09-2009, 03:57 PM

Scott,

Join EcoFishers Queensland. I'm sure your energies could be effectively and usefully targetted, in an unbiased and constructive fashion.

Cheers,

Tim

Lovey80

09-09-2009, 05:02 PM

Chris, well said and if ECO think that they can successfully lobby gov't for more funds I will happily make a 180 in my opinion on the rec licence. While it may seem Un realsitic but I think a figure of 40-50% return of revenue from the state gov't if only for a few years (10?) would be such a good investment for the state as a whole ( not just us anglers.)

Scott Mitchell

09-09-2009, 05:16 PM

They did promise that Scott..BUT...will they spend it or not is the big question.
Same as if there was a fishing license..would the funds go where it is supposed to??

I believe if it was set up the same as in NSW - They Have to, because ALL of the revenue goes into the trust accounts. I would NOT support any proposal for a rec license unless ALL of the revenue raised goes into designated trust accounts & rec anglers have a 99% say in how it is spent.

Regards Scott

Scott Mitchell

09-09-2009, 05:19 PM

Scott,

Join EcoFishers Queensland. I'm sure your energies could be effectively and usefully targetted, in an unbiased and constructive fashion.

Cheers,

Tim

Thanks Tim - But I recon I will sit on the fence until I work out who "I" believe can provide the strongest/loudest voice. This is not to say it isn't Ecofishers , as I have not done my home work yet.

Regards Scott

mangomick

09-09-2009, 06:25 PM

You poor soul.
Dont you know it will always be the commercial fishing lobby and the charter fishing lobby that will have the loudest voice.
Look at some of these other groups like cane growers and the cattle grower associations or even in the fruit and vegetable farmers where you have the melon sub committee and the mango sub committee the orange and on and on. its a case of a few of those bigger farmers that want to promote their own cause form a group. They then get the government ok to levy all the smaller growers so they can collect a heap of cash then dole out money to programs which benefits their own sales and breeding lines. And what happens to the smaller growers. They are eventually chased out of the market because they cant comply with the latest changes that are brought in by the very committees that were formed to supposedly help them
stick your license idea up your nearest cod hole

Mrs Ronnie H

09-09-2009, 08:14 PM

Ronnie - You NEED to read the details of the proposition - which is based on the NSW model - more details @ http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/your-fees

Believe it or not - this stuff actually happens :P

Regards Scotto

I have one question-- What makes you think a NSW model or something fashioned on it will work in Queensland. ???

Something to improve the state of our boat ramps, waterways etc could be a good thing but at present I am really peaved with the constant 'User pays" perception. You pay for this, someone else pays for the same thing but what benefits are we seeing in the long term. Forgive me but i am fed up with constantly having to pay more and more for the things i like to do and constantly see little or no change.

Ronnie

yellowbeard

09-09-2009, 08:23 PM

On second thoughts: you cane toad breedin', banana bendin', troppo trippin', fourex fornicatin' (yummy), pineapple perpetratin', bjelke petersen patronisin' northerners probably deserve a fishin' licence.

Disclaimer: The above comments are not attributed to any one abled person of sane mind.

mangomick

09-09-2009, 08:25 PM

yellowbeard....are you still pi$$ed off over the State of Origin results

yellowbeard

09-09-2009, 08:49 PM

yellowbeard....are you still pi$$ed off over the State of Origin results

Yep, you guessed it. Can't wait to get up there for my next vacation, like all us hypocritical NSW cockroaches.
:)

PinHead

09-09-2009, 09:15 PM

you know why you lost SOG..cos your players probably need a bloody license to use the training paddock...user pays.

PinHead

09-09-2009, 09:17 PM

Scott..how does the average angler have a say in how the money is spent in NSW.

The trust account idea still has many flaws..just because it works in NSW does not mean it will work anywhere else.

Once again..in NSW..what have the funds been spent on?
research?
Ramps and facilities?

what else if anything?

and..i will reiterate..i would be totally opposed to any payment to anyone sitting on that board...not one single cent to any of them.

Scott Mitchell

10-09-2009, 06:22 AM

Scott..how does the average angler have a say in how the money is spent in NSW.
* Communication via your local/zone trust committee members or directly to PDI&F who can direct your enquiry - http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/licence-fee/trusts (http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/licence-fee/trusts)

The trust account idea still has many flaws..just because it works in NSW does not mean it will work anywhere else.
* If it works in NSW ( Which I believe it is ) WHY wont it work here if set up on the same frame work ?

Trust Fund summaries - http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/licence-fee/trusts/trust-fund-reports

Once again..in NSW..what have the funds been spent on?
research?
Ramps and facilities?

what else if anything?

These are some of the projects that are made possible with approved funding from the trust accounts :- http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/your-fees

Saltwater specific projects http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/saltwater

Freshwater work shops -http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/freshwater/invitation-glenbawn

Research & publications - http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/publications

Applying for grants process - http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/licence-fee/apply-for-funds

and..i will reiterate..i would be totally opposed to any payment to anyone sitting on that board...not one single cent to any of them.
* I only believe it fair to compensate any "grass root" angler who is prepared to devote a reasonable amount of time & energy to support & ensure their past time is managed sustainably. Committee members often have to attend meetings during teh week & travel across to teh state to attend - leaving their normal employment for that time.

Details @ http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/your-fees/management/meeting-expenses

I am waiting on the last 3 years total revenue raised & the break down on freshwater & saltwater. I will also see if I can get the break down on license sale types IE:duration report.

Regards Scotto

TimiBoy

10-09-2009, 06:25 AM

i would be totally opposed to any payment to anyone sitting on that board...not one single cent to any of them.

I'll add my voice to that, with the possible exception of costs. Carefully audited...

That should clean up the agenda of many who would think to be involved in the Management of such an additional layer of tax (for such it is).

As EcoFishersQld grows, it will be strong enough to elicit an "I want your vote and will bend over to get it" response from whatever Government rules the day. To those who think Rec Anglers can't organise, get on board and help make the change happen.

The link is in my signature. $10 a year there will do more than any not-worth-a-fig fishing license, and the creeps in Anna's brigade of monkeys have not a chance in hell of getting their grubby little hands on it. Just do it, you know you want to!;D;D;D

Cheers,

Tim

Scott Mitchell

10-09-2009, 06:32 AM

I have one question-- What makes you think a NSW model or something fashioned on it will work in Queensland. ???

Something to improve the state of our boat ramps, waterways etc could be a good thing but at present I am really peaved with the constant 'User pays" perception. You pay for this, someone else pays for the same thing but what benefits are we seeing in the long term. Forgive me but i am fed up with constantly having to pay more and more for the things i like to do and constantly see little or no change.

Ronnie

I appreciate your feels & just do not believe we can leave it up to the government to supply enough funding to manage our recreational fisheries ( Commercial as well for that matter ! ). Have a look at our states current financial position - they're not selling off assets for no reason - the have a look at the public health system , education, roads & infrastructure etc ;)

I am afraid I will become pessimistic for a moment and say - I just don;t see the current system changing or any no-strings-attached funding coming our way ?

So why not lobby for & implement a system THAT PUTS ALL OF THE MONEY RAISED BACK TO OUR RESOUCE MASNAGEMNENT ? I ONLY SUPPORT this concept IF ALL OF THE REVENEW RAISED goes into transparent trust accounts & rec anglers have teh say in where it is best spent. Now I am the 1st to admit that the NSW system is not perfect - BUT it is a darn sight better than what is on offer in Qld currently.

BUT if you believe the government is going to commit to provide 35 million in no strings attached funding towards recreational angling as part of a "promise" - then we have nothing to worry about :P

Regards Scotto

Scott Mitchell

10-09-2009, 06:40 AM

I'll add my voice to that, with the possible exception of costs. Carefully audited...

That should clean up the agenda of many who would think to be involved in the Management of such an additional layer of tax (for such it is).

As EcoFishersQld grows, it will be strong enough to elicit an "I want your vote and will bend over to get it" response from whatever Government rules the day. To those who think Rec Anglers can't organise, get on board and help make the change happen.

The link is in my signature. $10 a year there will do more than any not-worth-a-fig fishing license, and the creeps in Anna's brigade of monkeys have not a chance in hell of getting their grubby little hands on it. Just do it, you know you want to!;D;D;D

Cheers,

Tim

So what do we get for our $10- ?

Please don't take this the wrong way - I am just not sure what Ecofishers are standing for ?

I've only been in Qld for 3 years ( Hervey Bay ) & been more preoccupied with getting settled & fishing ;D

Regards Scotto

Scott Mitchell

10-09-2009, 06:46 AM

I'll add my voice to that, with the possible exception of costs. Carefully audited...

Cheers,Tim

NSW management/Expenditure committee Expenses @
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/your-fees/management/meeting-expenses

NSW Freshwater Trust Expenditure committee details @ http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/licence-fee/trusts/rfftec/about-rfftec

NSW Saltwater Trust Expenditure details @ http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/fisheries/recreational/licence-fee/trusts/rfstec/about-rfstec

Pretty transparent system - I believe NSW DPI&F provides a Great web site over all.

Regards Scotto

PinHead

10-09-2009, 06:56 AM

Scott Mitchell

10-09-2009, 07:04 AM

$63.5k on management costs?????
Are you serious.
You want to be on that board...you do it at your own expense.

What a waste of money..how many licenses just to cover management costs? A lot!!!!

Not interested...be on the board but take not one cent.

So paying to get feedback on how to spend the money from grass root anglers from right across the state is a "waste of money" - Hu - who would have thought ::)

You obviously have a better system for gaining angler feedback on how the government should spend its budget ( we do have one - right ? ) on improving recreational angling across our great state ?

I'm after solutions - not causes - Scotto

TimiBoy

10-09-2009, 07:17 AM

So what do we get for our $10- ?

Please don't take this the wrong way - I am just not sure what Ecofishers are standing for ?

I've only been in Qld for 3 years ( Hervey Bay ) & been more preoccupied with getting settled & fishing ;D

Regards Scotto

do I have to spell it out?

www.ecofishersqld.org.au

EcoFishersQld is only a few months old, but discussion about them is all over this site like a rash.

have a read. Please.

Tim

Scott Mitchell

10-09-2009, 07:24 AM

do I have to spell it out?

www.ecofishersqld.org.au (http://www.ecofishersqld.org.au)

EcoFishersQld is only a few months old, but discussion about them is all over this site like a rash.

have a read. Please.

Tim

Thanks Tim - I had a read & agree with your cause. I see you need membership to help fund the lobby groups actions ?

I have no problem with that myself - how many members have you raised to date ?

Thanks Scotto

TimiBoy

10-09-2009, 07:46 AM

Thanks Tim - I had a read & agree with your cause. I see you need membership to help fund the lobby groups actions ?

I have no problem with that myself - how many members have you raised to date ?

Thanks Scotto

I don't know how many members there are. I have no role on the committee, but someone out there may be able to help. I know we are growing rapidly. Chris?

The funding is being used to support research and promotion. The Committee members have put in a heap of $ to get this going, but I believe most if not all of those costs are not being borne by EcoFishersQld. Those of us who are pushing/funding it are doing it because it's a cause that matters, deeply. It's a bit above dollars and cents, for me anyway.

Cheers,

Tim

TheRealAndy

10-09-2009, 08:40 AM

ECOFishers has around 600 members to date, with more coming in everyday.

I was going to give a speil on why I decided to get involved with ECOFishers but it really has nothing to do with the original topic.

finga

10-09-2009, 11:05 AM

For those who are 'suspicious' of where the fee would go how about we all write out a cheque to the value of the proposed fee and mail it to TOL (well he was a public servant wasn't he so he must be good for at least something) so he can bank the fees so the committee of no-hoper's can decide where the money goes like the buying out the licenses, restocking etc.
A committee could meet every Saturday or Sunday morning and decide what the go was over smoko.
I reckon the admin. fee would be about the cost of a box of wine and a pack of fags to TOL every fortnight and a packet of Arnett's assorted creams, a litre of real milk every week and a jar of Nescafe every month.
At least we might get some better bang for our buck that way.

I would not trust this Government (or any government in Australia at the moment) with any form of cash BUT I'm in favour of a fee IF it's run correctly to purely benefit the people that are paying the fee.
The little funding that the government is now providing for our fisheries and for facilities for fisher persons should not be stopped as well...but the government funding will be stopped in the long term so the proposed fee will doing the stuff our taxes should be doing...so what's the point??

We would be better off giving the fee to TOL so he can buy the commercial licenses and he can keep the licenses in his name and he can support the groups he feels deserves the money. They will be purely commercial deals...Nothing more, nothing less.
At least he'll be totally independent of any government based committee or any committee that has any thing to do with any government or any of it's departments. A lot better scenario I reckon.

TOL for PM :)

PinHead

10-09-2009, 12:28 PM

So paying to get feedback on how to spend the money from grass root anglers from right across the state is a "waste of money" - Hu - who would have thought ::)

You obviously have a better system for gaining angler feedback on how the government should spend its budget ( we do have one - right ? ) on improving recreational angling across our great state ?

I'm after solutions - not causes - Scotto

yes it is a waste of money..except of course for those that are on these boards and pocket the money..any member of boards such as this should do it for free, gratis, nothing..called volunteering..simple concept really.

why can't the NSW anglers send in their feedback to their volunteer board members? simple solution isn't it Scott..then that 60 odd k can be spent on items for those anglers.

Scott Mitchell

10-09-2009, 01:51 PM

yes it is a waste of money..except of course for those that are on these boards and pocket the money..any member of boards such as this should do it for free, gratis, nothing..called volunteering..simple concept really.

why can't the NSW anglers send in their feedback to their volunteer board members? simple solution isn't it Scott..then that 60 odd k can be spent on items for those anglers.

The committee members communicate with the anglers in their zone through out the year - AS VOLUNTERS

The committee members then meet with DPI&F quarterly to discuss any concerns that need addressing & discuss expenditure items etc Some of these committee members travel for two days to attend these meetings & only receive the days meeting fee - which used to be about $150- So it's NOT about the money ::)

I believe this is more than fair for the time these members dedicate to helping rec anglers in each of their zones - I also had NO complaints from any anglers in our area when I represented them.

Regards Scotto

PinHead

10-09-2009, 02:51 PM

but you still accepted the money ?

Scott..if I did have to pay a license fee then I would expect every last cent of it to be spent on facilities for anglers..not going into any individuals' pockets...if they cannot afford the 2 days off for the meetingsd then don;t put oyur hand up for them.

facilities is what it should be for...so based on your ideal NSW system..they can shove it..not interested..it sucks..some people get some extra cash from others who may be struggling pay their fee..all bullshit as far as I am concerned.

and Scott..there is modern technology..you know..conference calls..video links..no need to travel to meetings but I have noticed that Govt Dept's are a bit slow on the up in that regard..they would miss out on their trips away and their lil power plays.

Once again..no more taxes in Qld.

Greg P

10-09-2009, 04:25 PM

Scott Mitchell

10-09-2009, 05:30 PM

Scott - just a question !

Whats your motivation for pushing this along? Are you just gunna say it is a debate or is their a personal agenda cause you sound really motivated?

I don't care either way if you have by the way - just interested.

Greg - My ONLY MOTIVATION is ensuring our fisheries are managed sustainably for the future. I am a pretty motivated angler - have been all my life.

I have served as president of the Wollongong Sport Fishing club at the age of 18, NSW ANSA State recorder, President of the Trout Festival Committee, committee member of the Monaro acclimatisation society, member of ACORF for NSW DPI&F , President of the Fraser Coast Fish Stocking Association.

I have always tried to give back to the sport in which I dedicate ever spare moment to enjoy. I am sick of seeing our fisheries miss managed & our access rights taken away.

I do not believe the government is capable of supplying enough no-strings-attached funding to do the job - So I am in favour of taking control of the main management via a user pays system. To date the best model "I" have seen is the NSW example.

I agree the NT appear to have done it one their own - but I am not confident that the Qld government is as capable.

This is a debate - And one which I believe may determine the future of the Qld recreational fishery.

Regards Scotto

PinHead

10-09-2009, 05:42 PM

"taking control"..where do I get whatever you are taking.

That ain't ever going to happen..and NSW has not "taken control" either.

All appointments and recommendations have to be approvedd by the Minister..still at the beck and call of a pollie..hardly taking control.

we all want sustainability...but charging people for what they already own is akin to theft by stealth.

Pity the NSW anglers have been conned and ripped off.

Go for it Scott..lobby the pollies if that is what you really want.

mangomick

10-09-2009, 06:28 PM

I believe if it was set up the same as in NSW - They Have to, because ALL of the revenue goes into the trust accounts. I would NOT support any proposal for a rec license unless ALL of the revenue raised goes into designated trust accounts & rec anglers have a 99% say in how it is spent.

Regards Scott

Scott explain this to me.
The money goes into trust accounts that is then doled out by the committee. The committee is made up of whoever the minister deems to include. Am I right so far.
So how do grass root fishermen benefit if the committee is made up of a majority of academics. The grass root fishermen who are paying a yearly license fee wont get much of a say if they decide to hand over vast amounts to some obscure research program. And if they do decide to spend a great bulk of it on such a project what the hell can you do about it. The committee certainly wont have a majority number of recreational fishermen.The few that are on the committee will just be there to pay lip service .
Semi government quangos have never been known to be thrifty when it comes to spending public money.

Black_Rat

10-09-2009, 08:37 PM

Interesting point Mangomick

Whats to stop the government influencing the government appointed committe to take on projects the Governemt should be looking after ? Just another tax !

Whats to stop the government blocking a proposal because it might be politically damaging to them even though the committee (ie: the recreational angler) wants it, all funded by a rec licence ? Who signs of on the funding ? Who has the final say no matter what the wants of the rec sector ! The Government I bet ! >:(

FNQCairns

10-09-2009, 08:45 PM

Scott Mitchell

11-09-2009, 06:37 AM

Scott Mitchell

11-09-2009, 06:47 AM

Scott explain this to me.

The money goes into trust accounts that is then doled out by the committee. The committee is made up of whoever the minister deems to include. Am I right so far.
* Yes - The minister will ultimately select those who the department believe can contribute & are prepared to put in the effort to support the anglers from their zones.

So how do grass root fishermen benefit if the committee is made up of a majority of academics. The grass root fishermen who are paying a yearly license fee wont get much of a say if they decide to hand over vast amounts to some obscure research program. And if they do decide to spend a great bulk of it on such a project what the hell can you do about it.
* I can tell you that I am no "academic" - My father bribed me with a new reel to finish year 10 ;D The committee members are advertised on the DPI&F web site & positions are called for in the local media publications. The grass root anglers have the ability to contact "their " representative any time they need. This is NOT a conspiracy ::)

The committee certainly wont have a majority number of recreational fishermen.The few that are on the committee will just be there to pay lip service .
Semi government quangos have never been known to be thrifty when it comes to spending public money.
* This is NOT the case & I can tell you we had MANY strong discussion with the department & I can not recall an issue that they over turned the committees decision ?

I can see that approx 50 % of of those who have polled to date are dead against the concept - BUT 50% are also in favour of change ;)

I hope to have some true figures from NSW DPI&F shortly.

Regards Scotto

TimiBoy

11-09-2009, 06:47 AM

Oh good. Now Sunfish are having a conference over two days in a month or two (I can't get the site up to confirm the date). They want to canvas issues and ideas from Rec Anglers to help give them a direction going forward.

What a good idea.

Only $50 a head. It would be more, but it is partly funded by (from memory) a levy on our boat registrations. I'd have thought we paid enough to cover more than a bloody conference.

Now our "own"... wait for it... "representative" body can't do free consultation...

Maybe they should be directed to stick this precious idea where the sun don't shine. Or maybe in the future this is what a Rec Angling License will be required to fund???

I feel sick.

Tim

Scott Mitchell

11-09-2009, 06:50 AM

Also correct me if I am wrong because I could be but the committee doesn't just doesnt hold Anglers didn't the Minister appoint a seriously wacko, wacko wacko, anti Angler extremist to the committee?? Blue fringe author's???

Cheers fnq

I have been out of the NSW for over 4 years - W always had a green rep on the committees as you need to be seen as unbiased. There where many strong discussions with that representative during my time on the committee - BUT they where always outnumbered by the rec fishing sector ;)

Regards Scotto

seatime

11-09-2009, 06:50 AM

A Recreational Fishing Permit system fazed in over 2-5 years. Paying for a licence alone without participant invovlement could be viewed with suspicion by some.

All anglers are required to complete a course of study comprising:
# sustainable fishing practices - best practice C&R, etc
# DPI&F regs - bag/size limits, fish ID, etc

Study Options:
# online courses
# face-to-face thru fishing/boating clubs, public venues, etc
# mail-out packages for distance learning

Applicable fees to cover course costs, admin expenses, and R & D.

Above proposal is not complete, lists aren't exhaustive, but a base to work from...

Scott Mitchell

11-09-2009, 06:54 AM

Whats to stop the government influencing the government appointed committe to take on projects the Governemt should be looking after ? Just another tax !
* This is NOT how it has been working in NSW FOR OVER 15 YEARS

Whats to stop the government blocking a proposal because it might be politically damaging to them even though the committee (ie: the recreational angler) wants it, all funded by a rec licence ? Who signs of on the funding ? Who has the final say no matter what the wants of the rec sector ! The Government I bet !
*During my time on the ACORF committee I can not recall the minister over turning any of the committees decisions ?

I will stick with the facts - From a system that has been in practice for over 15 years in NSW ;)

Regards Scotto

STUIE63

11-09-2009, 08:00 AM

TheRealAndy

11-09-2009, 08:10 AM

Hey Scott, one question from me. I spend my $30 each year for my NSW fishing licence so I can fish the north coast, what exactly have I got for my money?

Scott Mitchell

11-09-2009, 10:36 AM

Hey Scott, one question from me. I spend my $30 each year for my NSW fishing licence so I can fish the north coast, what exactly have I got for my money?

I personally have not fished the area you are referring to but from what I can see the License fee has helped fund :-

* FADS off Ballina & Evans Head
* Recreational Fishing Havens at the Tweed & Richmond rivers
* Communication & angler education projects - State based
* I am sure there would be area specific research projects as well ?

You could communicate with the area saltwater trust expenditure committee representative for more details -

Brian Hutchinson Region 1 – Queensland border to Evans Head
President and founding member of Southern Cross University's Unifish Fishing Club. Experienced fly, rock, beach and deep sea fisher.

Brian Hutchinson Region 1 – Queensland border to Evans Head recfish.licensing@dpi.nsw.gov.au

Regards Scotto

Scott Mitchell

11-09-2009, 10:41 AM

Why do they need to be seen to be unbiased as they are paid for by rec fisherman surely their reps would be rec fisherman or people representing them not the greens
Stuie

Just part of the political arena now days - political correctness ;)

BUT in saying that I also believe that we need to look at the sustainability of our resources & support moves that are backed by legitimate research to protect fragile habitats or threats from pollution etc

Just not extreme moves to "lock up" vast areas of water & land for the sake of marine & national park percentages ::)

Regards Scotto

PinHead

11-09-2009, 11:08 AM

Pinhead - How about we let this run it's coarse & we re-visit our situation in 12 months time ;)

Regards Scotto

I have no intention of leaving it alone..I feel very strongly against any form of another tax.

If implemented it would just be another jobs for the boys.

I , like some others, cannot help but wonder what your agenda is in this? personal glory perhaps..a need to feel important maybe.

All in all...NSW can have their licenses..they can have anything else they want but I don't think we need to follow them.

If at any time the idea of a license is publicly spruiked by the Govt I will be bombarding my local member with my thoughts on it.

It ia quite obvious you have little memory of your time on the board..you cannot give any idea of answers ot my questions.

FNQCairns

11-09-2009, 01:02 PM

I have been out of the NSW for over 4 years - W always had a green rep on the committees as you need to be seen as unbiased. There where many strong discussions with that representative during my time on the committee - BUT they where always outnumbered by the rec fishing sector ;)

Regards Scotto

yeah also a couple from the commercial fishing sector?, retail fishing industry. it's been a while, have searched half heartedly this last few day for a modern insight into it's workings but it's largely secret squirrel except at the glossy brochure level, found that level of info easily. Too lazy to chase up the where in the regs it is all contained if anywhere.

This almost identical discussion has been seen on Ausfish a few times before, it's always a dead end re licence but does point each time toward lobby groups and/or full political representation, personally I believe both need to stand side by side if each represents the grass roots angler first, if they will not represent the pure anglers then they are doomed, like a licence cannot by it's very fundamental nature but still exists solely because of it's punitive nature.

The AFLP I understand is looking to officially reassemble, the wins they had even in their short existence has never been seen before in QLD fishery history or federal actually.

cheers fnq

Scott Mitchell

11-09-2009, 05:55 PM

yeah also a couple from the commercial fishing sector?, retail fishing industry. it's been a while, have searched half heartedly this last few day for a modern insight into it's workings but it's largely secret squirrel except at the glossy brochure level, found that level of info easily. Too lazy to chase up the where in the regs it is all contained if anywhere.

cheers fnq

Give me a brake - if it was any more transparent you'd hit your head on it :P

I have put all the relevant links up to answer the questions to date & I am just waiting on actual figures to come back from DPI&F on total revenue raised , break down on license sales & the allocated standard budget to NSW DPI&F from public revenue. The license fee is used solely ON TOP of the departments budget ;)

The too lazy bit - is why rec anglers continually get shafted ::)

Regards Scotto

Scott Mitchell

11-09-2009, 05:57 PM

Pretty close Poll results so far - Neck & Neck ;)

Have a Great weekend - Scotto

Poseidon

11-09-2009, 06:35 PM

mangomick

11-09-2009, 07:22 PM

Hi Scott,

And thanks for debating the Naysayers over the last 16 pages, you must feel like Columbus did after trying to convince the knockers that the world is round.

I doubt very much that any amount of information you could provide will remove the blinkers from many here....none are so blind as those who will not see.

Rest assured that there are many out there that would fully support the proposal and can't wait for a system that could be best described as 'For the People By The People.'

Anyway....there must be a lot more conspiracy theories to be thrown out there by the NaySayers.......over to them.:builder:

Is he your brother Scott ????

your great ideas have got me thinking now. Maybe we can have a recreational swimming licence too.
It can collect $25 a year off everyone and that can help pay for shark netting. beach patrols maybe a few research grants towards making artificial beach breaks for the surfers put a few more council workers on the payroll to sweep the beaches.
Whats that you say. Thats a ridiculous idea.
yeah,now your getting the point

Poseidon

11-09-2009, 07:50 PM

Is he your brother Scott ????

your great ideas have got me thinking now. Maybe we can have a recreational swimming licence too.
It can collect $25 a year off everyone and that can help pay for shark netting. beach patrols maybe a few research grants towards making artificial beach breaks for the surfers put a few more council workers on the payroll to sweep the beaches.
Whats that you say. Thats a ridiculous idea.
yeah,now your getting the point

Not a bad idea, however the comparison between the 2 are closer than you think....Surf Lifesavers are always looking for more money because the Government can't support them...and surely the government with all of the taxes they take should be able to provide the lifesavers with the resources they need, without having to run chook raffles and door knocks.

So, a $25 levy for all beach swimmers that would go straight back to the Lifesavers via a committee scheme administered by the lifesavers would get my vote....there may be an option for the recreational fisherman to join the same scheme and get some Independence from the Govt Purse Strings......or maybe they could create their own system.....lets call it the General Recreational Fishing Licence...for want of a better term.....and get some self determination for a change as opposed to waiting for the scraps.

FNQCairns

12-09-2009, 05:26 AM

mangomick

12-09-2009, 09:06 AM

The possibilities are endless. A license to breathe. Every man women and child $25 bucks a year for a license to breathe . We can shut down dirty industries,create oxygen tents on every corner and employ hundreds of academics to work on a clean coal agenda and then there's a license to ride a push bike why should they use the roads that I as a motorist have to pay a car license to use, we can then build heaps of bike lanes and employ more police to police them and a licence to walk hardly fair motorists and bike riders have to pay to get around when those pesky walkers get away with walking across our roads when everyone else has to pay.

gee, how silly can we get.????.... oh I know ...how about a fishing licence..............

bluefin59

12-09-2009, 09:39 AM

I am against the fishing liscence idea totally ,how would it work i get a yearly one the people i take occasionaly need to get one weather it be a one of situation or more . Its an absolute debarcle what if i go on a charter which i do occasionaly would my yearly do and what about customers who fish once a year they would have to buy one by your reconing from what i understand ,it certainly would change the spirit of spare of the moment fishing . The governemnt already regulate us as to what we can and cant do way to much surely at the end of the day those of us that fish would have no say, it would only those that brown nose there way into the commitee or what ever you want to call it who would be making judgements for us all . Getting any sort of say would be neigh on impossible . It would only be a few that would gain and it would become an absolute nightmare for the rest of us who just want to fish in peace and take our family and friends out . If on a volantary bases then go for it and i hope you can make some sort of difference but i dont see too much difference happening with the organizations that are out their now .....matt