Shamatures.

[nigelr]

Re: Shamatures.

they don't dob because they are bloody cowards and frightened of the hassle that may ensue and the stigma of being called un Australian.


kev

Nailed it in one, Kingtin, IMO.

Have enjoyed yours' and finga's replies on this topic immensely.

Thank God some people have some moral fortitude.

Leave the non-dobbing mentality where it belongs, ie Boggo Rd.

Cheers.

[roz]

Re: Shamatures.

Never thought of it as stealing, suppose it is "taking the livelihood" away from pros, maybe ripping off the Govt the large sums they charge for fishing licences, ripping off the other amatures fish they might have been able to catch, or even denying the fishery its breeding population etc.

Me I just never do it, coz its illegal, never gave it much more thought than that. Not that I dont bend the odd rule or two, but never seen the need to bend that one.

I'm sorry Ferel if I jumped on you.

I have to say that at least you are broard minded enough to see the issues from a different perspective. I wish at times I could ignore the silly bonehead comments, or at the very least, calm down before getting my "knickers in a knot" ....now where did I hear that remark????

It seems to have gotten down to the question of whether 'to dob or not to dob', for me it's a no brainer. I really have tried to look at it from the other side, but it doesn't make any sense at all.

The greedy 'shamatures' don't give rats about our fishery, they will continue to take and take until there is nothing left, then move on to something else.

If they were true aussies, they certainly wouldn't compromise their mates, in my opinion that's very un Australian.

I put in a netter once...Yep I'm a dobber! He had strung a gill net across my favourite bass creek. He was found guilty in court and made the local paper.

He definately isn't my friend anymore, and I don't care. Real mates don't compromise.

r.

[dogsbody]

Re: Shamatures.

If a person was fishing strickly to sell his catch sure i'd nark him in.The pro's pay a hefty sum to catch fish why should these knobs rort the system.

If someone handed over a couple of fish over the fence and was offered a couple of bucks for petrol or bait and was not expecting any payment but took the offer i don't have a problem with. It would be just the same as if the bloke next door went fishing with him and gave him a few bucks.

Dave.

[roz]

Re: Shamatures.

Dave,

I think the money you save by putting that fresh fish on the table is more than enough to cover your expenses, you would also have to use fuel in your vehicle to drive down to the supermarket. I've already said this previously.

So from my point of view that really doesn't justify selling fish over the fence. Try simply giving to your neighbour for no money, you'll have a friend for life.. priceless.

As for selling "extra" fish, what's wrong with stopping when you've caught enough, or simply enjoy catching fish then putting the surplus back. No body accidently catch too many fish.

r.

[banshee]

Re: Shamatures.

If a person was fishing strickly to sell his catch sure i'd nark him in.The pro's pay a hefty sum to catch fish why should these knobs rort the system.

If someone handed over a couple of fish over the fence and was offered a couple of bucks for petrol or bait and was not expecting any payment but took the offer i don't have a problem with. It would be just the same as if the bloke next door went fishing with him and gave him a few bucks.

Dave.

No it would not be the same as the bloke going fishing with him.......it would be the same as selling fish....and like you I would tend to mind my own bussiness.

OK,seeing how every one likes to throw up the what if, I would wager that if the commercial fishermen at Evans Head could completely stamp out either the black market or 'the Classic',the fishing comp would be gone in a flash,I am yet to see an article or a letter concerning the black market but come July the paper is full of their objections.

[dogsbody]

Re: Shamatures.

Hey you asked for my opinion or thoughts,That is my opinion Be it right or wrong i stand by what ive said. I don't remember reading what are your thoughts so i can pick it to bits. That is just MY view.

Dave.

[Mattg68]

Re: Shamatures.

I think Dave's right on this one. Firstly he's not saying that 'he' sells fish over the fence - that's hypothetical. Secondly he said he 'would' nark in someone who was making an illegal living out of selling regular catches. I'm with him on the hypothetical though, I mean if someone who, once in a blue moon gets offered sum sponies for some fillets no harm no foul, the fish have been caught in a legal fashion (just like the ones you caught on the weekend - hopefully) but because some money changes hands it becomes a crime - I don't think so. If he was selling them whole to 'Joey' the local seafood shop owner for on-selling to the public yes, I can see that being wrong.

I think one point that's being missed here a little is sustainability, there's some folk here that are out fishing (legally) every other weekend & bringing back there full bag limits & yet some guy who sells a couple of fillets to his neighbour gets condemed, pfffff.

Let's compare apples with apples. Constant (illegal) selling of catch for primary or even secondary income - no, but a couple for some pocket money - come on.

Matt

[roz]

Re: Shamatures.

I think Dave's right on this one. Firstly he's not saying that 'he' sells fish over the fence - that's hypothetical. Secondly he said he 'would' nark in someone who was making an illegal living out of selling regular catches. I'm with him on the hypothetical though, I mean if someone who, once in a blue moon gets offered sum sponies for some fillets no harm no foul, the fish have been caught in a legal fashion (just like the ones you caught on the weekend - hopefully) but because some money changes hands it becomes a crime - I don't think so. If he was selling them whole to 'Joey' the local seafood shop owner for on-selling to the public yes, I can see that being wrong.

I think one point that's being missed here a little is sustainability, there's some folk here that are out fishing (legally) every other weekend & bringing back there full bag limits & yet some guy who sells a couple of fillets to his neighbour gets condemed, pfffff.

Let's compare apples with apples. Constant (illegal) selling of catch for primary or even secondary income - no, but a couple for some pocket money - come on.

Matt

Matt,

Dave may or may not have put forward his arguement as hypothetical, you are simply assuming that. It's still wrong.

Sustainability. What has that got to do with greed??? Just because you can legally catch X number of tailor, why bother, if you can't eat or use those fish in some way other than selling for money. You know the answer to that before you walk out the front door to go fishing.

Primary income, secondary income, but pocket money OK would love to be in court to hear ya say that to the magistrate . "come on".

My neighbours are not a source of any form of income, I value their friendship more than just a bit of "pocket money", any fillets I give away have no strings attached.

You can trivialize the reasons for selling fish to soothe your own conscience, maybe you need to.

r.

[kingtin]

Re: Shamatures.

<snip>
Let's compare apples with apples. Constant (illegal) selling of catch for primary or even secondary income - no, but a couple for some pocket money - come on.

Matt

I understand what you're saying Matt, but just where do you draw the line?

What is "pocket money"? How would you know whether that pocket money wasn't a secondary income? If too many reccos thought that they could make "pocket money" from their fishing trips, and decided to do so, just think of the impact that could have on fish stocks. Whereas once they may have returned fish to the water as being 'surplus to requirements' they may well now decide to offset their fishing costs. Primme fishing spots would become a target for those seeking pocket money as opposed to the pleasure of fishing.

Grey areas (in law and individual morality) lead to exploitation and none of us are perfect.......we are human with human frailties..........if we thought we could get away with selling a few fish to the neighbours, what then would be the next step if we had a few bills mounting up, or if we simply became a little greedy. The vast majority of fishos are decent responsible folk, but if some bugger thought that decency extended to them not being dobbed for selling fish, then who knows what may result when viewed in the perspective of the recreational fishery as a whole.

No, laws have to be hard and fast tempered with compassion and understanding. That compassion and understanding is for the courts to exercise, not individual members of the public. Apply any other thinking and the law becomes impotent and anarchy ensues We are not the judges, the courts are, but by the same thinking, we are not the police nor fisheries either, so where to from there?

kev

[logan]

Re: Shamatures.

i like a feed of flake as good as the next bloke but im not gona lie to you most people turn there nose up of i wana give it away , see it now kingtin before the judge but i wanted to sell catties to feed my kids, you are safe mate noone will ever buy your cattys my mum always said those sqeelers have got somethin to hide there is a lot of sqeelin in this topic by a few

[rick k]

Re: Shamatures.

( keep your comments related to the topic in the thread, suggestive and personal comments are not condoned. Moderated )

[rick k]

Re: Shamatures.

me again.

Gotta love losing a reply because the system gobbled it up half way through typing.

When I was a kid in the 60s, dobbing was invariably a bigger sin than whatever was dobbed on. In the world we saw as kids, anyway.

I reckon this goes back to the squatter/convict days where the golden rule applied. S/he (another product of political correctness) who has the gold makes the rules. The rich ab/used the law, and the Government enforcers, and the working person made their own arrangements in response and did not dob.

Stealing an image from about page 3 of this post, as a 'Cat' in another context, I draw some comfort from changes in attitudes to this. But only some. If people are prepared to 'dob', maybe that means they trust the Government and its Cats to do the right thing. Alternatively, maybe they don't care about that, they just want to do the other person in, or, that, plus they are too scared to confront them, unlike Samson and likeminded types.

[tunaman]

Re: Shamatures.

Give this thread a break. ( you have been warned before about your langauge tunaman, fix it !! moderated ). Know one sells fish in this day and age. And if you do, snap out of it. Your giving us a bad name.



signed tunaman

[Mattg68]

Re: Shamatures.

Roz,

Firstly, I know Dave personally so I know for a fact he doesn't sell fish, so there's no assumptions there.

Secondly, you (& others) 'assume' that when I write 'pocket money' you must think I'm talking $000's of dollars a year judging by your responses. If you want to take some bugger to court for $10 bucks go ahead I say, god knows the judges could use some more overtime.

Thirdly, Sustainability has everything to do with greed, for where there is greed then sustainability is GONE. You say that it has nothing to do with it & then say 'why catch full bag limit'. These are YOUR views but unfortunately not everyone's. Believe or not there are greedy people out there.

Your moral concerns seem to be with receiving monies for fish (which is fine if it were regular & substancial) but the fish are still being caught & if you 'have' to give away fish maybe you are catching too much (& I'm not suggesting over bag).

As I said - Selling catch 'on a regular basis' is wrong. If you want to linch some bugger for getting a 10er for some fillets then load your guns. If you were really concerned about taking away the livelyhoods of commercial fishos then sell your boat & rods & take up bowling, I'm sure they wouldn't object.

I think your passion on this issue is to be comended but there are alot of assumptions being bandied about & it's pointless debating in this fashion. Maybe one day when I'm up your way we can get together for some heated discussion (& a drink or 10) & you can give me a slap over the head. Until then keep your blood boiling.

And by the way, my conscience is clear.

Matt

[roz]

Re: Shamatures.

Hi there Mat,

It's hard not to get emotional when debating the pros and cons of topics like this one, and it's hard to resist getting in the last word (don't count this post Matt)

I don't post many topics in General, mainly just respond.

I usually get enough of a flogging in Rodbuilding from Myles Stu & Co., so wasn't expecting this thread to grow into a bit of a monster & get everyone so fired up....

Is that such a bad thing??? IMO No.

If you feel you have the right to take the high moral ground on a topic, go right ahead, there is always someone out there happy to try and shoot you down.. so I've discovered.

At the end of the day it's nice to go to a M&G and meet up with some of your opposition, I know there have been times I've thought....hope I never meet that B@$T&*D!!!! ey Pinhead lol!!

Looking forward to meeting you one day Matt.

cheers roz.

P.S. I know I'm right.