Hypothetical size limit question

[NAGG]

At the other end of the scale, a mate told me of a guy who he saw get done for keeping a tailor, which had its tail savaged by something on the way in, it would have been a legal fish had it a tail but without it was just under size. Fisheries apparently did him when they inspected peoples eskies.

Bit of a joke considering that the fish would not have survived had it been released anyway. ???

I think it would depend greatly on the attitude of the person making the decision but you can only hope if you do keep such a fish, that common sense prevails.

Once again this is why they have reference points to measure! ... I've heard of tail snipping of barra to allow the taking of an oversize fish ( to me it would be pretty obvious .... & the offender should be fined & then ... Nagg

[Kleyny]

i say throw it back with the hook still in it to catch the shark and eat it

neil

[Matt_Campbell]

G'day Jeff
For what its worth, I'd throw it back. It'd be very difficult to prove to a fisheries officer that it had been attacked by a shark and not mutilated by yourself?
Matt C

[baitwaster]

I would suggest that most fish that have had the back half bitten off would probably die. In this scenario, I would throw the fish back in, knowing it would
be a waste of good food, simply to avoid any chance of a fine from the DPI.

[ffejsmada]

Have just been informed by Fisheries that any fish that would have been oversize that has been docked either from natural predation or from your own hands, and now fits in the legal size slot, will be deemed illegal and prosecution will follow to - quote -" the full extent of the law "-unquote.

Cheers Jeff.

[NAGG]

Have just been informed by Fisheries that any fish that would have been oversize that has been docked either from natural predation or from your own hands, and now fits in the legal size slot, will be deemed illegal and prosecution will follow to - quote -" the full extent of the law "-unquote.

Cheers Jeff.

I 'd love to see how that would stand up in Court! ..... specially the natural predation & if a significant part of the fin or jaw was missing ....... ( clipping would be different)..
Nagg

[Kleyny]

I 'd love to see how that would stand up in Court! ..... specially the natural predation & if a significant part of the fin or jaw was missing ....... ( clipping would be different)..
Nagg

I'm with you Nagg

if the legislation spells out how to measure fish and if the points for measurement are missing (naturally) it would be hard to prove or disprove in a court of law what size the fish really was.

As we all know with our knowledge of the species we catch that a "rough estimate" size of some fish can be measured by other ways. Like size of head and the height of the fish. BUT rough estimates don't stand up in court.

what 90% of the law comes down to is REASONABLE PERSON.

neil

[Lutjanus johnii]

I'd throw it back. You don't know where it's been. could have rotted off. gone all manky

[oldboot]

Ah now we have to look at this in the context of "recreational fishing"........ the laws are not framed arround food value or for that matter if the fish will or will not survive.
The subsiquent use of a " sporting caught" fish is irrelivent..... it must be a legal sporting catch......... it is unwritten but expected that the fish be whole and entire when caught and measured and that is how the laws are framed.

So if it is possible that an incomplete fish may have been an illegal catch if it was entire..... it would be viewed as an illegal catch.

this is why they have gone further with the complicated fillets not retirning to the boat & skin on provisions

I would say the fish in question would most definitely be an illegal catch.


Now here's a real good one........... would you keep a foul hooked fish?

It is illegal to keep a foul hooked fish in QLD.....

Hmmmm

cheers

[mangrove rat]

i think if we all love fishing and fish as much as we do, let it go and let nature take cause, if it gets swooped by a bird 10 seconds later, so be it, or if it survives and breeds, everyones a winner. saying that, most fishing presenters and the like will tell you a flatheads tail basically starts from its head anyway, so 3cm knocked off a 70cm fish you think, wouldnt make a lot of differance.....
also while fishing near gladstone i caught a load of bream, one of which had its tail bitten off, and healed over, and this fish which was around 30cm, faught as hard as any other fish i'd hooked that day.
cheers guys, can do.
PS thousands of flathead in the coast rivers anyway