Hahahaha finga if ya refering to my statement about following trend of QLD.... i said SOME not all lolOriginally Posted by finga
YES
NO
Maybe
Hahahaha finga if ya refering to my statement about following trend of QLD.... i said SOME not all lol
not sure how this would work or even how it would be policed,as some one meantioned before there is limit of 20 mixed coral reef fin fish,butsay with the likes of jack,are you saying if i catch 20 jack i can keep them all????that would not be sustainable to the mangrove jack or any other fish that have bag limits..ive been told by someone whos in the know how that the 35cm size limit on jack is being reveiwed and may very well be increased to 50 cm..the reason is said to be that jack at 35cm are not sexualy matured and are not spawning atleast once..and the whole idea of bag limits and sizes is to allow the fish to spawn atleast once before they can be caught keept and eaten,ie sustainability..
Yeh full agree with this.. and i assume that 20 mix reef bag is in qld?? i believe the limit for other species should stay because 20 jacks is not suitable but my arguement is what does one person want with more then 20 fish say if i went offshore i could catch and keep 60 fish as long as i keep to the bag limits of each species. What does one person do with 60 fish. but yeh with any fish that have existing bag limits under 20 should stay the same, but can be included in your 20 fish
clean them
freeze them
defrost them
cook them
and then the good bit, eat them
cheers Murf
Sounds like a plan.clean them
freeze them
defrost them
cook them
and then the good bit, eat them
cheers Murf
What time is tea??
Even after defrost the local caught stuff has to be 10000000% better then 98% of the stuff in any supermarket.
I intend on living for-ever....so far so good
i guess if you eat fish every day and only go out once a month or so that would work i guess i mainly like my fish fresh the quicker i get it from the water to the frying pan the better :-)
what are you going to do with only 20 whiting? its barely one family meal. every time I take my boat out, I get no change from $70 on the shorter trips (ALL costs added up) would you pay $70 for 20 winter whiting?
what about big long trips, where someone might tow the boat 200-300 klms to get to the area, then run out offshore and move around a lot and do 150 + klms on a big trip? Should he be limited to a maximum of all species of 20 fish? I think not.
As long as people stay within the law and in possession limits, they should be free to do whatever the desire. And if that is to go and legally catch 50 or however many fish, take them home and freeze them and not go out and do a big trip like that again for 6 months - then so be it, its their choice, and should not be subject to second guessing of the fishing regulations by people who dont have scientific basis for their comments.
just my opinion
Mick
Ahhh. Dollars vs. Fish.
It always amazes me how on earth people actually try and calculate or justify their fishing on a Dollars vs. Fish basis.
I should try it some time. I just need to know how you calculate it
Do I need to take into account how much I initially outlayed for my boat?And then I need to also factor in that every hour I am fishing I could be earning a dollar working? And my fishing gear, do I depreciate that over the next 4 financial years? Anyone got a formula for working out how much freezer space I am using to store my fish, in turn allowing me to calculate my annual overheads for electricity? Oh, and I burned X ammount of calories/energy catching the fish, so I'll need to replace that with food and drink to the value of X. Do I get a rebate for the ammount of fun I have had?
Far out!
Sorry for being a smart arse, but seriously.........Get real!
Sayings like "the worst day on a boat is better than the best day at work" need to be remembered.
Fishing in Australia is a luxury alot of us take for granted, me included sometimes
Yes, well said and we do forget why we go fishing sometimes.Ahhh. Dollars vs. Fish.
It always amazes me how on earth people actually try and calculate or justify their fishing on a Dollars vs. Fish basis.
I should try it some time. I just need to know how you calculate it
Do I need to take into account how much I initially outlayed for my boat?
Sorry for being a smart arse, but seriously.........Get real!
Sayings like "the worst day on a boat is better than the best day at work" need to be remembered.
Fishing in Australia is a luxury alot of us take for granted, me included sometimes
I often think of that when seeing someone go off the deep end when they drop a fish or don't come home with a feed. I say to myself...I thought fishing was supposed to be a relaxing past-time, not a get crank past-time whilst I'm lazily drifting by (I'm so lazy I hardly anchor. Not worth the effort I reckon) eating a sambo or having a cup of coffee with my Anzac biccy all while drowning a prawn.
To me if we catch something we can eat it's a welcomed contribution to our weekly budget, but on the downside, it's also a continuing contribution to my growing girth because I love fish so in that respect maybe overall bag limits would be good.
I intend on living for-ever....so far so good
Sorry .... I'm not one for seeing the ocean / rivers / lakes as a free for all source of protein . So I have no sympathy for those that use a cost / kg for justifying their trips.
Therefore as you could imagine - I'm all for mixed bag limits in some form - But not sure if it would work as just an low arbitrary number (ie 20). ..... unless you also lower the legal limit for individual species ........ otherwise fishoes will take 20 winter Whiting & toss them out once they start adding snapper , jew- whatever is better to their bag......... In most cases the fish will be thrown out dead. So that's where I see the problem with mixed bag limits.
Cheers
Chris
Give a man a fish & he will eat for a day !
Teach him how to fish
& he will sit in a boat - & drink beer all day!
TEAM MOJIKO
Mod 5, seems it was more of a question than an assertion, thats what such forums are for, good discussion. Does everyone have to have scientific backup to write anything on here now???
Flatzie
Certainly not but what reasonable thinking people have been fighting for, for quite some time now is bag limits and sizes based on good scientific research and not the whim of greens, fanatics and bureaucrats.
Regards
mod5
to true,but size limits are enforced to protect the different species of fish allowing them to spawn atleast once in there life cycle..thats scientificly proven..
its not about justifying the cost of the trip with a certain amount of fish - that calculation will never work out in the fishos favour... It is about "why should we want to give up our right to harvest fish for personal consumption under the current regulations".
My point is that:
If the fish are on, and if the fisho chooses to do so, he should be entitled to take as many fish as he likes under the current regulations, provided he sticks to the law. We should not be suggesting an increased requirement such as this proposal of a new maximum take quantity for all species, as touted at the beginning of this thread.
If the current regulations are not adequate to sustain fish stocks for the long term, I am quite confident that further reductions in bag limits will be introduced by the authorities based on scientific studies.
At the moment, follow the law and fish on.............
cheers
Mick
Good one Trueblue
Im all for having limits but i think that very few fishos reach those limits on a regular basis,(havent done any scientific research tho LOL)
I think the fish stocks of most varieties are pretty safe as many of the people who hit the water come in with pretty lean eskies, at least thats the case where I often put in at Donnybrook, often people are shocked if you have a good bag of flathead, some nice bream and a few whiting, I hate them asking these days after they assure each other how "dead it was out there today"
Mod 5 there are some extremes and fanatics on the other side as well with people who would take crazy amounts of fish if they could or were allowed, so its no use just highlighting green, fanatics and bureaucrats.
Cheers
Flatzie
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
