Bet KC is entirety correct, all comes back to whether a person victimised already has got deep enough pockets to access their legal rights, nothing has changed here time will tell.
Our lawful types must be so very proud of themselves every time they stick it the little bloke because by design they cannot fight back.
While I feel for the blokes getting unjustly fined, you've gotta ask why the hell people keep trying to fish as close as possible to the green zone? If you KNOW where the green zone is then stay well clear and you won't get caught. As simple as that.Originally Posted by Flex
Yeah and the $10K sounds dodgy to me unless he was commercial
Re: Green zone fines
jmo...LL
Once upon a time they "probably" could have FISHED there , and probably ,the GREEN zone is on the edge of a drop-off , and/or covers the BEST spots.
Just guessing , i s'pose,whatdoyareckon LL
...add another kilometre to the boundary as a "buffer-zone"
did he fight it in court. I vaguely remeber someone here in nsw tried to fight it and the judge threw the book at them.
Are you for real? You think that fishers should stay well clear of green zones, effectively making the green zones far larger than they already are?
Total BS! I should be able to fish 10 m outside of a green zone and be confident that I am doing the right thing. The boundary is the boundary and has to be a fixed position. If it is as difficult to define the boundary as you say, then there is no way they could effectively prosecute.
Jeremy
"The underlying spirit of angling is that the skill of the angler is pitted against the instinct and strength of the fish and the latter is entitled to an even chance for it's life."
(Quotation from the rules of the Tuna Club Avalon, Santa Catalina, U.S.A.)
Apathy is the enemy
Be interesting to know on what grounds the NSW guy fought it in court! Without knowing the circumstances of the breech I can say with some confidence that a breech relying on GSP evidence as the sole means of determining a position is flawed and a prosecuction would not succeed (if properly defended). This position is clear at law and the authorities know it. They have changed their proceedures for "on water" breeches as a result but I am unaware of the circumstances of photos taken from planes but would bet they have not been tested.
The judge may well have "thrown the book" at the guy in NSW if he did not mount a proper defence, maritime law is complex and well beyond the scope of the average suburban solicitors firm. The Cairns guys had the weight of TFPQ and some significant assistance in framing a defence and the judge (in fact magistrate) had no alternative to find them not guilty. The crown appealled to the high court and then chickened out (withdrew the appeal) because they knew they could not win. A high court decision would have set a precident and they did not want that. (A magistrates court does not set legal precident).
KC
Done a bit more homework on this. The mapping software used from planes, mainly developed for the mining industry, is, for all intents accurate BUT it relies on GPS. The problem here is relative to maritime law. AMSA take a view that "on water" GPS MUST be confirmed by other navigational means. They can not, on one hand, prosecute a skipper who has an accident, for relying on GPS as his sole means of determining his position and then use GPS as the sole means of fixing a position when breeching in green zones. They just can't have their cake and eat it too. I doubt (IMHO) that this will never see the inside of a courtroom. It has too many ramifications for all those already charged with variuos navigation and boat accident issues. On one hand you have magistrates courts who determine outcomes based on the balance of probability and to some degree (some would argue) common sense, while the high court must determine issues based on the LAW. The GPS issue has gone both ways in a magistrates court but has never been tested in the high court. If it ever is and was found "wanting" it would mean a number of cases would need revisiting. It would be interesting to see if anyone ever defended a "plane" breech using the same basic arguement as the Cairns case. I think, in time, AMCS may change its view towards GPS accuracy but will never allow a skipper to rely on it. Beyond the GPS issue are the mapping data used in most recreational vessels. They are, in many many cases, dead wrong. If you are looking at reef maps and comparing those to your GBRMPA map and not looking at the fine print in terms of your actual lat/longs you can easily be in a green zone when you think you are 500 meters away. This will be another can of worms to open up in court one day. No one has yet twigged to the mapping issue in terms of a defence against GPS charges and again it is a double edge sword. If we and the crown are to rely on GSP, this brings with it a reasonable expectation that we can rely on the GPS maps as well...........and clearly we can't because they are often wrong.
I think this whole issue has a way to play out. Using planes and photos is an attempt by the authorities to maximize coverage and "return on investment" and is clearly a better deterant than on water patrols. More coverage, faster and must "help" with stopping large scale poaching. Nothing wrong with that.
They just need to dot the i's and cross the t's.
KC
Here is the NSW incident.
A South Coast magistrate has said it’s up to recreational and commercial fishers to know whether or not they are fishing in a permitted area.
Magistrate Doug Dick made the comments while sentencing two men for fishing illegally in a sanctuary zone, in Jervis Bay Marine Park, in the Nowra Local Court earlier this week.
40-year-old Andrew Allen of Dapto and 50-year-old William Baillie of Sussex Inlet pleaded not guilty however Magistrate Dick found the men guilty and convicted them of the offences.
The men were each fined $2000 and ordered to pay costs of $976.
The men had elected to go to court after initially being issued with on-the-spot fines of $500 each.
The Court heard that in January last year the men had been on board a boat from which fishing lines with lures were being trolled, in the Point Perpendicular-Crocodile Head Sanctuary Zone, in the Jervis Bay Marine Park.
In finding the men guilty, Magistrate Dick noted that marine park officers had known the men were in a sanctuary zone, not only from GPS technology but from prominent landmarks.
Magistrate Dick found the men had engaged in a joint criminal enterprise of fishing in the sanctuary zone and emphasised that people fishing were themselves responsible for finding out whether they were lawfully allowed to fish.
Jervis Bay Marine Park manager Matt Carr said it was a timely reminder, particularly for people who are unfamiliar with the area, to make sure they had a zoning map with them when venturing out into the marine park.
“All major boat ramps are signposted with marine park maps. Free maps showing where fishing is allowed are available from the marine park office, at local outlets and from the Marine Parks Authority website.”
Mr Carr also said that where circumstances and conditions allowed, sanctuary zones, which are the most protected and sensitive areas within the marine park, were marked with signposts and buoys. Media Contact: Tonia Liosatos
Telephone: 02 6495 5024
Mobile: 0418 820 504
After Hours: 02 9995 5347
Pretty well covers it. If there is a clear visual reference to confirm the GPS fixing, which in the NSW case there was. GONE!!
Still leaves open the plane breeches in the middle of the ocean but I hope I personally never have to test it...but would support anyone who did IF they were not deliberately fishing in a Green Zone.
KC
Yeah unfortunately that is often the case but the law is the law, like it or not and ignorance is no excuse. I'm not saying green zones are right or wrong (that's a discussion for another time) but if we don't stick to the rules where does it end?jmo...LL
Once upon a time they "probably" could have FISHED there , and probably ,the GREEN zone is on the edge of a drop-off , and/or covers the BEST spots.
Get off your horsey mate. I never said (a) you should fish miles away from the green zone or (b) that the boundries are difficult to define. Just stay clear so that there is no chance of accidently straying into a green zone. If you feel 10 meters is far enough and then go for it. Personally I fish further out than that.
I thought I was North of a green zone east of fitzroy reef when the customs plane buzzed me and a mate about 5 times. They said I was in it, so I disputed it saying I know where I was, checked my GPS for the tracks and then had to call them back with egg on my face saying my bad, I was actually in a corner of a peak that heads up that way from boult (only bloody JUST, but in it nonetheless). Formally interviewed, I apologised and said that it was entirely my fault as I was the skipper and should have been more careful than to drift/motor into it. They said it was obvious to them it was stupidity and not deliberate and they let my mate off. I got hit with an $1100 or $1200 fine I think it was. I spent another $800 the following week on a GPS with maps and green zones in them.
They can/do fine other fishers on board.
Matt.
thats a bummer Mattthey sure do hit you hard up there with fines or was one for anchoring and one for fishing making it two fines?
cheers Murf
No fines for anchoring Murph. You are allowed in Green Zones- just cant fish in them.
We have plenty in the bays of Magnetic Island which I often pull into for a swim or whatever. You do have to have rods stowed but- either below decks or in rocket launchers- I have been told by fisheries that people have been and will be done if rods are rigged and in rod holders.
Have to catch an arsehole on a bad day to go for that I reckon but just a heads up- you can go for it.
Cheers,
okay we are not allowed to anchor in our RED (green) zones down here in NSW, it brings a $500 fine
cheers Murf
I do wish the respective governments got together and make a standard set of rules re the green and yellow zones they are not even the same in Qld let alone with NSW
Stuie
IF IT CAN'T EAT A WHOLE PILLY I DON'T WANT IT
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
