What Option is Best?

[Sevric]

Never thought of it that way Gazza; i think you may be right.

[thelump]

They all stink and I dont agree with any BUT if i HAD to vote for one it would be number 1. I would rather pay 90 clams and have them close it for 6 weeks in summer when i can go and catch pelagics than have them close it for 4 months over winter when there is bugger all else to target.
Just my opinion.

[Micadogs]

I'm also for Option 1, it is less than $2 / week for a boat not an individual. 4 months is just too long not to fish. It will be easier to fight a fee than a closure if the Government changes. This at least has a shot a obtaining some real data on stocks for the future. If selecting option 4 than trag, parrot, pearlies will all be in trouble next time using the same estimation model as they did with snapper and their closed periods will be after the 4 months proposed i.e. 6 - 8 months at a time.

No one wants to pay more money, no one wants to NOT fish. Which one is worse, for me its not fishing.

[tropicrows]

I can't vote for any of them, they are all flawed, and we don't have to settle for any of them.

Jim said at the Redlands/Victoria point meeting all options will be looked at, so we just need to make our point and prove to this government that our option is better.

[Fish_gutz]

A closure for 4 months per year will bring the 415 tonne recreational annual catch down to 400 tonnes , now I really am completely satisfied that this whole thing is a load of hot cock! ( not this thread or your poll Horse , no disrespect intended) I would have voted 4 if THEY were fair dinkum but with option 4 they take no data!
Cheers Andrew

[honda900]

None are viable options without facts.

Regards
HOnda.

[TimiBoy]

I won't support (or obey) any of them.

Options 3 and 4 supply no new science, so we will be at their beck and call next time Labor need to suck green %$^&, and the time after that, and the time after that....

Options 1 & 2 give the control of the numbers to the Government, and rip us off to boot.

Nope, it's a bag limit of 5 and 35cm minimum for me. Those haven't had the chance to work yet as there's been a drought and the green zones were implemented. Given that there is a better chance of winning lotto than being caught (as there are no Inspectors ANYWHERE it seems), it seems a safe bet.

I would be content with Option 1 if the information was handled outside Government hands, was not compulsory, and was free. I would happily participate and encourage others to do so. It's not perfect, but it's workable, and we would get good data. But Anna has blown our dough and needs a tax grab. She ain't getting another penny out of me.

Tim

[Gazza]

CLEM7 or CLEM8

[Teejay24]

i think youll end up paying something to catch em cause bligh needs more money. as for the fish i thought you people would have realised yourself that good sized snapper are getting rare, so obviously there are fewer in the water.
as for me i vote let the fish breed. id be happy to focus fishing for other species for a few months a year so brisbanes kids will get to catch a snapper. if they didnt try to enforce something and we fish them dry in 10 years. then youll have something to whine about. and i bet it wont be your fault.

i bet the price of snapper will sky rocket also.

[Gazza]

So the MLS was pumped-up 30 ---> 35, with the bagimit reduced 30----->5 ,
and "it's now deemed" to be "less fish" available and WEIGHT taken has increased.......FMD ,what a revelation

Being forced to "take" the LARGER Breeders is Science - FOLLY , they "now" know-it , "now" perfectly rejected by them many times in the options , and "now" acknowledging ....

.......INCREASING MINSIZE WON'T INCREASE the B-I-O-M-A-S-S.......

30cm fish ....weigh less in "notational" TAC calcs , 260T not-a-problem
10 fish integrates with the STUPID border regs i.e.qld/nsw

p.s. yep, i had a spew about MLS in some other post hereabouts , way back when ....this year

[webby]

Option 10.
1. Minimum size 35cm (give it a bloody chance to work)
2. Limit of 5 per person( give it a bloody chance to work)
3. No License or fees apply (i pay enough fees to get on the water as it is)
4. 4 weeks closure in June.
5. Limit of 2 over 80cm (with or without a hump, and be allowed to take one
more if a noah only gives you half)
6. No log book (fisheries can take a running jump)
7. Reduce the TAC on commerical operators.
8. Trag and Pearlies remain the same (as they haven't a clue, the same as
Snapper).
9. Fisheries to get off their collectible asses and do some real science, instead
of all this Guess work.
10. Divide the Snapper Grounds into Zones from the border up to Rocky, and
have the Closures migrate north on a monthly basis from May onwards.

[CHEE-FEE]

What a difference a flood can make!! Captain Blight and the Ranga slag from down South went to the Bob Hawke "Cry on Cue for the Camera" school and twanged everybody's heart-strings. Now the ALP has gone ahead in the Qld pollls; which can only mean an election is on the cards. Turf the pricks and their Green poofta mates; as long as the oposition will go on record stating that all these non-sensical fishing laws will be repealed in a very short time span, or at least put on hold pending up-to-date, credible, transparent research.

Cheers,
NICK.