Sunfish. What have they done for those of us in QLD??

[PADDLES]

the point we are missing here is that commercial operators will still be able to catch flathead and the little old lady will be able to go down to her local seafood store and buy flathead, it will simply be caught elsewhere and not in the moreton bay marine park. i agree with pinhead here, in that i think it's a pretty long bow to draw by saying that removal of commercial fishing effort from the moreton bay marine park will in turn make a brisbane seafood black market flourish.

anyhow sunfish is the subject here and i guess this is an issue that a recreational angling representative body should maybe look at putting forwards.

[Macks forever]

[QUOTE=Captain Incredible;1321670]

I have to agree with Paddles.

Quite simply there are not enough fish for everybody to take all they want. Even more to the point, there are not enough fish of certain species for both commercial fishers and rec anglers to take all they want. It is time for the tough decisions to be made. Part of that is allocating resources to best use.

Many areas and some species need to become net free. Flathead is a good species example. And before we hear the cries of "no fresh local fish" and "What about the poor little old lady who would be denied her flathead?" I simply say, the world will not end because someone cannot buy a piece of flathead. They will buy something else. And there will then be more flathead caught by anglers and the little old lady's kindly angling neighbour will share some of his fresh caught flathead with her.

Yes there would need to be adequate compensation to the affected commercial fishers but that would also have to prevent any displaced effort which has been the curse of past buy-backs.[/QUOTE

]

So how will the litle old lady repay her kindly neighbour? With money? With goods or services? So Macks Forever, you have highlighted the real issue- sustainability of the resource. Will the resource be more sustainable if it is bought, sold or traded on the black market through "kind neighbours"?

If the dismantling of the formal commercial fishing sector & its replacement with some black market neighbourhood "nudge, nudge, wink ,wink" way for rec anglers to earn a buck then this debate has gone nowhere. In fact the debate was about what Sunfish was doing to manage the effort of the rec sector in discussions with Fisheries managers. Not that Sunfish have bothered. They went straight to the Minister, stuffed up their representation because they had not widely consulted on an acceptable rec stance, then tried to re-enter the debate after getting what Sunfish had asked for by pressuring the new Fisheries DG. She rightly told them politely to get stuffed. And on & on. To the extent that Sunfish not only have emasculated the recreational fishing voice from any Departmental consultation, they have slammed the door on anyone at all having a say.

Unfortunatley MF, you are too close to the money. The world will not end if there is no more recreational fishing either. This is where I have been coming from for years. Discounting the right of other to access fisheries plays into the hands of the non fishing lobby. `. And if you think this is bullshit, look at how badly the Federal Government handled the ban on live cattle exports because of "animal cruelty". Another debate where Sunfish are MIA. Which was the topic of the thread.

WOW! What an extrapolation from Capt Incredible.

For starters CI is suggesting that every angler that gives away a fish or even a fillet of fish is encouraging/participating in black marketing. And then almost in the same breath links that to sustainability!

I have given my friends and family fish occasionally. I have never expected, asked for nor received any payment in return. It is still legal to give fish away and it is pathetic way of arguing a point to suggest otherwise. It has been done for centuries. I am sure if Capt Incredible has evidence of black he would have reported it to the authorities. But then I guess he would be reporting every angler who shared some fish, judging by his comments above.

To suggest that re-allocation of a species such as flathead from the commercial sector to the recreational sector will be the end of both commercial and recreational fishing as we know it is just another "bullshit" [to use your term] red herring. Re-allocation of species has happened numerous times and results in the enhancement of rec fishing and very little detriment, often over-compensation, to commercial fishing.

I stand by my statement:-
Many areas and some species need to become net free. Flathead is a good species example.

It is sounding more and more like Capt Incredible is an apologist for the commercial fishing sector. It begs the question, does Capt Incredible own a commercial fishing licence?

I think the name Capt Uncredible is becoming more applicable.

[Macks forever]

the point we are missing here is that commercial operators will still be able to catch flathead and the little old lady will be able to go down to her local seafood store and buy flathead, it will simply be caught elsewhere and not in the moreton bay marine park. i agree with pinhead here, in that i think it's a pretty long bow to draw by saying that removal of commercial fishing effort from the moreton bay marine park will in turn make a brisbane seafood black market flourish.

anyhow sunfish is the subject here and i guess this is an issue that a recreational angling representative body should maybe look at putting forwards.

I agree with Paddles in that net free areas such as Moreton Bay Marine Park will still allow fish to be netted and provided to people who want to buy fresh local fish [although >75% of fish bought now is frozen and/or imported but that is another story]

However I do believe it is an important issue to also have net free species as well, and I still believe species such as Flathead are a good example.

And I guess this is the quandry, getting back to the subject of the thread-
Where does Sunfish stand on issues like this?
and
What has it done to progress issues like this?

These are 2 distinctly separate questions. Having a position on something is one thing. Strategically progressing/pushing it is another. And making it a reality is something totally different again but often out of the control of those pushing the issues.

[Macks forever]

Stimulated by another thread:

What happened at the Sunfish Qld AGM?
Is Barry Pollock still chairman?
Was there a press release?
Any statements?
Position policies?

[PinHead]

Stimulated by another thread:

What happened at the Sunfish Qld AGM?
Is Barry Pollock still chairman?
Was there a press release?
Any statements?
Position policies?

who cares????????

as someone from Sunfish stated about egos on websites..maybe that same person should have a look at his own position. Ego running rampant.

Oh..and if he thinks I hide behind a keyboard:

. Phone no is 0402 230 162

[rayken1938]

Have a look at their press release on the female mud crab issue.
Also their website is up and running.
Have a read and think again.
Cheers
Ray

[PinHead]

Have a look at their press release on the female mud crab issue.
Also their website is up and running.
Have a read and think again.
Cheers
Ray

Ray,

read the press reports from the Minister and read the Sunfish reply. Scott Mitchel has kindly put it in the news section. Plus there is another post there with a report from someone else. There are some glaring items there that appear that the not all the dogs are barking up the same tree at the same possum.

[oldboot]

Here are some thaughts that may not have occured to some readers.

Bag Sunfish as much as you like..perhaps they deserve it perhaps not.

But the fact remains that "peak bodies" like Sunfish have the primary function in the government view of being a cheap clearing house for government responsibilities.

The state government has a responsibility under federal legeslation to conduct CONsultation, current government does not realy want to hear what grass roots people think, they prefeer that their agenda goes forward unchallenged, so they support "peak bodies" and claim that they represent far more than they do.

They then claim thay have "consulted stake holders" and thus they claim to fulfill their responsibilty for "CONsultation"

Mostly these "peak bodies" represent a very small fraction of the effected community and are never radical or militant.

If they became radical or mitant or caused trouble for the government, they probaly would not last past next june.

It is in the interests of the government that these " peak bodies" are seen to be viable, but they remain underfunded, such that they can not afford to comprehensively represent commuity views nor employ qualified experts or high powered communicators.

So government funded "Peak Bodies" such as Sunfish are limited in what they can achieve.

This is the way current government wants it, and it is the same across the community.

Another responsibity the state government and the head of the fisheries department has under the act, is education.

In this day and age Government is not interested in informing the effected public about what is happening least of all changes to legeslation that may not win votes, so they sponsor touchy feely functionally pointless programes like teaching kids to fish.
Face facts, taking a whole pile of little kids fishing once will have almost no impact on the fishery or on the interests of recreational angling.... but it makes a nice touchy feely media story and there is probaly a few votes in it.

They then claim that they have fulfuilled there education responsibilities under the act.

Personally I would rather see a training programes for adults ( teens welcome) that addressed real issues that every recreational angler should be aware of, like spicies identification, release practices, boating safety and changes to legeslation......in the general fishing community blind ignorance is the norm.

But I doubt that that will ever happen.

The only hope we have is to support other non government funded representative groups with a more radical and agressive agenda..if they exist.

for example.
The government would prefeer to point at the RACQ as the peak motoring body and say they represent all motorists......but their views on vehicle modification would be very very moderate..without the existance of the 4wd, hotrod and other associations there would be no alternative view on the matter, this does not mean the RACQ is not doing its job.

Sunfish is what it is and sorry I don't see any likleyhood of significant change.

We need to get of our own bums and go direct to out pollies in numbers and we need to form and support other orginisations to represent an alternative view to Sunfish.

Specificaly so the government can not point to one orginisation ( regardless of its identity or view) and say the represent all recreational anglers.

cheers

[ricksta]

Interesting read.........

…….and I hope that this reaches some sort of a conclusion, namely that Sunfish lifts its game and becomes more open with the people it is supposed to be representing.

The queries raised here are not unreasonable and more transparency on Sunfish’s part would certainly be a step towards resolving some of the issues that a great deal of recreational anglers obviously have.

[rayken1938]

Well i have to eat my hat after speaking up in favor of sunfish I am appalled at the quality of their latest work after reading their proposal for the simplifying of Qld Fishing regulations.
I was informed that this was written by one person and then sent out to a fairly select group for submission to fisheries.
Whilst there are some very good things in parts of the proposal there are serious areas of concern that should have been adressed within Sunfish before release.
It should have been compiled by people with expertise in each individual section instead of being left to the one person and should also have been reviewed before release.
I thought that my days of stirring the establishment were over now it looks like i have to put my money where my mouth is and join up and give them heaps.
Cheers
Ray

[PinHead]

Well i have to eat my hat after speaking up in favor of sunfish I am appalled at the quality of their latest work after reading their proposal for the simplifying of Qld Fishing regulations.
I was informed that this was written by one person and then sent out to a fairly select group for submission to fisheries.
Whilst there are some very good things in parts of the proposal there are serious areas of concern that should have been adressed within Sunfish before release.
It should have been compiled by people with expertise in each individual section instead of being left to the one person and should also have been reviewed before release.
I thought that my days of stirring the establishment were over now it looks like i have to put my money where my mouth is and join up and give them heaps.
Cheers
Ray

Just ignore them..treat them as the non entity they really are..let their egos run riot and forget them.