Fisheries Manager in the studio this weekend

[Nugget]

This Sat Jan 3 on Talking Fishing:

Fisheries Manager Mark Elmer will be in the studio to answer your questions.
He will also advise of an error in the new regulations summary brochure, and an error on the DPI website.
His comments should clear up a lot of confusion.

Ken Fox - the developer of Fishing Log For Windows, - the software I use for fishing predictions, will explain his program and its capabilities.


Talking Fishing - 5 - 6am Sat and Sun on radio 4BC - 1116am on your dial or listen on-line at www.4bc.com.au

Dave ><>

[Gorilla_in_Manila]

Nugget,
A couple of good topics. Don't know that I will be able to get online to listen, thats a 3 - 4am for me. Is there transcripts posted somewhere?
Maybe you could pose a question or two for me if you think them worthwhile:

1. To Mark Elmer.
Which of the 3 main sources of fisheries regulations (the acts themselves, the website info or brochures and such issued by the department) are actually enforceable?
I would have thought the acts (or written legislation) themselves would be the only ones actually enforceable. The DPI would, I guess, have some obligation to be responsible for any misinformation they had distributed via the website or brochure, but if push came to shove, it would be the actual legislation that governs. (probably a disclaimer somewhere on website and brochure)
Similarly, I would expect that if I was inspected and found to have fish not in compliance to the new regulations, and I pulled out an old brochure, or incorrect info I had downloaded of someone elses website, even though I thought I had made every effort to do the right thing, I would be still deemed to be in the wrong.

2. Concerning the predictions shown on your website (which it seems comes from Ken's software) have you or someone done a reconciliation between say the solunar predictions times and an actual catch log? Has there been any statistical analysis that proves that the predictions actually result in a better catch?
Cheers,
Jeff

[Nugget]

Good questions Jeff - I've printed them out and will endeavour to get the answers on air.

Dave ><>

[Gazza]

Mate , P-l-e-a-s-e ask 8) / tell > Mark ,that "IF" Queenslanders CAN and HAVE been fined for NOT having an RFL...... to fish NSW waters, as in "their laws"

Q1. WHY , oh friggin WHY can't QUEENSLANDERS catch(in NSW) Jennies , Mangrove Jacks 12cm or less!! and keep ONE 90cm FLATTIE , and several under 35cms snapper/squire........all diffferent regs. to Q,L of D ,but with a 'legit' NSWRFL and take them back to their 'home/castle' ??? ??? ???


Q2. Does "he or his dept." EVER envisage an "increase" in baglimit ,OR a "decrease" in min. size ,due to improvements in "Fisheries M-a-n-a-g-e-m-e-n-t"

Q3. please ask Mark to respond to Q1. & Q2.

p.s. you should do 2hrs mate

[Fitzy]

Gorilla,
I'll answer that one. The act is the enforcable thing. That is what they will be refering to if & when anything ever gets taken to court.
Went down this path when they stuffed up the freshwater closed season/waters a couple of years ago. One hand dont know what the other is doing.
The www & brochures are only a "rough guide" I was told & for the "letter of the law" I should refer to the act.

Fitzy..

[gif]

I think I can partially answer Jeff's questions

The Legislation, followed by the Regulations IS the L-A-W. The only words that are enforceable.

Not just in fisheries but all the western world.

"I didn't know that was the law " is never an accepted excuse in Court - for some pretty obvious reasons. The legal principle is “Ignorance of the law is no excuse”

"the DPI brochure was wrong" - is likewise technically not an excuse for breaking the law. But this is one occasion we can rely on commonsense ( or in the end, the threat of bad PR) to come into play. Thus I would expect that anyone charged over removing scales from a coral reef fin fish over the last week would have the charges quickly dropped.

BUT - " I got the wrong information from an old brochure - or some fishing web site" may give you some leniency but not get you off.


Even if there are no typos in the summary brochures - they are just that - a summary and we cannot rely on them 101%. The Fisheries Act is 152 pages, the Fisheries Regulations are 455 pages long, The Coral Reef Plan ( regulations) is 127 pages, Freshwater Plan ( regs) is 108 pages. (that’s why you need a bigger boat - to carry the regulations)


BUT - " I got the wrong information from an old brochure - or some fishing web site" may give you some leniency in penalty but not get you off. Again the reason is that “Ignorance of the law is no excuse”

I sincerely hope this helps rather than confuses. The regulations are hundreds of pages long - but most of it is technical padding. Don’t worry about it too much. The next version of the brochure will be better I am promised. Or you could send me a message and I will try to sort it out for you.

It all becomes too much follow my fine example – I spent 4 hours out there and caught nothing!

Cheers
Gary

[Gazza]

Even if there are no typos in the summary brochures - they are just that - a summary and we cannot rely on them 101%. The Fisheries Act is 152 pages, the Fisheries Regulations are 455 pages long, The Coral Reef Plan ( regulations) is 127 pages, Freshwater Plan ( regs) is 108 pages. (that’s why you need a bigger boat - to carry the regulations)

Gaz, you nor I are a rocket scientist ,you AND I , understand our poo stinks and we bleed red blood........

Fishing (recreationally) can't be expected to be only "enjoyed" by Lawyers ,mate ,surely ???

p.s. penalty 'points' aren't r-e-a-l-i-ty ,in the badness scale of "human" nature, mate ,surely ???

[Gorilla_in_Manila]

Nugget,
Thanks.
Fitzy & Gary,
Thanks for the replies. I was fairly sure I knew the answer to my question number 1, but I thought it important that the fisheries answer it in a public forum. The written legislation and regulations are the law, but the website and brochure are the means by which they communicate changes to those regulations and legislation to Joe Citizen (which they are no doubt obliged by law to do before they can enforce the changes). For the DPI not to carefully check their website and brochure prior to release is, for my money, just plain slack.
Cheers,
Jeff