getting caught under sized fish..outcome

[spears]

This question was bought up with mixed answers,so I thought I’d put it up to see what the out come would be

Your fishing and have fisheries check you and you have an undersized fish with out knowing it.
They tell you…. you shouldn’t have it ..and you throw it back in the water still alive and it swims of.
Do you still get charged for having that illegal fish.

[struktcha_man]

sounds like you would be very unlucky if you did get fined and very lucky if it still could swim away :D

cheers

[Noelm]

what will happen is you will probably get fined for something else along the lines of disposing of evidence, how would you have undersized Fish and not know it?? if a Fisheries guy/girl approaches and you have them in your possession, I doubt any amount of smooth talking will get you off, and throwing away the undersized ones in front of them will not be such a big hit, trust me on that one!

[Spaniard_King]

In Posession is the term that fisheries use. Depends on the officer involved to wethere you get finned or not :P

My last brush with fisheries they didn't even know what creek they were in::) nor were they up to date with current life jacket regulations::)

[84mick]

They would probably say the same if your live bait was under size, if you didn't know and am able to let it go alive you should only get a warning....... But then there are not so nice people too.

Mick.

[laugag]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe it is an offence to even collect poddy mullet (such as in a castnet) as they have to be a certain size. :P

[Eagle]

I can't remember the exact size limit for poddy mullet but you can't keep them if they are undersize. A length of 30cm seems to jog the brain cells a bit. There was some info published somewhere about a bloke who got caught with undersize poddies and the fisheries fellas got a bit excited about it. I have never caught more than about 10 in my life so I dont target them but I go after the greenback herring instead.
Eagle

[BOMBER]

In possesion is the term and it means exactly that if you have them on board your boat and get caught by fisheries with fish undersize you will be fined make no mistake, and ignorance of size limits is no excuse, plenty of info out there in regards to legal size limits.


The Bomber

[Nico.d.R]

poddies are ok 30cm limit on sea mullet thats what fisheries told me , they got excited to when i said nah only caught a few mullet for bait so far . i thought poddy mullet were just small mullet .

cheers nico

[spears]

We seem to be getting of the point.


I’ll try explaining it this way.
Your sitting on the edge of the sand and u catch a fish,the fish is placed in a bucket full of water and the fish is in that bucket for 5 minutes.
Fisheries come along and ask you have you caught something and you say yes it’s in the bucket.
He says it’s under sized so you pick it up with the tail flapping and infront of the fisheries guy you put it in the water infront of him and it swims away.Any penalty..

Down to the nitty gritty,do you know the exact answer for this test case.

[walugi]

I reckon they'd technically be able to fine you, but it depends on the guy. Otherwise people could catch 10 fish that were undersized but kept them alive till they left.

How undersized they are is probably a factor as well i.e. 2cm off or 10cm off

[NAGG]

Spears ..... I think the In Possession is the key .... They will say that once you identify that the fish is undersized you must release it unharmed immediately ...... Its the same for having a qty of fish over your bag limit in a live well .

So if you are lucky .... you could get a warning - But , If you were fined ...... well you broke the law!

Chris

[webby]

For a start if your fishing with out knowing the reg's and you have illegal fish on board, i have no pity for anyone in this situation.
If you or whoever got of scott free, you can thank your lucky stars.
If you dont no the requirements and not sure of a legal size, throw it back until you do no what is legal and whats not wether its in the live bait tank or esky.

[Jeremy]

I reckon you bloody well SHOULD be fined. IN POSSESSION and NO EXCUSES.

Jeremy

[spears]

So it’s possession word being used.

Ok you are in possession then you were not with no dead fish being released only live one.
Which then means I had them or one but the size was wrong so I let it go unharmed.

I see a dead fish as no chance of any one getting off.
I can’t see what charges can get laid when it can be sorted out and no harm done.
Yes the law got broken then rectified.

Just one case not that long ago:
Their was a case where a fisheries officer caught a guy,they went to court.
The guy won the case as he himself was a layer.How come..?
As he stated in his defense that the sea is there for all to use by god and no human had rights as dictating terms and conditions over it..He won.

[RayDeR]

G'day!

I would think they would treat the situation as to what would have happened to the fish if they had not come along. So you have gone.

I think they would also tell you to release it. So that you "only released it under their instructions" So you have still gone.

Ray de R

[haggis]

I also think it would depend on the officers at the time .
I was sitting in the pine river on Wednesday at the motor way bridge close to the sunken bardges , the fisheries came flying through the bridge flatt bickies straight to myself & the misses , asked if we caught any fish , asked to look in the esky , which only had bait in it as we had only caught one bream at that point @ 24.5cms & had spent nearly ten minutes fighting a big fish which evenually broke us off around the prop . They asked if anyone on board had a boat license I said aye me , they never asked to see it they just said have a nice day & off they went . There were at least another six boats around but they never checked any of them they just went up south pine & disappeared . What if I never had a license ?

[Aeon]

Oh I read about that case.... it was heard by Judge Judy I believe..... ::) ::) ::)

POSSESSION = DUSTED. If you can't play by the rules, find another sport.

Mick

[NAGG]

Like every issue with law enforcement ........ Its how the officer/s is feeling on the day - some people get a warning - others gone! (show attitude & you'll go!)

= Do the right thing & its a pointless discussion8-)

Chris

[catfishkid]

A few year back I was camping at johns landing on the noosa river.We had set several pots on the other side of the river using the canoe,the following morning I paddled across to collect them and the first one had on legal buck and several jennies,I placed the pot across the canoe and paddled back across to the little beach on the johns landing side and proceded to release the females and placed the buck in a bucket.While I was doing this fisheries pulled up and advised they had just watched what i had done and my actions were illegal,I explained in my opinion trying to sort them in the canoe could be dangerous,and clearly they had seen me release the females immediatly before placing the male in said bucket.They didnt fine me but did give a warning.I know it is a little different to the question asked but the IN POSESSION rule was stated.I will also add that they were not bad guys and did understand my situation.

Cheers Craig

[CreelReaper]

Yep fined!!!!! the rule is very clear. In possession limits on both size and quantity. Doesn't matter if it/they are alive or not. If you are over your bag limit you will be told to throw them away. The same if it is undersized. Your intentions may be innocent ignorance but usually it is going to cost you.
As a few have said, you have to be aware of the rules to play this game fairly. No different to driving your car etc.

Shane

[Eagle]

Possession also includes the number of fish you have in your freezer at home. If you have say 5 of one kind and 5 is the limit to possess but you have more at home, you're in the wrong. I have heard of some blokes being busted for this but they were well know for their underhanded dealings. The total number in your freezer could go against you, something to also think about. It's not likely to happen but it is possible.

Eagle

[spears]

I think one of the biggest problems that may come up is for people who travel to new locations and coming across fish they haven’t fished for before and making a mistake.

As some people will do the right thing in their road driving or boat and a fishing day and get caught out unintentional.
With the saying that ignorance is no excuse it only leaves me thinking their must be some perfect people around.
Yes lots of poaching goes on around the place but for a guy to get done for one fish who tries to do the right thing most of his life is a bit disappointing.

Almost starts me thinking some of these fish officials couldn’t make it as cops so the revenge starts on an 80 year old pensioner with one undersized fish.You guys said it ..It's the law.
It’s all down hill from here

[sleepygreg]

A bit like the fisho who posts a pic of a fish (gilled and gutted) and asks for an ID and if it is good eating!!!!!!!

Are there really that many people out there who are deliberately ignorant of the law, or just plain arrogant about their way of doing things.

FFS if you are going to play a sport, (and i include fishing in this), the least you could do is learn the rules. Unless you are one of those people that likes to find ways of cheating, or think that you are above the law.

Greg

[NAGG]

A few year back I was camping at johns landing on the noosa river.We had set several pots on the other side of the river using the canoe,the following morning I paddled across to collect them and the first one had on legal buck and several jennies,I placed the pot across the canoe and paddled back across to the little beach on the johns landing side and proceded to release the females and placed the buck in a bucket.While I was doing this fisheries pulled up and advised they had just watched what i had done and my actions were illegal,I explained in my opinion trying to sort them in the canoe could be dangerous,and clearly they had seen me release the females immediatly before placing the male in said bucket.They didnt fine me but did give a warning.I know it is a little different to the question asked but the IN POSESSION rule was stated.I will also add that they were not bad guys and did understand my situation.

Cheers Craig

Good to see common sense prevail in your case

Chris

[NAGG]

Possession also includes the number of fish you have in your freezer at home. If you have say 5 of one kind and 5 is the limit to possess but you have more at home, you're in the wrong. I have heard of some blokes being busted for this but they were well know for their underhanded dealings. The total number in your freezer could go against you, something to also think about. It's not likely to happen but it is possible.

Eagle

You are spot on Eagle ..... & it is an important point often missed / overlooked.

We saw NSW fisheries going through a camp site at Providence Flats (Eucumbene River Snowy Mts) during the period where the river is declared a trout Spawning stream ( very strict size & bag limits of 1 per day over 50cm & 2 in possession) ........ tough rules & clearly enforced!

Chris

[CHAPPY]

Possession also includes the number of fish you have in your freezer at home. If you have say 5 of one kind and 5 is the limit to possess but you have more at home, you're in the wrong. I have heard of some blokes being busted for this but they were well know for their underhanded dealings. The total number in your freezer could go against you, something to also think about. It's not likely to happen but it is possible.

Eagle


Had an interesting debate at Cardwell over the break. A bloke in the caravan park 2 nights in a row came back to the park with heaps of reef fish which he cleaned and placed the fillets in the large esky full of ice. About 30 per night.

Third day, he was leaving so all of the fillets from about 60 fish were loaded into the boats large esky.

If fisheries pulled him over, he was gone big time. The fish were Jacks and Reds
and all in the boat at one time and the fillet law also comes into play.

I now have the fisheries number in my mobile phone. He also proceeded to deposit the frames in several of the parks bins.

Chappy.

[NAGG]

I think one of the biggest problems that may come up is for people who travel to new locations and coming across fish they haven’t fished for before and making a mistake.

As some people will do the right thing in their road driving or boat and a fishing day and get caught out unintentional.
With the saying that ignorance is no excuse it only leaves me thinking their must be some perfect people around.
Yes lots of poaching goes on around the place but for a guy to get done for one fish who tries to do the right thing most of his life is a bit disappointing.

Almost starts me thinking some of these fish officials couldn’t make it as cops so the revenge starts on an 80 year old pensioner with one undersized fish.You guys said it ..It's the law.
It’s all down hill from here

Its a shame that you think this way Spears ....... either you are doing it for a bite or you just want to be an anarchist.
Just remember one thing ..... If there were no enforcement officers & regulations - - would we have any fish to catch ........... There are too many people out there that are ignorant of the rules or worst still think that they are above the law.
I know I'm happy every time I see the authorities doing their job8-)

As for travellers ....... you need to know the regs of the area ( infomation is not that difficult to obtain)

Chris

[84mick]

Possession also includes the number of fish you have in your freezer at home. If you have say 5 of one kind and 5 is the limit to possess but you have more at home, you're in the wrong. I have heard of some blokes being busted for this but they were well know for their underhanded dealings. The total number in your freezer could go against you, something to also think about. It's not likely to happen but it is possible.

Eagle

Thanks Eagle, I never knew that.

Spears, Id love to see that lawyer prove that there is a god! ::)

Cheers, Mick.

[spears]

We haven’t heard from any one who’s gotten ping yet,would have been interesting to the reasons.

Just an example..
Not many people are aware that just on legal size fish being thrown into an ice slurry will make the fish shrink and make it an illegal catch.

As the older I get to see more and more laws being introduced on so many things in general life.

[laugag]

So as long as I see the fishery boys coming and dump any fish overboard, they cant prove it was undersized you are okay. Is that right?

[FNQCairns]

Spears, the bloke who booked him would be a moderate in doctrine for sure and probably did 103km/h at some stage on the way home and as a result if the blue lights got turned on him he would be disgusted to near outrage - as is stereo-typical of this personality type. The sophistication needed is sad to the point of transparency, what you going to do....complain??

cheers fnq

[roz]

We seem to be getting of the point.


I’ll try explaining it this way.
Your sitting on the edge of the sand and u catch a fish,the fish is placed in a bucket full of water and the fish is in that bucket for 5 minutes.
Fisheries come along and ask you have you caught something and you say yes it’s in the bucket.
He says it’s under sized so you pick it up with the tail flapping and infront of the fisheries guy you put it in the water infront of him and it swims away.Any penalty..

Down to the nitty gritty,do you know the exact answer for this test case.

I have a little inside info here. It's reasonable to see that a person has absolutely no control over what sized fish takes a lure or bait, however if the angler does not immediately release the undersized fish, he or she should be fair game. Ignorance is no excuse for having undersized fish in posession.

Putting an undersized fish into a bucket and not back into the water, would in my view be asking for trouble... it's not rocket science.

cheers roz.

[chewy01]

Nagg, i know for a fact fisheries will be going through the monduran campground this year looking for barra in possession.Also a bloke was caught prawning in a green zone up here with excessive prawns.Was taken to his home where anoher 15kg were found.He will go,though as stated in another post he was known for this. In possession is something that will be targeted more and more these days. To simplify all the different limits,an easy way for the fisheries would be to allot a total fish kg limit.eg you can have no more than 15??kg of fillets regardless of what species,therefore making it easy to see if you areover the limit.Just my thoughts.

[Mossy247]

Spears, if a person was to walk into a shop and place an object in their pocket and knowingly proceeded to walk out have they not shoplifted??? But if you were to repeat this but before leaving the store they were approached by security that seen the person place the object into their pocket (freely available to be returned undamaged) would you be so reluctant to let the offender off with a warning and think they just didn't mean to do it??? It is just up to each person, what are you comfortable doing? just my thoughts :)

[RayDeR]

Spears, if a person was to walk into a shop and place an object in their pocket and knowingly proceeded to walk out have they not shoplifted??? But if you were to repeat this but before leaving the store they were approached by security that seen the person place the object into their pocket (freely available to be returned undamaged) would you be so reluctant to let the offender off with a warning and think they just didn't mean to do it??? It is just up to each person, what are you comfortable doing? just my thoughts :)

G'day!

To my knowledge security will not approach you until you leave the store or end up on the otherside of the checkouts without paying for an article. There is no law that you cannot carry articles around the store in your pocket or any bag including a handbag. The video of you concealing the item or testimony of the security or other staff member will be of interst to the arresting police and the court. However, the crime is not paying for the item.

I guess you could try to argue but I was slowing down sir when you stopped me. Or you should have seen what I would have blown two hours ago, I am sobering up.

However there is an "in possession " rule about illegal fish.

Ray de R

[the gecko]

So we all agree that the question is 'how did it get into the bucket without being identified and measured?' Hes gooone....

While we are on possession, I spoke to Fisheries last week about barra closed season, and releasing IMMEDIALTELY. They said that its NOT ok to take a pic before releasing an illegal fish. The extra time out of the water will harm the fishes chance of survival. Closed season fish must be released immedialtely.

Then they said that if they saw a camera being used, they could confiscate it, check it for pics of illegal fish, and CHARGE you with not releasing immediatley, IF they wanted.

Just another trick for the memory banks. I would have taken a pic before releasing, so I thought Id post this to let you all know.

Andrew

[HST]

ignorance of the law is no excuses for anything

[spears]

OK so I threw some different angles out at ya all to see where the answers go.
I have seen some really bad things happen over the years re..over fishing and undersized fish.

[Fishbait]

So what is the penalty $$$ and fine for an undersized fish?

[oldboot]

There are a couple of concepts here.
In posesion.....there are some interesting complications here.

Two blokes go fishing, they put both their legal catces in the one esky, upon reaching the ramp, the esky stays in the boat, one bloke thakes the boat home the other goes to work with the intention of picking up his share after work.

Are the fish in the esky "in posession" of the bloke with the boat?

I aregue we would be wise to use two eskies with our names on them...even then???

Taken..... means seperated from the fishes natural environment. now where do you draw the line....when the pot or landing net is in the water nothing has yet been taken... but is it when you take the fish or whatever out of the net or off the hook,...... it is unreasonable to call it taken till it has been measured.

but if you motor off with crabs still in the pot....the crab has been taken away from where it lives.........the case with the canoe......I'd like to see how that one stood up in court.

which brings me to the point of standing up in court..... in the hypothetical case that started the thread.....unless fisheries can positively identify and measure said live fish....I would be very suppriesd if it would stand up in court......unless the person in question makes some sort of verbal admission.

Remember every question ( every word that comes out of ) a law enforcement officer asks is contrived to give you the oportunity of incriminating yourself.

There are quite a few things about fisheries regulation that are bordering on unmanageable.

the best one is noxcious fish, you cant keep it, you cant return it to the water, you cant place it in a container.....the letter of the law is unmanagable.
So you have a talapia in your hook.... what do you do with it. kill it of course but, you cant put it in a bucket, you cant throw it over the side, you cant chuck it on the bank....so you have to leave it lying arround in the bottom of the boat....when you get back to the ramp.....is the rubbish bin a container?

cheers

[CreelReaper]

Some good points there Oldboot...... the letter of the law indeed. In court however it is the officers word against yours. Unless you have photographic evidence to back you up I think that you would be really screwed.
I had a look at the DPI website last night and I believe that on the spot fines up to $750 could be given. If the case went to court however I believe the judge could award fines up to $75 000 under extenuating circumstances.
I also found out of interest that if you are caught damaging marine plants a fine up to $225 000 can be imposed.

Straight from the DPI website......
What do I do if I catch a tilapia or carp?

If you catch a noxious fish, kill the fish as quickly and humanely as possible. Methods include freezing the fish, cutting through the gills with a sharp knife or applying a quick, hard blow to the head. It is an offence to have noxious fish (such as carp and tilapia) in your possession, dead or alive (except dead Nile perch). You must therefore dispose of the fish as soon as practicable after killing. It is recommended that you do this by burying it a suitable distance from the waterway where it was caught or disposing it in a rubbish bin.
Cheers

[mattooty]

Its quite a situation you're cooking up. And as has been said already, if will come down to the parties concerned. If the fisherman or woman, is genuine about not knowing that the catch was illegal and can prove and actively show that he/she is trying to rectify the situation by releasing that undersize fish in the bucket then chances are they'll get off with a warning. If you are a pr!ck to the officers, swearing and abusing, chances are you'll get stuck with 2 or 3 fines instead of the simple warning that could be achieved through rational conversation. But in saying that, I'm sure you will get the bad egg occasionally who is only out for a power trip to take your money!

The unfortunate thing with NSW fisheries is that out of all the illegal fishing instances they came across in the last year, only 5.5% of them were fined. The other 94.5% were issued warnings or had their gear partially (either the rod that was directly attributed to the fish or worst case scenario all their gear, car/boat/rods/spearguns/wetsuits etc) confiscated. Is this a good thing? I personally don't agree with the confiscation of gear as the level of ignorance to the law would be higher, the cheaper the gear is (supposedly). The once a year fisherman having his $50 rod and reel combo confiscated because he thought he had a record catch of undersize bream would hardly bat an eyelid at the fine, whereas the bloke with the stella and Egrel rod would be much more devastated and effected (but should be more likely to have a full comprehension of the law). Different convictions for the same offence?

Another interesting note, that comes straight from the horses mouth, is that the fish measuring devices issued by fisheries such as lobster measurers, stickers and such, are 'to be used as a guide only' and as such can not be used as evidence should a case arise. Fisheries can, use either a micrometer or a set of Vernier calipers to check size limits. So that fish that was JUST legal when you bent it in the right way becomes .1 of a mm undersize and as such is an illegal catch. This has been used recently in a court case against a Pro lobster fisherman in NSW who has been charged over having a lobster that was 0.3mm undersize!


Basically, what it comes down to, is fish using the CYA principle. COVER YOUR A$$! Don't keep a fish if it is just on legal, don't keep that extra fish over your bag limit in the bucket alive, and most of all KEEP UP TO DATE ON THE REGS!
Its not (but it bloody should be) up to fisheries officers to come around to your house, politely sit you down over a coffee and update you on each and every change in the regulations.

[Lovey80]

Some good points there Oldboot...... the letter of the law indeed. In court however it is the officers word against yours. Unless you have photographic evidence to back you up I think that you would be really screwed.
I had a look at the DPI website last night and I believe that on the spot fines up to $750up to $225 000 can be imposed.


Some very good points raised. The lad with the canoe, whilst by the writing in is breach, what self respecting judge is going to award that? If he did it would make for great A current Affair show and the judge would cop it through the public at least

On the issue of the one word or another, i would have thought that the onus of proof would be on the officer to proove that the said fish was actually undersise. If the officer had himself measured the fish then sure the officers word would be taken, but if it was only assumed that the fish was undersize by visual judgement then i would think that the onus would be on the officer to prove that in fact the fish was under size.

On the 'in possession' it is my understanding that this law was designed for those guys that did a once a year fishing trip over a few weeks and brought back tucker box freezers full of fillets. I like that law purely because it allows the authorities to really nail those that go overboard in doing the wrong thing.

Another hypothetical the fisheries guy is having a bad day and catches you with your mates catch i the esky as described earlier and demands to inspect your fridge at home.....'who said that the fillets in the fridge weren't paid for'? Surely the laws are for personally caught fish and there is no proof there that any wrong doing was done?????

Cheers

Chris

[mangomick]

FFS if you are going to play a sport, (and i include fishing in this), the least you could do is learn the rules. Unless you are one of those people that likes to find ways of cheating, or think that you are above the law.

Greg

Its a bit hard to keep up with the rules when they are being changed regularly and not being clearly passed on to the public. Does the poor old Dad who just wants to wet a line with his son have to search the internet and download all he can find and digest it everytime he wants to go out.
Geez just look at estuary cod that anyone can catch in a creek , its is now or will soon be a coral reef fin fish, so if you catch him during the three 9 day closures north of bundaberg you have to release him but if you catch it south of bundaberg where there isnt any closure you dont need to worry about it.
I bet most people couldnt tell an oversize poddy mullet from an undersize sea mullet. Geez, I had a fisheries guy carefully scutinize a large poddy I had one day just to make sure it wasnt a sea mullet. And he took ages before he was sure it wasnt and he reckoned that if it had been a sea mullet he would have booked me. Learn all the rules
Strewth, turn it up

[jelifish]

Just to add a bit more debate to the discussion. Many years ago I was pulled up at the Tewantin boat ramp by fisheries, not over size but fish id. I had several large grassy sweetlip which the fisheries officer was adamant were red throat(tricky snapper) but which are veery easily separated by shape and colour as well as a discussion then over moses perch and fingermark(golden snapper). As far as he was concerned, moses perch caught outside were fingermark.

[NAGG]

Its a bit hard to keep up with the rules when they are being changed regularly and not being clearly passed on to the public. Does the poor old Dad who just wants to wet a line with his son have to search the internet and download all he can find and digest it everytime he wants to go out.
Geez just look at estuary cod that anyone can catch in a creek , its is now or will soon be a coral reef fin fish, so if you catch him during the three 9 day closures north of bundaberg you have to release him but if you catch it south of bundaberg where there isnt any closure you dont need to worry about it.
I bet most people couldnt tell an oversize poddy mullet from an undersize sea mullet. Geez, I had a fisheries guy carefully scutinize a large poddy I had one day just to make sure it wasnt a sea mullet. And he took ages before he was sure it wasnt and he reckoned that if it had been a sea mullet he would have booked me. Learn all the rules
Strewth, turn it up

I've got in my hand a brouchure "FRESHWATER RECREATIONAL FISHING IN NSW .... Rules & Regulation Summary" now on the bottom right hand corner is written
" Some bag & size limits are currently under review & may change during the life of this publication. It is the responsibility of fishers to ensure they are operating within the law at all time"

So as you can see ..... Even in a current publication you are being warned to keep up with the latest rule changes ........ based on the wording I dont think you can expect any grace from fisheries

As for fish identification ....... If you are not sure - let it go!

Chris

[oldboot]

I note that QLD government has recently puiblished new versions of the boating and fisheries guides, plainly knowing that size and bag limits and a variety of catch conditions would be changed during this year.

In fact changes from in inshore fisheries review have already been published.

By march all the size and bag limit tables will be useless

considerimng both of these publications are single point references this is a real concern

Size and bag limits will change across the board.

The moreton bay marine park closures are not addressed

The whole snapper issue is not mentioned

This is the first thing I have heard of the estury cod thing But I can understand why.

I have never seen any specific mention (in the above 2 books) nor a diagram for the permanent fishing and anchoring ban out in front of the leads comming into the port of brisbane.

There does need to be a single place printed reference on all these issues, but the boating and fishing guide will be next to useless for at least 12 months.

As for the fingermark/moses perch thing. that is a real trap. ( the same with mackerel..).......To a certain extent I can see the point that anything caught outside is likely to be the bigger fish but a correct identification comes down to counting spines on the dorsal fin and looking at the teeth......you would realy have to know your stuff to argue this one.

As for grass sweetlip......the trap here is that it is an emperor and not a sweetlip and many of the books mention this fact and that it is a trap.

cheers

edit
I've just checked a few facts and there is some... discussion as to what the grassy is...sweetlip or emperor... either way id does not matter in QLD it has it's own size and bag limit.

ern grant recons its a sweetlip..... thats good enough for me.

[FNQCairns]

Its quite a situation you're cooking up. And as has been said already, if will come down to the parties concerned. If the fisherman or woman, is genuine about not knowing that the catch was illegal and can prove and actively show that he/she is trying to rectify the situation by releasing that undersize fish in the bucket then chances are they'll get off with a warning. If you are a pr!ck to the officers, swearing and abusing, chances are you'll get stuck with 2 or 3 fines instead of the simple warning that could be achieved through rational conversation. But in saying that, I'm sure you will get the bad egg occasionally who is only out for a power trip to take your money!

The unfortunate thing with NSW fisheries is that out of all the illegal fishing instances they came across in the last year, only 5.5% of them were fined. The other 94.5% were issued warnings or had their gear partially (either the rod that was directly attributed to the fish or worst case scenario all their gear, car/boat/rods/spearguns/wetsuits etc) confiscated. Is this a good thing? I personally don't agree with the confiscation of gear as the level of ignorance to the law would be higher, the cheaper the gear is (supposedly). The once a year fisherman having his $50 rod and reel combo confiscated because he thought he had a record catch of undersize bream would hardly bat an eyelid at the fine, whereas the bloke with the stella and Egrel rod would be much more devastated and effected (but should be more likely to have a full comprehension of the law). Different convictions for the same offence?

Another interesting note, that comes straight from the horses mouth, is that the fish measuring devices issued by fisheries such as lobster measurers, stickers and such, are 'to be used as a guide only' and as such can not be used as evidence should a case arise. Fisheries can, use either a micrometer or a set of Vernier calipers to check size limits. So that fish that was JUST legal when you bent it in the right way becomes .1 of a mm undersize and as such is an illegal catch. This has been used recently in a court case against a Pro lobster fisherman in NSW who has been charged over having a lobster that was 0.3mm undersize!


Basically, what it comes down to, is fish using the CYA principle. COVER YOUR A$$! Don't keep a fish if it is just on legal, don't keep that extra fish over your bag limit in the bucket alive, and most of all KEEP UP TO DATE ON THE REGS!
Its not (but it bloody should be) up to fisheries officers to come around to your house, politely sit you down over a coffee and update you on each and every change in the regulations.

This astounds me, what does it mean? Can they confiscate property without any further legal process, just " hi that fish looks illegal, on your bike we are driving your car home"

OR does the paragraph actually mean that fishery's officers are promoting every case they come across to a court level for future departmental existance justifications except for a cases where their evidence is so dodgee that they decide to fine/confiscate instead to save loosing a case they wouldn't win anyway.

Would love to see the warning stats at least, to make more some sense of it.

cheers fnq

[PaulMark]

A bit like the fisho who posts a pic of a fish (gilled and gutted) and asks for an ID and if it is good eating!!!!!!!

Are there really that many people out there who are deliberately ignorant of the law, or just plain arrogant about their way of doing things.

FFS if you are going to play a sport, (and i include fishing in this), the least you could do is learn the rules. Unless you are one of those people that likes to find ways of cheating, or think that you are above the law.

Greg
Unfortunately there are,Greg.I've heard it said around here regarding boating regs,"Thank God you don't need to worry about that shit round here".Excuse me!,Yes you bloody do,cos the bloke coming the other way is relying on you to Know what you're doing.This atitude is more and more prevalent these days so you can understand the officers being toey.Sorry to hijack the thread there,
Paulo

[struktcha_man]

Possession also includes the number of fish you have in your freezer at home. If you have say 5 of one kind and 5 is the limit to possess but you have more at home, you're in the wrong. I have heard of some blokes being busted for this but they were well know for their underhanded dealings. The total number in your freezer could go against you, something to also think about. It's not likely to happen but it is possible.

Eagle

are you sure this is right?

"Bag Limit" usually refers to your catch on the day ..

or else it would be called "fridge limit" :D

(this thread has turned into quite a big read :o )

cheers

[ifishcq1]

Struktcha_man

Eagle is spot on, it is in possession

Cheers

SL

[crabbie]

So it’s possession word being used.



As he stated in his defense that the sea is there for all to use by god and no human had rights as dictating terms and conditions over it..He won.


I LOVE IT
Crabbie

[mangomick]

I've got in my hand a brouchure "FRESHWATER RECREATIONAL FISHING IN NSW .... Rules & Regulation Summary" now on the bottom right hand corner is written
" Some bag & size limits are currently under review & may change during the life of this publication. It is the responsibility of fishers to ensure they are operating within the law at all time"

So as you can see ..... Even in a current publication you are being warned to keep up with the latest rule changes ........ based on the wording I dont think you can expect any grace from fisheries

As for fish identification ....... If you are not sure - let it go!

Chris

Thats very good. The fishereries know who owns a boat or in the case of NSW who holds a fishing licence. Just how often have you been sent a notification advising of recent changes to catch or size limits.
I can tell you now up here it doesnt happen. It seems to me they (the goverment and its agencies) are taking the lazy/easy/ cheapest way out and making a small financial killing catching people for breaking rules that only a QC knows exist.
How can you keep up with changes that have occurred if you arent told the changes have occurred. Its a bit like training someone then asking them if theres anything they need to know that you havent told them yet.

[goat boy]

Interesting thread. For anyone fishing in NSW waters and wondering about 'possession' and or 'bag limits'....here it is quoted from DPI (NSW)

Possession limit

A possession limit is the maximum number of fish that a person is allowed to have in their possession at any time. Possession limits provide a useful tool to discourage illegal sales of fish by constraining recreational fishers from accumulation commercial quantities of fish. For all saltwater species, the daily bag limit is the possession limit and it applies to all areas of the state.


end quote



DPIs list their fishing regs and rules online. It doesn't take long to peruse whats relevant to what you will be doing...

[spears]

DPIs list their fishing regs and rules online



But not every house hold has a computer to go on line.
What about the elderly that have no use for one or claim they are too old to learn all this high tech stuff.
How are they to keep up with changes..??

[goat boy]

Well, this was aimed more at some of the posts on this thread. If you are on Ausfish then there's certainly no reason why you don't go to your relevant DPI site and check the rules out.
I agree, and would *assume* that DPI officers would use discretion with each separate case, same as coppers, anyone who has dealt with coppers more than a few times on the same issue/s will know that personalities and how they're feeling at that moment can play a part in the severity of punishment (if any) handed out.
In the end though, it's no different to any other law we are bound by, ignorance is no excuse but sometimes helps in mitigation.

[BOMBER]

Spears,

Your question was answered if you are in possesion of live fish or dead fish whether it be for 1 second or 1 day irrespective whether you let it go in front of the fisheries officer, if he wants to charge you under the act as it stands today he can, that simple and thats a typical reply from a lawyer, lucky we don't all think this way and if he got off with that sort of defense me thinks he had mates on the job;)

The Bomber

[Wahoo]

DPIs list their fishing regs and rules online



But not every house hold has a computer to go on line.
What about the elderly that have no use for one or claim they are too old to learn all this high tech stuff.
How are they to keep up with changes..??

pick up the phone and then get them to mail out the papers.

Daz

[mangomick]

pick up the phone and then get them to mail out the papers.

Daz
Yeah thats fine but we need a crystal ball to know that the copy we already have ,that we think is current, has now changed.
What about your average mum and dad fisho here who isnt a member of ausfish but who just wants to wet a line occaisionally on a week end with his kids.
He catches an estuary cod off the bank of a creek and how the hell is he supposed to know its now classed as a coral reef fish and it needs its fin cut off and it was alright to catch it last week in bundaberg while on holidays but this week he's camping in Gladstone but its the nine day closure and its now an offence. What a lot of bull$hite

[mattooty]

FNQcairns, thats exactly what I'm saying. They're completely within their power to confiscate gear used to aid an illegal activity. I know of a few fisheries officers on the central coast of NSW who have over 100 masks/snorkels/wetsuits/gloves from illegal lobster diving, as well as all manner of rods, reels, tackle etc. Alot of the time its just confiscated, not put on the books and the officer ends up with some new gear. Thats just the way it goes.

There was one particularly funny incident that he was telling one of my fishing mates where they confiscated a pair of stellas and matching rods off a pair of, uhhh, 'oriental' blokes in their mid 20's who had a large number of undersize fish. That afternoon after shooting around the river doing their business found the same pair of blokes, back again with another stella combo a piece, with even more undersize whiting, bream and mullet. This time they copped a heavy fine and had their second combo confiscated! Very exxy trip for a bucket of undersize fish.

[oldboot]

Now here is the bargin vulture in me comming out.:D

If there is all this gear being confiscated.............;D ;D ;D ...... when and where is the auction.;D


cheers

[catfishkid]

FNQcairns, thats exactly what I'm saying. They're completely within their power to confiscate gear used to aid an illegal activity. I know of a few fisheries officers on the central coast of NSW who have over 100 masks/snorkels/wetsuits/gloves from illegal lobster diving, as well as all manner of rods, reels, tackle etc. Alot of the time its just confiscated, not put on the books and the officer ends up with some new gear. Thats just the way it goes.

There was one particularly funny incident that he was telling one of my fishing mates where they confiscated a pair of stellas and matching rods off a pair of, uhhh, 'oriental' blokes in their mid 20's who had a large number of undersize fish. That afternoon after shooting around the river doing their business found the same pair of blokes, back again with another stella combo a piece, with even more undersize whiting, bream and mullet. This time they copped a heavy fine and had their second combo confiscated! Very exxy trip for a bucket of undersize fish.

They confiscate the gear, do no paperwork and keep it for themselves.:o Thats no different to a policeman doing a drug raid doing no paperwork and keeping it for themselves in my opinion nothing short of corruption and they should be bought to task for it if this is really the case.


Craig

[CreelReaper]

This is a great post guys and one that has provided a number of ideas and thought processes. The reality is though that the rules and regulations are easy to find and access.
Put simply the current rules on bag limits, size and in posession limits are set and there will be ramifications if you are caught.

To clear up one little matter mentioned earlier. The Estuary cod is NOT a Coral Reef Fish....it is listed under 'other tidal species' and carries a size limit of 35cm to 120cm with a bag limit of 10.

The following applies to the rules and reg of today.....naturally they will be changed somewhat in March.

In Posession
Is there a limit to the number of fish I'm allowed to catch?
It depends on the species of fish.
If the experts decide that the fish is abundant, there is no limit.
Other species may be regulated by number, known informally as a "bag limit". This limit varies from species to species. The aim is to conserve fish populations and spread the catch more fairly among all fishers.

The limit means that you are not allowed to catch and keep more than a set number of the particular type of fish at any one time. It doesn't matter when the fish were caught, so if five (say) is the limit, you cannot take five today, put them in your esky or your fridge, and take another one or two tomorrow. You can only catch more when the supply in your fridge falls below the official limit.

In addition to individual take and possession limits for each species above, all coral reef fin fish species have a combined take and possession limit of 20. For a complete list of coral reef species see the Fisheries (Coral Reef Fin Fish) (http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/OQPChome.htm)


For those that want to read the relevant pages themselves.....

http://www2.dpi.qld.gov.au/fishweb/2876.html

http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/cps/rde/dpi/hs.xsl/28_3042_ENA_HTML.htm

http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/documents/Fisheries_RecreationalFishing/RecFishingRulesQld-SizeTakePossessionLimits.pdf

And this is the link to the new regulations.....

http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/cps/rde/dpi/hs.xsl/28_12570_ENA_HTML.htm#New_bag_and_size_limits

Hopes this clears everything up.

Shane

[Wahoo]

Yeah thats fine but we need a crystal ball to know that the copy we already have ,that we think is current, has now changed.
What about your average mum and dad fisho here who isnt a member of ausfish but who just wants to wet a line occaisionally on a week end with his kids.
He catches an estuary cod off the bank of a creek and how the hell is he supposed to know its now classed as a coral reef fish and it needs its fin cut off and it was alright to catch it last week in bundaberg while on holidays but this week he's camping in Gladstone but its the nine day closure and its now an offence. What a lot of bull$hite


do what most fishos do, if one does not know, put it back, there seems to be an excuse for everything

[mattooty]

Catfishkid, I'm unsure of the validity of the lack of paperwork but the confiscated gear is definately true. There was a write up in the local rag about 6-8 months ago about a guy who had his boat confiscated because he was keeping 10-20 jewfish a day, as well as huge amounts of lobsters and cobia, and selling them off without a licence.
I suppose having my gear confiscated would deter me alot more from illegal activities than a simple fine although I think there needs to be a certain dollar value incorporated into this.

[oldboot]

While there is no excuse for knowing the variuos laws and regulations, I do have a very big beef with how much the QLD government does not do to inform the general public about various laws and regulations.

they are very big on spending money and media time promoting vote winning polocies that realy have no direct impact on our daily lives and do not influence our daily choices but they spend very little on publicising changes to laws and regilations...... and this is right across the board not just boating and fishing.

Several full sized highway type bill boards media events and television campaigns on how wonderful and marvelous the water grid is but didly squat on changes to electrical laws, traffic regulations, or in our case fishing size and bag limits, boating regulations and we are still waiting on the printed maps of the moreton bay marine park.

cheers

[finga]

While there is no excuse for knowing the variuos laws and regulations, I do have a very big beef with how much the QLD government does not do to inform the general public about various laws and regulations.

they are very big on spending money and media time promoting vote winning polocies that realy have no direct impact on our daily lives and do not influence our daily choices but they spend very little on publicising changes to laws and regilations...... and this is right across the board not just boating and fishing.

Several full sized highway type bill boards media events and television campaigns on how wonderful and marvelous the water grid is but didly squat on changes to electrical laws, traffic regulations, or in our case fishing size and bag limits, boating regulations and we are still waiting on the printed maps of the moreton bay marine park.

cheers
Well said.
When was the last time you saw an ad anywhere about new fishing regs??
At least in NSW they have big signs near a lot of popular boat ramps with size/bag limits.
They used to even give out fish measurers for the boat with pictures of species with the regs.
I still have a spare one here somewhere. They're brilliant. They're even entertainment for the kids learning the different species when the fishings quiet
Never seen the like in QLD I'm afraid.

[BOMBER]

Might be Bullshite but rightly or wrongly its the law


The Bomber

[oldboot]

I think this " angler education" / public information thing is something that "we" need to have words with our locak members and the government about.

cheers

[FNQCairns]

FNQcairns, thats exactly what I'm saying. They're completely within their power to confiscate gear used to aid an illegal activity. I know of a few fisheries officers on the central coast of NSW who have over 100 masks/snorkels/wetsuits/gloves from illegal lobster diving, as well as all manner of rods, reels, tackle etc. Alot of the time its just confiscated, not put on the books and the officer ends up with some new gear. Thats just the way it goes.

There was one particularly funny incident that he was telling one of my fishing mates where they confiscated a pair of stellas and matching rods off a pair of, uhhh, 'oriental' blokes in their mid 20's who had a large number of undersize fish. That afternoon after shooting around the river doing their business found the same pair of blokes, back again with another stella combo a piece, with even more undersize whiting, bream and mullet. This time they copped a heavy fine and had their second combo confiscated! Very exxy trip for a bucket of undersize fish.

I thought so, it has been the way it goes for a long time too, the culture that cuts though all minions in authority is what's yours is mine, if I can get away with it, seen this from just outside the ranks often. Shame but who are you going to call...ghost busters?

It's the regulated presumption of guilt before innocence that's driving it. The level of human sophistication under regulation needed to drive our system astounds me>:(.

cheers fnq

[finga]

If my gear was taken by the boys in blue I'd be asking for a receipt I reckon.
But I think I'll try and not have to ask for one.

[cormorant]

Well said.
When was the last time you saw an ad anywhere about new fishing regs??
At least in NSW they have big signs near a lot of popular boat ramps with size/bag limits.
They used to even give out fish measurers for the boat with pictures of species with the regs.
I still have a spare one here somewhere. They're brilliant. They're even entertainment for the kids learning the different species when the fishings quiet
Never seen the like in QLD I'm afraid.


Last time I looked at the signs they were out of date and had no date on them so no one would be the wiser. Ramp ones only hep those who do the boat from a ramp. Stickers should be sent out with fishing lic as they have our addresses and should be done out of fisheries or DPI budget not out of fishing lic fee. Either that or make a fish length sicker mandatory and send it out each year with our rego stickers and that will at least keep boat holders up to date as near no cost - nah that would be too easy like having the option of paying your fish lic with boat lic so you don't forget it and then it is marked on your card and on their computers . I don't mind a fair cop in any case but one because some small detail has changed and a fisheries bloke o authority is on a revenue quota day just isn't what it is all about. Come toNSW and go back 20 years

[honda900]

I would just like to add a little to the debate, with regards to the current regulations in place today, Has anyone looked up the size and bag limit chart (current publication) for red throat sweetlip, under sweetlip?

You will be please to find that it says, all sweetlip 30 unless red throat.. No bag limit, (not even a mention of please refer to emperor section), then on another page under emperor it says "red throat sweetlip" 38 bag limit of 8. :o WTF

I would also like to point out that the DPI website until 2 weeks ago that there was a publication on that indicated a yellow circle around flat rock, hendersons and Cherubs cave indicating that it was open to all forms of fishing, It looks to have been replaced in the last week or so.

Aguably both these document could be used against fisheries successfully.

What the QLD government needs to do is get all the current legislation from "all" the governement departments and create a single document, this should be free to the public and well advertised, they should release the document anually, it should be in a form that we are able to carry in our fishing bags or boat, it should also be in a simplified manner so everyone can understand it (put sweetlip under the sweetlip heading).

Why not add boating rules and regs to the document as well..

The laws are becoming too complex and changing far to often for everyone to know all the exact details of each of the laws they need to be simplified and consolidated and made available..

Regards
HOnda

[catfishkid]

Catfishkid, I'm unsure of the validity of the lack of paperwork but the confiscated gear is definately true. There was a write up in the local rag about 6-8 months ago about a guy who had his boat confiscated because he was keeping 10-20 jewfish a day, as well as huge amounts of lobsters and cobia, and selling them off without a licence.
I suppose having my gear confiscated would deter me alot more from illegal activities than a simple fine although I think there needs to be a certain dollar value incorporated into this.


The fact the gear is confiscated is not my concern,its the statement that the officers keep it for themselves.All confiscated gear should be reciepted,processed and then sold at public auction,the money then going to the crown.

Cheers Craig

[Bros]

Yo could try Morton's excuse http://humour.bluehaze.com.au/files/Mortonmudcrab.mp3

[Scott nthQld]

Ok I've read most of this thread and most of you agree that for example, if I had a live undersized fish in my boat when fisheries pulled me over I would get done, or at least would be done if you were the officer.

Now, here's a question for you all, keep in mind, given that most of you have already replied that I would be in big shit etc, you're answer here will definatley prove any of you a hypocrite.

I give you this situation,

I am happily fishing away at anchor when fisheries, in this case you, come over for a chat and to check my catch. I have no illegal fish onboard (if I have any fish at all) and mid chat, one of my lines hooks up. I duly pick the rod up and wind in the fish to bring up an undersize and therefore illegal fish. At this point I remind you that this fish is officially in my possession, hence rendering it illegal. I am unaware this fish is undersize and proceed to measure it, not, as some of you have said, immediately returning it to the water. Furthermore, I am unsure of the species and decide to look up what it could be in my ID book. meanwhile to keep the fish alive, incase I have to release it, I put it into my livewell.

All the while you, as the fisheries officer are still there checking safety gear etc. I take a couple of minutes to ID the fish, and upon finding out what sppecies and that it is indeed undersize, I release the still healthy kicking fish.

Now bearing in mind the following, which all of you have pointed out in one way or another:
1. As soon as the fish was boated, whether I knew it or not, being undersize, the fish was in my possession.

2. I do not release the fish immediately, I proceed to measure it, which may take a couple of minutes to get out my ruler

3. As I am now unsure of the species, I stow the fish in my livewell to look it up in my ID handbook.

4. The whole time, you, the fisheries officer, have been there watching my methods, knowing full well that I was in possession of an illegal fish.

5. Once the fish has been successfully ID'd and found to be below minimum size, I remove the fish from my livewell and release it in a healthy state.

Now answer me this:

As the fisheries officer, what would you do? knowing that you cannot give a correct answer because of what you have already said.

Will you:

If you decide that you would fine me:
Bear in mind that if this is the case, everyone on these boards is guilty of having an undersize fish in their possession. I don't doubt that not one person has had trouble in identifying a species, nor have they stopped to measure an undersize fish, therefore making every single one of you a hypocrite.

if you decide against:
Then you have just said something that is completely contradicting what you people have already said in your previous posts. Therefore rendering any answers any of you give on this subject moot, and IMO not worth listening to as you can't seem to get your shit in the one sock.

Whether or not you were there watching the process is irrelevant, as this could very well be the case if you happened to drive upon someone who was midway through the process.




To answer the original question, its a matter of common sense. If the fish is healthy and kicks away strongly no I wouldn't, however, if the fish can't swim away because of it ill health attributed to the treatment it has just received then yes I would. But like other, reasonable people have said previously, it would strongly depend on the officer, what mood they were in, your attitude, and the amount of common sense the officer possesses.

[mattooty]

Scott, you pray to god that he....
a) Got lucky on said morning with the Mrs (or Mr if officer is female)

b) Had no traffic lights on his/her way to work

c) Got to work, with a clear sunny day, looked out the window with a wishful look on his/her face and got told he/she was on boat duty

d) Found noone at the ramp



But seriously, it is up to the discretion of the officer in question. If they're in a good mood and you can rationally explain the situation and show that you are genuinely out for a good day on the water and you're not marauding the waterways then chances are they'll let you off with a warning.

[spears]

Now I would like to hear about fisheries power, I’m asking this as I don’t know.

They find reason to call around to your house after a fishing encounter and they want to have a look in the shed and house for any other under sized fish.

You hear a knock on the front door so you open it and standing there are 2 fishery guys in uniform which state there intentions.
Can they enter a house without any officially signed documents giving them the right to enter with out your approval.
Even though police can be refused with out a search warrant.

[Bros]

Can they enter a house without any officially signed documents giving them the right to enter with out your approval.

Yes they can if they believe there is a crime being committed but if they are wrong they would be in deep doo doo if you persuse them to court. In theory that is the case however due to the implications I'd be surprised if any ot them took up the option as they are not career people like police it's just a job, a uniform and pretty ordinary pay. I rate fisheries inspectors to be like security officers just a uniform and a dead end job.


Even though police can be refused with out a search warrant.

Yes same thing applies they don't have to get search warrant if they believe a crime in being committed

[sleepygreg]

Just make sure you are basing this on AUSTRALIAN LAW, not the hollywood hype and american system (which varies from state to state as it does here....and they have over fifty different ones)

[choppa]

i posted a thread not so long back that had the same issue in subject called "" is this legal or not"" and to see the responses to this thread opposed to the current makes me wonder

i laughed at some(if not most),, and wondered about the rest of the 81 pages

place yourself in both circumstances,,, and for those of you who didn't follow my initial thread,,, it was appealed,, and no conviction was placed,,, makes you wonder?????????

choppa

[finga]

Now, here's a question for you all, keep in mind, given that most of you have already replied that I would be in big shit etc, you're answer here will definatley prove any of you a hypocrite.

I give you this situation,

I am happily fishing away at anchor when fisheries, in this case you, come over for a chat and to check my catch. I have no illegal fish onboard (if I have any fish at all) and mid chat, one of my lines hooks up. I duly pick the rod up and wind in the fish to bring up an undersize and therefore illegal fish. At this point I remind you that this fish is officially in my possession, hence rendering it illegal. I am unaware this fish is undersize and proceed to measure it, not, as some of you have said, immediately returning it to the water. Furthermore, I am unsure of the species and decide to look up what it could be in my ID book. meanwhile to keep the fish alive, incase I have to release it, I put it into my livewell.

All the while you, as the fisheries officer are still there checking safety gear etc. I take a couple of minutes to ID the fish, and upon finding out what sppecies and that it is indeed undersize, I release the still healthy kicking fish.............................................. .................................................. ...............
.................................................. ..........................................etc etc etc

.
I would have asked the Fisheries fella's what it is and if it's legal.
Would have saved a fair bit of time for Nemo.

[mik01]

Ok I've read most of this thread and most of you agree that for example, if I had a live undersized fish in my boat when fisheries pulled me over I would get done, or at least would be done if you were the officer.

Now, here's a question for you all, keep in mind, given that most of you have already replied that I would be in big shit etc, you're answer here will definatley prove any of you a hypocrite.

I give you this situation,

I am happily fishing away at anchor when fisheries, in this case you, come over for a chat and to check my catch. I have no illegal fish onboard (if I have any fish at all) and mid chat, one of my lines hooks up. I duly pick the rod up and wind in the fish to bring up an undersize and therefore illegal fish. At this point I remind you that this fish is officially in my possession, hence rendering it illegal. I am unaware this fish is undersize and proceed to measure it, not, as some of you have said, immediately returning it to the water. Furthermore, I am unsure of the species and decide to look up what it could be in my ID book. meanwhile to keep the fish alive, incase I have to release it, I put it into my livewell.

All the while you, as the fisheries officer are still there checking safety gear etc. I take a couple of minutes to ID the fish, and upon finding out what sppecies and that it is indeed undersize, I release the still healthy kicking fish.


To answer the original question, its a matter of common sense. .


there's a huge difference between your example and the OP, Scott - the difference is that in the first example fisheries have come across you sitting there with an undersized fish swimming around in a bucket - you have no intent to release it, measure it or find out if its too small - otherwise it wouldn't be there.

your example shows the process of checking in front of fisheries - you're showing you are making an effort to do the right thing.

I would add that there would be additional evidence needed to successfully fine a person for undersized fish as well as simply possession - its called intent.

as with most laws, intent forms an important part of determining the difference between an intentional breach of a law and an innocent one. of course, breaching most laws even innocently is still an offence, however it opens the door for leniency or the officer/fisheries/whatever the discretion to apply a warning only.

Therefore I think that possession is the key factor, however intent forms the decisive factor whether the fine proceeds or a warning suffices.
After all, we've all heard stories of people being simply warned when caught speeding - speeding = breaking the law - everyone should be fined right? no - there are always mitigating factors and allowances for practicalities of life.

[Noelm]

I think you are groping at straws at best if you actually caught the Fish while the Fisheries guy was there, (I guess instead of looking for your set of Encycopedias that you just happen to have with you) the Officer at the scene would/could advise that the "nemo" you just caught was indeed undersized/protected, about the same chance of being struck by lightning while riding a Zebra during a full moon on a Sunday I would reckon as being booked during that exact occurence.

[oldboot]

Remember that most of the heavier powers and quite a lot of the inconvienient rules are written for high value offendors.

That is the problem with large lumps of the rules, they are written with the small number of high value offendors in mind and make things for the average rec fisho very inconvienient and confusing at times.

The fisheries inspectors are not likley to excercise their powers of entry to check out yoir home feezer unless they have a real good reason to do so.......

For example a tip off that you have a freezer full of reef fillets and you have been flogging them to local shops.

Think of the paperwork these guys would have to fill out associated with excercising their powers of entry......they aren't likley to do it without good reason.

Same with large scale confiscation.
Think of what it will cost them to conficate a boat, and they will have to transport and store it and everything else till the court case is concluded.

cheers

[tony_fish]

In Qld they can't enter your property without a warrant.

Most of the Fisho's that I have met seem really passionate about fishing and ensuring my children and their children and catch a fish. They do a tough job for what seems little pay.

The fisheries legislation in the biggest piece of legislation in Qld, so I'm told.

I think you will find that there is a section of the legislation that covers this problem.

[RayDeR]

Scott_nth Qld

If the fisheries guy -me - was ther. The fisherman would say "Whats this?. I have never caught one before.. whats the legal length? Quickly measured and quickly back if necessary.

I would see my role as educational as well as punitive.

Ray de R

[CreelReaper]

Half the problem is that there are too many yobbos full of p**&*ss and bad manners out there shooting off their mouths that the inspectors just end up giving up and stop being polite and informative. If you treat them right usually will get you a long way.

The last time I was checked the "officer" was in a foul mood. I had watched him pull over a small tinnie with eight guys on board. They gave him plenty and he reciprocated big time. (no safety gear on board at all). He called in the coppers and they dragged them all away with the tinnie in tow.
He pulled me up, demanding this and that right off the bat fairly rudely. After a couple of minutes of chatting to him casually his attitude changed in a flash.

Ended up having a cuppa and we chatted about 1/2 an hour and he was really easy with info after that. Ended up giving me a couple of points to fish on the section of the creek I was in.

Shane

[Mossy247]

Spears, the police can enter you premises like they say, any reasonable suspision...... kinda like when your 16 and with friends and they pull up next to you giving the speak about resent break in's and we fit the discription??? LoL Male???? Best to just be yes sir, three bags full sir...... It all depends on the people and the day I guess...

[ashh]

ahh this thread reminds of that show on TV, NZ Fisheries patrol or Waterpolice or sumthin like that.....anyways was funny how the bros just play it dumb, ahh whatz thit bro? underseez fush? shet hey didn even know thet bro.
Was even better when the officers trying to give them a ticket and he asks one of them where he lives and he looks at his mate and replies along the lines of ' ahh just down the road from that fella bro' and the other ones, 'ahh yeah I just live up the road from him bro' lol was classic...

[FNQCairns]

ahh this thread reminds of that show on TV, NZ Fisheries patrol or Waterpolice or sumthin like that.....anyways was funny how the bros just play it dumb, ahh whatz thit bro? underseez fush? shet hey didn even know thet bro.
Was even better when the officers trying to give them a ticket and he asks one of them where he lives and he looks at his mate and replies along the lines of ' ahh just down the road from that fella bro' and the other ones, 'ahh yeah I just live up the road from him bro' lol was classic...

One of my favourite shows, numbnuts everywhere (well not really, the show is a condensed version of events) and not just from the cold water while diving for kapookie or whatever they call whichever animal.

cheers fnq

[oldboot]

Those kiwi law inforcement shows are always a larf.

Eh bro, unregistered eh, n no licence, an me bro in the car tell me you are wonted on outstanding warants.....ooo bro, not good.
Eh stand over ere while we have a look in d' car.... wots in this little bag.....oo bro not good.....I think you betta come for a drive...you should stayed 'ome bro'.;D

And on the water shows
The fisheries inspector is always sus ov the blokes will all the undersized fish.

The best one was when a bloke was caught with a stolen boat on someone elses stolen trailer with yet someone elses stolen outboard..... clever eh bro.


cheers

[oldboot]

After some sillyness I add some thing interesting.

Section 12 of the fisheries act

When the act does not apply.

(a) the unintentional taking of regulated fish or marine plants if the fish or plants are not intentionaly or recklessly injured or damaged and are immediately put back; or

(b) the unitentional possession of regulated fish or marine plants by a person if the fish or marine plants are not intentionaly or wrecklessly injured or damaged and the person can not, because of circumstances beyond the persons control, put the fish or plants back immediately they come into the persons psssession; or

(c) the use of a hand net to lift from the water fish taken by other fisnhing aparatus; or

(d) the use of gaf to secure fish taken by other fishing aparatus.

cheers

[oldboot]

My trawl of the regs continues.

chek out section197

Taking fish using fishing apparatus summarised

applies to fish taken unintentionaly or you do not intend to keep.

must immediately release into deep enough water

not allow the part of aparatus containing the fish to be out of the water othere than to immediately remove the fish from the aparatus

unless you have reasonable excuse


Here is an interesting one

section199

you cant take a coral reef fin fish otherthan with a line or spear.... so if you get one in your crab pot you have to let it go;D ......hmmm

cheers

[mangomick]

To clear up one little matter mentioned earlier. The Estuary cod is NOT a Coral Reef Fish....it is listed under 'other tidal species' and carries a size limit of 35cm to 120cm with a bag limit of 10.

Shane

the reference to estuary cod being classed as coral reef fin fish is after the new changes come into force in March. I think the point was that the changes are coming on so thick and fast with very little notification that the average Joe who just goes fishing occaisionally with his kids wouldnt even consider an estuary cod he just caught in a creek could be considered a coral reef fin fish nor would he be aware that they have closed seasons for coral reef fin fish north of Bundaberg .
Maybe they should change the name from Estuary cod to Coral reef fin fish cod.;D

[bassfan]

We seem to be getting of the point.


I’ll try explaining it this way.
Your sitting on the edge of the sand and u catch a fish,the fish is placed in a bucket full of water and the fish is in that bucket for 5 minutes.
Fisheries come along and ask you have you caught something and you say yes it’s in the bucket.
He says it’s under sized so you pick it up with the tail flapping and infront of the fisheries guy you put it in the water infront of him and it swims away.Any penalty..

Down to the nitty gritty,do you know the exact answer for this test case.

The Fisheries would have to have measured the fish on a certified measuring board before they could fine you for having undersized fish in your possession. If your fish was slightly undersized and you released it unharmed before it was properly measured, a verbal warning would be the most likely outcome.

BF