In Possession (Bag Limits)

[webby]

As you no Bag Limits are inforce for a number of reasons, like protecting certain species, restricting the capture of fish that are susceptible to capture, and restricting the numbers taken etc etc.
There are also a number of bag limits inforce for individual species, combined and boat limits.
1. Do you think those limits enforce at present are working ???
2. Do you think they are helping to protect certain species ???
3. Do you think limits are working to share the captures amongst fishos ???
4. What other species where no limits apply should have a limit applied to them. ???
5. Do you think all species both small and large should have a limit applied. ???
6. Do you think some species should have a Minimum and Maximum limit applied. ???
7 What other means beside bag limits, could be introduced to help protect some or all species. ???
8. Do you think those that fish regularly should be restricted more, compared to those that only fish occassionaly.
regards

[Noelm]

well lets start at #1
1 I think most limits are OK and working.
2 A limit no matter how generous must have some positive impact
3 No I do not think a limit can share resources, if you fish every day you can get a limit each day, so no real shareing takes place
4 My thoughts are ,there should be a max limit on all species, regardless of their value or usefullness.
5 See answer to 4
6 I guess you mean size limit here? yes, some species do need an upper limit as well.
7 Another means to protect species is the OH so unpopular "sanctuary zones"
8 Not too sure how you prove if I fished 1 day per month or 20 days a month, so not too sure how that could work.

[S.S.]

Another one for you Webby. Have a great christmas :)

1. one species I have noticed an increase in numbers and better sizes is the flathead. A bag limit and upper size limit has certainly helped this species. Each species has to be looked at on an individual basis
2. Most definitely.
3. Limits work to help the fish and their numbers given the increase in human population, there needs to be size and bag limits for their survival. You can only share if there are fish there and even then we're not all going to catch fish all the time ;)
4. Sand whiting, diver whiting, yellowfin bream.
5. A limit is great in reducing the excessive extraction of fish. Some are sold, some are dumped, some given away..... from a personal point of view i think it best to leave fish in the water to breed rather than feeding the neighborhood
6. Where relevant.... this certainly has helped dusky flathead numbers around the Jumpinpin area.
7 Increased powers to the authorities so that can check in possession bag limits. If you're staying in a caravan park, they are not allowed to check your catch in the freezer. What's the point of having an "in possession" limit ::)
8. No. It's your choice as to how often we want to fish. those that don't fish regularly are the ones that complain about lack of fish. Those that fish more regularly are able to "suss out" fishing spots, learn about the fish and their habitat and from this knowledge, catch fish. The once a year danglers are always going to struggle.

[Dogbream]

As you no Bag Limits are inforce for a number of reasons, like protecting certain species, restricting the capture of fish that are susceptible to capture, and restricting the numbers taken etc etc. #
There are also a number of bag limits inforce for individual species, combined and boat limits.
1. Do you think those limits enforce at present are working ??? NO
2. Do you think they are helping to protect certain species ??? MAYBE
3. Do you think limits are working to share the captures amongst fishos ??? at times pros the exception
4. What other species where no limits apply should have a limit applied to them. ??? BREAM
5. Do you think all species both small and large should have a limit applied. ??? NO
6. Do you think some species should have a Minimum and Maximum limit applied. ??? YES
7 What other means beside bag limits, could be introduced to help protect some or all species. ??? CLOSED SEASON
8. Do you think those that fish regularly should be restricted more, compared to those that only fish occassionaly.
regards NO

[Chris Ryan]

Well I only fish for sport as both myself and the deckie are allergic to eating seafood. So I am doing my part sending them back for others to enjoy!

Puff 8-)

[Jeremy]

1. Do you think those limits enforce at present are working ??? Yes
2. Do you think they are helping to protect certain species ??? Yes
3. Do you think limits are working to share the captures amongst fishos ??? Yes
4. What other species where no limits apply should have a limit applied to them. ??? dart, trevally, bream,
5. Do you think all species both small and large should have a limit applied. ??? Yes, even bait fish - say 20 per person of each species. Would help to curb the mincer brigade.
6. Do you think some species should have a Minimum and Maximum limit applied. ??? works for flathead, but not sure what else it would really work for. Gotta have a high chance fo survival if you have to release it.
7 What other means beside bag limits, could be introduced to help protect some or all species. ??? The closures on Frazer to protect the tailor work, but in general I do not agree with breeding season closures.

Jeremy
8. Do you think those that fish regularly should be restricted more, compared to those that only fish occassionaly. NO

[blaze]

Maybe at odds with a lot of people here but what about a tag issue system where by you maybe issued with 50 snapper tags for the year so if you went to the banks and had a good trip you could bring home 25 snapper, you do that twice and you have no more taggs so no more snapper. Just a thought.
cheers
blaze

[Noelm]

hhhmmm Blaze, that could work in a kind of way I guess, as there will only be X amount of Snapper/Mackeral, whatever caught in a year, but you will need tags for lots of species as you may get a mackeral and another specie but have no tags for a certain one, maybe! but who knows, it may just have some "merit"

[Mr__Bean]

Blaze,

That's what they had to do with collection of firewood in some Victorian forests.

It didn't matter what time of year you went or how much you collected at a time, you had a quota on the species that was under pressure.

- Darren

[Brett1907]

Good post webby!!

1. Do you think those limits enforce at present are working ???
In most cases yes. Should be more fisheries guys out to stop people taking too small/large/many of a certain species.

2. Do you think they are helping to protect certain species ???
Definately, I too have noticed more flathead and not just at the pin.

3. Do you think limits are working to share the captures amongst fishos ???
I think the fish in some areas are being replenished due to limits imposed.

4. What other species where no limits apply should have a limit applied to them. ???
Any species that doesn't currently have a limit should have, especially types f fish that don't keep well. Baitfish should also have limits per person. If you run out you go get more.

5. Do you think all species both small and large should have a limit applied. ???
I think there should be some sort of restrictions for all fish.

6. Do you think some species should have a Minimum and Maximum limit applied. ???
Definately, I read some research which showed that by only having a minimum size limit people would mainly take fish which grew rapidly larger. In doing this fish with the genetic makeup to become and breed larger fish would be removed from the breeding cycle. This would, over time, lead to the reduction in average size of the entire species.

7 What other means beside bag limits, could be introduced to help protect some or all species. ???
Rotating exclusion zones. By closing areas for parts of the year they get time to recover a little. Also off seasons, it has worked for snapper down south. Banning ALL COMMERCIAL RIVER & ESTUARY NETTING, this not only wipes out the fish stock but decimates the underwater environment.

8. Do you think those that fish regularly should be restricted more, compared to those that only fish occassionaly.
NO! I believe a lot of more regular fisherpeople (politically correct Ha) become more aware of the need to manage the fishery and possibly become more likely to catch & release. I know we don't keep everything we catch.

I also think the TOTAL FISH IN POSESSION is a little unfair. If you go away for a week fishing you can fill your quota within the first day. I missed out on a fishing trip before easter as the guys went a day early and caught the total limit, even though they didn't reach the individual limit on any fish. And the eski was only half full. Now thos of you who say that is wasteful, we would be lucky to do a trip like that once a year, and would consume all fish caught within a few months. No wastage.

If I am wrong in my interpretation of the total possession limit could someone please correct me so I can go next time!!!

Brett

[StevenM]

1. Do you think those limits enforce at present are working ??? No not really. Stll alot of people who are unaware of these limits and ignorance should not be acceptable
2. Do you think they are helping to protect certain species ??? They are doing their best
3. Do you think limits are working to share the captures amongst fishos ??? Interesting question webby, are you saying pro vs rec??
4. What other species where no limits apply should have a limit applied to them. ??? Bream and Whiting
5. Do you think all species both small and large should have a limit applied. ??? Yes
6. Do you think some species should have a Minimum and Maximum limit applied. ??? Yes, my opinion only and will cause alot of discussion re for and against
7 What other means beside bag limits, could be introduced to help protect some or all species. ??? Havent really thought about it, maybee I should
8. Do you think those that fish regularly should be restricted more, compared to those that only fish occassionaly. No, but BAG and POSSESSION needs to be understood
regards

[tunaman]

Jeremy is pretty well spot on. I too think the same as that.



signed tunaman

[Lucky_Phill]

Bag limits seem to be working on some species. ( but this does lead to ' high grading ' )

Personally, I 'd like to see increased size limits and not necessarily in conjunction with a bag limit on certain species.

Bag limits have been around for quite some time, and to this day the same question arises about bag and possession limits. Generally, IMO, people still do not fully understand what that means.

Further, an alignment of size limits between the States on species that cross ' borders ' should be in place to stop confusion. ::)

I didn't answer your questions, did I Brian ??

Phill

[agnes_jack]

Too many people still seem to think that we still have a daily bag limit!!!
In possesion means just that........in possesion. This includes whats in your esky, whats in the frypan, and whats in your freezer at home. Example; if you have 2 trout in your freezer at home, 1 in the esky at the campsite and 3 in your kill tank, you have broken the law and are liable for prosecution, the law is 5 of any one trout species...IN POSSESION.

Regards, Tony

[Smailesy]

number 6 min and max i disagree eg flathead the big ones are ladys the ones we can eat are boys so if we eat all the boys who is going to play with the girls just a thought

[nigelr]

Great post, Webby.
1 - they are certainly a step in the right direction, but IMO are only adhered to by conscientious fishos, ie those that give a damn.
2 - I'd certainly like to think so, but this is not a simple equation, IMO, weather /environmental factors play a large part as well I feel. I stand to be corrected here.
3 - (lol) what's that story about the top 10%? Then we have the pros.........
4 - slimy mackeral, yellowtail, I'm showing my ignorance/lack of a Fisheries booklet here............... are these 'bait fish in possesion', a la poddy mullet?
5 - have to look at the enforceability, perhaps, how do you realistically police such a law, but above and beyond that, theoretically, why not?
6 - not really, but I am ignorant and can easily be converted by a case pro this idea, perhaps preserving the juveniles and the breeding stock? Sounds pretty good. Personally I fish for mulloway quite frequently and I prefer to catch fish between 3 and 6 kg, not specifically for this reason, ( I believe those fish between this size are the best eating), but I would be happy to let the juveniles grow bigger and the big buggers breed...
7 - closed seasons and pro exclusions, hehehe...........sorry, a bit too cynical here.
8 - Damn good question, IMO. I am not sufficiently versed in ethics to give you an answer to this, but as a keen and active fisho who lives adjacent to both a surf beach, a river and an inshore fishery, I hope not!
Cheers!

[dogsbody]

As well as bag limits why not have a boat limit depending on how many people on board. Don't know if it would work but just a thought.

1. Do you think those limits enforce at present are working ?Yes could do better
2. Do you think they are helping to protect certain species ??Yes
3. Do you think limits are working to share the captures amongst fishos ??Im not sure i don't have that knoledge
4. What other species where no limits apply should have a limit applied to them. ?? Whiting, Dart, Garfish, Sandies
5. Do you think all species both small and large should have a limit applied. ??? Yes
6. Do you think some species should have a Minimum and Maximum limit applied. ???Most
7 What other means beside bag limits, could be introduced to help protect some or all species. ??? See above
8. Do you think those that fish regularly should be restricted more, compared to those that only fish occassionaly??More in possesion limits

Dave.

[Dogbream]

the law is 5 of any one trout species...IN POSSESION.

Regards, Tony

that could be a typo master.

[Kiktz]

What a topic, Good on ya Webby

1. Do you think those limits enforce at present are working ???In some areas
2. Do you think they are helping to protect certain species ??? Yes
3. Do you think limits are working to share the captures amongst fishos ???Yes
4. What other species where no limits apply should have a limit applied to them. ???Depends see note below
5. Do you think all species both small and large should have a limit applied. ??? Some Not all
6. Do you think some species should have a Minimum and Maximum limit applied. ??? Yes
7 What other means beside bag limits, could be introduced to help protect some or all species. ???Closed season
8. Do you think those that fish regularly should be restricted more, compared to those that only fish occassionaly. No

The problem with this for my lil corner of the world, Snapper/ Squire
have a very low survival rate when released, so even though a legal fish may be returned the possibility of it dieing is very high. So what is that point of having a bag limit when the fish caught you could say are going to die even though the are released and the angler has done his up most to do the best thing by the fish. I beleive that a closed season is in the best interests of a number of species. Secoundly stop Pro fishing in the Bay.

Aj

[trout3030]

Tony,
Are you sure about the 5 of any individual trout species. I can only find reference to 7 in total of all trout species.

[stevedemon]

Hi Webby
mate i agree with most of the comments here Bream is one species that need to have a bag limit of 20 per person and min size of 25 - 27 the same with Trevally and Dart the same with most species that do not have limit or size #:-X :-X :-X

and yes in possesion needs to be clarified to those that do not understand the rule :-? :-? :-?

the only problem at the moment you can not police the possesion rule this action it is realling on the honesty of all Fisho's most will obeyed by the rules ;D 8-) ;D ::)

:'( :'(but there are some out there that just take for the sake of taking #:'( :'(

i think i mention this to you about 5 yrs ago that there should be better size and bag limits on the bream 23cm is just to small to keep and not enough meat on them for a good feed anyway ;) :D ;)

and if they are thinking along the lines of a closed season will this mean for the pro's as well or just recreational fisho's what is good for one is good for all ::) ::) ::) ::)

just my thoughts now i'll wait for the kicks and comments as well but sorry people i do beleive we need to look to the future not only for us but our children's children to enjoy the same pleasures we are enjoying now

:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)


Cheers ;D ;D
Steve 8-) 8-)

[Glenn_Woods]

Quote "Too many people still seem to think that we still have a daily bag limit!!!
In possesion means just that........in possesion. This includes whats in your esky, whats in the frypan, and whats in your freezer at home. Example; if you have 2 trout in your freezer at home, 1 in the esky at the campsite and 3 in your kill tank, you have broken the law and are liable for prosecution, the law is 5 of any one trout species...IN POSSESION.

Regards, Tony "

I find this a bit to hard to believe Agnes_jack. To say i have a trout or any other fish i have caught a week before in the freezer is included in my daily catch cant be right. [smiley=book2.gif]
You can only put out 4 crab pots at a time. Doesn't mean i cant have 8 in my shed at home.
Can only do 100 kph on the road, Doesn't mean i cant have a car that can do 140kph

If i go out and get my 5 or 6 trout (what ever the limit is) , that is my trout in possesion.

Woodsy.

[blaze]

Hi Glenn
Dont know about qld, In tassie the in possession limit is that, even its a 12 month old fish in the bottom of the freezer.
cheers
blaze

[Brett1907]

I am one who does not entirely understand take & posession limits. (As I don't catch/keep that many fish it doesn't really matter). I would like someone to explain it to me.

In QLD we have a few extra limits, for instance (these come from the DPI&F website, I have them laminated in my tackle bag)

5 total of all cod species

7 total of all trout apecies (salt water)

AND, 20 total of all coral reef fin species.

To me 20 fish total, no matter what species is a little tight. I may only get one chance a year to get anywhere near that, and was unhappy earlier this year as I missed out on a Moreton trip because of this limit. I think that if there is a bag/posession limit of a certain species that should be sufficient.

ALSO, as Geoff has posted elsewhere, size limits NEED to be policed. He saw a guy yesterday at one of our spots with a flatty well over the max limit. The old guy was totaly ignorant. Why aren't there big charts showing limits in tackle shops instead of having to go find the stickers? That may help educate people.

I'll get off my soap box now.

Brett

[NeilD]

1. The current limits seem to be quite acceptable to the general community at the moment. It is difficult to work out what impact these limits are having on the average fisho as many of us seldom ever reach our bag limit anyway so the actual limits are generally redundant for many people. Therefore the limits are probably in force to control the behaviour of only a few percent of fisho’s and even then on only their better trips. In terms of resource management I think seasonal spawning closures and restricting commercial effort may be more beneficial to maintaining fish stocks.

2. The bag limits are probably having the biggest positive impact in this area on fish like Tailor, Spotties, Snapper and Flathead

3. While I am a strong supporter of bag limits as a way of showing that the recreational sector is contributing to long term fisheries sustainability I am not totally convinced that there is a great deal of resource sharing within the recreational . This is partly due to the fact that so few actually reach current bag limits regularly in heavily fished areas that I doubt their overall impact on the fishery.

4. All species should have limits in place in order to control certain individuals who will at times abuse the resource. I think that it is important to show that the recreational sector is strongly supporting the long term sustainability of our fisheries resources.

5. As above

6. If research supports slot limits as being highly beneficial to the overall fishery then they should be in place

7. No management policies can be effective without a strong enforcement system in place. Highly visible and effective enforcement and heavy penalties for deliberate and repeated breaches give teeth to the legislation. Periodic or seasonal closures, sanctuaries and limits to inshore commercial activities should be looked into in order to ensure the long term viability of our resources.

8. Generally the more you fish the greater your investment in time and money would be so you should probably be entitled to greater share of the resource overall. The only way to manage total catch per person for specific species may be the tag system where a limited number of tags are issued with a licence and they are attached to fish that are kept

Overall I think that fisheries management has to be based on a hard core scientific basis and we have to be seen by the general community as contributing to the management of the resource by limiting effort and working towards long term viability and sustainability. Limiting environmental degradation and controlling high impact commercial activities are also part of the equation

[choppa]

Bag limits seem to be working on some species. ( but this does lead to ' high grading ' )

Personally, I 'd like to see increased size limits and not necessarily in conjunction with a bag limit on certain species.

[b]Bag limits have been around for quite some time,[/] and to this day the same question arises about bag and possession limits. #Generally, IMO, people still do not fully understand what that means.

Further, an alignment of size limits between the States on species that cross ' borders ' should be in place to stop confusion. ::)

I didn't answer your questions, did I Brian ?? #

Phill

totally 1000% agree with phill,,,,,size limit increase vs bag limit has been an issue for some time,,,,increase the size,,,more breeding,,,more fish,,,,,,,,,,,,

bag limits have been around for some time,,,,yet its very INfrequently that we hear of a decrease in fish bag limits,,,due to the increase in number,,,,although quite a lot of tax payers money is spent on this research

and yes again,,,1 rule SHOULD dominate all states,,,,,,regardless

and like phil,,,i didn't answer all the questions,,, i don't keep all that many nowadays,,,,,(tag & release),, which is a big turn around from 2 years or so back,,,we used to eat more fish than meat,,,

but thats a different story

choppa

[el_pescador]

As you no Bag Limits are inforce for a number of reasons, like protecting certain species, restricting the capture of fish that are susceptible to capture, and restricting the numbers taken etc etc.
There are also a number of bag limits inforce for individual species, combined and boat limits.
1. Do you think those limits enforce at present are working ??? They have to work to some degree but there are too many influencing factors outside recreational fishing pressure alone such as commercial fishing, habitat degradation etc. to make a call.
2. Do you think they are helping to protect certain species ??? #Yes, undoubtedly. #If you look at the ban they had on taking blue groper in nsw as an example it has proven how a fish stock can recover from a state of serious decline.
3. Do you think limits are working to share the captures amongst fishos ??? #20% of the fishos will always catch 80% of the fish. #Many fishos are still taking way more than they need.
4. What other species where no limits apply should have a limit applied to them. ???
5. Do you think all species both small and large should have a limit applied. ???
6. Do you think some species should have a Minimum and Maximum limit applied. ??? #Yes, slot limits are the best way to preserve fish stocks as the big breeders get released.
7 What other means beside bag limits, could be introduced to help protect some or all species. ??? #Re the above, there should be slot limits on many more species such as Mulloway.
8. Do you think those that fish regularly should be restricted more, compared to those that only fish occassionaly. #It's pretty well impossible to enforce a limit over more than 1 fishing outing so I don't see how this could possibly work.

regards

Onya Webby, poly boat owners rule.

[el_pescador]

Just a further note in regard to the "increase" in flathead numbers this year.

I wouldn't get too excited by a one year blip on the graph. This could be a purely cyclical thing. Until we see a trend over a number of seasons I wouldn't be saying that the flathead population had increased.

Also in regards to the comment re catching all the smaller male flathead. It only takes 1 male to fertilise the eggs of many females so to have a population of mainly large breeding females is not such a problem. Small males under legal size are also capable of breeding (as long as the female doesn't eat them) so this shouldn't be a problem.

In regard to closures in specific areas, this will not work to conserve stocks as fish are mobile. Unless you are talking about commercial netting which can damage habitat such as sea grass beds etc. IMO ban commercial fishing from an agreed percentage of inshore waters.

[haggis]

The bag and size limits are a good idea ,
but how many people do you see on shore fronts ,bridges ,jettys & rivers with lots of rods ,containers and nets . Who still keep everything they catch no mater what the size or type of fish they get .
they always have loads of little kids with them who are not fishing but can claim their bag limit anyway . All you have to do is take a walk along to the
Redcliffe side of the hornybrook bridge any Friday , Saturday or Sunday night to see what is going on #. Most fisher people are honest but there is lots who are not .
cheers Haggis .................

[agnes_jack]

Dog Bream
No typo mate, That 7 is a "combined" limit. When these regs first came into force we clarified this with the DPI. You may have in possesion 5 of any one species of trout, or seven if more than one species is caught.
Eg:......You have 4 bar cheek trout and 3 blue spot trout or 5 bar cheeks and 2 blue spots....thats legal. But if you had 6 bar cheek and say 1 blue spot, you have exceeded the "individual" in possesion limit for bar cheeks which stands at 5.

If I am wrong I stand corrected, but this was explained to me by the DPI call centre when these regs first came into force. There was also indepth disscusions on this site regarding the "combined" limits, and the confusion they cause.

Woodsy
I know what your saying, sounds rediculous, but that is the law.
The idea is to stop people going fishing every day of the week and loading up the freezer, or going out in the morning, catching your limit, returning to shore and unloading the boat and going out again to fill back up. (which is probably more common than most of us realize.)

They are actually a toothless tiger when it comes to policing this law, but technically you could be prosecuted for it.

In this area we have also seen great results from the change to flathead regs. We used to see a few large flathead caught each year up to the metre mark, but over the last two years particulary, we are seeing heaps of fish between 80-95cm, and several over the meter each year. Diving in the estuary over the last two breeding seasons, we have seen dozens and dozens of large breeding females in sand washouts, surrounded by the usual cluster of male fish close by. Far more flathead than were around in years prior.

Regards, Tony

[webby]

Plenty of info to take to the next inshore finfish meeting thanks.
Now this will stir the pot, how would you react to a limit or bucket placed on all bait species, plus a few others in that small size family that are not caught for bait use but for mincing purposes (if you get my drift regarding the last bit). :-X
regards

[imported_admin]

I reckon that all bait/species currently without any limits should have some sort of protection/limit. If we continue to allow people to catch boat loads of bait fish, yakkas, slimies, etc. then we could soon see a decline in stocks of the species that eat these bait fish. Maybe have no limit while on a boat but only a limited number can be bought ashore. If too hard to enforce just have one rule.

[Brett1907]

I agree Steve. Maybe limit the number of dead slimies/yakkas in posession, no limit on the number live in the tank as they can be returned to the water if unused. The limit on the dead ones can be checked at the boat ramp.

Sure some people will just throw the dead ones overboard, but hopefully most people would do the right thing.

Brett

[BigE]

Intresting thread Brian
Not that everyone will agree...... but how about this for some left field simplicity.

1 each species has a min size (appox after 2-3 spawns)
2 a fish(not species) bag limit IE: 30 fish per person


HMMM that seemed easy to understand & enforce for the average Joe (after all who wants to be a lawyer or an accountant just to catch some fish & spend a day on the water) , I suspect # 2 will cause some angst but i fail to see why anyone should be put in the position of being limited to 3 or 5 of whatever species while their schooled up in there thousands and bustin the surface all around the boat.

Now you want REGS for BAIT ........ your kiddin (soon i need to delcare on a form if i intend to fart while fishin.... yes sir you'll require the FWF Form to be witnessed by a JP)

let's not make it harder to fish than it already is ....... that just don't make sence.



BigE

[Jeremy]

i fail to see why anyone should be put in the position of being limited to 3 or 5 of whatever species while their schooled up in there thousands and bustin the surface all around the boat.
BigE

That is exactly why the limits are so important. From time to time, fish do school up and become very easy to catch. A number of anglers catching many fish each can have a big impact at these times.

I am all for a limit of bait fish. I would support 20 of any one species, live or dead. Pretty rare that you need more than this per person for a session. One bucketfull of mixed species would also work. Would also be good to see a catch quota applied to pros eg for the longliners taking tonnes and tonnes of slimies.

Jeremy

[Cheech]

Webby,

What exactly do you mean by "plenty of info to take to the next fin fish meeting"?

Everything so far in this thread is only speculation/personal opinion of a very small number of people, and nothing based on facts. I would be a little concerned if what has been posted here has any impact on future decisions on limits and restrictions. We have all discussed on this chat site how we hate the greenies getting limits or regulations applied without being based on fact. Surely we are not doing the same thing using any of the comments on this thread as information?

Hopefully I have missed something here.

With all due respect to those that have posted replies, I am not having a go at anyone. There are a lot of good points that I agree, and others I disagree with. My point is that I do not see anything that should be taken to such a meeting as information.

Cheech

[webby]

Craig all of the above questions will possibily be brought up when we sit down and review the whole Inshore Finfish, this along with the meetings held from Cairns to the Coast, are all valuable info in helping decide wether changes need to be made or are made.
A lot of you may not have attended one of the meetings held and such did not voice your opionions.
Wether you think this info should not be posted on a site such as this makes no differences regarding wether someone is watching, all those meeting held were open to the general public so any wanna be spy could have obtained a lot more ammunition from those meetings then from whats posted above.
I am only trying to obtain some feed back and what better then from regular fishos, as if you may not have read, the entire Inshore Finfish is about to go or possibbily go through some major changes, and some of you will be the first to complain if you were not given the chance to at least voice some of your opionions
You will still have a chance to again voice your opionions when the review is completed and a RIS sent out.
Again Thanks to those that replied
regards

[Nico.d.R]

i think all fish need a min and max limit and the min should be bigger than the breeding size of the species in question . I'm still trying to figure out how tagging a fish that you are going to keep is going to help ? Catch a fish , tag it , kill and clean it , then you got 2 fillets and a frame with a tag in it ? what would stop people from taking out the tags and putting them on the next 50 fish that they keep . and i also agree there needs to be limits on bait fish , we don't want to take a link out of the food chain and throw natures balence out .

[GEEFA]

the size limits on doggies and spotty mackeral should be made the same to stop a lot of confusion. and bream should be 25cm from 23cm. the flathead size and bag limits seems to be working well by all reports. i think the mackeral [doggies and spotties] should be reviewed , ASAP

[hooknose]

Good one Webby,
I say protect the bait species like herring etc from the mincer brigade( they are a disgrace , it is not part of our Australian values and should be policed along with taking of molluscs, weeds, pippies etc in outragious quantities), surely a reasonable "take" can be worked out. Blokes/ gals who fish a bit dont generally want to take loads of bait home with them, we generally get what we need for the days fishing every time we go fishing( I appreciate that exceptions to this rule do exist). Getting bait in any conditions is half the challenge anyway !

Cheers!!!
8-)

[Glenn_Woods]

I feel the takeing of bait commercialy has got to be doing alot of harm. More so than the reco's. After all, they are usually targeting an area for that bait. Be it worms, pippies or pilchards. Prawns are probably the biggest link between fish and bait. As hooknose said, Getting bait in any conditions is half the challenge anyway ! I never buy bait. The quality is crap. Costs to much and there is no enjoyment in it. I only catch what i need cause i can always go and get more if i need it.
But if they are going to make another change to the bag limit or min/max sizes, please make it right and leave it alone. Too many changes confuse me. Is my sticker in my boat i bought last year still current. I beleive so, but maybe not. I should not have to get on the net and check the size limits each time i go out fishing. They are taking the fun out of my passion.

Woodsy